Remember the new Camaros and Challengers wil be toned a bit to allow use of 'regular' parts to keep costs down. All GM and Chrysler has to do is introduce cars that sticker above Mustang to see flat sales. I like the Challenger because it is more retro than the Camaro (and I'm thinking that when GM execs say "retro isn't that important.. ." they are really saying "@#%$#%, Ford beat us to the punch again!" Ford has got to stop producing trucks that sticker at $35K and get crappy gas mileage. Why are thay waiting to expand us of their hybrid technology? I drive a very butt ugly '01 Prius in town - 46 MPG in town and 50 MPG on the highway. I want a Focus that does that. I'm tired of Toyota getting all the press.

 

I think the changes will akin to the changes seen on the 99 re-do. More modern lines and cleaner, harder edges, but still the same general design. It you think about it, the 99 is very similar to the current camaro concept as they both use hard creases, sharp lines and little-to-no soft, sournd edges like on the 05-06 stangs.

I don't think it will be as drastic as everyone thinks. Look at Ford's current lineup with the Focus, Fusion and Edge. These cars are much more modern in their approach and I think the Stang will get a piece of this, and less heritage design.

A Mustang is still a Mustang, but this will bring it up to speed a little.

 

Well, I know some people believe that nostalgia is a form of obstructionism, but personally, I see good design as good design, and if the next Stang evolves the current overall theme (which is based straight out of the best of the '60s), then I think that is the smart way to go, because those 60s Stangs are the ones so coveted today.

Besides, you never hear people leveling that "nostalgia is a form of obstructionism" charge at Porsche, whose overall 911 shape must be the least changed in history.

 

I agree wholeheartedly. IMO the problem with retro as it has evolved is one of execution and not of concept. Too many automakers have engineered retro vehices that looked old for the sake of looking old (PT Cruiser, HHR, even the Prowler), while others have taken what are worthy classics but produced modern examples that really don't capture the spirit and style of the original (Thunderbird, Beetle) The Mustang and 911 are perfect examples of the argument that some designs are so good that there exists no reason to stray. Why reinvent the wheel simply for the sake of reinventing the wheel?