It's not called "Dart II". It's just Dart. What appears as "II" is Dodge's ill-advised, mildly-idiotic red "timing stripe" logo which does absolutely nothing for brand recognition. Apparently no one at Chrysleroni is aware that particular logo is a hallmark of the Grand Sport Corvette. :eusa_doh:
Prepare To Puke
- Thread starter Jack Meoff
- Start date
Jack Meoff
Mopar Maniac
Chrysleroni.....I nearly fell off my chair laughing!!
ramenth
Well-Known Member
BWAHAHAHAHA! I love these threads.
efriedrich
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2011
- Messages
- 724
- Reaction score
- 41
I really like it and the new Chally as well.
Mopar&vettedude
Well-Known Member
I think everyone agrees with me when i say they should've brought out the charger concept from 99, that is a charger. Even though it was also a 4 door, they hid the back doors so well that it still looked like a 2 door. they cant leave well enough alone.
72Dodge
Well-Known Member
I don't like that any better than the actual production car, actually. Front end looks too much like a Camaro for a Charger.
That design is very similar to what you'd have if you grafted an '87 IROC-Z nose onto the current car. Other than the broad-shouldered quarter panel treatment and the Camaro schnoz, the styling cues are nearly identical.
Mopar&vettedude
Well-Known Member
I'd still take that over the new one. They can still make it a full size sedan, but in 2 door form. Like this
My imp
Well-Known Member
That is a vast improvement over the current model. A good place to start. Government reg.'s prevent any company from releasing a vehicle looking exactly the way they want. Crash standards, including pedestrian damage from the front end of the car, crumple zones, plus all the devices that replace a low skilled/low attention spanned driver all add to how a vehicle will look/perform/what kind of economy a vehicle will get.
Cordoba1
Well-Known Member
I really liked the '99 Concept, too -- but it was a front-driver based on the LH platform. That would have been a heresy far worse than having too many doors. I will say, even if we can't agree on the styling, is that the LX and LY cars are really "good" cars. The can be specified with a range of engines. For cars of their size, they get surprisingly good fuel millage -- and handle quite nicely. If nothing else, their 3-box designs are about the closest thing you're going to find as a modern M-Body replacement.
And speaking of replacements for M cars... Even if your a die-hard Mopar lover, used Mercury Marauders or Crown Victoria LX-Sports are nice cars, too. V8 powered, 3-box design, body-on frame durability, and easy to work on and mod. I've had two marauders (one black, one silver), and really enjoy them.
As far as current designs all looking like blobs, I have to disagree. There is so much exciting metal on the road these days. I think the 90's could be called the "blob" ere, everything was really getting rounded. Now there seems to be many more creases in the sheetmetal of new cars.
I'm surprised as anyone, but I actually bought a Cadillac. Love them or not, it's unlikely to be mistaken for anything else on the road.
72Dodge
Well-Known Member
Yeah, the '90s were the pinnacle for the "blob" look, but there's plenty of it out there today still. I agree though, that it is getting better. Styling is coming back somewhat.
slant6billy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2011
- Messages
- 2,971
- Reaction score
- 694
Like said.......... Look at the mopars of the 50s, the 60s, and then 70s. Those designers were on fire. Fins and flair. Then the Ramchargers (not the 4x4) were factory guys pushing the envelope. It is just some 3 letter corporate sock call out now. Garbage in/out. What ever business model mopar is using, it needs some help. I get it that soccer moms want throwaway crossover SUVs. No time to have maintenance done and they think all mechanics are scums. So that is what mopar is building cars for? I had to take a break from pool digg'n today, so I fired up the Plymouth. It was idling nice and clean in my driveway, when 2 of the neighborhood milfs (in their own mind) walked by in full jogger attire. They said I was limited to bringing the property value down on the weekends only. I got the hint of their attempt at sarcasm. I almost threatened to call the dogcatcher. Both drive some type of crossover SUV and one is a chrysler something? I really wished I had grabbed that 81 Lebaron wagon last week. Just to bring the property value down some more. People can't appreciate vision, style, design, or anything different than the latest "realhousewives/ honeybooboo" trend. Society as a whole is letting someone else tell them what is artistic. In 2014 there is less of appreciation for true craftsmanship and more of fake bling on a latest cellphone.
Jack Meoff
Mopar Maniac
I'm totally with Billy on this one...
