regarding the last sketch....


I really like the front section on that car.


The 68 rear quarters need toned down abit but this sketch has a much different feel that the previous ones. I think a smoother transition back would set it off.

 

I suppose to some degree I am, but that's not my intent. I'm just trying to relay that retro doesn't equate to DEATH. Even modern designs on cars can lead to death.

Most of those cars that you brought up were low volume vehicles which sold MORE than expected the first year or two, then sales declined. All car sales decline after three years unless it's Camry or some other family sedan. I think there are various reasons. For Prowler and T-Bird it was IMO a lack of power and price gouging (especially with the T-Bird). T-Bird was only offered in two unique colors every year. I could be wrong, and will happily admit it, but I don't think Ford expected this car [design] to be around for the next 10 years.

The Beetle's sales are expected to go up with the convertible top. The Beetle has sold poor or well depending on who you talk to. The Beetle is a niche car if you ask me, also not a mass produced vehicle IMO. But was it really retro? Considering the old model didn't stop selling until not too long ago, the "new" Beetle could be considered it's next step in the evolutionary process.

I think the real test of "retro" styling will be the Mustang. It will not be a limited run or niche vehicle. It will be a mass produced (170,000+ units first year) vehicle.

 

These concepts all look cool, but I would like to see them a little closer to production reality(as in: 16" rims and tires, 2" wheel to fender gap, 1.5" wheel well overhang, a couple more inches of ground clearance and you know most of the scoops and creases will dissapear as well.)
Things are looking up! We might get a Camaro that looks good AND runs fast. For so long its been one without the other.

 

So it doesn't look anything like the pictures being posted They are without a doubt "retro" The reactions from the people on this board shouldn't be considered hilarious as they are potential buyers. I'm tired of GM telling people what they want I think the passion exhibited here just shows how incredibly emotional some people are about a car, quite the tribute!

Corvette has never looked retro though it did have cues from previous generations (what I'd also like to see from Camaro).

I don't even care about the name, it could be called Mustang for all I care. As long as the car delivers what previous cars did, but better, I would consider buying. If not, the camaro is "officially" dead. I want to buy a new car not buy into some notion of history. The old cars pale in comparison to anything new, in every category, why push the stigma? I like modern not outdated!

Maybe we'll get lucky, GM will release a retro Camaro, and then to appease some of us folks with taste will also release a "modern" Firebird

 

When I was talking about retro vehicles and not one of them going through a redesign yet, I didn't necessarily mean they they were a failure, why they were out, I just meant that the ones that were not killed off have not gone through the redesign process yet so we don't know if they are successful or not in the redesign. We also don't know what direction they would take:come up with a fresh design or continue to use other ideas from the past.

As far as Guion's comments about people getting upset, I think they are founded and should not be dismissed. It is true that it is too early to write-off the new not-seen Camaro, but if what you are saying is true, and the sketches are close to the real thing, then that is cause for worry to some, and I include myself. And yes, those sketches are retro, no mistake about it. I would love to see the C5-C6 redesign theme go into the 4th-5th gen Camaro.

Maybe we need to come up with another word besides "retro" because it is such a polarizing word.

 

Well this one looks good
http://home.comcast.net/~blackwoodga.../GenV_rev4.jpg

But I don't like the front( crome bar, also the "nose" of the car looks just too low, like the cavaliers, the front of the car needs to be a bit more agressive,

this one looks really good especialy the back of the car I hope GM takes a look at this one

http://community.webshots.com/photo/...17517442eYucYE


Note: Gm please 4 round tail lights

 

I think the blue "evolution" one looks a little too much like the Chevy Impala.

Some say they like the round tail lights, but I prefer the slots of the original 1st gen. The blue one has round tail lights and the rear looks too much like the old Corsica's.

Overall I think we're on the right track though. The look is chunky and muscular and that jibes well with the latest looks coming from Cadillac.

Carry on. Then let's have a few polls and vote.

 

The Evolutionary drawings are awesome! I hope the front end resembles that type of aggresive look. The car in those drawings looks pissed off. Kind of a "Ill chew you up and spit you out". The 05 Stang would look scared next to that. Time will tell. Someone else said but if the Camaro is mellow looking I would hope GM would at least consider, Building off the best looking production car ever (98 - 02 WS6) and giving the Trans AM another shot, having the best of both worlds.

