[Interior] Dead Horse: "Retro" and why I think this interior is so hated.
01-09-2008, 10:07 AM
#46
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Posts: 2,947
I remember going to the Dayton Auto Show back when the first 4th gens came out. I sat in both the Z28 and the Firebird.
I remember my first impressions were that the visibility of previous generations was lacking and the lumbars in the seats were uncomfortable and confining. And at the time it didn't look a whole lot like a Camaro that I'd recognize, but more of an import feel. And didn't care for that huge dashboard, that if I sat something on and hit the brakes, I wouldn't be able to reach. Under the hood, seeing half the engine under the windshield, being a very mechanical person, thinking how difficult it would be to modify or maintain.(whether true or not)
I DID LOVE the performance numbers!..the engine and the large wide wheels and tires.
I didn't fall for the 4th Gen until the last redesign, then WOW, they really started looking Bad@$$..!
Seems like a lot of the cars start getting it right just before the go on hiatus, or vanish.
(...poor Oldsmobile....)
One thing I can say about the new Camaro, noone can deny at one look, that it's unmistakably a Camaro...
I have my cars pretty much paid off now and starting to build some bank for a new Camaro!..the wife is stoked too!..
(she loved those color chops!...)
I remember my first impressions were that the visibility of previous generations was lacking and the lumbars in the seats were uncomfortable and confining. And at the time it didn't look a whole lot like a Camaro that I'd recognize, but more of an import feel. And didn't care for that huge dashboard, that if I sat something on and hit the brakes, I wouldn't be able to reach. Under the hood, seeing half the engine under the windshield, being a very mechanical person, thinking how difficult it would be to modify or maintain.(whether true or not)
I DID LOVE the performance numbers!..the engine and the large wide wheels and tires.
I didn't fall for the 4th Gen until the last redesign, then WOW, they really started looking Bad@$$..!
Seems like a lot of the cars start getting it right just before the go on hiatus, or vanish.
(...poor Oldsmobile....)
One thing I can say about the new Camaro, noone can deny at one look, that it's unmistakably a Camaro...
I have my cars pretty much paid off now and starting to build some bank for a new Camaro!..the wife is stoked too!..
(she loved those color chops!...)
Last edited by 90rocz; 01-09-2008 at 10:11 AM.
01-09-2008, 10:19 AM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,897
01-09-2008, 11:46 AM
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: manassas, VA
Posts: 808
To a car fan, sure, it's pretty obvious. Other than that, not so much. I've had the 5th gen vert concept as my background on my computer at work basically since the first pictures were released. It's on my roaming profile so it comes up on the projector in meeting rooms too when i fire everything up. I've had several people in that time remark about what a nice looking *MUSTANG* it was.
01-09-2008, 11:49 AM
#49
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
To a car fan, sure, it's pretty obvious. Other than that, not so much. I've had the 5th gen vert concept as my background on my computer at work basically since the first pictures were released. It's on my roaming profile so it comes up on the projector in meeting rooms too when i fire everything up. I've had several people in that time remark about what a nice looking *MUSTANG* it was.
Yeah, I've had different pics of the Camaro concepts as screensavers on my computers at work. The only comments I usually get are, "is that the new Mustang"?
01-09-2008, 12:15 PM
#50
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 801
To a car fan, sure, it's pretty obvious. Other than that, not so much. I've had the 5th gen vert concept as my background on my computer at work basically since the first pictures were released. It's on my roaming profile so it comes up on the projector in meeting rooms too when i fire everything up. I've had several people in that time remark about what a nice looking *MUSTANG* it was.
01-09-2008, 04:30 PM
#51
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 9,710
01-09-2008, 08:56 PM
#52
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Southern NJ
Posts: 1,093
01-09-2008, 09:07 PM
#53
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Southern NJ
Posts: 1,093
Most know, though, that it's a Camaro since I've talked about it so much. But there are the few that still say it looks just like a Mustang...
01-09-2008, 11:17 PM
#54
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Posts: 2,947
I think the reason that people say that more than not, is b/c the Camaro is out of production.
Everyone knows they don't make them anymore and hardly noone outside of enthusiests knows it's coming back, and that there's a few of them running around.
I hope they start running some teaser commercials pretty soon, then those comments will fade quickly.
Some of you can remember back in the day it was hard to tell, like @ dusk, if the oncoming car was a Mustang, Challenger or Camaro.
Silohuetted, they are, and have been pretty similar in the first gens...headlights and all.
And I can see how the Concepts' angled front, plus other angles looks similar to a CTS as someone mentioned.
Everyone knows they don't make them anymore and hardly noone outside of enthusiests knows it's coming back, and that there's a few of them running around.
I hope they start running some teaser commercials pretty soon, then those comments will fade quickly.
Some of you can remember back in the day it was hard to tell, like @ dusk, if the oncoming car was a Mustang, Challenger or Camaro.
