"new" car designs

[hellonwheelz3]

I hope this post is allowed, if it isn't just delete it.

I have to say that I have seen a lot of classic car names coming back with new designs. For example the dart, charger, challenger, and others. I had a buddy that used to have a 1967 Dodge dart. That thing was sweet! It sounded great, it looked great, and was such a powerful car. The new Dart is UGLY. I like the new charger, but it isn't nearly as cool as the classic version. How does everyone else feel about the new designs of classic cars?

[cobraman]

Isn't the new Dart really an Alfa rebadged ?

[martinfan5]

I dont remember if its re badge or new model, but yes its based on Alfa's platform

I like the Camaro, I like the Challenger, I like the new redesign on the 2011 Charger, I have the agree, the new Dart is not the best looking.

Edited April 29, 2012 by martinfan5

[CadillacPat]

Here you go Hellonwhelz,

Read this thread,

http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=57564

It starts out as any normal Modeling thread and winds up talking about Xboxes,

But, it does have some answers you are looking for.

CadillacPat

[hellonwheelz3]

I forgot to mention the Camaro, and I do like it. Havent heard the part about the alfa platform

[martinfan5]

Here you go Hellonwhelz,

Read this thread,

http://www.modelcars...showtopic=57564

It starts out as any normal Modeling thread and winds up talking about Xboxes,

But, it does have some answers you are looking for.

CadillacPat

And play-stations too

From a Car and Driver arctile on it, just a short part of it

The first Chrysler vehicle to be based on Fiat Group architecture, the front-wheel-drive Dart utilizes lengthened and widened Alfa Romeo Giulietta underpinnings; they’re referred to internally as the “Compact U.S. Wide (CUS-Wide)” platform

[Junkman]

I have nothing against old nameplates. Most of them were used on several generations of cars anyway.

But what I cannot warm up to is retro-design. There is no such thing as coming home after you left it,

and retro design clearly illustrates that.

Edited April 29, 2012 by Junkman

[martinfan5]

I have nothing agains old nameplates. Most of them were used on several generations of cars anyway.

But what I cannot warm up to is retro-design. There is no such thing as coming home after you left it, and retro design clearly illustrates that.

Talking about the Dart, or all of them? but I agree with you too

[Junkman]

All of them. I just don't like retro-design and it's not restricted to cars.

[CadillacPat]

I know what you mean Junkman,

Consider this,

When these "retro design" cars you speak of were originally created in all their splendor and glory, there were no limits or restrictions on the designs.

Today they have tried to continue or emanufacture that same level of name badge credibility but it just doesn't work when they must create those designs within forced parameters of height x width x length x weight.

The names Charger, Challenger, Cuda, Camaro and Mustang just fall way short when riveted onto cookie cutter bodies that all look the same.

CadillacPat

[hellonwheelz3]

cadillac pat and junkman. very well put, both of you. I completely agree. Everything looks the same now days no matter who makes it. Fords look like chevys, and chevy's look like Dodges.

[martinfan5]

I know what you mean Junkman,

Consider this,

When these "retro design" cars you speak of were originally created in all their splendor and glory, there were no limits or restrictions on the designs.

Today they have tried to continue or emanufacture that same level of name badge credibility but it just doesn't work when they must create those designs within forced parameters of height x width x length x weight.

The names Charger, Challenger, Cuda, Camaro and Mustang just fall way short when riveted onto cookie cutter bodies that all look the same.

CadillacPat

For once, I agree with you to a point, a lot of the new cars today do share the same chassis's, and other components, but other then that, they are all different.

Edited April 29, 2012 by martinfan5

[Junkman]

Well, just look at the new Beetle, the Fiat 500, the Mini, the Rover 75, the Jaguar S-Type, yes, even the new Rolls Royces and Bentleys, to name just a few.

From all those manufacturers, I'd expect they come up with something new, since they have a long history in coming up with something new. Instead, they try to sell me this retro nonsense. This actually turns me off, since I get the impression, they ran out of ideas, and hence I have no trust in these products.

Why can't they just stop making stuff we don't need? Why don't they start making stuff we do need? Why do I still have to fill up my car?

There are so many things that urgently need to be invented, yet they waste their and my time on shabby chic.

[Rob Hall]

I don't see anything 'cookie cutter' about the modern Mustang, Challenger, Camaro, Charger, etc. They are all very distinctive designs w/ no resemblance to each other. As far as retro goes, I see nothing wrong w/ a bit of retro--the '05 and up Mustang looks much better than it's predecessor, as does the Camaro, IMO.

