I miss being able to say "Wow!" and mean it.

For me it is a different kind of wow....

Love some new cars....GTI and TDI VW...MINI Cooper S...Z06 C6...

But yeah.,..I agree with you. Let's build a delorian, get Doc Brown, and go back...to ride in a 68 Z28!

Chargers, Mustangs, Challengers, 300C's, Genesis, Genesis Coupe, Camaro, CTS, CTS-V, CTS Sportwagon, CTS-V Sportwagon(!), CTS Coupe, Alpha Cadillac, Corvette, SVT Raptor, Viper, 370Z, GTR...

Veyron, DB9, DBS, V8 Vantage, V12 Vantage, Rapide, XKR, Gallardo, Gallardo Balboni, Reventon, Murcielago LP670-4 SV, 458 Italia, 911 GT2 RS, Continental GT, Elise, Exige, Evora...

And even on the cheaper side: Focus, Fiesta, Dodge compact, Grand Cherokee, 500, 600, CC, GTI, Miata, RX8, Mini...

All of the top of my head.

Maybe in your depressing world, but there's still tons for me to get excited about. Sorry it's not the same for you.

There's just nothing exciting in the pipeline.

What's coming out now bores me to tears.

Lots of exciting stuff still made, Dodgefan named many of them that I like. Saw a gorgeous black Challenger R/T today, with silver R/T stripes on the fenders and hood, hood pins, chrome wheels...love the styling of that car.

Owner of LHF just bought a Challenger R/T. Can't wait to see it.

I still like the Challenger as well as Camaro and Mustang, and I like the drivetrain of the Vette and CTS-V.

But really, that's about it.

And none of those wow me enough to even consider making a purchase.

I want to see some stuff with stunning design, and it just isn't out there.

8C Competizione, Gran Turismo...

8C Competizione, Gran Turismo...

In the uber-expensive car world my favorite designs are the current Aston Martin range...looking forward to see the Rapide in person. Looking forward to seeing the 458Italia as well...I'll probably have the Fujimi 1:24th scale kit before I see the 1:1

Oh, and how could I get the Veritas RS III.

The exotic stuff is all made of unobtanium - so it really doesn't count.

But yes, Aston Martins are beautiful.

ist that what on the roof of the ZR1?

Oh, and how could I get the Veritas RS III.

I remember that from Top Gear, I think. One truly unique semi-exotic car I love is the Ariel Atom...I'd love to have one and a month of June or September days on Ohio backroads...strange to look at, but so pure in it's purpose. It would be a joy to drive, I think. Put on a helmet, a driver's suit, a Camelback full of water, and head for the hills...

Edited May 22, 201015 yr by Cubical-aka-Moltar

The Atom is an amazing car.

There isn't much listed in this thread you could finance for 60 months for under $500 dollars. That is what's really depressing.

(I'm going to rant now. You might want to rep this down on read the next post.)

Back in the day, there was something exciting for every budget. Nova SS, hello? Dodge Demon anyone? Forget about inexpensive a V-8 Mustang or Camaro could be? You used to be able to buy one with crank windows and a hole in the dash where the stereo goes.

Honestly, cars like that need to make a resurgence.

And there isn't any excuse why we can't have something excessive and stupidly ridiculous for about $19k that doesn't have the wheelbase of a pack of gum. Today's technology can make cars like that economical but still be able to make your friends ask, "Why in the hell did you think you needed that?"

You shouldn't have to explain why. You had the extra few bucks to finance that option, even with the part-time job you have to support yourself through college.

To get the good stuff, soon there won't be any choice but to be the dude with two PhDs and playing golf with Bill (and I do mean Gates).

Oh, and how could I get the Veritas RS III.

There's just nothing exciting in the pipeline at GM.

What's coming out from GM now bores me to tears.

***Fixed.

Just brighten your day by watching all the videos on these You Tube channels:

http://www.youtube.com/user/bestofshowautomotive

http://www.youtube.com/user/carsbyjeff

http://www.youtube.com/user/Flemingsclassics

http://www.youtube.com/user/Vanguardmotorsales

http://www.youtube.com/user/StreetsideClassics

http://www.youtube.com/user/southernmotors

Chargers, Mustangs, Challengers, 300C's, Genesis, Genesis Coupe, Camaro, CTS, CTS-V, CTS Sportwagon, CTS-V Sportwagon(!), CTS Coupe, Alpha Cadillac, Corvette, SVT Raptor, Viper, 370Z, GTR...

