Meh ...

Pritch wrote:

---

I do agree that everyone has been trying to reinvent the wheel since it was invented. It still just goes around. There are too many attempts at remakes of all kinds of products. Original is a once only no matter what company or product. Reminds me of people who try to modify the word unique by putting adjectives such as quite, very and really in front of it. Unique means one of a kind. One cannot do better than that.

---

 Perfectly stated.

I drove a rental 5 litre GT Mustang last year. I was impressed with it, so much that if I had the need for a new musclecar, I'd consider a GT convertible. 

Pritch wrote:

---

I do agree that everyone has been trying to reinvent the wheel since it was invented. It still just goes around. There are too many attempts at remakes of all kinds of products. Original is a once only no matter what company or product. Reminds me of people who try to modify the word unique by putting adjectives such as quite, very and really in front of it. Unique means one of a kind. One cannot do better than that.

---

 While generally true, it depends on what you are talking about.  Yeah, calling it a Mach 1 just because it was a successful brand has perhaps been done too many times.

However where I disagree is when classic styling cues are successfully used to create a new, modern version of a car.  While I'm not a big fan of the '15-up Mustangs, I am a fan of the '05 - '09s (in fact I wanted one when they were introduced, and finally bought one 9 years after the fact).  I considered it a "greatest hits" on Mustang styling, but on a newer chassis without the drop-in fuel tank, with modern structure and safety equipment, etc.  Nobody's trying to pass it off as a '65 fastback, but you have no problem in seeing the likeness.

I consider the Challenger in a similar vein - the Camaro was a nice try but missed the target a little.  I did like one of the aftermarket "Firebird" conversions that was done, though.  

Of course opinions are like bellybuttons, but that's mine.  

Oh, and sorry to all I've offended by talking Mustangs...  

MC wrote:

---

I consider the Challenger in a similar vein

---

 ... but they got it right! Not like Camaro or Mustang.

Pontiacanada wrote:

---

MC wrote:

---

I consider the Challenger in a similar vein

---

 ... but they got it right! Not like Camaro or Mustang.

---

 Well... not really.  When you look at the 'new' Challenger vs the original, it looks quite bloated - it is very tall from the character line down.  The roofline is off a bit compared to the original - not as bad as Camaro, but not as good as ('05-'14) Mustang.  When they showed the original concept, Challenger was an actual 2-door hardtop, but apparently they gave up on it due to rollover standards (which has always perplexed me because you can buy a convertible with a fabric roof, but a hardtop without pillars isn't strong enough).

However, all of the 'new' muscle/pony cars are bigger and more bloated than the originals.  The Challenger was 'challenged' because they had to make the LX platform for the 300/Charger (big, chunky 4-doors) work for a sleek 2-door coupe.  Apparently, to adhere to the required "hard points" of the platform, it had to have a tall profile.

I do feel they all captured the feel of the originals somewhat, if looked at in a vacuum.  The only issue I had with Camaro is that it looked more like a caricature of the original car with its exaggerated quarter panels and chopped up roofline.  I do like the car overall.  And, as stated above, I feel the '05-'09 Mustang captured the spirit of the originals the best of the 3.