I don’t like things that are made to resemble other things. An object should look like the object it is, not appear to be something else. For example: a telephone should look like a telephone. I don’t want one that looks like a Ferrari Testarossa. Or a cheeseburger. Or Garfield. Actually thinking about it … the landline phone industry has a lot to answer for here. Maybe the business of making telephones got too boring so instead of improving the design and aesthetics engineers just started sticking phone guts into any old plastic crap they could get away with. Likewise, those hi-fi systems that look like a gigantic can of Coke. What point does such an object have as a consumer good? Why do these novelty aberrations exist beyond pleasing the type of grown adults who eat rainbow colored breakfast cereal during the day?
I was watching a vintage electronic restoration show the other night, and the presenter was wanting to indulge in some pointless nostalgia by buying an old Scalextric set. Entering a money-for-old-rope emporium, not only was the host staggered to learn slot car racing was a 1960s invention and not the eighties, he was enthralled by a transistor radio in the form of a Robinson’s juice carton. It was like watching a seal clapping at a fresh bowl of fish heads. Where do producers find these people, and how do they end up on the screen? More importantly, why haven’t I got a cushy television gig like that?
Anyway, being autistic, what this all means is that my brain is not programmed to manage life and all its messy unpredictability at anything other than face value. If someone says they are going to do something and that doesn’t happen, or something doesn’t work the way it is meant to, the bad wiring in my head has a short circuit. Which instantly externalizes as me being oversensitive or an intolerant asshole. But this is an involuntary reaction to the anguish and confusion roiling inside my frontal lobes. When I was at Land Rover, a couple of times my manager had to kick me under the table for being a bit too blunt to the other people around the table whom I thought were not keeping up or not doing their bloody jobs. Like I say – an intolerant asshole.
Reverse Cosmetic Surgery
Therefore, as a designer, I value honesty and integrity in the creation and appearance of products. To get to the point, it’s one of the reasons I harbor a visceral dislike of hidden rear door handles – on a small level they are subterfuge, but also because pillar position, proportions, and category define whether a car should have two or four doors. Not some cheap tromp l’oeil trick and what, four- and five-door cars can’t be cool or look great? It’s dishonest bullshit. So when I see a car trying to look like a completely different car I immediately find myself needing to lie down in a dark room with a large bottle of something to ease the pain. Like Laudanum.
I’m not talking about playing mix and match with parts and trim to build your ideal version of a car that was never available from the factory. Dropping a different engine and transmission combo from elsewhere in the range is fine by me because if I had the money and time, I’d be building a Mk3 Ford Capri 2.8 injection with the later Scorpio 2.9 24-valve Cosworth engine in it. No, what’s putting the sand in my clams this week is another American Frankenstein: a poor 2022 Dodge Challenger that’s undergone reverse cosmetic surgery in an attempt to make it look like a 1971 Plymouth ‘Cuda.
Now look, I get it. I really do. When the Camaro and the Challenger both reappeared in 2009, suddenly it was like 1969 all over again for fans of traditional American muscle. There wasn’t quite the same variety as there was back then because so many manufacturers had revved their last in the intervening years, but enthusiasts clamoring for V8 performance in a modern daily driver never had it so good. The fans of this type of car can be tribal in their brand loyalty so if you weren’t a Ford, Chevy or a Dodge person you were shit out of luck. There are lots of these modern versions of an old model about with varying degrees of success, so clearly the demand for this sort of fake is out there: you can get a Firebird, a GTO and even a misguided attempt at a Chevelle. A modern Plymouth ‘Cuda based on the then-current Challenger has been rumored for years, but one enterprising shop got fed up of waiting and took matters into their own hands.
Understanding What Is Wrong
Since I’m a Plymouth fangirl, this is something I completely understand, but I want a proper OEM ‘Cuda, not a half-assed, badly designed hodge-podge of old and new. When you look at this recreation, your initial reaction might well be, huh yeah, that looks quite cool and well executed, although let me tell you that was a long way away from my initial reaction. This isn’t as bad as the white FrankenChallenger I ranted about a while back, but that was a homebuilt effort and this one was made by a professional custom shop, which should mean a better result. But for what this thing cost, not being as shit as something one guy could have drunkenly knocked up in his garage during his evenings is not fucking cricket my friends.
