Muscle Car Wars!
6/22/05, 08:46 AM
#21
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Interesting though that both the GTO and the Mustang were originally conceived as somewhat alternatives to the "musclecars" -- the term itself being coined much later -- of the day.
The Stang sought to infuse some degree of Continental refinement and restraint into a moderately sized platform powered not by some hulking, industrial age big block but rather, a small, light high-winding V8. It was only some years later, with the eventual introduction of the F series big block, that the Stang started becoming more of a "musclecar" in where the predominant emphasis was narrowly on off the line acceleration.
The GTO too, as the name suggests, was meant to be more of a grown-up gentleman's performance sedan/coupe with at least some emphasis on taste and refinement, aesthetically (pre Judge days mind you), and handling and touring capability, dynamically. The orginal GTOs were, for a number of years, actually quite restrained in their styling and comportment, much as is the current rendition. It was only later that they started becoming almost rather goofy caricatures of themselves and the musclecar image, what with the aforementioned GTO Judge, which, IMHO, really started becoming just a clown show at that point. But, for better or worse, it is these over-the-top GTO image that has become lodged in the public mind.
6/22/05, 11:48 AM
#22
Legacy TMS Member
Originally posted by rhumb@June 22, 2005, 9:49 AM
Finally saw a Charger live on my way to work this morning. Pretty much will have to stick to my original opinion regarding the styling. Not a bad car, but to my eye, its thick, volumunous shape connotes more flab and excess than muscle and sinew, more sumo wrestler than track sprinter. And too, the four doors aren't an issue. Indeed, I wish they had done a sleeker shapre more along the lines of the new Mercedes CLS(?), which too, is a four door, but just a far better executed design than the Charger IMHO.
Finally saw a Charger live on my way to work this morning. Pretty much will have to stick to my original opinion regarding the styling. Not a bad car, but to my eye, its thick, volumunous shape connotes more flab and excess than muscle and sinew, more sumo wrestler than track sprinter. And too, the four doors aren't an issue. Indeed, I wish they had done a sleeker shapre more along the lines of the new Mercedes CLS(?), which too, is a four door, but just a far better executed design than the Charger IMHO.
6/23/05, 04:46 PM
#23
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't find the charger as bad. The challenger (two door version) should be a bit nicer.
Personally, a revamped Camaro would have demonstrated that GM had a clue -- which is why it'll probably 2009 before it comes out.
Personally, a revamped Camaro would have demonstrated that GM had a clue -- which is why it'll probably 2009 before it comes out.
6/24/05, 12:32 AM
#24
Bullitt Member
Join Date: May 9, 2005
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TomServo92@June 21, 2005, 8:19 AM
What does the number of doors have to do with how fast a car is? Typical narrow-minded viewpoint.
What does the number of doors have to do with how fast a car is? Typical narrow-minded viewpoint.
I've always thought 4 doors were not really muscle cars. Name a 60's or 70's muscle car that was a 4 door? There were fast 4 doors mind you but I can't remember one that anyone classified a muscle car?
Some of the ricers think 4 doors are muscle cars but they are for my laughing pleasure.
Ford got the Mustang right. I would look for the RT charger to roll off the show room floor about as fast as the GTO. That anteater nose and Ram grill doesn't bring back any fond memories of a car you always wanted. Plus who ever longed for a four door muscle car, unless you were born in the 80's.
6/24/05, 06:03 AM
#25
Legacy TMS Member
Originally posted by dswhalen@June 24, 2005, 1:35 AM
Dude, it's an opinion. Chill. I've always thought 4 doors were not really muscle cars. Name a 60's or 70's muscle car that was a 4 door?
There were fast 4 doors mind you but I can't remember one that anyone classified a muscle car?
Some of the ricers think 4 doors are muscle cars but they are for my laughing pleasure.
Ford got the Mustang right. I would look for the RT charger to roll off the show room floor about as fast as the GTO. That anteater nose and Ram grill doesn't bring back any fond memories of a car you always wanted. Plus who ever longed for a four door muscle car, unless you were born in the 80's.
