Quote:
Originally Posted by DaBears
GT500 is the best looking muscle car that can be bought hands down. Not saying Camaro looks bad, but GT500 is simply bad ass.
|
Oh, I'd beg to differ, some of the SL65 AMG Blacks, Aston Martins, and others KILL the mustang. The mustang doesn't look like a serious muscle car or agressive, it just looks like a "mustang". The Ford GT...now THAT looked like a serious car, a supercar, but it actually looked the part.
Ford is always trying to make up for the fact that they do NOT have a super-car type like the ZR1/CTS-V (yes, I realize the CTS-V is more ZL1 territory and not quite AMG) so they have to spice up their Mustang and try to make it span what is best served by more than one model (like something higher end with IRS, more chassi technology, etc). The main way that american automakers keep shooting themselves in the foot is they always think that they have to make these retro-models and they they have to "carry over" heritage from the models before. Yes, it can be a little shocking to see a design that has changed, but IF the car is adequately designed and performs as expected, it does NOT have to look like or have the same name as the previous car. I'm not saying they should just "throw away" a name of a line like "mustang" or "camaro", but they also constrain themselves way too much, which in the end is where you get all the "WTF were they thinking?" and "why on earth did they do that?". Again, it's not that they can't keep some of the same lines and ideas, but it's so easy to go astray. The ZR1 looks like crap with all the "extra vents", it's not a bad car, but a basic vette looks better.
The camaro may have the Cd of a brick, but at least it's low-slung and looks like a sportscar. I don't care for the stupid fish-gills in the rear, smooth panels would be more to my taste, but I think it stands on it's own much better otherwise as it's own design.