The first problem is this looks like a ’71 ‘Cuda that’s swallowed a modern Challenger whole without chewing. It is so bulky and fat that Thanos would have to snap twice. In the front view, you can see the bodysides now stick out a long way from the glasshouse. The reason for this is because they’ve extended the bodywork from the bottom of the side window outwards in the Y-axis. The fender line now must rise vertically to meet this so the hood has to come up as well, and it’s completely flat with no variation in Z height across the surface. On the Challenger, the hood and the fenders are much lower – you can tell by the way the hood curves upwards to meet the cowl. This trick is partly hidden in the middle of the hood by extending the power bulge backwards towards the windshield.
Part of the reason for them doing this is to give them enough real estate – i.e. enough sheet metal, to play around with the surfaces to create the classic ‘Cuda Coke bottle hips. I get why they did this but the implementation is too rigid and brutal. The lines are too stiff and the curves need more ‘lead in’ – the radii should be softer and blend in and out more progressively. A sweeping corner rather than a sudden kink. Because the fender line at the front has risen, the whole of the back end has to come up to match. The problem with this is it’s led to entirely too much sheet metal (actually carbon) above the feature line running down the length of the car – so it looks under wheeled and flabby. Sorting out the front wheel arch so its not on the piss and then expanding the openings out a bit to keep it all in proportion would help, but because this car uses the existing Challenger body-in-white structure with new carbon fiber panels bonded on top, it wasn’t possible.
Before we send this thing off to fat camp, there’s a couple more chubby rolls of flab we need to poke at. The area below the rear bumper should have a much better defined shape rather than just lazily rolling away from under the bumper – it’s way too soft and soggy, making ‘Cuda look like it hasn’t had its diaper changed for a week. Finally, the rear side glass has had its shape altered and surface area reduced to better resemble the original ‘Cuda. Now the C pillar is much wider making the rear compartment more claustrophobic. There’s just not enough side glass to balance out the body color, adding to the visual weight problem.
Details Are Not Details
So the proportions are off, making the whole car look too heavy and underwheeled, but that’s not the end of my problems. Not by a long shot. I’ve got the knife in this far; I might as well push it up to the hilt. One of the problems I often find with custom-made cars is that not enough attention has been paid to the details – the little things that you might miss first time around but you are likely to spot over time. This happens because the little stuff is insanely hard to get right. As Charles Eames said – “the details are not the details. They make the design.” Is that the nit-picking train I hear pulling into the station? Yes, it is, so come onboard.
Let’s start off where we left off with the new side glass. Leaving aside for a moment the new glazing has a different color tint to the OEM glass, it looks like they’ve installed it by simply bonding it on top of the existing opening, which means the glazing is not flush across the two windows, giving an inconsistent highlight. On the Challenger proper, you can see both side windows flush with each other, and the rear glass is sealed into the underlying structure as opposed to on top of it. The upper radius of the new rear glass is far too sharp, breaking visual consistency with the window line at the top of the A-pillar. And the Hemi side graphic doesn’t have a consistent gap from the top and rear edges of the fender, making it look like it’s been slapped on in the wrong position.
Let us refresh our espressos and wander around to the front. The first thing I noticed, because it jumped out a mile off the screen, was that the front bumper and grille panel are badly lopsided. I know how this happened, which I’ll talk about in a bit, but first let’s look at the headlights. The grill opening is far too big because extending the bodywork in width (Y-axis) and raising the hood/fender line upwards (Z-axis) opened up the whole front of the car. The standard lights with their cut off top now exposed look lost in all that black carbon, making the down-the-road graphic appear cross-eyed like the unfortunate Leyland P76. For fucks sake put some bigger, completely round light units in there. There must be something suitable available off the shelf.
