Worst current Retro cars
10-02-2009, 05:44 PM
#1
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Worst current Retro cars
Just thought I would get some opinions of some of the current Retro cars Detroit has given us in the past decades. Not that these cars were bad in themselves but where the designers missed the boat. My first pick for the worst goes to the Thunderbird. I remember the hype before it was built. About designers feeling a 55 to capture the lines of the old icon. Phooey. What a beast. Second I vote the recent GTO. Great car, but what were these boys at GM drinking. Nothing even comes close to the lines on the 64.
10-04-2009, 11:34 PM
#6
Burning Brakes
Just thought I would get some opinions of some of the current Retro cars Detroit has given us in the past decades. Not that these cars were bad in themselves but where the designers missed the boat. My first pick for the worst goes to the Thunderbird. I remember the hype before it was built. About designers feeling a 55 to capture the lines of the old icon. Phooey. What a beast. Second I vote the recent GTO. Great car, but what were these boys at GM drinking. Nothing even comes close to the lines on the 64.
My pick is the SSR. Ugly and pointless and before they got a decent motor, slow as well. Typical of GM's confusion about what people want(Aztek). At one time I would have lumped the HHR in there as well because it seemed to be just a pathetic ripoff of the PT Cruiser but it is really is a lot better designed vehicle than the PT. I was shocked the first time I rode in one.
I agree the GTO was a bad idea, as does the rest of the world, but not a retro vehicle, just a badge.
The PT was junk but it was a better car than the Neon it was based on and bonus points for being the first real success.
The Viper was the original wasn't it? A cool car but how bad is it when you steal some other manufacturer's classic? The name AND the general design AND the tuner? I am surprised they didn't make the Dodge Stallion as well
But too cool to call them out, and Ford had their head so far up their asses back then they sure weren't going to do it.The Prowler was much like the T Bird. Over priced, but also rode like a buckboard, and had an Intrepid powertrain. But the extreme looks get them a pass from me. Still the most over the top and daring. Dodge really are the retro guys.
The GT, Mustang, Camaro, and Challenger all work for me.
I guess I rate the SSR and the T Bird as 1-2 on the mistake list. The others were either better packages or at least sold a bit.
10-05-2009, 12:18 PM
#7
Pro
I also agree on the SSR and the T-Bird. The T-bird's interior is straight out of the Lincoln LS and to me is more of a over 60 kinda cruiser. GTO should have been way better. After I heard about the retro mustang, and the challenger, and the camaro... I was really really hoping that GM would introduce a retro 1970 style Chevelle. I really love the 66-71 Chevelles and wish GM would have made a retro example with the LS3 as the base engine and the LS7 as the SS. In a dream world that would be cool but with an LS7 I feel the price would push $50-$60k and they wouldn't sell too many at that price. Just my .02 on this retro thread.
10-05-2009, 02:02 PM
#8
Burning Brakes
Member Since: Oct 2006
Location: Northern Indiana. SW FLA
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to step in and defend the SSR.
I just bought my wife an 06 slingshot Yellow SSR loaded with every option..with only 9,600 miles
I gotta tell you I love that car..
I know it was a disaster for GM when they came out but this is a cool
ride for 30K used.....
I wish Vettes came with a retractable hardtop....
Comment she was asked one day while driving...
"How long did it take to build that?"
Scott
I just bought my wife an 06 slingshot Yellow SSR loaded with every option..with only 9,600 miles
I gotta tell you I love that car..
I know it was a disaster for GM when they came out but this is a cool
ride for 30K used.....
I wish Vettes came with a retractable hardtop....
Comment she was asked one day while driving...
"How long did it take to build that?"
Scott
10-05-2009, 02:38 PM
#9
Racer
Member Since: Sep 2009
Location: Monroe LA
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh yeah I almost forgot about the prowler. It's still one of my favorite stylized cars. The only things I hate about it is the v6 powerplant and the lack of any luggage room. I like taking trips that last more than a few hours.
10-12-2009, 09:33 AM
#11
Cruising
Member Since: Sep 2009
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've got to defend the Thunderbird a bit. It got a lot of grief because it wasn't a Ford Corvette, but it was very stylish and nice to drive. It was certainly fast enough (0-60 6.0) As for its interior being a Lincoln LS, there are MUCH worse places to be than inside a Lincoln LS. It's a fine long-trip car for 2 people.
