Posted on 01/08/2006 1:36:56 PM PST by NCjim
Automakers will be flexing some muscle at this year's North American International Auto Show, with a slew of performance cars that harken back to the V-8-charged glory days of the 1960s and early '70s.
On Sunday, the first day of media previews, Ford Motor Co. planned to introduce the Ford Shelby GT500, a souped-up Mustang, and Chrysler Group planned to unveil the Dodge Challenger concept, a revamp of its 1970 model. Later in the show, General Motors Corp. will take the wraps off its Chevrolet Camaro concept.
Lamborghini is joining in, bringing out the Miura concept, an update of the 40-year-old supercar that was last produced in the early 1970s. And Hyundai Motor Corp. will have its HCD-9 Talus, the latest in a string of concept sports cars designed in the South Korean automaker's California studios.
But only Detroit automakers can lay claim to the tradition of muscle cars, the All-American vehicles that first appeared in the mid-1960s and faded out when the oil embargo and stricter pollution laws hit in the early 1970s. These are the cars made famous by the Dukes of Hazzard, who wreaked havoc in a 1969 Dodge Charger, and Steve McQueen, who raced around San Francisco in a 1968 Ford Mustang GT390 in the legendary chase scene from "Bullitt."
After years of focusing on sport utility vehicles, automakers were surprised by the popularity of the revamped Ford Mustang, which went on sale in the fall of 2004. U.S. sales of the Mustang rose 24 percent in 2005, according to Autodata Corp.
Erich Merkle, an auto analyst for the consulting firm IRN Inc., said Baby Boomer nostalgia is fueling the trend. Also, GM and Ford, who have been struggling with weak sales and U.S. market share losses, are eager to capitalize on something uniquely American.
"It's a place where the Japanese can't follow them. The Japanese couldn't do a Mustang. It wouldn't be credible," Merkle said.
The 2007 Ford Shelby GT500, in coupe and convertible versions, is the only one of the muscle cars at the Detroit show that is going on sale this year. Ford says the car will appear in showrooms in the summer of 2006.
The Shelby GT500 is the latest product from Ford's partnership with Carroll Shelby, a race-car driver turned designer who first began refashioning Mustangs in the 1960s.
The designers of the Dodge Challenger concept brought a 1970 Challenger into the studio for inspiration.
"For me, that car symbolizes the most passionate era of automotive design," Micheal Castiglione, principal exterior designer of the Challenger concept, said in a statement.
Chrysler hasn't said whether the concept will reach the market.
'56 Ford Pick-Up
If Ford made this vehicle, they could produce it cheap, cheap, cheap. Sell it for under $10K with a 4 cylinder engine and a usable 4x8 bed.
A lot of people would buy them as a utilitarian weekender vehicle. Folks who wanted to tow the Empire State Building could shell out the additional $30K for a tow vehicle.
LOL, I have no idea what a RAV4 is. I only have American Steel V8s at my house, well except for my Harley :). I would like to see the new version of Hemi that Jeep is using in that new Charger though...
Can I get flames on mine too?
Actually, I agree. Like I was saying with the mustangs, there is a market for inexpensive simple transportation. I think they should continue to make the luxury trucks but then make a real truck for farmers without all the junk, that costs less. Who wants to buy a 50K duro-max just to get it banged up on the farm.
Likewise, if I am only looking for a vehicle that is easy to work on, cheap to hop up and doesnt weight much, then I am looking for a Fox body mustang.
Car and Driver has the new Rav4 V-6 at 6.3 seconds to 60. A late 80's stock 5.0 was a little over 7.0. So were they to sell that old 5.0 as has been suggested it'd be a poor handling, poor riding muscle car that'd get blown off the line by a Rav4, an Accord, or an Avalon and destroyed by something like a Mazda 6 Turbo, or Suburu WRX.
That Challenger is a good looking car. The new Mustangs are very nice too, but the new Camaro is uuuuggggggllllllllyyyyyyyyyy.
I agree about the new Camaro...Ugly. Camaro is the car I was waiting for...
Proud owner of a 1968 Dodge Charger. Yeehaw!
I can't wait until I get my 2007 SVT Shelby GT500 Cobra.
We have a 1981 DMC. Volvo engine, peugeot and lamborgini parts.
Ok, heavy car. Little difficult to drive, Clutch esp. But darn, the heads you turn when you drive down the road with that Stainless Steel body and the gull wing doors.
OK, yer stupid.
(Only time will tell if that's a correct statement or not. I don't know.)
A red Sunbeam Tiger with minnilite wheels. I want one! When finished it will have a 300 horse 289 with 3.31 gears.
My wife's family owns a billboard on a prominent highway in a prominent city, bought back in the 50's, and is a gift that keeps on giving. It's been a family tradition to buy a new car when a family members turn 16 for over three generations. Out of well over a dozen parents, sisters, brothers and cousins who received its benefits only one relative has abused its privilege...my wife's sister who hasn't owned a car since and she's 35 years old now.
So there. You should be so lucky.
Oh well.
You are wrong on both counts. They use 3 Mustangs shooting the movie and they where all 390 4spd cars. By the way the "A" in GTA stood for automatic and that Emblem was only used on the 1967 Mustang.
Calm down. It was a joking response.
(But, I'd guess that the majority of parents who bought their 16YOs sports cars regret it later.)
I'm sure they could if they tried. Although the repro Rallyes I've seen in 16" and above look kinda funny.
That's why I'm putting 17" Magnum 500 repops on my Roadrunner.
My dad gave me his used 73' Cougar XR7 when I graduated high school. It had a 351 Cleveland and a T-6 tranny and I never gave them any regrets.
Perhaps you ran with a different crowd than I.
Probably. A couple or three guys from my class killed themselves with horsepower. One died from a fencepipe (the long horizontal one at the top of a chainlink fence) run through his neck at 80+ MPH on a residential street. The safe speed was 25.
That's tragic...truly. But isn't that the same argument the anti-gun people make. Inanimate objects kill people?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.