The situation doesn’t improve at the ass end either, which is more drunken than me after making through another week at The Autopian. The left hand side of the rear panel is lower than the right, which makes the lower line of the bumper look crooked in the opposite direction. The intersection of the rear fender and bumper is a horrible collision of mismatched surfaces and radii, the exhaust tips don’t match, and it’s all just a horrible mess.
How Much?
Now, you might think I’m being overly harsh here and that the person who commissioned this car wouldn’t notice all the things I’ve pointed out or did and isn’t bothered by them. And this is a fair comment. But this car was offered for auction back in January and didn’t sell at $275k. It’s now up for sale again. I’ve just been on the Autotrader website, and 2022 Hellcat prices are a bit all over the place, but there’s a zero miles one available for $75k. According to the listing, there are 3000 hours of labor in this car. So that works out to roughly $65 per hour, which for a skilled builder doesn’t sound like anywhere near enough. And we haven’t accounted for materials, which are all carbon fiber molded panels. So it’s a fair guess that the original purchase price of this car was above that $275k figure originally. This must be getting on for a half-million dollar build. For that much, in my opinion, you need to be getting everything spot on. Now I’ve watched the build video for one of these cars, I think I understand how the panels ended up all lopsided.
What the builders seemed to have done was cut off all the external sheet metal, leaving the inner structure untouched. They then laboriously hand-fabricated from sheet metal new bodywork, snipping out panels and tack welding them into place, before grinding the joints smooth.
Then the lot was covered in filler before being sanded back, and those new surfaces used as the basis to make the molds for the carbon bodywork. It’s a time-honored method of doing things, and on a wonky old ’71 ‘Cuda which was not even straight when it rolled out the factory you might get away with it. The thing is, if you’re building on top of a new OEM vehicle, as opposed to restoring an older one, you should be using as near to OEM methods as possible, because the build quality is so much better than it used to be.
Do It Digitally First
A better way of doing this would have been to purchase a complete CAD model of a modern Challenger. If that’s not possible, then scan a Challenger with the external sheet metal removed and build a proper A-class surface model to that. You’ve then got your own set of data for your design. All the checking for dimensional accuracy, highlights, and panel gaps can be done digitally before a single part is made. This data can then be used to create prototype parts to allow a physical sanity check, and then the molds by milling out hard foam the same way OEMs do. Get the thing off its wheels and make sure it’s level, and then use easily available tools to check, recheck, and check again to make sure it’s all correct. It’s more consistent, accurate, and, importantly if you’re producing a small run of cars, repeatable. Because as you can see:
The builders of this car didn’t pull it all out of their asses and totally design the thing by eye on a full size car. From my rigorous journalistic investigation, a sketch was commissioned, and it is surprisingly good even if the style is a bit contrasty and corny. What might have happened is that, once the builders had the sketch and were happy with it, they took it from there – because they used an illustrator not a car designer. Compare the sketch to the finished car, and the difference is stark. I’m always banging on about it, but coming up with ideas and doing the splashy sketches is only one part of the designer’s job. The designer should be involved at every stage from conception to completion, making sure nothing is fouled up or just left to be good enough. I spent hours every day for over a year supervising hard models and then prototype Defenders.
I don’t want you thinking I’m automatically against this sort of redo – the Japanese have been at it for years, but I consider that typical Japanese whimsy and theirs are fun. Who could resist a Jimny playing dress-up as a G-Wagen? And those kits all look to be exceptionally high quality. Muscle cars are closer to my heart so it’s no shock that’s why this Mopar shitbeast has raised the hackles of my mohawk so high.
It might cost you a few thousand dollars to get an accurate digital model built, but over a run of ten cars that’s a small investment considering the purchase price. Getting a proper designer with OEM experience contracted in once or twice a week to keep an eye on things wouldn’t be a bad idea either. The errors on this ‘Cuda wouldn’t be acceptable on a twenty-five grand car new car – so they are not acceptable on one on a two-hundred-and-fity grand one.
