[BigAls87Z28]

Anyone see it? Ill look for it on there website. It looked awesome! The rear could use a little work on a profile shot, but the whole shape and design of the car looks great, and guess what! THEY DIDNT HAVE TO MAKE A RETROMOBILE TO DO IT!! NOVEL IDEA EH?

More pics on there site! I havent read the article, but I would get this over any stupid Mustang. Hemi power, 6spd, IRS RWD, killer looks. Sorry, but unless the GTO was packing more then its 350hp, Id take the 345hp Hemi Challanger for now. Too bad this isnt a real car.
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/features/.../0404phr_dodge/

 

[giagastormer]

That looks terrible, GTO lives forever!!

 

[BBcamaroSS]

Thats gay. This is a charger:

:friday: :beer: :drunk: :drunk: :zippy: :wub:

 

[oldskls10]

The old Charger concept was way better. Looks like they stole Cadillac's styling and added a crosshair grill. Looks nasty if you ask me.

 

[jknudson98]

Ahhh, Chris Horton!! The designer behind the infamous and amazingly popular 5th Gen Camaro Concept!

 

[Rex Raider]

I was going to say that it looked a lot like Horton's work.
I thought someone had maybe photochopped his camaro.

Unfortunately these look fake.

 

[desmo9]

Yeah, I always liked the second one shown. A new look, but enough cues from the old Charger to make it unmistakably Mopar. The first one is, uh... clever, but the proportions are weird. Doesn't really say "Charger"... might as well call it Polara, because it's polarizing :afro:

I'd expect the new Charger to have some retro-influence, though not as much as the Mustang. They'll not do a GTO, bringing back a name that hints at nothing of the original.

 

[yoblues]

Another boomer nostalgia car that will cost over 30 grand. They only company that gets it is Ford. 2005 - 300hp/300+ pounds of torque - RWD - Mustang GT - for about 25 grand.

 

[demonspeed]

The original concept was when dodge was just revamping the k-car line with the Intrepid, Stratus, Avenger, etc... That was the style of that time period in Chrysler design. Now, they are going with the sculpted look, which is obviously more modern. I like the old, but the new one isn't bad either. Hello Chevrolet, where is the Camaro is this?

 

[Innotech]

WTF? That looks like a Cadillac cien! a Lot of similar styling tuoches, the shape, proportions...its a dodge Cien

 

[simmonsmb]

Yeah, I agree that his work on the Camaro was much better than on the Charger. This one is too easily identifiable as a CG picture. The earlier Charger concept is a lot cooler IMO. Good work though. He does have a lot of talent. This one does need more tweaking though.

 

[desmo9]

Originally posted by bigals87z28@Feb 14 2004, 01:14 AM
Anyone see it? Ill look for it on there website. It looked awesome! The rear could use a little work on a profile shot, but the whole shape and design of the car looks great, and guess what! THEY DIDNT HAVE TO MAKE A RETROMOBILE TO DO IT!! NOVEL IDEA EH?

Noticed that PHR implied that the Camaro is a "kids car" in the article, which is a key reason it died. Interesting. Kind of expect that from C&D, not PHR. BUt I suppose the truth is the truth no matter where you read it.

On another note, I understand GM made an agreement with CAW, when St. Therese was closed, that the Camaro/Firebord would never be built anyplace else, thus they'll probably never be built again. What kind of horse$hit is that? We can no longer use a legendary American nameplate because of an agreement made with a Canadain union???!!! St. Therese was not the only F-body assembler. The cars were made in Van Nuys, Calif. for years. The CAW does not own name or assembly rights to these cars. I think this is a poor excuse used by Lutz because he, in fact, does not want the cars to return. Who has the scoop on this fairly credible rumor?

 

[banzai79]

I heard they couldn't move the nameplate for 3 years, but I'm not sure if that's model years or real years. Either way, GM can reuse them pretty soon. That's why we occasionally hear about a Camaro return in 2007.

 

[BigAls87Z28]

Originally posted by desmo9+Feb 14 2004, 05:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (desmo9 @ Feb 14 2004, 05:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-bigals87z28@Feb 14 2004, 01:14 AM
Anyone see it?  Ill look for it on there website.  It looked awesome!  The rear could use a little work on a profile shot, but the whole shape and design of the car looks great, and guess what!  THEY DIDNT HAVE TO MAKE A RETROMOBILE TO DO IT!! NOVEL IDEA EH? 

Noticed that PHR implied that the Camaro is a "kids car" in the article, which is a key reason it died. Interesting. Kind of expect that from C&D, not PHR. BUt I suppose the truth is the truth no matter where you read it.

