direct connection
Ain't no misster E. from my perspective: I'll take an 'original' Dodge Challenger over an 'ersatz' version any day! As I see it, 'retro' cars in general haven't worked particularly well, mainly because their designers take too many liberties with the original styling. To my eyes, the 'retro' Challenger looks bloated, puffy, and heavy-handed. It may indeed be a great performance car, but retro is all about appearances, is it not?
I'd like to see somebody do a new, technologically-updated version of the 1953 Studebaker Starliner, KEEPING THE ORIGINAL LOOK. Now that'd be a conveyance worth seeing-----and maybe even buying, for those who understand and appreciate the meaning of the word 'classic'.
direct connection
Ain't no misster E. from my perspective: I'll take an 'original' Dodge Challenger over an 'ersatz' version any day! As I see it, 'retro' cars in general haven't worked particularly well, mainly because their designers take too many liberties with the original styling. To my eyes, the 'retro' Challenger looks bloated, puffy, and heavy-handed. It may indeed be a great performance car, but retro is all about appearances, is it not?
I'd like to see somebody do a new, technologically-updated version of the 1953 Studebaker Starliner, KEEPING THE ORIGINAL LOOK. Now that'd be a conveyance worth seeing-----and maybe even buying, for those who understand and appreciate the meaning of the word 'classic'.