This is a poor execution of a dumb, unoriginal concept. Just like the 5th and 6th generation Camaros that were tarted up to “resurrect” the Firebird.
I looked at some of those while researching this. They looked a lot better built from what I could see.
But that addresses only part of the issue. Does good build quality of something that shouldn’t exist matter?
From my point of view, no they shouldn’t exist. But clearly people want them so if they are at least decently designed and built properly that’s something.
I’ve only see one in person, and I loved it. The owner went all out with the badges and mandatory screaming chicken on the hood. They clearly did it for fun. Now this “Cuda” doesn’t work in my opinion because it takes itself way too seriously. The owner trying to get $250k for it is the only thing I find funny about it. Nothing about the Firebird-themed Camaro I saw made me think the seller would try to present it as anything but a Camaro with Pontiac badges.
But have you seen the Rocket Bunny S14 Barracuda kit?
Do I want to?
Hahaha. It’s…interesting.
If I recall correctly, the Rocket Bunny kits are designed exactly as Adrian recommended they should have designed this, by scannig the car and 3D modeling the kit.
Also, while it does look like a small Cuda, the ‘Boss Aero’ kit for the S14 is meant to resemble a mid 70s Datsun Sunny/160Z (120Y or B210 in some markets) which shared its platform with the S10 Silvia.
Look, I have tremendous respect for neurodivergence, but you will pry my Sports Illustrated football phone from my cold, dead hands.
Ok Grandpa/ma let’s get you back to bed.
But I haven’t even watched Matlock yet!
Weird and Gilly salute your name!
Oh and, wait until you see the interior because I’m certain it’s completely unchanged. So while you’re driving it, it evokes zero nostalgia. It’s like you threw your money away….
The interior is basically unchanged apart from some minor color and trim alterations. One of which was anodizing all the chrome parts metallic pink….
Gahhhhhhh. Keeping with the crap implementation.
Thank you for this, the top shot doesn’t look bad at a glance but I appreciate the deeper dive. As an engineer I agree with the manufacturability analysis, this is not a custom one-off but a prototype for planned (limited) production so it should be “right”.
I’d give you a Pulitzer for that if I could. I’ve seen these things and the designers go on and on about the modern electronics and dynamics, power safety handling etc. because that’s all they got. I’ve always thought the new Challenger itself was hideously ugly and completely wrong and turning it into a faux ‘Cuda is a sin, a crime and an abomination. Frankly, the whole thing looks like an inflated parade float. It looks like a joke. It’s worth less than an unrestored 1970 ‘Cuda with a 225 straight 6 under the hood and a gutted interior and a bunch of dents and rust. It’s all just dishonest. It’s a rolling lie. Someone needs to go to jail.
I like the Challenger a lot, and it deserved its long run and sales success. The early ones were a bit insubstantial, but with that facelift they really nailed it. Heritage done right.
I’ve had Challengers as rentals over the years and just never liked them. The sides are too high and you feel like you’re in a bucket, the windshield raked too steeply, the roof too low, forward visibility is compromised and the hood is way too high, especially with a hood bulge. Go over a small hill and you can’t see where you’re going or what’s in front of you. My first car was a ‘67 Barracuda and I want to like them but I just find them unsporty and boring to drive, despite the power.
I still have my ‘94 Miata and that is more my idea of fun.
I rented one for a month in California six years ago. Loved it, but it’s not for everyone and a very different experience from the traditional muscle car. I thought the visibility was fine though. But I am tall.
I feel seen. I also have a coffee cup that looks like a stack of tires.
*stares at empty bowl of Fruity Pebbles on the desk*
To be fair…
1) it was one of the only kinds of cereal on sale
2) the kids always ask for it
3) it tastes like nostalgia
Froot Loops is my jam.
Even my doctor said I need to eat more froot.
If you hate this, the ViperVette will make you apoplectic..
What’s even worse is that there are both C3 and C4 ViperVettes, and both are hideous and awful in their own unique ways.