Dude, it's an opinion. Chill.
I've always thought 4 doors were not really muscle cars. Name a 60's or 70's muscle car that was a 4 door? There were fast 4 doors mind you but I can't remember one that anyone classified a muscle car?
Some of the ricers think 4 doors are muscle cars but they are for my laughing pleasure.
Ford got the Mustang right. I would look for the RT charger to roll off the show room floor about as fast as the GTO. That anteater nose and Ram grill doesn't bring back any fond memories of a car you always wanted. Plus who ever longed for a four door muscle car, unless you were born in the 80's.
As for sales of the Charger, Chrysler already has 20,000 pre-orders, which is more than the total sales of the GTO for all of last year. Time will tell if it can be sustained of course.
6/24/05, 09:19 AM
#26
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 25, 2004
Posts: 1,470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't mind the four doors (it actually gives the Charger a unique personality and unmatched practicality amung performance oriented cars). I just have a hard time with the fact the Charger doesn't come with a MT. Add to that 4,000+ curb weight and 54/46 weight distribution and it sounds less and less appealing to me, as I like the turns more than just mashing a go pedal.
However, it has a very distinct personality (big, bulky and brutish) and that will appeal to a specific audience and bring sales. Something the GTO just doesn't do.
However, it has a very distinct personality (big, bulky and brutish) and that will appeal to a specific audience and bring sales. Something the GTO just doesn't do.
6/24/05, 09:34 AM
#27
Legacy TMS Member
Originally posted by Rampant@June 24, 2005, 10:22 AM
I don't mind the four doors (it actually gives the Charger a unique personality and unmatched practicality amung performance oriented cars). I just have a hard time with the fact the Charger doesn't come with a MT. Add to that 4,000+ curb weight and 54/46 weight distribution and it sounds less and less appealing to me, as I like the turns more than just mashing a go pedal.
However, it has a very distinct personality (big, bulky and brutish) and that will appeal to a specific audience and bring sales. Something the GTO just doesn't do.
I don't mind the four doors (it actually gives the Charger a unique personality and unmatched practicality amung performance oriented cars). I just have a hard time with the fact the Charger doesn't come with a MT. Add to that 4,000+ curb weight and 54/46 weight distribution and it sounds less and less appealing to me, as I like the turns more than just mashing a go pedal.
However, it has a very distinct personality (big, bulky and brutish) and that will appeal to a specific audience and bring sales. Something the GTO just doesn't do.
At the very least, the SRT8 versions should have a manual tranny if the R/T and 300C versions don't.
6/24/05, 09:52 AM
#28
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If some of you are get'n your panties in a bunch over 4 doors, what about 5 doors -- the Dodge Magnum RT8 (or whatever they call their top-dog Magnum)? A muscle-car station wagon! Actually, I think that thing is just plain cool, what with equal capability to haul hiney and haul crap.
And the hot-rod hearse styling, especially in black, obviously not your insipid soccer-mom kid hauler.
I've always thought these sly uber wagons -- Volvo V70 Rs, Audi S4 Avants, Subby WRX 5-doors were kind of cool in a sneaky way, the perfect Q-ships for blazing along under Johny Laws mental rader screen. While The Man would be picking off all manner of loud 'n proud Stangs, Vettes, Porches and Beemers like flies off his sugar Kroeler, these benign looking wagon would whoosh past at warp 5 with seeming impunity. Good to see that at least one American company has seen past the suburban wagon stereotype and gotten into this game.
And the hot-rod hearse styling, especially in black, obviously not your insipid soccer-mom kid hauler.
I've always thought these sly uber wagons -- Volvo V70 Rs, Audi S4 Avants, Subby WRX 5-doors were kind of cool in a sneaky way, the perfect Q-ships for blazing along under Johny Laws mental rader screen. While The Man would be picking off all manner of loud 'n proud Stangs, Vettes, Porches and Beemers like flies off his sugar Kroeler, these benign looking wagon would whoosh past at warp 5 with seeming impunity. Good to see that at least one American company has seen past the suburban wagon stereotype and gotten into this game.