Veyron, DB9, DBS, V8 Vantage, V12 Vantage, Rapide, XKR, Gallardo, Gallardo Balboni, Reventon, Murcielago LP670-4 SV, 458 Italia, 911 GT2 RS, Continental GT, Elise, Exige, Evora...

And even on the cheaper side: Focus, Fiesta, Dodge compact, Grand Cherokee, 500, 600, CC, GTI, Miata, RX8, Mini...

All of the top of my head.

Maybe in your depressing world, but there's still tons for me to get excited about. Sorry it's not the same for you.

DF...I never was much for exotics...until you started liking them...but I've got to go retro here, Ferrari F40 FTW!

The Atom is an amazing car.

Yes it is...and for working class guys like us...there is the hope that we could perhaps also buy something like a used Elise. Same sort of thrill, but tamer and cheaper...

8C Competizione, Gran Turismo...

8 C = Pure automotive lust for me...

I still like the Challenger as well as Camaro and Mustang, and I like the drivetrain of the Vette and CTS-V.

But really, that's about it.

And none of those wow me enough to even consider making a purchase.

I want to see some stuff with stunning design, and it just isn't out there.

Perhaps you should try anew direction with your love of cars...instead of buying a new car...ever think of trying motorsport?

There isn't much listed in this thread you could finance for 60 months for under $500 dollars. That is what's really depressing.

(I'm going to rant now. You might want to rep this down on read the next post.)

Back in the day, there was something exciting for every budget. Nova SS, hello? Dodge Demon anyone? Forget about inexpensive a V-8 Mustang or Camaro could be? You used to be able to buy one with crank windows and a hole in the dash where the stereo goes.

Honestly, cars like that need to make a resurgence.

And there isn't any excuse why we can't have something excessive and stupidly ridiculous for about $19k that doesn't have the wheelbase of a pack of gum. Today's technology can make cars like that economical but still be able to make your friends ask, "Why in the hell did you think you needed that?"

You shouldn't have to explain why. You had the extra few bucks to finance that option, even with the part-time job you have to support yourself through college.

To get the good stuff, soon there won't be any choice but to be the dude with two PhDs and playing golf with Bill (and I do mean Gates).

I think you have gotten to the heart of the matter.

I agree with Camino for the most part.

The only new product I can recall recently staring at were the Challenger, CTS, Ram and F-150/F-250s. And this is just from a lust standpoint- not taking price into account in the least.

I have said for some time now- I may never buy new again (unless money becomes no object). The value there is terrible.

Agree on buying new, Balthazar...

THEY DON'T MAKE THEM AS WOW TODAY AS THEY DID BACK THEN!

WOW! OMG ANOTHER?!

HOLY CRAP WHAT AWESOME STYLING!

OMYGOD VINYL ROOFS WOW THEY KNEW HOW TO STYLE CARS BACK THEN!!

HOLY EXCITEMENT!!!!!! BATMAN!

.

Clearly, the old days were nothing but rolling works of art.

Also beside the four or five of you, most people want things like radios, air conditioning, brakes, power windows, etc.

Or bone-stock vehicles with a V8; nobody wants those either. Seriously, if you can't afford the new V8 models today, you can't likely afford the fuel or insurance. Want a big hole in your dash? Make one yourself. Sheesh.

MORE ANTI-DEPRESSENTS!!

Dodgefan ~ >>"Clearly, the old days were nothing but rolling works of art. Also beside the four or five of you, most people want things like radios, air conditioning, brakes, power windows, etc."<<

Ummm, yer "old days" only apparently go back 25 years there, sport. There's a HOLE LOOT MORIE back there than you seem to be unable to see/willing to consider.

BTW : radios date to the '20s (IIRC), A/C to '51, PW to '49.... get the pernt?

Edited May 22, 201015 yr by balthazar

Clearly, the old days were nothing but rolling works of art.

Uh, well, yeah, they were. Sorry, but your modern eyes are apparently too used to soft, friendly lines... unable to process the beauty in the old designs.