I’ve seen a C3 in person, and the biggest problem by far is the wheel offset, the LT1 sounded amazing through side pipes though.
This thing seems to fall into the uncanny valley. It looks close enough that I know what it should be but all the details are wrong and the result is unsettling. For the amount they want from this you would probably be better off using an actual Cuda as a starting point and just putting modern guts in it. The result would’ve been much better.
That would be my approach.
That would be the best approach imo. As a former owner of an original Challenger this thing is an abomination. Updating the bones of an original is the correct approach. Also an opportunity to fix the atrocious NVH and build quality of the originals as they rattled and clanked even when not running.
It’s relatively easy now to scan old cars and check their dimensional accuracy, and then get them right.
Agree. When my one was running, every surface vibrated shook and hummed in a cacophony of NVH. It got old real fast. The handling was dodgy, braking not really and economy well… These are all things that a quarter of a million, a plan and a design could easily rectify.
Strip it completely, hire a guy to spend a couple of days sitting inside it seam welding the whole thing.
That would be a good start. Chuck in some bracing to stiffen it up a bit more. You’d have a good starting point. Add a decent irs (corvette maybe), a AL small block and a six speed. Decent.
They sell modern front suspension and IRS conversions for Chargers, so they might even be on the market for ‘Cudas. Even ’80s G-bodies have improved, replacement frames available—they’re expensive, but nothing like this thing.
That was a LOT of words that amount to it not being in proportion and that adapting old body lines to a new chassis doesn’t work well. Personally, it looks better than a lot of the Mustang variations of the same thing.
I’s not just about saying it’s wrong, it’s explaining why it’s wrong.
Yeah, I got that.
Hi Grumpybutt, I’m Dummyhead. Nice to meet ya!
Get bent. It was a passing comment that amounted to me thinking it was better looking than the Mustang variants of the same theme.
Knock it off the pair of you or you’ll be sent to Matron.
When they raised the hood line, they needed to extend the nose to keep the proportions right on the front end. Though likely very close in the originals, the front lip profile on the original gave the illusion of a longer nose.
While on the front, the lower intakes are a mess, they should be a single, delicate smile opening, not a gaping mouth breather.
I give them 85% grade on the concept they went for, 55% on the execution. This is a project I’d like to see Foose tackle.
I didn’t like rainbow cereals even when I was age appropriate for them.
It’s a futile effort since they’re adapting this car into its direct inspiration. You’re not really gonna get any closer if you’re not an OEM, may as well not bother.
I think the end paragraph hits the nail on the head, these boomer bait muscle abominations are just trying so. damn. hard. Mitsuoka and the like of JDM rebodies *know* it’s dumb and lean into it, they know it’s never going to be a perfect retrofit, it’s more a fun homage to the idea, than trying to do a 1 to 1 recreation of it.
This mess of a redo takes itself so seriously, and asking over a quarter million dollars “because 3k hours went into it” is all fine and dandy if it were good but it just isn’t. It’s styling, quality, and usefulness is just all worse than it’s starting point, and it’s somehow more expensive than an original Hemi Cuda, and a Hellcat combined. If you wanted a new Hemi Cuda, do a recreation/tribute car run like the Cobra has, don’t bastardize a perfectly fine vehicle instead.
I wouldn’t pay a dime for it, but I also wouldn’t say no if someone offered it.
Then I’d ship it to the UK and constantly drive by Adrian’s place.
If you can afford the car, you can afford to buy the house across from his and park this thing in the driveway.
You… are gonna get on The List.
Street park it next to the Ferrari.
You are ALL now on the new 2025 List.
I’ve obtained footage of Adrian reading this comment chain
I’m certain Adrian would be entertainingly acerbic. Likely involving pig’s blood and reference to someone’s father drunkenly mating with a marmot
Your father had cloven feet and your mother was a dockside prostitute.