As for the Prowler, it was a triumph of style over substance, but what style! It wouldn't have mattered if it had a Neon drivetrain- it was just so good looking that I can't believe they ever built it. Its performance (0-60 7.0) was similar to the Thunderbird's, and both were far faster than anything from the era they were meant to suggest. Compared to most hotrods, the Prowler's brakes and handling at least would be stellar, if not its engine.
The one that I don't understand still being around is the VW New Beetle. It's based on the now elderly Golf IV platform. It's a competent enough car, but it's not cheap, it's not simple, it's not fast, and it's appallingly troublesome for what amounts to a car that debuted in 1997. I'm not sure if it's the Mexican assembly plant that builds most US Volkswagens or if the company itself is that bad, but their reliability is just awful and has been for 15 years at least. There have been rumors of a replacement for the NB, but the seriously conflicting descriptions tend to make them sound unlikely.
As for the Prowler, it was a triumph of style over substance, but what style! It wouldn't have mattered if it had a Neon drivetrain- it was just so good looking that I can't believe they ever built it. Its performance (0-60 7.0) was similar to the Thunderbird's, and both were far faster than anything from the era they were meant to suggest. Compared to most hotrods, the Prowler's brakes and handling at least would be stellar, if not its engine.
The one that I don't understand still being around is the VW New Beetle. It's based on the now elderly Golf IV platform. It's a competent enough car, but it's not cheap, it's not simple, it's not fast, and it's appallingly troublesome for what amounts to a car that debuted in 1997. I'm not sure if it's the Mexican assembly plant that builds most US Volkswagens or if the company itself is that bad, but their reliability is just awful and has been for 15 years at least. There have been rumors of a replacement for the NB, but the seriously conflicting descriptions tend to make them sound unlikely.
10-12-2009, 02:53 PM
#12
Burning Brakes
I've got to defend the Thunderbird a bit. It got a lot of grief because it wasn't a Ford Corvette, but it was very stylish and nice to drive. It was certainly fast enough (0-60 6.0) As for its interior being a Lincoln LS, there are MUCH worse places to be than inside a Lincoln LS. It's a fine long-trip car for 2 people.
As for the Prowler, it was a triumph of style over substance, but what style! It wouldn't have mattered if it had a Neon drivetrain- it was just so good looking that I can't believe they ever built it. Its performance (0-60 7.0) was similar to the Thunderbird's, and both were far faster than anything from the era they were meant to suggest. Compared to most hotrods, the Prowler's brakes and handling at least would be stellar, if not its engine.
The one that I don't understand still being around is the VW New Beetle. It's based on the now elderly Golf IV platform. It's a competent enough car, but it's not cheap, it's not simple, it's not fast, and it's appallingly troublesome for what amounts to a car that debuted in 1997. I'm not sure if it's the Mexican assembly plant that builds most US Volkswagens or if the company itself is that bad, but their reliability is just awful and has been for 15 years at least. There have been rumors of a replacement for the NB, but the seriously conflicting descriptions tend to make them sound unlikely.
As for the Prowler, it was a triumph of style over substance, but what style! It wouldn't have mattered if it had a Neon drivetrain- it was just so good looking that I can't believe they ever built it. Its performance (0-60 7.0) was similar to the Thunderbird's, and both were far faster than anything from the era they were meant to suggest. Compared to most hotrods, the Prowler's brakes and handling at least would be stellar, if not its engine.
The one that I don't understand still being around is the VW New Beetle. It's based on the now elderly Golf IV platform. It's a competent enough car, but it's not cheap, it's not simple, it's not fast, and it's appallingly troublesome for what amounts to a car that debuted in 1997. I'm not sure if it's the Mexican assembly plant that builds most US Volkswagens or if the company itself is that bad, but their reliability is just awful and has been for 15 years at least. There have been rumors of a replacement for the NB, but the seriously conflicting descriptions tend to make them sound unlikely.
The Beetle gets high marks for style, and it is an M3 compared to the original, but it really doesn't stack up that well against the other cars in it's class. VW in general aren't as reliable as their reputation, it's German engineering rather than German reliability, and this is the worst of a mediocre lot. They need to quit reusing old chassis bits and build it from the ground up, because they can keep milking that unique styling fior years.. I totally agree the car has a junk reputation.
