Comeback cars. Who needs 'em when we have "the real thing"?

[Shop Rat]

Throwback Cars - Yahoo! Autos

We don't need no stinkin' throwback/comeback cars. :cool:

[West Peterson]

Colleen needs to do her homework.

Explorer? Taurus? Regal?

Showed the wrong Camaro for comparison.

Forgot about the Challenger and Mustang.

Plus, this is such old news it's a real yawner (kick at Colleen, not you, Susan)

As a car fanatic, I'd sooner buy the real thing, for about the same amount of money, eliminate the depreciation, less expensive to maintain (after the warrantee runs out), and have something much more unique.

[Rusty_OToole]

We need more good looking cars. If today's designers are not up to the job, let them copy the work of past masters. That is better than nothing.

[Marty Roth]

Go with the original----

Everything else afterward is just a "Knock-off"

[Dave Mellor NJ]

How about the flops? The 2002 Tbird and the HRH Chevy truck.

[LINC400]

It would be nice if someone could come up with an all new stylish design. But I think everything has pretty much already been done style-wise. That just leaves looking to the past for inspiration.

The cars that do not have any sort of retro styling are basically bland. Just went to an all Cadillac show at a Cadillac dealership. Unbelievable to see how much style these cars used to have, and how bland the styling and interiors are today. They could certainly benefit from some retro styling. So could Lincoln.

As far as the article, I would say the author needs to brush up on some facts. The cars need to be out of production for a while before they can be "comeback" cars. Explorer? Taurus? (I don't count calling it 500 for a year as out of production.)

Edited June 26, 2011 by West Peterson (see edit history)

[Guest Dave Boyer]

That's another one of those poorly researched internet articles...I saw it the other day..I like the new Explorers..but it's not a throwback?? It's the style it's always had.....

[Guest greg walsh]

They came out with a comeback beetle, nothing like the original, not even air-cooled. I had one, what a piece of crap. Looked cute but that was about it. I heard something about a comeback Karmann Ghia any body else hear of it?

[West Peterson]

Since Karmann no longer exists, I wonder what the chances of that would be??

[caddyshack]

They may be throw-backs, but at least they are trying to add some models with appeal. I would take original in a heartbeat, but after driving the 500+HP Camaro, I can see a future collectable car that will hold its value. Back in the day, GM allowed the customer to basically build his own drive train (engine, tranny, and rear gearing). Now that they have tried to appeal to us design wise, maybe they could also try special order drive trains again. That would get my attention immediately. Just an opinion.

[Jim Rohn]

the comeback cars help the hobby IMHO

Getting people excited about owning a car and getting into car clubs is all good in my book

The PT Cruisers, the Mustangs, the Camaros, Corvettes, Challengers, minis, etc they all have a following for the modern cars and that is good.

They may not know how to work on cars now but owning one is their 1st step toward being car people

Again, IMHO and YMMV

[Guest billybird]

How about the flops? The 2002 Tbird and the HRH Chevy truck.

I agree. I too would call the new retro look t-birds a failure as well. { from a marketing standpoint } However, I predict these T-Birds will become the most sought after of all birds except the first generation { 55-57 }. I say this because it's the only single seat T-Bird besides the 55-57. Sales were a flop therefore there are not that many of them around, by todays standard, and for the most part, I believe what was sold was not for everyday driving. The rise of this cars collectible status will not happen in my lifetime though.

[Matt Harwood]

I think the automakers paint themselves into a corner with retro-themed cars. How do you do the next generation of such a car? How do you do a new New Beetle? They've got one coming out, but it pretty much looks the same as the old one, which looks like the old, old one. Once the nostalgia-seekers have theirs, who's buying it? The PT Cruiser was somewhat practical, but what would the next one look like? What does the next Dodge Challenger look like? If you go retro, you're kind of stuck with it, and virtually every single retro-themed car has seen a dramatic drop-off in sales after the first few years of excited nostalgia seekers buy theirs.

I'll go on record saying that I do like how many of these cars look, including the new Camaro. However, if I were a brand manager at GM, I'd look at it and wonder where we go in 5 years when the style grows stale and we need something fresh. What next, a new Camaro that looks like the '82 redesign?

When you mine the past, you run the risk of running out of gems.

[West Peterson]

What does the next Dodge Challenger look like?

Maybe they'll put bumpers on it and make it look finished.

[Guest Klayfish]

I think the automakers paint themselves into a corner with retro-themed cars. How do you do the next generation of such a car? How do you do a new New Beetle? They've got one coming out, but it pretty much looks the same as the old one, which looks like the old, old one. Once the nostalgia-seekers have theirs, who's buying it? The PT Cruiser was somewhat practical, but what would the next one look like? What does the next Dodge Challenger look like? If you go retro, you're kind of stuck with it, and virtually every single retro-themed car has seen a dramatic drop-off in sales after the first few years of excited nostalgia seekers buy theirs.

I'll go on record saying that I do like how many of these cars look, including the new Camaro. However, if I were a brand manager at GM, I'd look at it and wonder where we go in 5 years when the style grows stale and we need something fresh. What next, a new Camaro that looks like the '82 redesign?

When you mine the past, you run the risk of running out of gems.