6/24/05, 11:36 AM
#29
Bullitt Member
Join Date: May 9, 2005
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My dad had a screaming 4 door 64 Impala. But when I think of a muscle car I don't think of it. I guess it was still a family car.
IMO The muscle car was a 2 door, with a convertible option, powerful V8, RWD, American Badge, and a real eye catcher.
Many 4 doors are now perfomance and tuner oriented but still don't meet my definition of a Muscle car. Many cars have Muscle, but what "makes them a muscle car?"
Is there any other car besides the 05 Mustang that brings back memories of the muscle car era? If the 4 door charger or magnum wagon does then we have different definition of an American Muscle car.
IMO The muscle car was a 2 door, with a convertible option, powerful V8, RWD, American Badge, and a real eye catcher.
Many 4 doors are now perfomance and tuner oriented but still don't meet my definition of a Muscle car. Many cars have Muscle, but what "makes them a muscle car?"
Is there any other car besides the 05 Mustang that brings back memories of the muscle car era? If the 4 door charger or magnum wagon does then we have different definition of an American Muscle car.
6/24/05, 11:44 AM
#30
Legacy TMS Member
Originally posted by dswhalen@June 24, 2005, 12:39 PM
My dad had a screaming 4 door 64 Impala. But when I think of a muscle car I don't think of it. I guess it was still a family car.
The muscle car was a 2 door, with a convertible option, powerful V8, RWD, American Badge, and a real eye catcher.
Many 4 doors are now perfomance and tuner oriented but still don't meet my definition of a Muscle car. Many cars have Muscle, but what "makes them a muscle car?"
Is there any other car besides the 05 Mustang that brings back memories of the muscle car era? If the 4 door charger or magnum wagon does then we have different definition of an American Muscle car.
My dad had a screaming 4 door 64 Impala. But when I think of a muscle car I don't think of it. I guess it was still a family car.
The muscle car was a 2 door, with a convertible option, powerful V8, RWD, American Badge, and a real eye catcher.
Many 4 doors are now perfomance and tuner oriented but still don't meet my definition of a Muscle car. Many cars have Muscle, but what "makes them a muscle car?"
Is there any other car besides the 05 Mustang that brings back memories of the muscle car era? If the 4 door charger or magnum wagon does then we have different definition of an American Muscle car.
The automotive world has evolved over time. Many of the old definitions no longer hold true. If you're talking about cars from the 60s then your definition is fine but by todays standards, it's outdated. After all, the mainstream automotive media has embraced the Charger as a modern muscle car, why can't you?
6/24/05, 02:07 PM
#31
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I guess depending on how broadly you draw the line for your definition of a muscle car, the Mustang ought not to be condidered as such either. Indeed, as I have pointed out before, the Mustang was originally conceived a bit more as a sort of anti-muscle car of its day. So instead of being a mid-size 2 door, 4 seat RWD seday/coupe chassis with a big, torquey hi-po V8 motor and perhaps somewhat stripped down accouterments, it was a smallish, 2 door sport coupe with a smallish, hi-rev V8, sort of an amalgam of Euro dash, American flash with a little V8 tossed in for not much coin. The muscle car ideal also did connotate a fairly crude and brutish personna, definitely something the Mustang was not.
Over time, some of the broader definitions of what a muscle car is would be most any big-motored V8 car that probably paid a bit more attention to off-the-line acceleration over other facets of the overall performance envelope. Big block Vettes, 427 Cobra and big block pony cars such as a 428 Mach I would fall withing this definition.
Other, later and even more broadly considered muscle cars might include the Turbo Buick GNXs, 350 Chevy Caprice SSs and yes, even small block 5.0 or even smaller block 4.6 Mod motor Mustang GTs, imagine such liberties taken!
