[FarmerFran]

Maybe I m wrong here but wasn't the original "muscle" of the 60s/70s just sedans/coupes with big motors? Maybe with the exception of the SuperBird

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by FarmerFran

Maybe I m wrong here but wasn't the original "muscle" of the 60s/70s just sedans/coupes with big motors? Maybe with the exception of the SuperBird

The muscle car started when John DeLorean at Pontiac said let’s put the big 389 from the big Bonneville into the small Tempest which was a little old granny car. The GTO option package on the 1963 Tempest.

Muscle cars were all coupes. GM made 4 door Malibu’s which were on the same chassis as the Chevelle but you couldn’t get the 396 or 454 in the sedans. Mustang, Camaro, Challenger, Charger, GTO, Roadrunner, GTX, 442, GS..... all were strictly 2 door coupes. Even Fords Galaxie 500, the Cobrajet 428 was only in the coupe.

Now, back then, one could order a car in a configuration not intended for standard customer build orders. That’s where the old COPO and the like comes in - there’s actually a one-of-one Ford Country Squire station wagon with a factory equipped 428 Cobrajet and 4 speed in existence - the customer went through hoops, and Lee Iacocca himself had to sign off on the purchase order, but they actually did build one in that configuration for the customer. Complete with leather, factory air, and factory power windows! Back then you could do that. So it’s possible any multitude of configurations are out there of muscle car sedans and wagons. But they were never “officially” available in those configurations.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeROC

Agreed. The SS was too plain looking. I ended up with a Charger bc of that reason. The CTS-V was 2nd on my list, mainly due to a higher price and I liked the looks of the Charger better. I would have LOVED an LSA powered family car though.

Also agree. In the right color they look good but they were very vanilla looking.

Everybody I know that owns one or has owned one absolutely loved/loves it.

As much as I ragged on the styling, had they been a little cheaper when I needed a new car I probably would own. But out of my price range and even the used ones were crazy expensive.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeROC

[redcoats1976]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeROC

yeah,thats kinda sad,isnt it.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Jeb114

Mustang Mach E is out selling all other EV"S

https://www.thedrive.com/tech/39586/...-tesla-analyst

That may well make it a good vehicle.

Just a terrible Mustang, and this proposed 4-door creation has proportions a lot closer the the Mach E than to the traditional Mustang coupe. IOW, still too SUV-ish.


Norm

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by redcoats1976

im sorry but my wifes 2018 honda civic coupe looks more sporty than any of those cars.

It's unfair to compare coupés to sedans. Of course the coupé looks cooler but you sacrifice practicality for that look.

And 10th Gen Civic has a bit of overdone style, when you look at those fake vents.

Oh BTW, Civic Coupé is dead now due to poor sales. RIP.

[Rayvan]

Originally Posted by redcoats1976

im sorry but my wifes 2018 honda civic coupe looks more sporty than any of those cars.

No, the Civic looks like a joke.

[genxer]

I think that profile pic was the Mach-E, not the proposed sedan. Ford would do better to use other heritage names. Model name Taurus or Galaxy, trim names Fairlane, Torino, SHO.

[MR's 2SS]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

The issue with SS, from what I have seen from a review(can't remember from whom, maybe Doug DeMuro?), is that it looked way too plain for a performance sedan.

Compare the following pics. The Chevy SS looks like a freaking Camry compared to a Charger. Dare I say, it looks even more boring than a current Honda Accord.

I mean, I like sleepers, but this is just way too plain. There is absolutely no spice in the design.

Right, all that.. All Im inspired by is those kind of nice looking wheels.
Plus, just look at all the pictures you put up... And thats just a sample of all the cars fitting into the "performance sedan" category.
Why even try to compete there.
The Camaro, Challenger, Mustang... were lost. Only the Mustang sort of soldiered on. Then when they went and actually brought them back they had pretty good sales for a good run.
Why a performance sedan? Look back to the original Charger/Chevelle/GTOs all those were great cars with room for a family and groceries without a total focus on performance...
A Wildcat?... early 60s Impalas?
So much uninspired cheezy crap available today. I cant believe anyone buys some of this stuff.
I had a 63 Buick Riviera... they still look almost contemporary today. Big Nailhead... 2 speed trans. 4 leather buckets and a bunch of stainless in the interior.
I got my dads 1965 Bonniville... It had the 389... but they could be had with a 428 with tri power.... Take a look back at some of those cars. They were great...
Im not saying they should build a 6,000 lb car with a 455 that gets 7 MPG...
but bring back that class like they brought back the pony cars and maybe some of us will show interest.
The Tbird for crying out loud... They put a HiPo 6 in a Tourus.. SHO... They were ok. I believe that 6 was developed by Kiekhaefer....
Merury just came out with a V-12 boat engine....600 horse....
Put that in a midsized 2 door with big enough back seat for 3 kids with cutting edge style? And Im sure theres emissions controls on boat motors so I dont think it would be out of the question...
Im too old.. I think out of touch with what the market wants.

[MR's 2SS]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

The muscle car started when John DeLorean at Pontiac said let’s put the big 389 from the big Bonneville into the small Tempest which was a little old granny car. The GTO option package on the 1963 Tempest.