Silohuetted, they are, and have been pretty similar in the first gens...headlights and all.
And I can see how the Concepts' angled front, plus other angles looks similar to a CTS as someone mentioned.
Last edited by 90rocz; 01-09-2008 at 11:35 PM.
01-09-2008, 11:30 PM
#55
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Posts: 2,947
“Challenger draws upon the initial 1970 model as the icon of the series,” said Tom Tremont, Vice President – Advanced Vehicle Design.
“The 1970 model is the most sought after by collectors. But instead of merely recreating that car, the designers endeavored to build a Challenger most people see in their mind’s eye — a vehicle without the imperfections like the old car’s tucked-under wheels, long front overhang and imperfect fits. As with all pleasurable memories, you remember the good and screen out the bad.
“We wanted the concept car to evoke all those sweet memories … everything you thought the Challenger was, and more.”
Compared to the original, the greenhouse is longer, the windshield and backlite faster, and the side glass narrower. All glass is set flush with the body without moldings, another touch the original designers could only wish for. The car is a genuine two-door hardtop — no B-pillar — with the belt line ramping up assertively at the quarter window just forward of the wide C-pillar.
Exterior details one might expect, like a racing-type gas cap, hood tie-down pins, louvered backlite and bold bodyside striping, didn’t make the “cut,” the designers feeling such assorted bits would detract from the purity of the monochromatic body form. But tucked reassuringly under the rear bumper are the “gotta have” twin-rectangle pipes of the dual exhausts.
“The 1970 model is the most sought after by collectors. But instead of merely recreating that car, the designers endeavored to build a Challenger most people see in their mind’s eye — a vehicle without the imperfections like the old car’s tucked-under wheels, long front overhang and imperfect fits. As with all pleasurable memories, you remember the good and screen out the bad.
“We wanted the concept car to evoke all those sweet memories … everything you thought the Challenger was, and more.”
Compared to the original, the greenhouse is longer, the windshield and backlite faster, and the side glass narrower. All glass is set flush with the body without moldings, another touch the original designers could only wish for. The car is a genuine two-door hardtop — no B-pillar — with the belt line ramping up assertively at the quarter window just forward of the wide C-pillar.
Exterior details one might expect, like a racing-type gas cap, hood tie-down pins, louvered backlite and bold bodyside striping, didn’t make the “cut,” the designers feeling such assorted bits would detract from the purity of the monochromatic body form. But tucked reassuringly under the rear bumper are the “gotta have” twin-rectangle pipes of the dual exhausts.
In contrast to the bright Orange Pearl exterior, the interior is a no-nonsense, “let’s-get-in-and-go” black relieved by satin silver accents and narrow orange bands on the seat backs.
“Though the 1970 model was looked to for inspiration, we wanted to capture the memory of that car, but expressed in more contemporary surfaces, materials and textures,” said Alan Barrington, principal interior designer.
“Though the 1970 model was looked to for inspiration, we wanted to capture the memory of that car, but expressed in more contemporary surfaces, materials and textures,” said Alan Barrington, principal interior designer.
Rethought, reworked, reproportioned and redesigned, the Challenger concept car offers iconic a HEMI-powered performance coupe derived from a classic American muscle car.
Also, how is the challenger NOT a copy of a '70? Dodge admitted it was
Tho once again, the Z has much more character...
Last edited by 90rocz; 01-10-2008 at 11:07 AM.
06-21-2008, 12:33 AM
#60
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 173
I think the interior is too retro as well. I agree the inside doesn't go with the outside. The gauges all in the floor console are silly and take up valuable space. A torque gauge is a waste of money. Put excellent gauges the driver needs and where he needs them. Big radio controls take up too much space, etc.
The main thing I absolutely do not like from the pics I have seen of the interior is that the speedometer doesn't have numbers for the 5s. No 55, 65, 75, etc. Just 50,60,70,80,etc. When I want to set my cruise for 64, for example I want to see that 65 mark. My wife's Jetta has the same kind of speedo with no 5's and its a pain in the ***. I dont' want to have to stop and pay extra attention to that needle to see if I'm 74 or 76 or wtf. Certainly it looks cleaner to have less numbers on the dial, but this isn't some kind of fashion wristwatch. I want clean setup that gives intuitive feedback, not something an Industrial designer thought looked nicer.
The main thing I absolutely do not like from the pics I have seen of the interior is that the speedometer doesn't have numbers for the 5s. No 55, 65, 75, etc. Just 50,60,70,80,etc. When I want to set my cruise for 64, for example I want to see that 65 mark. My wife's Jetta has the same kind of speedo with no 5's and its a pain in the ***. I dont' want to have to stop and pay extra attention to that needle to see if I'm 74 or 76 or wtf. Certainly it looks cleaner to have less numbers on the dial, but this isn't some kind of fashion wristwatch. I want clean setup that gives intuitive feedback, not something an Industrial designer thought looked nicer.