Michael Maskalans wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 10, 2005, at 23:27, TerribleTom wrote:
>
>> GTO = rebadged Aussie Holden Monero = SUCKS. The guys at work all
>> like the GTO - I think its a pile.
>>
>> Make it too modern and not retro enough - (like the GTO and now the
>> charger) and you loose the diehard follower segment.
>
>
> the current Ponti Goat isn't trying to be retro at all. it's got almost
> the same lines as the previous generation Monte Carlo (how's that for
> another bastardized name plate? Where's my '89 GNX anyway...).
> That's
> lifting the name for a similar principle as the original - not the same
> thing as the Charger seems to be trying and that the Mustang is doing
> and that the Thunderbird utterly failed at (my opinion isn't quite that
> simple on the Tbird, but I do hate it).
I didn't touch upon the T-bird for those very reasons - that, in my
opinion, is a perfect example of going a little too far Retro. For some
reason however - the New Beetle didn't suffer that fate and is more
retro than the new T-Bird. I think that has to do with the fact that
there can only be ONE Bug... and there was really no way on earth they
could have made the New Beetle too retro for people to love. (With the
exception that if they went with summer heaters and winter airc
onditioners and a rear mounted engine hehe, that might be too retro for
the mainstream)
The T-Bird just didn't make it. That car, throughout its entire life,
has been an oddity. Perhaps its better off being buried once and for
all. The only really nice T-bird was the very first few cars. Through
the 60's, 70's and 80's the car was changed around from one bastardized
model to the next. The final mid 90s models were actually very nice
cars in my opinion. I have a friend who had one with the supercharger
and he had it for almost 10 years, before he traded it in for a Jeep GC,
a couple years ago.
> Just why is [the Holden Monaro] a pile, anyway? Do Holdens automatically suck for some
> reason I don't know? Do GMs automatically suck for some reason I
> completely understand and usually agree with?
Well the fact that I think the car sucks, has nothing to do with its
Aussie origins, and only a little bit with the fact that its a GM. I
don't like GM products very much, with the few exceptions of the 89
Caprice, the older S10-Blazers (late 80s), the 1959 Caddie, the GTO, the
1976 Chevy pickup... and Camaros. Oh yeah and the 57 Chevy - everyone
loves that car - who wouldn't?
I am a self admitted Camaro nut. Mustang vs Camaro? Camaro all the way.
Which is funny because I also call myself a Ford Sympathizer. Must
have something to do with the fact there have always been Ford's in my
family.
The fact that I seriously dislike the new GTO is because it is nothing
but pure vanilla. Oh I've read the reviews and am aware that it is a
very very good performance car by the numbers and test drives.
But honestly - to stick a nameplate like the GTO on a very mundane
styled car is a disgrace. It looks like every other Grand Am, Grand
Prix, and Bonneville.
As I stated before, yeah I'm aware that the retro design trend is a
rather dangerous ball of radioactive material for auto makers. Everyone
and their brother has an opinion on how a remake of the original should
look. I think the best way to do it - is to lend a good strong slant on
design cues from the past, without going too far... and with a totally
modern power train and mechanical/performance abilities. As opposed to
going to either of the two extremes. One being a line for line rebuild
of the original (thunderbird), and the other being a totally unrelated
body style with an old name stuck on it (GTO, Charger).
Again i'll state that with the Charger, DC went and stuck something that
resembles a truck grille on a passenger car and it made it look funky.
Some might like that - hooray for you! I don't! Having just stated my
opinions on how a retro design should be done... I'll go even further to
say that I don't mind if a manufact. goes and makes a car look nothing
at all like its predicessors, but make it look GOOD all on its own -
without having to rely on its ancestors looks, to be attractive.
In my opinion the GTO and Charger fall short of that mandate.
> Mike Maskalans <http://mike.tepidcola.com/dodge/>
> '98 Dakota SLT 318 4x4 SFA & 35s
> '84 RamCharger Royale SE 360 4x4 stock
> mobile.612.618.4652 home.585.935.7129
>
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Attention Infidels: I am your official DBDoMPfIWUMOT! Terrible Tom -- AIM & Yahoo Name: SilverEightynine http://members.aol.com/silvereightynine/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 01 2005 - 00:18:31 EST