charger vs challenger retro design - some thought...

[marangen]

most agree that the new Charger is not worthy of being called a Charger - old topic. It is as we know not even an attempt to make a retro look, and a boring 4-door design in general.

most agree that the new Challenger (prototype admittedly) is looking great and well worthy of beeing called Challenger - has all the right lines and "improved" updated cues such as less front overhang etc. (Only thing that surprises me is the Cuda c-pillar rather than Chally c-pillar, and instrumentation derived from base version and not rallye cluster).

Challenger is a hit basically (althoug yet again they are missing out on great market timing!)

Being a Charger II fan and believer of those who claim it to be one of the best looking designs ever (wasn´t there a Discovery world car poll and charger 68 came 2nd after the MacLaren...anyone has that?) - can it be that the original Charger design is so good that they couldn´t make a good retro-version of it without it falling way short of the original?

This cannot be said of mustang/Chally however which are great retro designs.

have seen some pictures of earlier charger prototypes, and although 2-door and way cooler, still has little retro-resemblance. anyone has such pics.

AND following on from this - isn´t the conclusion that

1) we rather have a great challenger retro on the street (in our garage) than a "could have existed" sub-otimal sports coupe called Charger (however cool in its own right but still far off from original design excellence)

2) DCX should never have put the Charger badge on that sedan

3) DCX should not try to rectify things with a Charger "2.0" of any kind (have heard rumours of that)

4) When it comes to REAL masterpieces, there is nothing but the original that holds (says a bit about mustang and chally I guess)

some thoughts....

M