Classics. Chevy Classics. Ford Classics. Chrysler Classics. I’m sure I’m not alone in thinking that modern cars have too little personality.
The auto companies could make new replicas of their classic cars like the '57 Chevy, '65 Mustang, or '68 Camaro. Make the bodies identical to the originals, but with the benefit of modern materials, drivetrain, and electronics. Maybe even make the interiors identical, with some clever engineering you could hide modern conveniences in a classic-styled dash.
The redesigned Mustang is one of the better examples of retro design, but why not just make it look like
Most of those cars have the aerodynamics of a brick.
I can’t see them selling enough to warrant production. The big guys can’t just make a few cars, (like 100 thousand units) and turn a profit.
It would be cool though. I bet a '57 Chevy has plenty of room for hybrid engine and you would still have that huge trunk.
How small the cars were? I’ve been to a lot of classic car shows, the sizes are generally larger than modern cars (excluding SUVs…) Bench seats, huge trunks, huge engine compartments.
I think this is a great idea. I also think most people who are interested in classic cars don’t care very much about the aerodynamics. It’s my personal opinion that “aero” styling has resulted in all new cars looking the same - Mercedes look exactly like Kias, Jaguars exactly like Hyundais. Cars’ once-distinct personalities have been erased by this fanatical enslavement to the wind tunnel.
I bet if you introduced a modern version of this classic (with smaller engine and a good 5-speed0 it would sell like hotcakes! I too am tired of generic, jellybean cars. I think that is the future for detroit-small production runs of unique cars. let the Koreans crank out appliance cars. Detroit could alos make money, by being the FIRST in NON_THROUGHAWAY cars-think about it; you take your 5-year old Camaro in for a total renovation-for $12K, you get a new drivetrain interior updates, and new paint!
No, it looks like a classic muscle car. There’s nothing about that GTO in the picture that looks like a “ghetto cruiser.” When I hear “ghetto cruiser” I think mid to early 60s full-size sedan, with low-rider modification, or a 70s or 80s land yacht with large chrome rims, etc.
Half the problem is that the wheelbase is much smaller than the body. Further, there’s a lot of wasted space in the doors and spaceframe.
Basically, to rebuild a 1950s car with 2007 tech, you’re looking at a totally new car, inside and out. Plus, of course, legal issues. Those bumpers were lethal. There’s laws on how high hoods can be, some places. And the hood ornaments, too.
I’m not an engineer but I think that the skin from a car of that era wouldn’t fit on top of what we know of today as a proper vehicle. The dimensions of the chassis and wheelbase, combined with whats necessary for a proper geometric setup for the engine and suspension wouldn’t add up.
Also, I recall watching a show on Speed Network, where they tested for actual performance numbers for stock setups of vintage cars… such as the old GTO’s, Mustangs, and such. These were in mint condition as if they were fresh off of the dealers showroom floor with no modifications. They were equiped with the largest engines for the particular model and year and were arguably the top muscle cars ever built. They put the cars through the paces of modern tests that you’d expect in a car review (slalom, 0-60, braking, cornering etc.) The old cars were HORRIBLE. Most couldn’t even complete a modern slalom course. I think the conclusion was that a late model Honda Accord could out do the vintage cars in every catagory. Yes, even from 0-60, I didn’t believe it either. I’ll have to look around to find it.
I loves me some muscle car. I just know it’s a visceral thing. You build them into what you want and you savor the sight sound and smell that only old Detroit metal can give.
Complete body/chassis/shells of 1967 Mustang Fastbacks are available now, and soon there will be late 60’s Mustangs and Camaros available. With all the other parts being reproduced to restore old original cars, these shells will almost make it possible to build all new vintage cars. Many of the original brakes, suspensions and drivetrains can be replaced with more modern and updated available pieces, so the cars can drive and handle much better than the original versions.
The problem is, this will all be done on a very small scale, and the whole thing will have to be hand assembled, so they will be very expensive.
The problem with having one of the big guys start making the old cars again is making them safety compliant. There are probably thousands of things that would have to be changed to make them safe and legal by todays standards - things that would be obvious and would detract from the look of the car.
To make the bumpers actually functional instead of just decorative would cause them to no longer resemble the original parts. Little things like recessed outside door handles and all sorts of interior pieces, like air bags in steering wheels, would cause the cars to look totally different from the classics. So many parts on the old cars that were made of metal, particularly metal castings, would be expensive to produce now and would probably be made of plastic instead. At some point, the car would no longer have the look and appeal of the original model and look more like the “retro” designs that are available now.
I think it’s a great idea. And they don’t have to go back to making the same cars (with safety hazards and such), just to making new cars that look like the old ones. As much as I think it looks dumb, the PT Cruiser sold very well due to its perceived “retro” appeal. They can certainly do better than that. I kind of like that new Challenger linked above. And not only would the Boomers swoon over a classic look, twentysomethings like me would really dig the retro image. I never got to drive a car like that, after all…
