When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Come on, guys. Ponycars aren't supposed to be Suburbans. You don't buy one for massive cargo space. The only pony car ever built that had a really spacious cargo area, with the rear seat folded, was the original 1964-66 Barracuda, under that huge glass window. (I owned one as a teenager).
Come on, guys. Ponycars aren't supposed to be Suburbans. You don't buy one for massive cargo space. The only pony car ever built that had a really spacious cargo area, with the rear seat folded, was the original 1964-66 Barracuda, under that huge glass window. (I owned one as a teenager).
See FWIW thats what I was referring to. Some consider jumping into one of these with the Mcguvyer attitude, "I can make this work" but in reality it just turns into a hassle. If you need a secondary car from your regular family mobile, the low end ones are great ideas. Plus betcha these are supported with more bolt ons then you can imagine for any other entire automaker. However if your going to need child seats, and a full familys worht of luggage, and your primary car is this.....tears....
yet the GT trunk is much more usable. Both cars are about the same size, there is no reason for the camaro to be so impractical when the stang can do it fine. Get even more space if you dont get the upgraded audio package that includes that subwoofer
The problem with being a pony car these days is you have a limited hobby enthusiast market and that means you sell like crazy when you're the new kid on the block and once the light is off you, you have to either improve or just slowly fade away - except for your core loyalists who will buy you endlessly.
I think it's one of the best times to buy a pony car or muscle car these days. If anyone has ever driven any of those ole muscle cars (I have and had a couple or three), you'll know they had character... but that was about it. They handled atrociously, polluted the environment and generally were loud obnoxious, impractical noisemakers.
I'm not a GM fan but handling was one of the Camaro's strong points over the past 25 or so years. It was the Mustang that was critiqued for being "softer" and more prone to fits of understeer and oversteer.
Really today muscle car buyers have it pretty good. Over the years the Detroit trio have been criticized relentlessly for shortcomings about their pony cars. Scary handling, fit and finish or unrefined drivetrains etc. Now that they've tried to do something about all those things, sometimes it seems that people find new things to worry about.
Really you are buying a retro muscle car here. It's not supposed to be practical or have great visibility. If you don't like one flavor of vehicle, well there's one that will suit you from the other two manufacturers. Yes you pay a pretty price for these cars but you get something in return for that.
For me personally, it would have been nice to see GM use the 1970 1/2 body style to go retro on. Ford really hit a home run using that first fast back body from the mid-60's on their retro car.
For me personally, it would have been nice to see GM use the 1970 1/2 body style to go retro on. Ford really hit a home run using that first fast back body from the mid-60's on their retro car.
Dodge also really nailed it with their retro Challenger design, though it is somewhat larger then the original 1970-74. They even use many of the original colors now....the purple and lime green were always my favorites.
Yeah I find the Challenger body a bit too large compared to the original, but that body style is timeless. Instantly recognizable and very true to the original. The retro colors make it that much more interesting. There are going to people crying a few years from now if FCA changes this car to a 4 cylinder turbo, and kicking themselves for not scooping up the 707 hp version.
There was no Challenger in the 1970's that could even dream of matching this version.
Yeah I find the Challenger body a bit too large compared to the original, but that body style is timeless. Instantly recognizable and very true to the original. The retro colors make it that much more interesting. There are going to people crying a few years from now if FCA changes this car to a 4 cylinder turbo, and kicking themselves for not scooping up the 707 hp version.
Simply buying a 700-HP Hellcat is one thing.....especially with dealer-price-gouging. But, once that's done, getting insurance (especially affordable insurance) for it may be quite a different matter.
There was no Challenger in the 1970's that could even dream of matching this version.
I liked the interior trim on the 1970s version, though, even if over-plasticized and poorly-assembled. It had a lot of the matte-wood-tone trim I like, a proper symmetrical three-spoke sport steering wheel, and a nice-looking set of gauges. The new one, IMO, is too plain-looking inside.
08-24-16 | 09:59 AM
