It's about time

[sjordan2]

All I'm saying is that the new "Charger" should have been a 2-door coupe. Not necessarily a retro design, but a coupe. Chrysler already had a 4-door sedan.

That was always my wonder about the current Charger. It's like today's Chrysler management never understood the allure of the original and the loyalty of Charger fanatics.

[sjordan2]

I never understood why they didn't do the concept car, which was beautiful even as a 4-door. Maybe Chrysler management just didn't get what this car was about.

[Monty]

I remember years back when Mustang enthusiasts like myself learned that Ford was going to release a "new" Mustang with a wrong-wheel-drive chassis and no plans for a V8. There was no internet then, but the various Mustang magazine editors told us who to write and where to send the letters, and we did. By the ton. And Ford blinked. That car became the Probe, and thankfully it eventually died off. Deservedly so, in our opinion.

I wish a similar campaign could've been set up to keep Chrysler from tarnishing the Charger name. Question for Mark Taylor: why didn't they just make the Magnum available as a sedan and a wagon? They were the same platform, weren't they?

Car names are evocative to a lot of us who grew up with the "real thing" which accounts for the howls of derisive laughter heard across the US when Oldsmobile watered down the soup one more time and issued the Calais-based 442 (What'd that stand for? 4 cylinders, 4 speed and 2 gauges?), or when Chrysler tried to pass off an Omni-based econobucket as a Charger. Just seems strange that they went from that extreme to turning the current version into a dowdy Checker knock-off. Sometimes I swear "Chrysler" and "style" are mutually exclusive terms.

[Harry P.]

Notice that Pontiac's GTO was a non-retro coupe. The market ran away and hid on that one.

The "Pontiac" GTO wasn't even a Pontiac! And a 40 grand price tag didn't exactly appeal to Joe and Jane Six Pack.

If you're going to bring back a name as iconic as "Pontiac GTO," you might want to make sure the car is actually a Pontiac, not a thinly-disguised Holden.

I'm just sayin'...

[TurboKitty]

you know what's funny? The current Charger wasn't even going to be called "Charger". It was going to be called Monaco or Magnum, but so many people who got to see the car to vote on what to call it actually wrote in "Charger" on the ballot form. That's what people wanted, so that's what it is. Honestly, as much as I love Chargers, the current car should have definitely been called Monaco (or Magnum), 'cause a Charger it ain't. No such thing as a 2 dr Charger IMHO.

Edited August 29, 2011 by TurboKitty

[Harry P.]

Honestly, as much as I love Chargers, the current car should have definitely been called Monaco (or Magnum), 'cause a Charger it ain't. No such thing as a 2 dr Charger IMHO.

You go, girl!

I agree 100%.

They could have come out with a 4-door sedan version of the Magnum and called it Monaco. Heck, they already had the tooling, a sedan version would have been a no-brainer. The family sedan crowd would be covered.

Then they should have made the new Charger a 2-door coupe. Period and end of story. No more Mark Taylor rationalizations...

[TurboKitty]

I agree Harry LOL. Magnum for the wagon and Monaco for the 4dr, and Charger for the 2dr. Oh what might have been.....

[Harry P.]

This is exactly what I mean though...what would they have to do, bring back the old ("Real!") Pontiac engine to make it GTO-enough? Exhume DeLorean and have him do the commercials?

Sure, it was a Holden, but how different would it have looked if it were ground-up (think big Grand Am) designed in the US?

The point is, it was a Holden, and people knew it. It's not so much about the looks (the new "GTO/Holden" was actually a nice looking car, IMO)... but the fact that GM was trying to pass off a "foreign" car as a red-blooded U S of A "Pontiac GTO." People weren't buying the idea of a Holden GTO. That's where the whole idea fell flat.

That and the ridiculous MSRP.

I agree Harry LOL. Magnum for the wagon and Monaco for the 4dr, and Charger for the 2dr. Oh what might have been.....

We can only imagine...

[Harry P.]

It's not rationalization, it's called reality.

Coupes are going to be low-volume today, that's your period-end-of-story on that.

Fine. No argument.

