2010 Compared to 1969-70's
#25
Cobra R Member
Thread Starter
#26
Cobra R Member
Thread Starter
Tell Me ONE THING HelpMeJesus, How Old Are You?
How In The Hell is the Mustang copying the Celica, When The Mustang Was Around Long Before There Even Was a Celica?
Last edited by TampaBear67; 11/21/08 at 10:40 PM. Reason: Accidently Posted Wrong Users Name.
#28
V6 Member
Join Date: July 9, 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
your crazy dude.
#29
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: September 22, 2005
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know how hard it was to find a straight-on shot of the rear of the production version of the Camaro? It's like they're too embarrassed to photograph it or something...
#30
Legacy TMS Member
#31
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator
FYI, the 2010 neither looks like the 67-68, nor 69-70. If anything, the 05-09 and 2010 look more like the 65-66 fastback. As the greenhouse on both the 65-66, and 05-09's, clearly do not have full fastback rooflines. Where as both the 67-68, and 69-70 models, clearly do have full fastback profiles !
#32
Even retro design can look dated. It's all about how it's carried out.
The Mustang II was the first real attempt at returning the Mustang to its roots by emulating specific design details of the original Mustang, therefore making it a "retro" design. Are you telling me it doesn't look dated?
The Mustang II was the first real attempt at returning the Mustang to its roots by emulating specific design details of the original Mustang, therefore making it a "retro" design. Are you telling me it doesn't look dated?
The Mustang II wasn't a retro design theme at the time it was introduced. Not in the slightest. BTW, the retro craze that started with cars like the VW New Beetle and PT Cruiser didn't start anywhere near the time of the Mustang II. Retro car design wasn't even thought of back then... so it's funny to suggest that the Mustang II designer's were going for a retro look.
#33
Exactly. And the funny thing is that he seems to go to great lengths to find cars in similar angles and similar colors when he's posting comparison shots of the 2010 model. Of course he chose a silver '09, which isn't exactly a showcase color that really shows off the car.
If you're going to do it, then don't be so obviously biased, TampaBear.
If you're going to do it, then don't be so obviously biased, TampaBear.
#34
Yes, and that's because the design elements are all there. No weirdly contored taillight lenses, but rather 3-bar vertical tailights that are rectangular in shape. No weird bumper add-ons. No weird body lines to follow. Just classic Mustang styling.
#35
1 - antenna in the back
2 - funky tailight shape
3 - black plastic diaper
4 - strange body angles - the shape of the back looks like someone hit the corners against a brick wall and bent them inward. The top of the bumper has some weird slopes to it. It even has a fairly steep rake that is unappealing to my eyes.
#36
#37
#38
#39
Cobra R Member
Thread Starter
Too bad the Challenger is Such A TANK! I Was sitting next to one in traffic the other day, Man that thing is HUGE! It made My 97 T-Bird Feel Absolutely Small. I mean the bottom of the side windows was half way up my side window.
#40
Cobra R Member
Thread Starter
What I said was:
Where did you get the idea I thought you were posting under two user names? The thought never crossed my mind actually. But since you mentioned it, was that a Freudian Slip? Maybe You Really Are.
I asked your age because I just happen to have been around since the Late 60's, and all through the 7o's and Remember a Time when Imports Uncommon, with the exception of the VW Beetle. That Celica you keep mentioning was a Blatant Rip Off of the 69-70 Mustangs Styling, Thus making it one of the Best Looking Imports of that Era.