What seems to be happening now (at least in my mind) is after twenty years of offering melted dog crap as design, what's coming out of Chrysler now is a feeble glimmer of hope. I've noticed the same with music. I was just talking with some friends up at my trailer about new bands and the phrase that kept coming up was "not bad"......they're not bad. Compared to what? The aural landfill that's been the norm for the last twenty years? Yes. Comparatively speaking it's not bad. But it ain't good either. Same with car design. Compared to garbage....it's "not bad" but compared to the classic designs of the past it's still crap IMHO. Not bad and better than don't cut it for me.
A turd's a turd no matter how much Febreeze you dump on it.
Until someone grows a brain and comes up with something striking and original I couldn't give a ratsass what Chrysler or anyone else does.
Like I said before.....compared to what's out there now my flying brick Fifth looks like an Exner car......I have no interest in making mediocrity something to cheer about.....but hey.....that's just me.
What seems to be happening now (at least in my mind) is after twenty years of offering melted dog crap as design, what's coming out of Chrysler now is a feeble glimmer of hope. I've noticed the same with music. I was just talking with some friends up at my trailer about new bands and the phrase that kept coming up was "not bad"......they're not bad. Compared to what? The aural landfill that's been the norm for the last twenty years? Yes. Comparatively speaking it's not bad. But it ain't good either. Same with car design. Compared to garbage....it's "not bad" but compared to the classic designs of the past it's still crap IMHO. Not bad and better than don't cut it for me.
A turd's a turd no matter how much Febreeze you dump on it.
Until someone grows a brain and comes up with something striking and original I couldn't give a ratsass what Chrysler or anyone else does.
Like I said before.....compared to what's out there now my flying brick Fifth looks like an Exner car......I have no interest in making mediocrity something to cheer about.....but hey.....that's just me.
So much hate! It's much more badass than the Taurus or the Impala. Can you buy a rear wheel drive V8 Taurus or Impala? Hmmmmm? Noooooo. Ford, GM, or any other car company have nothing on Chrysler group. Especially SRT. Viper V10 Rams!! What other car company would do something so delightfully insane? Seems to me that Chrysler is still marching to the beat of its own drum and doing things its own way. So what if old names are being used? I love seeing the old names come back. This isn't 1970 it's 2015. We should be tickled pink just to have the Challenger. While GM and Ford are moving away from retro styling and shrinking their cars Mopar is happy to keep its Challenger looking like a Challenger. And WTF is with all the Fiat hate? If it wasn't for Fiat we wouldn't be talking about 2015 Dodge Chargers right now because there would be no such thing as Dodge! Fiat is the best thing that has happened to Chrysler in a long time. Fiat isn't some little shit car company that's a year away from going under and they (unlike the pricks at Daimler) actually have Chryslers best interests in mind. Chrysler group has been kicking serious ass as of late. Sales are sky rocketing for all models and material quality and build quality is at an all time high. Ram 1500 just outsold Silverado for the first time in history. Seems to me that Chrysler and Fiat know what they are doing. At the end of the day I'd rather live in a world with four door Dodge Chargers than in a world with no Dodge at all.
brotherGood
Well-Known Member
I have said this multiple times before, to much flak. That's why I haven't said anything so far. But, the way I see it..an opinion is an opinion. While, I don't agree with the general hate directed toward modern day Chrysler, on this and other forums, I know that is an opinion that people feel strongly about.
As far as Im concerned, the new nose on this thing isn't the greatest. But, it seems the industry is moving toward that Audi fish mouth nose..and here is Dodge's version of it. I like where the company as a whole is heading toward..if they were the crap that its being made seem..why would they have 48 straight months of sales increase? While the population may be braindead..something has to be leading them toward expensive American cars..
Jack Meoff
Mopar Maniac
As brother just correctly stated....this is all personal opinion.
For the record....I am very happy that Chrysler is making such a comeback. I would truly love to see them return to their glory days and without another company guiding them would make me even happier.
That being said I'd also like to say that I do not have a hate on for Fiat. They have indeed done more for Chrysler than Daimler ever did.
And it's great that sales are up. The Ram is bar none the best looking and best equipped truck on the market.
My issue is a personal one and has to do with car designs in general.
I just don't like them. A lot of that has to do with companies being strangled by the bumper and safety regulations that limit the freedoms they have.
But for me.....they just don't do it for me.
The closest eyebrow raiser I've seen is the Challenger.
And that's still a ho hum for me.
Yes CMX I agree with you....the fact that we even have the choice of a performance RWD car is phenomenal and shocking given the other choices out there. And that is Chrysler.....God bless them.
Don't mistake my disinterest as hatred.....it's not.
I do however think that if you're going to use a nameplate like Dart.
Why make it look like a Hyundai? To me it's a spit in the face of it's predecessor. The Charger looks to me like a bloated Hyundart.