Probably the closest things to the original Muscle car concept -- mid size chassis with biggest hi-po V8 might be the awesome Mercedes AMG E55, though of course, that thing actually handles and stops well and is a comfortable cruiser, so maybe not. The DC twins, the Hemi 300s and Magnums also come fairly close if not hitting the nail on the head. Cadillac's CTS-V certainly does too with perhaps the neo GTO coming closest to the old school definition, despite beign made in Australia and having a decent chassis.
I guess in the end, there really is no definitive muscle car definition to point to as the fact that many consider the Mustang with its modestly sized pony car chassis and small block 4.6 motor to be one.
Over time, some of the broader definitions of what a muscle car is would be most any big-motored V8 car that probably paid a bit more attention to off-the-line acceleration over other facets of the overall performance envelope. Big block Vettes, 427 Cobra and big block pony cars such as a 428 Mach I would fall withing this definition.
Other, later and even more broadly considered muscle cars might include the Turbo Buick GNXs, 350 Chevy Caprice SSs and yes, even small block 5.0 or even smaller block 4.6 Mod motor Mustang GTs, imagine such liberties taken!
Probably the closest things to the original Muscle car concept -- mid size chassis with biggest hi-po V8 might be the awesome Mercedes AMG E55, though of course, that thing actually handles and stops well and is a comfortable cruiser, so maybe not. The DC twins, the Hemi 300s and Magnums also come fairly close if not hitting the nail on the head. Cadillac's CTS-V certainly does too with perhaps the neo GTO coming closest to the old school definition, despite beign made in Australia and having a decent chassis.
I guess in the end, there really is no definitive muscle car definition to point to as the fact that many consider the Mustang with its modestly sized pony car chassis and small block 4.6 motor to be one.
6/25/05, 06:24 PM
#32
Bullitt Member
Join Date: March 8, 2005
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TomServo92@June 24, 2005, 6:06 AM
Like I said, thinking that muscle cars only have 2 doors is narrow minded thinking based on an outdated paradigm. But hey, that's just my opinion!
As for sales of the Charger, Chrysler already has 20,000 pre-orders, which is more than the total sales of the GTO for all of last year. Time will tell if it can be sustained of course.
Like I said, thinking that muscle cars only have 2 doors is narrow minded thinking based on an outdated paradigm. But hey, that's just my opinion!
As for sales of the Charger, Chrysler already has 20,000 pre-orders, which is more than the total sales of the GTO for all of last year. Time will tell if it can be sustained of course.
I think the bottom line here is,like the GTO most had hopes on the Charger having some resemblance of the old styling.Two door and 60s,70 ish styling cues.
Which this Charger has none .(so what....they bent the back lite down a bit
)As for a four door Charger...........maybe for some.Not for me.
But that Charger SRT8's with that 425hp HEMI's gonna kick some **** with grociers in the back seat!
6/26/05, 01:10 AM
#33
GT Member
Join Date: September 16, 2004
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Stangers@June 25, 2005, 6:27 PM
I think the bottom line here is,like the GTO most had hopes on the Charger having some resemblance of the old styling.Two door and 60s,70 ish styling cues.
Which this Charger has none .(so what....they bent the back lite down a bit )
I think the bottom line here is,like the GTO most had hopes on the Charger having some resemblance of the old styling.Two door and 60s,70 ish styling cues.
Which this Charger has none .(so what....they bent the back lite down a bit
)I disagree. I'll definitely give Ford kudos to the retro design of their new Mustang. They made it look like a Mustang without it being a blatant copy of the '60's originals. Hau Tai-Tang and Ford did a marvelous job of that.
But going back to roots is only ONE way to make an awesome modern muscle car.
If you think about it, stylistically, the current GTO sort of picks up where the final generation Camaro left off-- the problem is that, while the rounded, "jelly-bean" design would have looked great a decade ago, the industry has moved on to bigger and bolder design themes.