Magnum wagon/Monaco 4-door sedan.

Charger 2-door coupe.

[Junkman]

And while we're at it, a new Cougar based on the existing Mustang platform:

This would be the first new car I'd consider buying in more than 20 years.

And cruise it up and down the road...

Edited August 29, 2011 by Junkman

[Harry P.]

A $40,000 Holden "GTO" was destined to be a flop from the get-go.

[Harry P.]

This would be the first new car I'd consider buying in more than 20 years.

Thanks, Christian!

[Monty]

Note on your Mustang/Probe example Ford had no financial risk in deciding to keep selling Mustangs alongside Probes. Mazda developed the Probe off the MX-6/626, and it was always going to be built in Flat Rock (Mustang was in another plant) so there was nothing Ford had to do other than to not stop building Mustangs and come up with a new name for the new car.

The point was, an adamant group of Mustang enthusiasts did what they could to prevent the newest version from becoming yet another Japanese-designed, underpowered wrong-wheel-drive car. The Mustang was an iconic car, and despite its humble Falcon ancestry, it was solidly 100% American. The thought of a Mustang based on Mazda designs was unthinkable.

Good for Ford for finding a way to sell those Probes. We used to wonder if proctologists got discounts on them.

[Harry P.]

Harry,

I'm not sure where you're getting the $40,00 price tag from. MSRP on the 2006 GTO was $31,290, while invoice was $29,569. For the performance the car was capable of in stock form, $32K was a bargain and a half. You can get a nice used one for $15K these days. As a life-long Pontiac guy, the only thing about the Monaro-based GTO that bothered me was the somewhat boring styling, particularly the '04. By '06, they added a little spice to the looks, but the car was not what you would call dramatic to look at.

Having the GTO built in Australia by a GM subsidiary is far less troubling to me than if it were built in China, for example. Camaros and Firebirds were built in Canada, did that make them less "American?" I would have preferred that these American cars were built here in America, but at least the Australians and Canadians are our friends.

The difference is that Camaros and Firebirds may have been built in Canada... but they were still Camaros and Firebirds. The "GTO" was merely a Holden with "Pontiac" and "GTO" slapped on it. I think that didn't sit well with many fans of the "real" GTO from years past. It was even sold in some countries as a "Chevy Lumina!"

Excerpt from an edmunds.com review:

Many of the old car's (original GTO) charms had also been lost in translation, including its affordable price tag. The new coupe started in the low $30Ks -- hardly an attainable sum for young, cash-strapped enthusiasts. Bland exterior styling was another weak point. Power initially came from a 5.7-liter V8, but Pontiac swapped in a larger 6.0-liter V8 the following year. The bigger engine took the GTO up to a cool 400 horsepower, but between the 2+2 coupe's high price and dull styling, Pontiac simply couldn't sell enough of them. As a result, the Pontiac GTO was discontinued after the 2006 model year.

From wikipedia:

GM had high expectations to sell 18,000 units, but the Monaro-based GTO received a lukewarm reception in the U.S. The styling was frequently derided by critics as being too "conservative" and "anonymous" to befit either the GTO heritage or the current car's performance. In addition, the classic GTO faithful felt further insulted by GM's failure to present a U.S.-built car that incorporated any design lineage from the muscular icons of the 1960s and 1970s. Critics also pointed out the car's high sale price, commenting that a lower price would have made the car's apparent faults far more forgivable. Sales were also limited because of dealer tactics, such as initially charging large markups and denying requests for test drives of the vehicle.

As far as the MSRP, I was going by memory... obviously I was wrong. I seem to remember the MSRP being around 40 grand, I guess it wasn't quite that high.

[TurboKitty]

and your entitled to your opinion, it's not wrong and it's not right. The LX Magnum sold well, and the person in charge of killing it off is no longer with Chrysler, he has since retired. They are supposedly going to be bringing the Magnum back, here is a quote and rendering directly from Allpar.com:

"A Dodge Magnum, based on the Charger, is now rumored to appear around model-year 2013, partly to provide a Lancia Thema wagon for Europe"

I like it besides the wheels and the integrated spoiler over the rear window. Just wondering what the front may look like though, here's another set of renderings from the LX Forum:

The last one is a Photoshop of the "FatChance" 2011 Chrysler 300C show car, thus the wheels & slammed appearance.