The Challenger is at least an attempt to pay homage to it's legacy
But it still looks like a new Camaro body with a Kermit the frog face.
The tail treatment is okay but bulbous and awkward.
My point is.....if Exner could do what he did with sheet metal in the 50's
Surely 60 years later we can do a little better than fiberglass blobs.
To me they're as I said before......"not bad"
Pick a body letter.A, B, C, D, E, F, M, J.
I don't find any of those cars "not bad"
Even the ones that aren't on my A list have a "style"
Every new car I see has a "template"
I guess that's my issue.
But it's not hate.
I don't hate their cars.....I just don't care for them.
But hey.....different strokes.
And if it's helping Ma out.....rock on.....all the better.
Cheers.
For the record....I am very happy that Chrysler is making such a comeback. I would truly love to see them return to their glory days and without another company guiding them would make me even happier.
That being said I'd also like to say that I do not have a hate on for Fiat. They have indeed done more for Chrysler than Daimler ever did.
And it's great that sales are up. The Ram is bar none the best looking and best equipped truck on the market.
My issue is a personal one and has to do with car designs in general.
I just don't like them. A lot of that has to do with companies being strangled by the bumper and safety regulations that limit the freedoms they have.
But for me.....they just don't do it for me.
The closest eyebrow raiser I've seen is the Challenger.
And that's still a ho hum for me.
Yes CMX I agree with you....the fact that we even have the choice of a performance RWD car is phenomenal and shocking given the other choices out there. And that is Chrysler.....God bless them.
Don't mistake my disinterest as hatred.....it's not.
I do however think that if you're going to use a nameplate like Dart.
Why make it look like a Hyundai? To me it's a spit in the face of it's predecessor. The Charger looks to me like a bloated Hyundart.
The Challenger is at least an attempt to pay homage to it's legacy
But it still looks like a new Camaro body with a Kermit the frog face.
The tail treatment is okay but bulbous and awkward.
My point is.....if Exner could do what he did with sheet metal in the 50's
Surely 60 years later we can do a little better than fiberglass blobs.
To me they're as I said before......"not bad"
Pick a body letter.A, B, C, D, E, F, M, J.
I don't find any of those cars "not bad"
Even the ones that aren't on my A list have a "style"
Every new car I see has a "template"
I guess that's my issue.
But it's not hate.
I don't hate their cars.....I just don't care for them.
But hey.....different strokes.
And if it's helping Ma out.....rock on.....all the better.
Cheers.
brotherGood
Well-Known Member
If the Cafe standards weren't in play..and the biggest seeking point wasn't MPG..I'd almost guarantee you'd see crazy lines running around. Lots of possibilities as far as distinguishable vehicles. But, when everything had to get X Amount of MPGs..aero plays a big key..even at the low speeds. When the best aero shape is a jellybean, you can only make them slightly different while remaining the same shape.
I hear what your saying..and to an extent, I agree. But what they lacked in technology in the early days, they are making up for in cafe regulations, crash standards, and media gizmos to try to distinguish your jellybean from mine.
I hear what your saying..and to an extent, I agree. But what they lacked in technology in the early days, they are making up for in cafe regulations, crash standards, and media gizmos to try to distinguish your jellybean from mine.
Actually, even the most aerodynamic cars available today have only a marginally-better Cd than a 1969 Charger Daytona. Love it or hate it, it was definitely a distinctive design. The biggest battle to meet CAFE standards is weight. All those little trinkets the consumer can't live without and the insurance compa... er, federally-mandated safety nannies make today's cars by far the heaviest ever built in terms of physical dimensions.
I don't hate on Chrysler or Fiat specifically. I hate the auto industry almost universally.
I don't hate on Chrysler or Fiat specifically. I hate the auto industry almost universally.
kkritsilas
Well-Known Member
Not an Impala or a Taurus, but a 2014 Caprice. Maybe the US car makers will get a clue and figure out that front wheel drive is not the only way to design a car.
At one time, Ford had V10s in pickup trucks (still do in the >1 Ton trucks, as an option to diesels). Not that I am a fan of either, but the Mustang (yes, even the 2015 version) and Camaro are pretty good at picking up some of the styling cues of the late 1960s/early 1970s, within the limitations of current legislation and market demands. We wouldn't be talking about Chrysler any more due to Fiat? More like due to government bail outs in the billions (and not only Chrysler, but GM, too). And it was both the US and the Canadian government as well. Fiat is a European company, as Daimler was. When things get tight, really tight, do not bet on Fiat doing what is in Chrysler's best interest. And for the record, Daimler isn't exactly a little shit car company, either.