The Charger possesses a bolder design theme-- one that works very well for this decade. Hence, it should sell fairly well.
6/26/05, 05:19 AM
#34
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't dislike the Charger -- it does have a nice design language. I'd rather it was 2-door and about 800 lbs lighter. Which is what I imagine the Challenger will strive towards in a few years.
I'd like to see the Camaro come back; some of the chops on the web don't look too bad at all. LS7 SS anyone?
I'd like to see the Camaro come back; some of the chops on the web don't look too bad at all. LS7 SS anyone?
6/26/05, 10:28 PM
#35
GT Member
Join Date: September 16, 2004
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by dke@June 26, 2005, 5:22 AM
I'd like to see the Camaro come back; some of the chops on the web don't look too bad at all. LS7 SS anyone?
I'd like to see the Camaro come back; some of the chops on the web don't look too bad at all. LS7 SS anyone?
LS2 or LS3 is more like it. There's no way Chevrolet will make anything that will outrun a Corvette, unless it's another Corvette.
Camaro SS or RWD Monte Carlo SS = LS3 (303 hp), likely
Chevelle SS = LS2 or LS6 (400 hp), likely
Note that a Chevelle SS would be slower than a base Corvette because it will inevitably be heavier. Same for the Camaro, even if it, too, had an LS2.
Despite GM's hopes for fast Chevrolets, the Corvette has an important image to uphold, especially in the racing world. That image would easily be ruined if it were outrun by a GT made by the same company.
It would be like a Ferrari Enzo being out-run by a Ferrari 612 Scaglietti, or Porsche's Carrera GT being outrun by a 911 Turbo...
... Or a Lamborghini Murcielago being outrun by the Gallardo...
... you get the picture. :nono:
6/26/05, 10:48 PM
#36
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See I doubt the Camaro would be as light, have as good a weight distro, be as low a CG.... so even with the same motor, it won't be a vette. So I'd like to think they could put it in without detuning it, and without threatening their Vette. But even a little detuned or slightly older version would be nice.
6/27/05, 12:50 AM
#37
GT Member
Join Date: September 16, 2004
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by dke@June 26, 2005, 10:51 PM
See I doubt the Camaro would be as light, have as good a weight distro, be as low a CG.... so even with the same motor, it won't be a vette. So I'd like to think they could put it in without detuning it, and without threatening their Vette. But even a little detuned or slightly older version would be nice.
See I doubt the Camaro would be as light, have as good a weight distro, be as low a CG.... so even with the same motor, it won't be a vette. So I'd like to think they could put it in without detuning it, and without threatening their Vette. But even a little detuned or slightly older version would be nice.
The LS7 is, for starters, brand-spanking-new, so there are no "older" versions. The highest-performance version, sporting 3 valves per cylinder, hasn't even debuted yet. So, technically, the LS7 debuting in the Corvette Z06 is a detuned version.
The LS7 puts out 505-hp. In a theoretical Camaro/Monte Carlo weighing 3500 lbs (as per Mustang GT), the weight/power ratio would be 6.93 lbs/hp.
The power/weight ratio of the Corvette Z51, powered by a 400-hp LS2 is 7.95 lbs/hp. This means the LS7-powered Camaro/Monte Carlo would be WAY faster than a Corvette Z51.
I refuse to believe GM will damage the reputation of a GT-S racing icon by letting their top-notch 2-seat sports car take the back seat to a 2+2 GT of any kind in their own lineup.
Hence, the top motor you can expect in ANYTHING that isn't a Corvette is the Corvette's base engine (the 400-hp LS2), plus extra weight (from a 2+2 unibody format), plus a more forward weight distribution.
Make no mistake-- you'll NEVER see an LS7 in any car that isn't a Corvette Z06, unless it is an aftermarket addition. GM has announced that they will be selling the LS7 as a crate engine.