The only crap you posted was the Plymouth Champ... hardly a "real" Plymouth. There was not a single bad looking American car in this entire thread.

In fact, as time marches on, even the early imports are starting to outclass the current styling... even the Champ.

Also beside the four or five of you, most people want things like radios, air conditioning, brakes, power windows, etc.

I have had plenty of old cars and all had radios, brakes... and with one or two exceptions, they had air conditioning and power windows.

_Functioning_ A/C is a different matter, I'll concede, but I could have ponied up for a R12 recharge.

Heres some things my old cars had that new cars apparently will never have again... trunk space, easily understood drivetrains, body styles available as coupes, sedans, wagons and convertibles, and ignition that is not able to shutdown remotely (OnStar, HERF or electrical pulse).

I'm not going to say the old cars are better than new in all ways... they're not. The technology has progressed to give us better batteries, build quality, transmissions... but when these technologies are added to an old car, you have a pretty unbeatable ride.

I would love A/C, PW, modern suspension/tires & a modern trans with a rebuilt iron V-8 and a period interior in a vintage (1960s or 1950s) full-size car.

Also beside the four or five of you, most people want things like radios, air conditioning, brakes, power windows, etc.

Wahh-wahh 1,000 watt FM/Satellite stereo system with an iPod input. Wahh-wahh air-conditioning. Wahh-wahh power windows.

Brakes? You had to list brakes? Dude ... seriously? Uh, yeah. I think we can all agree we all want brakes. Even the Cutlass has power-assist brakes. That's from 1972, if you didn't remember. Thinking about it, everything I've owned has had brakes. No brakes ... dude, that should be a deal breaker for all of us.

I can install my own radio if I'm just going to absolutely fucking die without one.

Until I bought the Camaro, I lived without functioning air conditioning in everything I had. I could do it again if I had to.

Power windows? Those add weight, brah. More weight makes you go slower. I've had crank windows in three different cars (S10, then Sonoma, then Cutlass). It doesn't bother me to reach down and push a lever forward or back.

Please, don't take this post the wrong way.

But dual-zone climate control, Sirius radio, and leather seats that massage your ass and give you an enema while you drive ... those things are luxuries. Things you can live without. Things that should all be option boxes on an order sheet so that I don't have to pay for them if I don't want them, which honestly I don't.

That's the whole point here. In 1969, you could order a car anyway you wanted it. You didn't have to opt for a car costing thousands more than what you wanted to pay to get a V-8 under the hood. You could choose the base car, add the V-8, and drop all of the nonsense. You weren't forced into option groups and packages to get what you wanted while adding on stuff you didn't want.

Why should a V-8 Camaro, for example, HAVE to come with leather-fucking seats and a big ol' set of factory 20 inch tires that come at a 1.5k premium? I don't want either of 'em, nor do I want a 2,000 watt RockAlPioneer surround sound, high-definition stereo system. I just want the base Camaro, not even the RS Camaro, not even an "LT" Camaro, with crank-windows, just a heater, and some sort of V-8 option ringing up for 19k even. GM could build it. Give me one reason why they couldn't without using the excuse involving the words "market", "demands", and "it."

(There's nothing wrong with the V-6 in the Camaro or most any other car anymore. Don't get me wrong.)

It's not the styling of newer cars that's depressing. The Camaro, Challenger, Mustang, Charger, 300C, the Caprice (whenever GM sells it in civilian trim), the current and upcoming Malibu, the Fusion, the Taurus, the Alfas that might be sold here soon ... those are all great looking cars without being something the mega-elite can buy. It's the details which suck a massive amount of chode through a bendy straw.

Edited May 22, 201015 yr by whiteknight

I would love A/C, PW, modern suspension/tires & a modern trans with a rebuilt iron V-8 and a period interior in a vintage (1960s or 1950s) full-size car.

If I had about $300K hanging around, I'd start building them for resale. I feel there is a small niche market there... and as battery tech falls in price, for electric vintage cars.

Granted, though, I'd be limited to Dynacorn sourced models.

The problem for you YJ (and the other few of you) is that not enough people want things like stereo delete on their cars, and it adds cost to the production process to make different options. By simplifying the options, it costs less to produce. If there was a great demand for stereos to be optional, then it would be an option. However, stereo deletes are only found on the very cheapest of cars, or the low volume, lightweight versions of performance cars (which ironically cost more, but that's because of all the performance enhancements).