I agree with you on the styling issue. If the car only has style to offer, it'll fall off in sales really fast. The T-bird, PT Cruiser and HHR are perfect examples of that. And like you said, how do you create the next generation? Copy the next in the series of "old" generations? If that's the case, I sure can't wait until Ford gets to the mid-70's generation of the Mustang. :eek:

At the same time, if the car offers more than just a retro look, it can be great to create a whole new generation of enthusiasts, clubs, etc… Think of it this way. Both the base model 2011 Mustang and Camaro are over 300hp. They could whip the snot out of a bunch of older "muscle" and sports cars. The V8 versions of those cars are some serious machines. That kind of performance at a decent price in todays' dollars can only lead to good things.

[keiser31]

All I can really say about "comeback cars" is that a few of them look good, but they HAVE to be better at driver's positioning than they used to be. The 1970 Challenger that I drove on a long distance trip once, just about crippled me! My right leg was lying on it's side the whole trip as the transmission tunnel was not really very high or close to the gas pedal. My foot was not supported on the side and by the time I got home, my leg ached. I HATED driving it that far. I would gladly drive it to lay down two dark streaks of rubber, but for a long trip??? NO! I would love to drive my neighbor's new HEMI Challenger to compare old and new. Oh....as said previously....bring back chrome bumpers!

[Guest Old48Truck]

Well, we must need the retro cars, because they're pushing the older cars off the stage at car shows. A local car club opened their show to all years, and guess what? In the top ten were a 2011 Camaro, a 2011 Mustang, a 2007 Mustang, a 2005 Corvette and a 2001 Corvette. The Best of Show was a 2005 Honda! Now, these cars were stock, and I have to admit to being quite annoyed. There was an absolutely stunning 1930 Model A depot hack - bubkus! A 1954 Pontiac that looked showroom fresh - nada. The list goes on...

[1957Birdman]

At over 68,000 sold over four years, it is hard to consider the retro T-Bird of 2002-2005 a failure. I doubt that Ford ever expected to sell great numbers of them, especially given it lofty base price and additional dealer profit (at least initially). Esthetically it is a whole different matter. The original two seat T-Birds photograph well from almost any angle. The retro birds look downright dumpy from some angles. They are one car that looks better in person than in a photograph, in my opinion.

I've driven both and of course the new one drives better in all ways and is a safer car. Of course, since I'm a hobbyist I wouldn't trade my '57 for one of the new ones.

As in many things, success or failure is in the eye of the beholder.

[Pomeroy41144]

Is the new Camaro supposed to be a retro type throwback car? It barely resembles a Camaro of old. If it is, then it is nowhere near the mark like the new Mustang and new Challenger. Sorry Chevrolet, I would never buy one. I am still honked off about the fall of Pontiac. They should have kept it around as a specialty performance speed brand. My first brand new car was a red Pontiac.

[LINC400]

I doubt many people are debating between a new Camaro and 1969 Camaro, or new Mini or a 1969 Mini. People looking at a new Camaro might look at a new Mustang or Challenger, or those looking at a new Mini might look at a new Fiat 500 or new Beetle. Chances are they would buy something else new if the one they wanted was not available. They wouldn't be suddenly looking for an antique instead.

In that regard, I would rather have a car with retro styling than a bland new 4 door pillarmobile appliance that looks the same as any other on the road. Even if they offer nothing more than any other new car besides their styling, they are already more interesting by that fact alone. Whether you like the styling of them or not, at least they do not need a basketball sized logo on the grill or trunk to identify it from every other similar appliance on the road. So I really don't get bashing these cars. I would have thought people on here would have been happy to see a newer car that at least attempts to bring back the style of some of the old ones.

As far as updating, when the originals came out, cars were generally all new every 3 years with a facelift every year. That is no longer the case. Cars now look the same for as long as 8 - 10 years. Changing an eggcrate grille to horizontal bars is considered a big deal now. So with a simple grille change or taillight change after approx. 4 years, they are good to go for approx. another 4 years. After that they can either be dropped, or have a new version brought out as they have done with the Mustang.

Edited June 29, 2011 by LINC400 (see edit history)

[caddyshack]

It's all in the name. If you don't like the name then you won't like the newer version. I don't want them to look like the old version. Most were boxy, high horsepower, fairly cheap rides. If you like Pontiacs that great, Mustangs, great, Challengers that's super too. Everyone has their likes and dislikes. Personally, I would love to own any of newer versions. Unfortunately, Pontiac is out. And if they were in, GM would probably throw a Vette or Camaro mill in it anyway. The new Camaro may have lousy window area, and your butt might be inches off the pavement, but hang on if you punch down on the 500 horse model. The others perform well, but I have only driven one comperable to it and that was an early Viper. Just my opinion.

[MarkV]

Yup its really pathetic what people will settle for!

[Guest Siegfried]

I recall a letter I wrote to Chrysler Corp. where I stated that I loved the looks of the PT Cruiser, but would not buy one unless they would install at least a 318 c.i. and 5-speed transmission. Never got a response. I wonder why?

On a more serious note, I personally feel that bringing back a new version of a former car is a good idea, and to date the cars that have come back are rather impressive.