Nothing wrong with RAM division. Real issues with market acceptance of Dart, and even Viper (from SRT group). Both have had product lines shut down this year for lack of sales (what is often refereed to as "excess inventory"). Dart is a good design, I actually like the way it looks, but they have to get serious with the paint colours. Light/Baby Blue? Really, what's next, a Sundance version? In a market that seems to be dominated by darker, more aggressive colours? A potentially hot pocket rocket without a coupe/2 Door/hatchback version? Without a high perf version? Look at what Ford has done with the Focus and Fiesta. Both have hotted up versions, both have modern colours, (and only from what I am seeing out on the streets) they seem to be doing well.
The problem with current car design, is that all of the designer for US car companies are coming out of the same limited number of "art colleges" or "design colleges". As such they have the same design principles drilled into them. They are not actually ground up designers in the mold of the designers of old, which all did their own thing, and the next generation of designers learned from them. Now, they go to art school, all go to the the same art classes, and upon graduation, are hired as designers. Look at what has happened at Jaguar. Their middle and top line sedans look identical, and they could be clones of the mid 2000s Ford Taurus if seen from the front. As little as 5 years ago, an XJ sedan had NO resemblance to the S-Type, but both were clearly Jaguars. Now, not only can you not tell them apart from each other, you really can't even tell they are Jaguars from a distance.
Seems like cars are being designed to not offend, as opposed to looking good.
Things seem to just go in trends. The gaping Audi fish mouth is one that is going on now. So is the trend to take the headlight lenses halfway up the fender (for some reason that eludes me, but I suppose it does help to massively increase the price of a headlight lens if it is cracked). The truck trend is to make the front's look "massive", this one probably started by Ram trucks, but carried on by the other two US makers, along with Toyota. Car makers must think it makes their trucks look "tough". Why the wasted effort on design, vs. the same effort in making trucks actually tough is really a triumph of the marketing dept. over the engineering dept. And that is nothing new.
Kostas
At one time, Ford had V10s in pickup trucks (still do in the >1 Ton trucks, as an option to diesels). Not that I am a fan of either, but the Mustang (yes, even the 2015 version) and Camaro are pretty good at picking up some of the styling cues of the late 1960s/early 1970s, within the limitations of current legislation and market demands. We wouldn't be talking about Chrysler any more due to Fiat? More like due to government bail outs in the billions (and not only Chrysler, but GM, too). And it was both the US and the Canadian government as well. Fiat is a European company, as Daimler was. When things get tight, really tight, do not bet on Fiat doing what is in Chrysler's best interest. And for the record, Daimler isn't exactly a little shit car company, either.
Nothing wrong with RAM division. Real issues with market acceptance of Dart, and even Viper (from SRT group). Both have had product lines shut down this year for lack of sales (what is often refereed to as "excess inventory"). Dart is a good design, I actually like the way it looks, but they have to get serious with the paint colours. Light/Baby Blue? Really, what's next, a Sundance version? In a market that seems to be dominated by darker, more aggressive colours? A potentially hot pocket rocket without a coupe/2 Door/hatchback version? Without a high perf version? Look at what Ford has done with the Focus and Fiesta. Both have hotted up versions, both have modern colours, (and only from what I am seeing out on the streets) they seem to be doing well.
The problem with current car design, is that all of the designer for US car companies are coming out of the same limited number of "art colleges" or "design colleges". As such they have the same design principles drilled into them. They are not actually ground up designers in the mold of the designers of old, which all did their own thing, and the next generation of designers learned from them. Now, they go to art school, all go to the the same art classes, and upon graduation, are hired as designers. Look at what has happened at Jaguar. Their middle and top line sedans look identical, and they could be clones of the mid 2000s Ford Taurus if seen from the front. As little as 5 years ago, an XJ sedan had NO resemblance to the S-Type, but both were clearly Jaguars. Now, not only can you not tell them apart from each other, you really can't even tell they are Jaguars from a distance.
Seems like cars are being designed to not offend, as opposed to looking good.
Things seem to just go in trends. The gaping Audi fish mouth is one that is going on now. So is the trend to take the headlight lenses halfway up the fender (for some reason that eludes me, but I suppose it does help to massively increase the price of a headlight lens if it is cracked). The truck trend is to make the front's look "massive", this one probably started by Ram trucks, but carried on by the other two US makers, along with Toyota. Car makers must think it makes their trucks look "tough". Why the wasted effort on design, vs. the same effort in making trucks actually tough is really a triumph of the marketing dept. over the engineering dept. And that is nothing new.
Kostas
Last edited:
