Can someone look on the Wall Street Journal who has a sign in. Yesterday, or the day before there was an article about the Return of the Muscle Car Wars. Im sure there at least was a mention of the Shelby. I was interestd in seeing it, and im sure the rest of you were. Thanks in advance.

 

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB...?mod=TFFP1YAHOO

AUTOS






Muscle Cars Make a Comeback

In Effort to Lure Back Buyers,
Detroit Turns to Retro Models
Of Mustangs, GTOs, Chargers
By NEAL E. BOUDETTE
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
June 16, 2005; Page D1

The American auto industry is trying to muscle its way out of the doldrums.

Three decades after the heyday of muscle cars -- raw, powerful vehicles such as the Ford Mustang and Pontiac GTO that helped define freedom-of-the-road independence for a generation -- some newly redesigned versions are emerging as strong sellers. Ford Motor Co. is selling about 18,000 Mustangs a month, as many as its factory can produce, and says demand is greater than expected.

In coming weeks it will face a new challenger, the Dodge Charger, from DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group, which is hitting showrooms this month and is a remake of a vehicle that last rolled off assembly lines more than 25 years ago. The Mustang and GTO have both been on the market since last year.


Price now: $29,995; Price in 1966: Base of $3,122; the bigger engine added about $1,000. Coming out this month, it has a sneering 'face' -- and a spacious rear seat.


The stakes are high for Detroit's Big Three auto makers, which are having trouble finding new designs that connect with buyers. At Ford, the Mustang is one of its few big hits among several new passenger cars that were supposed the help the company regain market share.

Despite a few successes like the Mustang and the top-selling new Chrysler 300 sedan, Detroit's auto makers have mostly had trouble getting buyers interested in their new designs. Ford already has started reworking the look of its Ford Five Hundred, a rival to the Chrysler 300, less than a year after its launch in hopes of boosting sales. GM's Buick division has piled up a big inventory of LaCrosse sedans, an all-new model that was supposed to turn around the brand's dowdy image.

In the first five months of this year, Ford's market share has fallen one percentage point to 19.1%. GM's is down to 25.7% from 27.2%

Even with the Mustang's strong sales, Ford's market share has continued to slip, although profit from the car is one of the factors putting Ford in slightly better financial condition than General Motors Corp. In the first quarter GM had a loss of $1.1 billion.


Price now: $25,815; Price in 1970: Base sticker price $2,721. The biggest seller among muscle cars and particularly popular among buyers for its retro look.


To meet current demand, Ford considered investing in additional capacity to build more Mustangs than the current maximum output of 192,000 a year. Executives decided against it to avoid getting stuck with too much capacity should demand slack off after a year or two, says Stephen G. Lyons, Ford North America group vice president for market, sales and service.

Part of the Mustang's appeal to buyers is its aggressive, retro look. As part of the redesign for the 2005 model year, Ford reverted to styling that hews closely to the look of the Mustangs of the mid-1960s. The most noticeable change is the car's front end, which features a large grille slanted backward toward the engine, giving it sort of a "shark nose" profile.

Despite the redesign, don't expect the kind of refined interior found in a BMW or Audi. There is plenty of hard plastic, and the rear seat is small: During a recent test drive, a three-year-old complained about a lack of leg room. Entry-level Mustangs go for $19,890, but the most powerful GT version starts at $25,815.

The remake of the GTO, which also started appearing in showrooms with the 2005 model year, followed a different strategy. Instead of evoking the car's 1970s heyday, it adopted a more modern, rounded look, which hasn't been a hit with buyers.

As a result, GM is on track to sell only about 13,000 this year: this year, they are averaging only about 1,000 a month. Evan Sobran, a 43-year-old real-estate executive in Duxbury, Mass., who has test-driven the car, says it drives well but doesn't turn heads like the Mustang and Charger. "It's $34,000 and looks like a Saturn, or some rounded bar of soap," he says.


Price now: $34,295; Price in 1964: $3,081 for the convertible. Has V-8 with 400 horsepower, most of the three muscle cars, but its power is overshadowed by dull design


That is bad news for GM, which was hoping the GTO would help generate excitement for its other new passenger cars, particularly the Pontiac G6, a all-new replacement for Pontiac's aging Grand Am. The company was counting on a comeback in passenger cars to offset declines in sales of sport-utility vehicles, one of its biggest sources of profit.

Chrysler is launching the Charger while the company is on a roll, thanks to the success of the 300 sedan, which shares its underpinnings, as well as its powerful eight-cylinder engine, with the Charger. If the Charger turns into a hit along the lines of the 300, Chrysler could be on its way to its most profitable year in some time. A sedan with a big, bold front grille, the 300 is among the hottest cars right now. Chrysler sells about 12,000 a month.

The new Charger won't be an updated copy of the original, which is perhaps most widely known for its iconic role in "The Dukes of Hazzard" television show.

In a nod to the baby-boomer sensibilities of its current target market, the new Charger is a four-door -- the original had only two. The car does retain its scowling, angled headlights as well as other styling cues to remind consumers of its heritage.

Catering to consumers' concerns about fuel efficiency in an era of $2-a-gallon gas, the Charger also has a system that shuts off four of the engine's eight cylinders while cruising on the highway or sitting in traffic. In one day of heavy stop-and-go driving, the Charger managed 19 miles a gallon, which is roughly two or three miles a gallon better than the Mustang in similar driving. On the highway, the Charger got almost 24.

Write to Neal E. Boudette at neal.boudette@wsj.com

 

I like the charger but I wish they would lose the truck grill and instead of have the crossed bars just leave it open. I think that would look a lot better.

 

My jaw nearly hit the floor when I saw the Daytona R/T. Absolutely gorgeous. Too bad it's only a limited edition, and doesn't come in bright green (though "Top Banana" and "Go ManGo" are certainly fitting muscle-car colors).

 

Either way it is still a 4 door sedan. It is a Poser Muscle Car.

 

I really woudn't call it a poser muscle car. I mean it does follow the basic "muscle car" formula (i.e., big engine + big power in a medium sized car), but yeah I do agree with you that Dodge should have just kept it a two door. Plus another thing that bugs me about the Charger is the weight. Doesn't the LX platform weigh like around 4000 lbs?

 

Even if it weighs around 4000 pounds it's got plenty of power to move smartly down the road. I'm not crazy about its looks, but it's light years ahead of the GTO.

 

yeah the grill on the charger belongs on a truck. thats the only thing that bugs me. i dont mind that its a four door. they should do a coupe version of it for the SRT8 instead of the 4 door version. but the GTO is definitely a GOAT and not in a good way. good power nice ride good interior. boring exterior.

 

I'm really loving this Muscle car comeback, although it won't ever be complete without a couple of GM brothers

 

I saw in the Motor Trend a while back that the '08 GTO looked pretty cool, more like the mean muscle look.

 

What does the number of doors have to do with how fast a car is? Typical narrow-minded viewpoint.

 

GTO.....

"It's $34,000 and looks like a Saturn, or some rounded bar of soap,"

 

I get what you mean, but you have to admit that the car would look a million times better with 2 doors as opposed to 4. I just think it looks like they took a pretty good design for a 2 door coupe and then stretched it so they could add another set of doors.

 

I personally think it was a good move. They made a muscle car for those that need the convenience of a sedan. If they make a 2-door Challenger then they'll be far ahead of Ford in that they'll have both 4- and 2-door muscle cars to offer.

 

The Charger just looks too much like some hot-rod Checker cab to me. More pudgy than muscular and kind of awkward in the detailing, which is quite unlike most recent DC efforts which are excellent in the detailing. The four doors doesn't bother me as much as it's overall lack of cohesion.

The GTO, while perhaps not the most exciting or au currant design -- but then, neither was the original back in '64 -- is a nicely balanced and executed design, if in a more mid-'90's vein rather than mid-'00's. But hey, it worth noting that its well worth having a modern GTO to kick around at all rather than the Grand Prix as Pontiac's performance torch bearer. Makes for a great Q-ship though for those who don't insist on some screaming loud design to get Johny Laws unwanted affections.

Then the Mustang is more Pony car than Muscle car, depending on how broadly one defines those terms. Indeed, the Mustang was originally conceived as a sort of anti-musclecar with more than a bit of Continental style finesse over simple, brutish power. It is, I think, the best executed overall of the three, especially in styling and overall character. The chassis is a touch bargain basement -- perhaps true to the muscle car idiom after all -- but the others don't have to meet the Stang's <$20K entry price point either.

 

While I don't agree with all your points regarding the Charger, I respect them because they're a critique of the design execution and not just a complete dismissal of the car due to the number of doors.

 

While I don't particularly like the styling I do like the idea, just like the AMG Mercedes this is going to be a cool family car. However you cannot classify it as a Muscle Car because it does not meet the traditional Muscle Car styling. If you wanted to call a 4 door sedan with a powerful engine a muscle car then you would have to make leeway for AMG Mercedes, Dodge RAM SRT 10, Dodge Magnums, Ford F150 Lightnings, BMW M3 & M5s. Where would the cut off be?

This is my honest opinion.

Believe me if I had a need for the extra space I would have to get a Magnum, but you can bet it would be an SRT 8. Luckily I have a Gr Cherokee for the fam.

I just love the Mustangs.

 

You need to start thinking outside the box and stop relying on old definitions. Just because there hasn't been a muscle car with four doors doesn't mean there can't be one.

EDIT: sorry...changed that to be "four doors" not "two"

 

Like I said that is my opinion

 

That's sort of the problem-- the muscle car as we once knew it doesn't really exist anymore. Just about any performance car that sells for 30 large can be considered a muscle car. This includes the likes of the Subaru WRX-STi, the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, Nissan 350Z, etc.

The new GTO can't really be considered a muscle car because it's too refined and handles great. Ironically, now that the GTO finally lives up to its name and becomes a superb Grand Tourer, nobody likes it.

Today's automotive market has reached the point where nobody buys a 2-door car unless it's a pricey 2+2 GT or a 2-seat sports car-- cars whose soul purpose are to show off how much money their owner has to throw around.

Chassis development has reached the point where a car doesn't need to be a 2-door to maintain excellent torsional rigidity. Why do a 2-door when you can make it a 4-door almost completely without sacrifice? Why take only 50 thousand sales when you can get 200 thousand?

The times have changed, the automotive industry has changed, and it is about time some of us allow our definitions and expectations to change as well.

Besides, have you seen the new Charger Daytona R/T in Top Banana? I totally want one!