Regards

 

Better, but I still don't care much for the blended mirrors...and maybe just a little too much windshield rake...and I (having a Commercial Art cert.)know that when this car takes on real coloring and shading, those fenders will tone on their own...
Almost there...for me..

 

I hope the fourth-gen mirror thing does not make it into production. I don't care very much for the mirrors blending into the fenders trick and I would rather see the car go without this.

 

If they say its not retro, but these drawings reflect what these certain people have seen, then these drawings are our window into the next camaro, and the drawins are VERY retro.
The new 05 mustang is very retro as you can look at an older design and compare it directly to the new one, just like the 54-58 tbirds to the present tbird. They take on many appreances of an older version. The C6 is not nearly as retro as teh Mustang in comparing the "retro-ness" of each car, the Mustang wins hands down. The C6 is clearly a much better showing of "evolution" and to retro. The hightend fenders does hark back to the C2 and C3's fenders, but over all design and look of the car is very very diffrent then the C2 or C3. Put the 69 stang next to the 05 stang, and you see that they look near the same with the roof line, front end design, interior lay out, almost everything.
Put a C6 next to a C3 and the similarities are less. You know that the C6 is a vette and the C3 is a vette, but you dont see direct design highlights between the 2. Most people would say that the C6 looks more like a updated and more agressive C5. In that case, its more of an evolution, much like the 911 Porsche. You look at a 911 and you know right off the bat that its a Porshe. The slope of the roof, the headlights, the whole front end design is distictive, but it is not a "retro" designed porsche but much as evolution of the last one.
Now that is out of the way, if no one said the car is retro, why are the pictures that people are drawing, which IMO and other peoples opinion think, are retro? The one picture that was posted from webshots with the blue camaro was perfect. Id like for that picture to reviewd and see if thats close as it sounds like its closer to what you posted in the first post of this thread. More and more retro designed cars keep showing up in this thread, and it is not helping the situation. I hope that you are right and that this car is not retro, but the artist renderings tell me otherwise.

 

I like retro!

Being 21, I did not grow up in the muscle-car era, so retro design cues are not familiar to me outside of car shows, cruises, and muscle car magazines. I like how the new Mustang looks, and if a Camaro comes out resembling a '69 Z28, then that is fine by me.

*puts flame suit on*

 

I agree with pentatonic. I love the 1st gens and can't wait to buy a 5th gen Camaro that looks bad ***.

*oh crap where did I put my flame suit*

 

No offense, but this is not true. I've seen sillouette comparisons of the 2005 Mustang and it is closer (nearly identical) to the 99+ Mustangs than ANY other Mustang. No rear fender bulges like the 65-70 Mustangs either. In fact, the line from the top of the front fender to the rear fender is straight, JUST LIKE the 99+ Mustangs. Even the wheel well flares are like the 99+ Mustangs.

The interior is quite different too. The instrument cluster is from the NEW F-150! The steering wheel looks SIMILAR to the 67 steering wheel, but it is DIFFERENT! I own a 1967 Mustang, I know. The interior seat arangements are from the LINCOLN LS. Go ahead, compare them, they're the same. There are more things that are not the same.

Oh, there are similarities no doubt. But none are from any one generation of Mustang. This car is not a "carbon copy" as has been posted here. The problem is many people here can't get past certain styling cues to see how modern this car really is.

 

I really don't know what you're looking at. There's too many similarities in those two cars ('68 and '05). The interior is the '68's with new material, right down to the 1960s era lettering on the gauges. The large front grill is the same profile, the driving lamps are in the exact same place. The headlamp bezels are the same. The rear quarter window is the same prfile as the intake/vent thingy on the '68, the three flush fitting vertical tail lamps are the same. If it's not a 'carbon copy', then it's one heck of a 'spitting image'.

I don't know what '99+ 'Stangs you're looking at, but (at least not in this reality or one known to God) by no stretch is the '05 closer to a '99 than a '68. It's not certain styling cues...it's the whole damn car!

I think the problem is people can't get past the fact Ford took a '68 and just added a few contemporary touches.