10-20-2009, 02:54 PM
#13
Race Director
Member Since: Aug 2009
Location: Detroit MI
Posts: 16,976
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the Prowler was a great car for its target market. Middle aged guys with lots of disposable income that wanted a "classic" car but didn't grow up turning wrenches. They didn't want to deal with the maintenance of a real classic, and you could even finance a Prowler. A great car for cruising or homecoming parades.
The Beetle was terrible...they tried so hard to keep the original lines they sacrificed interior comfort...and what was with the bud vase in the dashboard?!? People actually paid huge premiums over sticker on those too, for a LONG time.
I think the Mini is a pretty good car, actually. Performance is surprisingly good, they're well made, and very true to the original cars.
I think the T-Bird was a pretty good car, again considering its target market. The original Thunderbird was comparable to the Corvette when it came out, but they diverged wildly in the decades to follow. The Corvette became a muscle car, then a sports car. The T-Bird became a luxury car, then a sports-touring car. The new 'Bird was a step in the right direction that didn't go so far as to alienate the loyal customers, who didn't want it to be a 'Vette wannabe. It was a car that blended a little of the original T-Bird, a little of the Turbo/Supercoupe, and a lot of the prowler. A great cruiser for a more sedate audience, with enough performance to keep them excited.
And now the GTO, what I feel is a VERY unappreciated car. The original GTOs weren't anything special, just regular production Pontiacs with big, powerful motors. The current one is exactly that...a regular production Pontiac with a 'Vette engine. Nothing wrong with that, and it's more GTO than anything that's carried that badge since the early '70s. I think they scored a win there; anything else wouldn't have been "GTO."
The Viper wasn't really as much of a ripoff of the Cobra as the previous post suggests. It was Lee Iacocca and Carroll Shelby teaming up once again to build Shelby's dream car...they just worked for a different manufacturer this time. A close friend of mine worked on the Viper (and Prowler) projects nearly from start to finish. They weren't trying to rebuild the Cobra, although that was the strongest influence (the Corvette had a strong influence too, btw, among others), they were trying to do what they did before, applying the newest technology to make it even better this time. Shelby wanted a race car with the bare minimum to make it street legal...he didn't want A/C, a radio, or a top on the car. His quote was something like, "if you want to listen to the radio or drive in the rain, this isn't the car for you." I'm told there were heated arguments about whether these were ultimately optioned in the car (for example, the original targa tops were afterthoughts, which fit very poorly...Carroll musta won that one). I think they did a great job, and I'm really sad to think they probably won't make them much longer...guess I'll go with a Factory Five when it's time to go that route.
I love the Challenger, it looks like Chip Foose Overhauled an original one.
The Mustang has looked good since 1994, with each redesign following the originals.
I don't love the Camaro as much as I did when it was first shown; I think the Challenger did a better job, and the Camaro is supposed to be the AFFORDABLE Chevy, not a direct competitor to the Corvette. You buy a Camaro when you graduate from college and a Corvette when your kids do, right? 50,000 for the ENTRY LEVEL Chevy?!? That's just crazy, especially since most of their target market is unemployed. They're selling very well, so I guess I don't know everything, haha.
I really always liked the Dodge Ram pickups, too, even though I'm not a truck guy. One of the first vehicles to go retro, and still looking good today.
The BMW Z3 and Mazda Miata are two successes in the retro field as well.
The Beetle was terrible...they tried so hard to keep the original lines they sacrificed interior comfort...and what was with the bud vase in the dashboard?!? People actually paid huge premiums over sticker on those too, for a LONG time.
I think the Mini is a pretty good car, actually. Performance is surprisingly good, they're well made, and very true to the original cars.
I think the T-Bird was a pretty good car, again considering its target market. The original Thunderbird was comparable to the Corvette when it came out, but they diverged wildly in the decades to follow. The Corvette became a muscle car, then a sports car. The T-Bird became a luxury car, then a sports-touring car. The new 'Bird was a step in the right direction that didn't go so far as to alienate the loyal customers, who didn't want it to be a 'Vette wannabe. It was a car that blended a little of the original T-Bird, a little of the Turbo/Supercoupe, and a lot of the prowler. A great cruiser for a more sedate audience, with enough performance to keep them excited.