On another note, I understand GM made an agreement with CAW, when St. Therese was closed, that the Camaro/Firebord would never be built anyplace else, thus they'll probably never be built again. What kind of horse$hit is that? We can no longer use a legendary American nameplate because of an agreement made with a Canadain union???!!! St. Therese was not the only F-body assembler. The cars were made in Van Nuys, Calif. for years. The CAW does not own name or assembly rights to these cars. I think this is a poor excuse used by Lutz because he, in fact, does not want the cars to return. Who has the scoop on this fairly credible rumor? [/b][/quote]
the camaro and firebird thing and the CAW is true from as much info as I have.

And as of 1993, the only factory making fbodies was the Ste.T plant. Norwood was first(where my car was made!), then they opened up the Van Nuys, Cali plant late in 67 I belive. Norwood shut down in 87, and Van picked up the rest of the production. I belive that the Ste.T plant at the time was one of the best factories in GM's line up.

I dont wana turn this into a camaro debate, but im finding it hard to belive that the Mustang wasnt a "kids" car too. I see more kids in mustangs then I do 50 year old guys. I say the mustang is more of a kids car then the Camaro.

 

[StevenJ]

Originally posted by bigals87z28@Feb 14 2004, 01:14 AM
Anyone see it?  Ill look for it on there website.  It looked awesome!  The rear could use a little work on a profile shot, but the whole shape and design of the car looks great, and guess what!  THEY DIDNT HAVE TO MAKE A RETROMOBILE TO DO IT!! NOVEL IDEA EH? 

The new 05' Mustang is excellent. Just because you are a GM fan I'd appreciate you not ranting on a great car. Now I've said my opinions on the GTO and what not and admitted where I was wrong but mind keeping this "THEY DIDNT HAVE TO MAKE A RETROMOBILE TO DO IT!! NOVEL IDEA EH?" to yourself buddy. If you can't accept that the new 05' is a masterpiece, then you must be blind. This Charger concept is awsome btw. Thank you for finding it. I posted a link to it on BON.

 

[yoblues]

I love Chevy's but I am not in a good mood today so I will make it simple. Come Sept you will be able to go to a Ford Dealer and for about 25 GRAND buy a 300hp/300+ lbs of torque RWD Mustang GT. You can piss and moan all you want, that car sucks I would never buy one, BUT if your a GM or MOPAR guy all you have are drawings to look at of cars that may or may NOT be built. I would rather buy a real car than a drawing of one. Thats why I hate GM suits. I do not want to hear about the GTO or SSR either. 33 Grand/GTO 40 Grand/SSR . 25 Grand Mustang that will propably outrun either of them wins, never mind what C. Shelby will be cooking up.

 

[demonspeed]

Originally posted by StevenJ@Feb 14 2004, 04:21 PM
If you can't accept that the new 05' is a masterpiece, then you must be blind.

Pure opinion. Myself, being born in 83 and growing up around the late Fox body and SN95s, I think the retro 05 is ugly. I prefer the 99-04 over any of the previous Mustangs.

I'm probably also in the minority that would choose a 3rd gen over a 1st gen Camaro.

 

[StevenJ]

Even if you don't like the styling, mechanically it is still a feat. 300 hp, 318 lbs torque, a BMW like front suspension, and it still runs on 87 octane. It certainly is well engineered.

 

[BigAls87Z28]

Originally posted by StevenJ@Feb 15 2004, 01:23 AM
Even if you don't like the styling, mechanically it is still a feat. 300 hp, 318 lbs torque, a BMW like front suspension, and it still runs on 87 octane. It certainly is well engineered.

I dunno about 87. I wouldnt go lower then 89. It has about 10:1 compression. My Z has 9.5:1, and If I put less then 89, it will ping and knock.
Masterpiece? Maybe back in 67. The Ferrari 360 Moden is a masterpiece, the 1963 split window Vette is a masterpiece. The Lambo Galliardo(sp?) is a masterpiece. The 05 Mustang is a revised version of an old idea. BMW front suspension? MacPherson strut set is in a lot of cars. BMW suspension would be more of an active suspension found on vettes.
The new mustang just looks bulky. Its not as slim and streamlined like its derived older version. It just looks so un-aerodynamic. That front end really bothers me a whole lot. It just looks like a brick with 4x4 lights attached to the front of it. I understand that a lot of people like it, but not me.
The mustang will never look good in my eyes. I dont care what year with how much hp. Strap 4 turbos to the thing, I could give a crap. Call it being biased or whatever, but IMO the Stang has never, and will never look good.

how did I know this was gunna turn into this?

 

[yoblues]

Bigals87, the point is, FORD took the plunge. At least the 05 Mustang is a performence car that the average Joe can actually afford to buy. Just like the old days. What the bleep is wrong with GM and Mopar. 30+ grand for vehicles that are nice to look at but how many average people can afford them? I would rather have an 05 Camaro but the truth is that car does not exist, and may never exist, neither does any Mopar product. You can't knock Ford for trying something GM and Mopar do not have the balls to try. In the end, would you rather have a Mustang or a picture/drawing of something from GM and Mopar that may never be built?