I really doubt you'll ever find things like crank windows and stereo deletes options on a $32,000 Camaro SS or Mustang GT.

Of course, if you really wanted to lose some weight (although void the warranty) you could remove that stuff yourself. I suppose.

The point of this thread originally was that Camino doesn't like the style of new cars, which in the end is his own thing, since as we know, it's subjective. That's all a matter of taste. I personally can't look at my friend's Camaro RS and or a 370Z say "yeah that's boring", but that's me.

whiteknight ~>>"That's the whole point here. In 1969, you could order a car anyway you wanted it. You didn't have to opt for a car costing thousands more than what you wanted to pay to get a V-8 under the hood. You could choose the base car, add the V-8, and drop all of the nonsense. You weren't forced into option groups and packages to get what you wanted while adding on stuff you didn't want."<<

RIGHT ON !!

SAmadei ~>>"I'd start building them for resale."<<

I'd prefer to save an original, half decent car. For $30K you can build a kick-ass, subtly-modified version of vintage iron.

383, 6-spd auto, 3.23s, A/C, done.

HURR DURR 240 HORSEPOWER IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN 350!!!! THE WING BRAH MAKES ME FASTER!!!!

HURR DURR HOW DO FIX FAULTY FUEL INJECTION!!!

The problem for you YJ (and the other few of you) is that not enough people want things like stereo delete on their cars, and it adds cost to the production process to make different options. By simplifying the options, it costs less to produce. If there was a great demand for stereos to be optional, then it would be an option. However, stereo deletes are only found on the very cheapest of cars, or the low volume, lightweight versions of performance cars (which ironically cost more, but that's because of all the performance enhancements).

I dunno ... There seemed to be quite a few people requesting Ford build a bare bones V-8 Mustang recently.

Perhaps stereos have to be standard now due to their integrated designs, but I don't see how you couldn't design a door panel to have interchangeable trim pieces to house either a module for a power window control system or a window crank. And nothing says A/C has to be standard. You can still use the same dials for the interior, just mark them different.

I really doubt you'll ever find things like crank windows and stereo deletes options on a $32,000 Camaro SS or Mustang GT.

You're thinking of it backwards.

Think of it as adding a V-8 or whatever option to a Camaro LT. That's what I'm trying to say.

If removing PWs & replacing them with cranks voids a new cars warranty- that's yet ANOTHER problem with modern cars.

You can probably thank the legal team for that.

I'm perfectly happy with my new car options right now. It's certainly better than the options from, say, 5 years ago.

Course, I can sort of relate with YJ. I personally plan on removing the A/C and power steering from my Golf for the simple fact that they aren't needed. Personally, I could never live without some form of music in my daily driver and as such, I'm upgrading the stereo and speakers instead. However, I doubt we will ever return to a market filled with such options. The grand majority of the market wants all these luxuries and no automaker wants to come off as downmarket by making everything options. "Standard features" is the name of the game. It's in marketing, its in reviews, its what you see on a dealer's lot. The only vehicle to my knowledge that currently offers an affordable vehicle with a trim that removes standard features in favor of performance features is Hyundai's Genesis Coupe 2.0t R-Spec. I don't expect to see many more.

The problem for you YJ (and the other few of you) is that not enough people want things like stereo delete on their cars, and it adds cost to the production process to make different options. By simplifying the options, it costs less to produce. If there was a great demand for stereos to be optional, then it would be an option. However, stereo deletes are only found on the very cheapest of cars, or the low volume, lightweight versions of performance cars (which ironically cost more, but that's because of all the performance enhancements).

With the current state of unitized parts, communication busses, computerization of the manufacturing process and JIT inventory systems, I just don't give this argument much validity. In 1967 with virtually NO computers, people on the line could customize cars anyway the customer wants. It should be easier to do it today... but I don't think the General wants to truly appease more than 60% of the buyers. What GM forgets is that by winning over the toughest 5%, they will use word of mouth to help move more traffic to the GM stores.