[Rob Hall]

Just thought I'd mention that while everyone was busy debating meaningless topics like this one, a major bit of actual model car-related news seems to have completely slipped by this forum ... which makes me think perhaps there should be an initial change — from MCM to HUA.

And no, I'm not going to say what that news is ... y'all get to figure that out for yourselves!

Ah, yeah..the new Revell releases mentioned in passing on the Revell website....interesting stuff..

[Rob Hall]

VERY interesting, I thought ... and the news was disseminated quickly once Revell posted it ... just not to here ...

Yes, I saw it last night on that other site..

[Harry P.]

VERY interesting, I thought ... and the news was disseminated quickly once Revell posted it ... just not to here ...

So how about you clever guys that are in the know about this "big news" post the info here instead of playing games?

Some members here are only members of this forum and not any of those other ones, so they can hardly be blamed if they don't know about this big news you're referring to.

This kind of comment reminds me of treehugger Dave's "tutorials," where he told people to go and figure it out for themselves...

[Rob Hall]

So how about you clever guys that are in the know about this "big news" post the info here instead of playing games?

Some members here are only members of this forum and not any of those other ones, so they can hardly be blamed if they don't know about this big news you're referring to.

This kind of comment reminds me of treehugger Dave's "tutorials," where he told people to go and figure it out for themselves...

Actually, it's on Revell's website...so it's easy to find with a little effort.

Apparently, for 2012 they are planning on releasing a '50 Olds 88 and a '57 Ford Tudor, as Snap Tite kits. And likely a Ferrari FF (which I assume will be a RoG kit).

[Harry P.]

Actually, it's on Revell's website...so it's easy to find with a little effort.

Apparently, for 2012 they are planning on releasing a '50 Olds 88 and a '57 Ford Tudor, as Snap Tite kits. And likely a Ferrari FF (which I assume will be a RoG kit).

Sure it's easy to find... if you happen to be in the habit of checking Revell's website regularly... which most people, I'd bet, don't do.

Thanks for posting the news here.

[Monty]

Apparently, for 2012 they are planning on releasing a '50 Olds 88 and a '57 Ford Tudor, as Snap Tite kits.

Yay! Moar Snap Tite kits! I can't git enuff Snap Tite kits!

[Monty]

I don't believe for a second the Ford and the Olds are going to be snap kits ... I think the statement was just clumsily worded. There's not a single reason in the world FOR them to be snap kits and it defies logic that Revell would produce them that way.

The FF, on the other hand ... maybe.

Of course, if someone wanted to copy and paste the statement, we could spend 20 or so pages debating it ...

Actually, I'm inclined to agree with you. The subject matter probably wouldn't appeal to younger buyers, which, I've been told, is the primary market for snap kits. OTOH, I'm still cranked at them for making their '63 'Vette a snapper when the tooling from the '67 'Vette could've provided the means to make it a worthwhile kit.

Edited August 30, 2011 by Monty

[Rob Hall]

I don't believe for a second the Ford and the Olds are going to be snap kits ... I think the statement was just clumsily worded. There's not a single reason in the world FOR them to be snap kits and it defies logic that Revell would produce them that way.

The FF, on the other hand ... maybe.

Of course, if someone wanted to copy and paste the statement, we could spend 20 or so pages debating it ...

From the Revell website:

Revell has invested in new tooling for products like assembly-ready SnapTite® models, including Ferrari®, Star Wars® kits for science fiction fans, and classic cars and planes for nostalgia buffs. Among the latter you'll find '57 Ford® Tudor, '50 Oldsmobile® Coupe and Ventura bomber models coming in 2012.

Key word is the 'and' before 'classic cars'.

[Rob Hall]

That would mean the Ventura bomber is also gonna be a snapper, and somehow, I'm just not seeing that ...

No idea..I don't build planes.

[Rob Hall]

It will be interesting to see what Revell announces this fall...