Muscle cars were all coupes. GM made 4 door Malibu’s which were on the same chassis as the Chevelle but you couldn’t get the 396 or 454 in the sedans. Mustang, Camaro, Challenger, Charger, GTO, Roadrunner, GTX, 442, GS..... all were strictly 2 door coupes. Even Fords Galaxie 500, the Cobrajet 428 was only in the coupe.

Now, back then, one could order a car in a configuration not intended for standard customer build orders. That’s where the old COPO and the like comes in - there’s actually a one-of-one Ford Country Squire station wagon with a factory equipped 428 Cobrajet and 4 speed in existence - the customer went through hoops, and Lee Iacocca himself had to sign off on the purchase order, but they actually did build one in that configuration for the customer. Complete with leather, factory air, and factory power windows! Back then you could do that. So it’s possible any multitude of configurations are out there of muscle car sedans and wagons. But they were never “officially” available in those configurations.

YUP! My neighbor had a Ford Country Squire wagon with a 427 and tow package... posi.. When they traded it they got a Bonniville wagon tow package with a 428....
And those werent even the sort of back door drag car options offered in the early 60s.

[MR's 2SS]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

It's unfair to compare coupés to sedans. Of course the coupé looks cooler but you sacrifice practicality for that look.

And 10th Gen Civic has a bit of overdone style, when you look at those fake vents.

Oh BTW, Civic Coupé is dead now due to poor sales. RIP.

A lot of the coupes in the 60s had room in the back. Plenty.
The cars then were all designed as coupes and the 4 doors were stretched from there.... They all looked kind of goofy.
I think maybe the Ford Tuarus might have been the first American car really designed from the start as a 4 door so the proportions were ok.
I could be wrong... And at the time they were unveiled they looked like jelly beans.

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by MR's 2SS

Right, all that.. All Im inspired by is those kind of nice looking wheels.
Plus, just look at all the pictures you put up... And thats just a sample of all the cars fitting into the "performance sedan" category.
Why even try to compete there.
The Camaro, Challenger, Mustang... were lost. Only the Mustang sort of soldiered on. Then when they went and actually brought them back they had pretty good sales for a good run.
Why a performance sedan? Look back to the original Charger/Chevelle/GTOs all those were great cars with room for a family and groceries without a total focus on performance...
A Wildcat?... early 60s Impalas?
So much uninspired cheezy crap available today. I cant believe anyone buys some of this stuff.
I had a 63 Buick Riviera... they still look almost contemporary today. Big Nailhead... 2 speed trans. 4 leather buckets and a bunch of stainless in the interior.
I got my dads 1965 Bonniville... It had the 389... but they could be had with a 428 with tri power.... Take a look back at some of those cars. They were great...
Im not saying they should build a 6,000 lb car with a 455 that gets 7 MPG...
but bring back that class like they brought back the pony cars and maybe some of us will show interest.
The Tbird for crying out loud... They put a HiPo 6 in a Tourus.. SHO... They were ok. I believe that 6 was developed by Kiekhaefer....
Merury just came out with a V-12 boat engine....600 horse....
Put that in a midsized 2 door with big enough back seat for 3 kids with cutting edge style? And Im sure theres emissions controls on boat motors so I dont think it would be out of the question...
Im too old.. I think out of touch with what the market wants.

You think auctions like Barrett-Jackson are big time now? With the Baby Boomers buying the cars of their youth?

Wait till they start to cut out all the fun of cars like our Camaros now. Us Gen-Xers are going to push the prices of those classics even higher. There are already people my age getting really interested in the old stuff because it's easier to work on, most of those old cars look even more beautiful today next to most of the cheap, ugly stuff produced as new cars, and there's simply no replacement for displacement.

When one of those old big blocks fires up inside one of the tents at Barrett-Jackson EVERYONE within earshot stops and turns around to see what just fired up and is coming down the aisle.

If I have to sacrifice modern airbags and anti-lock brakes for a car I enjoy driving much more then I guess that will be the case. Car companies can continue the path to electric mixing bowls. My next Camaro will just have to be a 1970 split-bumper SS 396 restomod on an Art Morrison chassis, with modern fuel injection and other engine upgrades, a 6 speed Tremec, 4 wheel disc Brembos, and luxury upgrades to power windows, locks, seats, cruise, tilt, A/C, rear defrost, and a Pioneer bluetooth sat-nav system with Apple Carplay.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by MR's 2SS

A lot of the coupes in the 60s had room in the back. Plenty.

The cars then were all designed as coupes and the 4 doors were stretched from there.... They all looked kind of goofy.

I think maybe the Ford Tuarus might have been the first American car really designed from the start as a 4 door so the proportions were ok.

I could be wrong... And at the time they were unveiled they looked like jelly beans.

Yeah, when the cars were humongous and were as safe as tin cans in a crash, of course they had a lot of room. Even an old Mini Cooper had lots of room inside because there is no thickness to it.

Nowadays, any RWD coupé that's reasonably sized and can pass safety standards won't have much room in the back.

Even for FWD coupés that have room in the back, accessing it is another issue. You can have all the room in the world, but if I can't fit a box through the space between the folded front seat and the door opening, it's useless.

That's why I actually wish more coupés tried the quad-coupé/suicide door approach like my RX-8. You maintain the coupé look but the access to the rear seats are better than standard coupés. You don't even have the pesky B-pillar in the way - that's attached to the rear door.