6/27/05, 03:14 PM
#38
V6 Member
Join Date: September 14, 2004
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dunno, I have a '69 Camaro and an Audi S4 sedan, and I sure don't consider my S4 a muslecar. With a twin turbo V6 and a 6 speed manual and all wheel drive, it's pretty impressive performance-wise, but pretty boring looks-wise.
I don't think anyone would confuse the two, though my S4 is faster than most most cars made today and is easily as fast as these new 'muscle-car's, save for the GTO.
I think arguing that the Charger is a Muscle-car is all semantics. Maybe we should just leave the term Muscle Car for the 60-70's icons, and call these modern day muscle cars...or something....so as not to be confusing...nor narrow minded.
Josh
I don't think anyone would confuse the two, though my S4 is faster than most most cars made today and is easily as fast as these new 'muscle-car's, save for the GTO.
I think arguing that the Charger is a Muscle-car is all semantics. Maybe we should just leave the term Muscle Car for the 60-70's icons, and call these modern day muscle cars...or something....so as not to be confusing...nor narrow minded.
Josh
6/28/05, 03:11 PM
#39
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: March 23, 2005
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Josh I couldnt agre more. Someone made the comment earlier "the media has accepted it as a muscle car so why cant you" and to that I would say "screw the media". It is all in personal perception and I think the term muscle car is used too loosely and should be buried along with alot of other terms used nowadays. I would venture a large wage on alot of people out there buring down Bill Ford's home and hanging him by his n*ts if Ford had released the 05 Mustang as a 4 door. Doesnt seem quite right does it? IMO when I see the Charger, which is nice looking in its own right, I get irritated that they bring a car with a great history and bring it back with 4 doors and make it not even close to what it once was. Yea they coulda made a lame retro like the PT Cruiser but I just think if they were going to re-use the name they owed a little something to keeping it truer to its roots. Again it is a nice looking car, with plenty of sack but name it something totally different.
6/28/05, 03:59 PM
#40
V6 Member
Join Date: September 14, 2004
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Calling people narrow-minded because they relate a term that represents a very SPECIFIC genre of car from a very SPECIFIC era only to those SPECIFIC cars from that SPECIFIC era, is being completely narrow-minded in and of itself. IMHO.
Sure, these cars today are powerful and bold, without question, but I don't consider them to be true Muscle Cars, nor do I think 95% of the buying populace will either. Regardless of how time moves on, people will remain fairly steadfast in their interpretation of what a Muscle Car is. I think that fact shall prove itself over time. In 30 years, people will still call the real Muscle Cars as such, and will most likely consider the 4-dr Charger to be just another old sedan.
Certainly don't bash people that prefer to acknowledge the original and true Muscle Cars as such and prefer not to include cars made 30 years later as the same. The term as most everyone knows it is pretty specific about what they are talking about.
Just because a tree has mold on it, doesn't make it cheese. Get my drift?
Would ANYONE that has subscribed to this forum consider the mid-80's Dodge Charger to be a Muscle Car? I mean heck, you could get the Shelby Package on that thing too! That econobox was fine and modern enough for it's day, but it had zero significance and in 30 years, neither will the 4dr Charger of today.
Josh
Sure, these cars today are powerful and bold, without question, but I don't consider them to be true Muscle Cars, nor do I think 95% of the buying populace will either. Regardless of how time moves on, people will remain fairly steadfast in their interpretation of what a Muscle Car is. I think that fact shall prove itself over time. In 30 years, people will still call the real Muscle Cars as such, and will most likely consider the 4-dr Charger to be just another old sedan.
Certainly don't bash people that prefer to acknowledge the original and true Muscle Cars as such and prefer not to include cars made 30 years later as the same. The term as most everyone knows it is pretty specific about what they are talking about.
Just because a tree has mold on it, doesn't make it cheese. Get my drift?
Would ANYONE that has subscribed to this forum consider the mid-80's Dodge Charger to be a Muscle Car? I mean heck, you could get the Shelby Package on that thing too! That econobox was fine and modern enough for it's day, but it had zero significance and in 30 years, neither will the 4dr Charger of today.
Josh