And now the GTO, what I feel is a VERY unappreciated car. The original GTOs weren't anything special, just regular production Pontiacs with big, powerful motors. The current one is exactly that...a regular production Pontiac with a 'Vette engine. Nothing wrong with that, and it's more GTO than anything that's carried that badge since the early '70s. I think they scored a win there; anything else wouldn't have been "GTO."
The Viper wasn't really as much of a ripoff of the Cobra as the previous post suggests. It was Lee Iacocca and Carroll Shelby teaming up once again to build Shelby's dream car...they just worked for a different manufacturer this time. A close friend of mine worked on the Viper (and Prowler) projects nearly from start to finish. They weren't trying to rebuild the Cobra, although that was the strongest influence (the Corvette had a strong influence too, btw, among others), they were trying to do what they did before, applying the newest technology to make it even better this time. Shelby wanted a race car with the bare minimum to make it street legal...he didn't want A/C, a radio, or a top on the car. His quote was something like, "if you want to listen to the radio or drive in the rain, this isn't the car for you." I'm told there were heated arguments about whether these were ultimately optioned in the car (for example, the original targa tops were afterthoughts, which fit very poorly...Carroll musta won that one). I think they did a great job, and I'm really sad to think they probably won't make them much longer...guess I'll go with a Factory Five when it's time to go that route.
I love the Challenger, it looks like Chip Foose Overhauled an original one.
The Mustang has looked good since 1994, with each redesign following the originals.
I don't love the Camaro as much as I did when it was first shown; I think the Challenger did a better job, and the Camaro is supposed to be the AFFORDABLE Chevy, not a direct competitor to the Corvette. You buy a Camaro when you graduate from college and a Corvette when your kids do, right? 50,000 for the ENTRY LEVEL Chevy?!? That's just crazy, especially since most of their target market is unemployed. They're selling very well, so I guess I don't know everything, haha.
I really always liked the Dodge Ram pickups, too, even though I'm not a truck guy. One of the first vehicles to go retro, and still looking good today.
The BMW Z3 and Mazda Miata are two successes in the retro field as well.
Last edited by dpd3672; 10-20-2009 at 03:01 PM.
10-20-2009, 06:24 PM
#14
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
[QUOTE=dmk9561;1571791001]I've got to defend the Thunderbird a bit. It got a lot of grief because it wasn't a Ford Corvette, but it was very stylish and nice to drive. It was certainly fast enough (0-60 6.0) As for its interior being a Lincoln LS, there are MUCH worse places to be than inside a Lincoln LS. It's a fine long-trip car for 2 people.
I don't think there is anything to defend. This was the worst idea since the Edsel(although the Edsel was a good idea its timing was bad). Some things are better left alone and, the fake modern T Bird was one of them. Fords attempt was to go after the Mercedes , BMW crowd ( fat chance) the Corvette never entered their minds. The hype was as bad as the Edsel when. we were told designers were rubbing the lines of the 55 to get the feel for the new car. Please. Since I am a fan of the early birds even the four passengers (owning two myself) IMO this fake was an insult to true Thunder bird enthusiasts. It had none of the spirit the original car had. Anyone can built a decent handling car today with all the technology at designers finger tips .As far as performance it was lame. Family sedans today can match most of what some thought were muscle performance decades before. I rejoice Ford pulled the plug on this beast I just wish they would of done it sooner.Next time you at a car show go look at the nostalgic two seater T-Birds. You will soon realize only resemblance to the older Icons is the emblem on the newer retro.
I don't think there is anything to defend. This was the worst idea since the Edsel(although the Edsel was a good idea its timing was bad). Some things are better left alone and, the fake modern T Bird was one of them. Fords attempt was to go after the Mercedes , BMW crowd ( fat chance) the Corvette never entered their minds. The hype was as bad as the Edsel when. we were told designers were rubbing the lines of the 55 to get the feel for the new car. Please. Since I am a fan of the early birds even the four passengers (owning two myself) IMO this fake was an insult to true Thunder bird enthusiasts. It had none of the spirit the original car had. Anyone can built a decent handling car today with all the technology at designers finger tips .As far as performance it was lame. Family sedans today can match most of what some thought were muscle performance decades before. I rejoice Ford pulled the plug on this beast I just wish they would of done it sooner.Next time you at a car show go look at the nostalgic two seater T-Birds. You will soon realize only resemblance to the older Icons is the emblem on the newer retro.