I so feel seen 🙂
In the design illustration, there’s some sweeping stylistic striping/”reflection” arching over the lower edges of the glass. It distracts the eye so you don’t notice quite as much just how fat the rear quarter is and the somewhat awkward transition into it. Even the illustrator knew this thing was visually overweight from the get-go. :facepalms:
And yet, they went ahead and slapped it together anyway.
I think we’ve reached the point in the automotive hobby where certain vehicles are built specifically to be sold at Barrett-Jackson. The hope is some drunk boomer will buy it on a whim only to stuff it away in the back of a warehouse and promptly forget about it.
Either that or a money laundering scheme.
Ah yes, let’s take a thoroughly modern design and slap some vintage-looking parts on it. Never mind that you can’t make the proportions right because the mean old government says cars made today have to be reasonably survivable in a crash. The roof on the authentic Cuda looks like it would collapse if you put your coffee cup on it before you got in. It’s a sexy beast that you cannot duplicate today.
Considering the Barracuda and Challenger shared the same body shell to begin with, there was no need for most of this, DaimlerChrysler’s own designers had already made like 90-95% of a new retro inspired Cuda in the first place just by making the new Challenger. They should have left the sheet metal alone and focused on changing plastic parts, as DaimlerChrysler/Chrysler/Fiat Chrysler/Stellantis would have done themselves if Plymouth still existed and was allowed to have their own version
New gille. New rear valence. New badging. Viola, the new 2025 ‘Cuda.
The Barracuda and Challenger had different sheet metal on their own E-body platform.
Well, the roof pillars and the front portion of the roof panel were identical, at least
The originals had different wheelbases and, as Adrian said, sheetmetal, but a “what if” modern ‘Cuda would almost definitely not have those differences due to the cost, so I completely agree that trim changes are all that would be needed here and it’s already been done, including some with the single headlight design. To me, the front’s fine, but the rear tends to look fatter and dumpier with the ‘Cuda styled tail lights I’ve seen as they look a bit small thanks to having to fit the stock Challenger tail light spots (or just using the outer part of the Challenger tail light) while losing the horizontal emphasis of the originals (didn’t see anyone go with the quad rounds). Still, they’re certainly better than this thing and for much cheaper.
“I don’t like things that are made to resemble other things. An object should look like the object it is, not appear to be something else”
Says the man who owns a Ferrari that LOOKS like it’s fast
😛
No it doesn’t.
I guarantee it’s the fastest thing on the Autopian fleet.
I guess Beau’s collection doesn’t count?
Also, I want to see you take on Torch and the Pao at the next Goodwood Revival before I accept your retort as fact.
I’d mistake the Pao for one of my boots.
It manages to make the Challenger look svelte, which is a pretty impressive accomplishment in and of itself.
As the former owner of a ’71 Challenger, I think this creation looks… bulbous. 🙁
I have the same issue with vegetarian and vegan food. Stop trying to imitate meat, because you will not get it right – let your food be its own thing.
I’ve struggled with this for a really long time — I came to the conclusion that the vegan world faces three main struggles:
As an omnivore who loves veggies, I usually find this means I choose a meat option because I can’t afford two or three of the vegan option because I would go broke just trying to stay full.
Oh, this is a car article? This rendition looks like it’s for the more discerning gentleman who has graduated from Black & Mild blunts and is now looking over a fine selection of Maduros in a walk-in humidor, the contents of which will soon be dumped unceremoniously on the ground in the Autozone parking lot, from which he has just emerged under the false hope that four hanging air fresheners will actually cover the aroma of an eighth ounce of Kushberry Popcorn Hybrid.
I will say that Beyond meat is genuinely very good. It’s not cheap, but it’s honestly a perfectly fine beef substitute. I made a meatloaf out of it once and it was near impossible to tell the difference.
I’ve had it and liked it. I think Beyond and Impossibe both face the same issue, and that is trying to sell vegan “meat” to people — without the massive health benefits of a traditional vegan diet — is an uphill battle.
I get it personally (mainly about reducing land usage, CO2, and animal cruelty) but the mainstream consumer is more like my MIL:
“These are delicious burgers, I can’t believe they’re cheaper AND lower in fat than meat!”
(looks at package, realizes she’s wrong on both counts, never eats it again)
I agree that they’re pretty good. Not terribly healthy, though. The usual older vegan “meat” was disgusting. I had some vegan bacon once (my sister wanted a birthday dinner at some vegan place), which looked and—I assume—tasted like toddler plastic play food. But, I’ve had vegan (or maybe just vegetarian) patties that weren’t trying to be meat that were pretty good.
It looks like a 67 yr old boomer – oh wait that’s me!
….uh….ok….?
“More importantly, why haven’t I got a cushy television gig like that?”
I would pay to watch you go through a vintage tchotchke shop, and start ripping apart the design of all manner of shit.
Me too. You tube is a thing, I’m sure someone has a camera in their pocket and there’s probably a curio palace nearby…
YES!
Absolutely! Crank up both the “snooty Britishness” and the “never grew out of the goth-kid phase” and call it Adrian Doesn’t Like Things.
That ‘Dieter Rams points at things he doesn’t like’ video on YouTube is my series bible.
If you film it, guaranteed we’ll watch it!
Let’s see what happens at Goodwood.
It would be internet gold!
I’m feeling specifically called out this morning. Why Adrian be peeking in my windows anyways?
Yeah I get that too, cereal is cereal and I’ll have everything from cheerios and corn flakes to fruit loops, so yeah I hear ya on feeling called out on that one. Breakfast time is also Autopian time as well
I also had Fruity Pebbles today, and now I’m wondering if that shadow I saw was Uncle Adrain peering over the cubicle wall with disapproval.
I’ll bet this shit hits so hard if you’re stupid.
I bet this thing has been shared seven million times on FB with titles like “PLYMOUTH IS BACK – 2026 CUDA CONFIRMED”
LOOSK GOOD I HAD A 1971 CUDA IN BLACK GOOD TO SEE TRUMP HAS MADE AMERICA GRET ONCE MORE BY TARRIFS SO THAT COOL CARS ARE BACK ITS ABOUT TIME NO MORE EV JUNK FROM CHINA!!!! – sent from my Large Print Jitterbug powered by T-Mobile’s nationwide 4G LTE Network
Apparently there’s a rumor that Stellantis wants to bring Talbot back, so if they bring back Plymouth it would be with the Horizon so they could do both with the same car.
Besides, ’68-72 muscle was the retro craze of the 2010s, now it’s ’80s hatchbacks time to shine.
WHAT
Granted, I don’t have any sources other than “I read it in an internet comment” myself.
That can’t be real, Stellantis needs to shed brands, not add new ones!
Every time I go to YouTube some video about some long lost vehicle model (The Chevelle Is BACK!) with a clearly AI/CGI generated visual is recommended. I invariably select “Don’t recommend channel” and it invariably recommends some similar channels that are clearly coming from the same source.
Oh yeah. When the 5th gen Camaro dropped, and somebody started making frankensteined Firebirds out of them, my sister-in-law was all about them. She is one of the dumbest human beings I have ever had the displeasure of interacting with.
These are the same people who will just randomly come up to you because they know you like cars and excitedly go, “So did you see they’re building a new X???” And you know they just fell for some Facebook AI clickbait nonsense but you have to stand there and act intrigued while they tell you it’s going to have a Bugatti engine with a Hellcat turbo on it or some insane nonsense.
UGH! YES!
Ahh, so I see this is a universal experience then. I do so enjoy having to gently explain to my older coworkers that the crappy AI retro muscle car render they are excitedly showing me is not, in fact, Ford rebooting the Boss 429 Mustang, or something along those lines.
TDIL that those massively dumb clickbait articles actually go to a matching BS article. I see enough of them to know they must get clicks, but I don’t understand how anyone who would be interested—a car person—would not see how obviously fake they are, like, yeah, they’re going to bring back the ’59 Cadillac with some body colored trim and some more modern wheels instead of chrome, let’s just ignore decades of change, regulations, modern concerns, and buyer trends!