There is a wide variety of designs out there today, from retro styled to ultra modern...probably the blandest segment w/ some 'cookie cutter'-isms are the FWD compact and midsize sedan segments... but there is a lot of going on design wise today...look at Nissan--they have a lot of distinctive--even weird designs on the market today.

Edited April 29, 2012 by Rob Hall

[Junkman]

I agree, Rob. Why don't we - for once - start a thread for automobiles, that have fresh and innovative design?

For example, I quite like the look of the Citroen Metisse concept. Now here is a midsize FWD sedan that is fresh, modern, and I haven't seen anything like it before. Oh, and there is a 1:18 scale diecast of it. Sorry, no plastic kit.

Edited April 29, 2012 by Junkman

[Rob Hall]

I agree, Rob. Why don't we - for once - start a thread for automobiles, that have fresh and innovative design?

For example, I quite like the look of the Citroen Metisse concept. It's fresh, it's modern, and I haven't seen it before.

Citroen has had some interesting designs in recent years...I like the DS models...too bad Citroen has been gone from the US since the '70s...the French have done a lot of interesting designs over the years.

[Harry P.]

I don't see anything 'cookie cutter' about the modern Mustang, Challenger, Camaro, Charger, etc. They are all very distinctive designs w/ no resemblance to each other. As far as retro goes, I see nothing wrong w/ a bit of retro--the '05 and up Mustang looks much better than it's predecessor, as does the Camaro, IMO.

Exactly! Anyone who can't tell a Mustang from a Camaro from a Challenger isn't looking.

And as far as retro styling goes, I'm a big fan. I love the new yet old current Mustang and Challenger. IMO, a good design is timeless, and I have absolutely no problem with a manufacturer revisiting and putting a slightly new spin on a "classic" design. I wish the new Charger looked a whole lot more like the classic 68-69 version. In fact, the whole reason I bought a new Mustang is because of the "retro" styling. I love it.

[martinfan5]

Exactly! Anyone who can't tell a Mustang from a Camaro from a Challenger isn't looking.

And as far as retro styling goes, I'm a big fan. I love the new yet old current Mustang and Challenger. IMO, a good design is timeless, and I have absolutely no problem with a manufacturer revisiting and putting a slightly new spin on a "classic" design. I wish the new Charger looked a whole lot more like the classic 68-69 version. In fact, the whole reason I bought a new Mustang is because of the "retro" styling. I love it.

Thats what I dont get, when Dodge did the Challenger, they made it look like the original one with a modern look to it, but why not the Charger?. The new modern style on the Mustangs and the Camaro is very close to the original styling

[CadillacPat]

cadillac pat and junkman. very well put, both of you. I completely agree. Everything looks the same now days no matter who makes it. Fords look like chevys, and chevy's look like Dodges.

You bet Hellonwheelz,

If I would not want it sitting in my driveway then why would I want an example of it in my display case.

The death knoll has been ringing on new automobile style for the last 40 years.

CadillacPat

[martinfan5]

I like having the new Mustangs, Camaro, Challenger and Charger on my display case, sitting next to their original counter parts.

[charlie8575]

New cars have design?

I suppose. But it's the same two designers....the wind-tunnel and the crash barrier, under the direction of a bunch of government dweebs.

That said, once in awhile, something attractive does come out. I do agree with Harry in that the new Mustang is probably one of the better efforts of late. If I were in the market for such a car, I'd certainly consider one.

Personally, I do kinda like the new Dart. At least they're attempting to give it some personality. Let's see how they actually look before rendering final judgement, though.

Charlie Larkin

[Harry P.]

Well, you can argue whether or not FWD is better or worse than RWD, you can argue the merits of a manual shifter vs. an automatic, you can argue gas vs. diesel... they all have their pluses and minuses... but you can't argue styling. Styling is completely subjective. It's like arguing about which color is the best, or which ice cream flavor is the best. There's no "right" answer.

[martinfan5]

But even in the 60's and 70's and the 50's as well, the cars shared a lot of the same styling, so its not different then from today

Edited April 29, 2012 by martinfan5

[charlie8575]

But even in the 60's and 70's and the 50's as well, the cars shared a lot of the same styling, so its not different then from today

At least you could tell what they were from fifty feet away...

Charlie Larkin

[martinfan5]

At least you could tell what they were from fifty feet away...

Charlie Larkin

That is true, but I have no problems with the new cars of today and telling them apart from each other, at the same time, they are a few new cars that I have to take a second or third look at to be able to tell.