SAmadei ~>>"I'd start building them for resale."<<

I'd prefer to save an original, half decent car. For $30K you can build a kick-ass, subtly-modified version of vintage iron.

Sure, I'd like to, as well... but we're in Jersey. And finding repairable vintage iron is getting pretty hard. Plus, some trim parts are near impossible to locate or repair right.

Not only that, but its can be a problem in some states when you rebuild a ship of Theseus.

So, I'd rather create some vintage cars that may be common, but can be created as brand new... properly undercoated and treated from the start. My current parts list is 90% complete and has a "new" 1969 Firebird shipping for about $60K. Thats with a 6x automatic, 500hp IA engine, Brembos, build subframe with Corvette parts, etc. Could do a Camaro quite a bit cheaper...

I like where this thread is going, some of you actually get it.

SAmadei ~ >>"Sure, I'd like to, as well... but we're in Jersey. And finding repairable vintage iron is getting pretty hard. Plus, some trim parts are near impossible to locate or repair right."<<

Granted; I was only speaking about building one (or two)- but would like to hear a lot more about this ::

>>"My current parts list is 90% complete and has a "new" 1969 Firebird shipping for about $60K. Thats with a 6x automatic, 500hp IA engine, Brembos, build subframe with Corvette parts, etc."<<

Goodmark sells 400 hoods- are fenders available ? More, please...

I'm in agreement with Camino, YJ, and others. The issue isn't necessarily the cars themselves, it's the fact that we're inevitably told we can't have exactly what we want option wise. Cars today are packaged to streamline production and, of course, to maximize profit. Unfortunately, that means fewer choices for the consumer. Want the polished aluminum wheels? Sure, check off option package 1SB, which also gets you the six speed automatic, heated leather seats, navigation system with backup camera, dual zone AC, adaptive cruise control, etc. Oh,and by the way you've just bumped the car's price by $4500.

I'm in agreement with Camino, YJ, and others. The issue isn't necessarily the cars themselves, it's the fact that we're inevitably told we can't have exactly what we want option wise. Cars today are packaged to streamline production and, of course, to maximize profit. Unfortunately, that means fewer choices for the consumer. Want the polished aluminum wheels? Sure, check off option package 1SB, which also gets you the six speed automatic, heated leather seats, navigation system with backup camera, dual zone AC, adaptive cruise control, etc. Oh,and by the way you've just bumped the car's price by $4500.

Given what you have to pay for a new car, you would think that the choices would be yours. We lost the ability to make a new car completely our own with those damned option packages. If I'm going to spend 40k, I want it my way.

Cars today are packaged to streamline production and, of course, to maximize profit.

This right here. The thing is, and it may come as a shock, but the automakers aren't exactly rolling in money, so they've done just this to help save costs and make whatever money they can. Chrysler did this last year where they cut down a lot of the individual option packages and either dropped options (AWD) or simplified them into groups. Maybe when they're doing better they'll have more standalone options, but not so much right now.

Why the automakers do it is no mystery, why we tolerate it is.

Maybe because 98.1% of the population either don't care, or actually like the system in place. You can bet 99.7% of the population want a radio and air-conditioning.

Anyhow, the intention of this thread was to decry how new cars have no 'wow' factor. I'm sorry, but I cannot agree. Stylistically, whether they've improved or not is purely subjective. There's a lot to 'wow' about with the new cars these days, probably moreso than anything within the past 40 years.

Maybe because 98.1% of the population either don't care, or actually like the system in place. You can bet 99.7% of the population want a radio and air-conditioning.

Anyhow, the intention of this thread was to decry how new cars have no 'wow' factor. I'm sorry, but I cannot agree. Stylistically, whether they've improved or not is purely subjective. There's a lot to 'wow' about with the new cars these days, probably moreso than anything within the past 40 years.

Radio and A/C are hardly the issue.

As for the rest, how many sedans of the same general shape do we really need?

They are so boring, no "wow" at all.

Techwise, new cars are fine. Stylingwise they are anonymous.

I can think of plenty of cars that, whether you like the styling or not aren't anonymous (and aren't supercars).

Most of the cars worth looking at are at least retro-inspired, if not outright retro designs. I want to see something new and beautiful.

Re-badged Opels don't do it for me.

Where are the stunning designs, especially from GM?

I'm not seeing them.