Quote:
Originally Posted by HuJass
I disagree with the notion of changing the look of an iconic muscle/pony car.
The 5th gen did so well mainly because of its looks. It wasn't it's performance (remember how testers kind of tore up the car before the 1LE, ZL1, and Z/28 came along).
The majority of the target demographic of the car loved it because it looked like how they thought a Camaro should look like.
Then, think back to the '04-'06 GTO. Sure, the car stayed true to the original's mission statement, but the looks were not there. The target market largely said no thanks. Why? Because it didn't look like what they believed a GTO should look like. I'm part of a Pontiac club and not one member had anything good to say about the car.
Bob Lutz even lamented the fact they didn't have a bigger budget to reskin the car to make it look more like a GTO.
Cars like Camaro and GTO need to look like their predecessors from the heyday of the muscle/pony car era.
Younger people might not appreciate the retro-styling, but they're not the ones doing most of the purchasing. It's the older (40, 50, 60 year olds) guys that are putting these cars in their garages in large numbers.
|
See, the good thing is, you have access to the classics and the 10-13 cars to fall back on. What then, should be held back for the sake of nostalgia?
Old guys will continue to get garage queens regardless of what GM or anyone else continues to pump out. What boggles my mind is that folks are willing to stunt progress because they see change as a negative thing.
GM has teased us with the coming features of the 6th gen and presumably, they will all be changes for the best. This seems to fall under the same failing mindset of redundancy while still improving. We want the car to get lighter, faster, more fuel efficient, cost less money, yet stay the same. It should trump competition by default without succumbing to the evils of technology and the ever increasing safety standards. I want the car I have now, but better and less expensive than before.
Sorry, that is a fallacious and undermining position to take. No manufacturer in their right mind would continue to produce the same tired product, year after year without making fundamental changes to it's core, somewhere in their product lifespan. If they didn't, sales would plummet and continued manufacture of said item would only prove to be a hindrance.
You want your 1969 Camaro? Go buy one. You want to keep your 10-13 because GM finally got it right? Guess what, you're entitled to that to. But to impose judgement on a *business* whose sole purpose is to make money because they don't suit your tastes, is downright silly.
Let progress march on for the rest of us.