Want a retro-mobile, but the Mini, Fiat 500, NewNew Beetle and Mustang just aren’t making it for you? So what will it be? Here’s your chance to design the next hot retro-mobile. Just give a few parameters, including some basic technical details (engine, platform, etc) to make it semi-feasible. Executives from all the major manufacturers are eagerly awaiting your responses. Here’s mine:
Big surprise, eh? My first car, and one of the most influential ever. I just can’t resist. Now building it is going to be a bit trickier. An elongated Porsche 911 platform? That won’t exactly be cheap. Maybe save a few bucks and install a Subaru boxer in the back, with a turbo option, of course. It’s time to bring 360 degree visibility back, as well as a rear engines.
Your turn:
I would endorse a new Corvair wholeheartedly. It’s really hard to plunge into the land of powerglides and get a used one now.
Volvo could desperately use a P544 or 122/Amazon type as a replacement car for the S40/V50 though.
New 1982 (for the small grille) Chevy Celebrity. Ecotech 4cyl, six-speed auto (optional turbo Ecotech for the “Eurosport” model.) 16 cubic foot trunk with such a big trunklid and square space that it feels like 20 cubic feet. Three cubic feet more passenger room than the current Malibu (almost all of it in headroom and rear leg room). Very square but still fairly areodynamic (<0.30) so it should get good fuel economy. An antidote to our current "squashed roof" cars with their bunker styling.
Make it have the styling of the 1989 Eurosport and I’m there.
Make it a Eurosport WAGON and I’m there, Black on red- or vice versa
1975 Honda Civic.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BrR9k5sso6M/TVvqu9Wse0I/AAAAAAAAAHE/EDqsOZBuyYE/s1600/1975-Honda-Civic-CVCC.jpg
It’s what the world is coming to.
Totally agree on the original Civic! Heck even the 2nd gen would do too (had an ’83, 3 door 1500DX hatch, it was hella fun).
Hm… I think perhaps bring back the Plymouth Duster, even if it has to be the Dodge Demon instead.
This time, make it modern with FWD, bucket seats and a retro styled dash and console, though not huge like so many of them are today, but suitably updated but retro in looks.
Keep the car’s original profile, though updated it and make it a fastback style hatch or sedan if preferred, ala Neon. Have it be everything from an everyday car with say, no more than 120HP for the base motors, a sportier, faster turbo version for an upgraded model, all 4 cyl and have it available in either as a manual or an automatic.
Otherwise, a more modern FWD variant of the Pinto, Vega and Chevette in all its body permutations.
I could go for a retro Duster (or Demon). It would be logical to morph the Challenger into a Demon but the problem would be it certainly wouldn’t be an economy car like the original.
That’s the issue with doing a retro economy car – was the original worthy? The names Pinto, Vega, and Chevette don’t exactly evoke positive memories and, frankly, the styling wasn’t that great for any of them. But a retro-Corvair might work simply because the second generation version was so nice looking.
Actually, the Duster, or Demon would be based on the Caliber platform and be FWD for the space usage concerns while retaining its entry level price point, though nothing like its predecessor where it was rather plain in the accoutrements dept.
FWD and entry price point? Sounds like an excellent candidate for using FIAT’s C-Platform to me rather than the tired old Caliber’s underpinnings.
I can just imagine a neat retro US style 2 door saloon/sedan type thing based on the current Bravo’s underpinnings.
Why not call it the Dodge Duster? Has a nice ring to it.
I allready have a 1984 Ford Sierra waiting for me to finish the engine build (2.8 v6 stroked to 2.9, ported, skimmed heads, 284 degree cam), but it was never really a dream car of mine, it’s just the car from the 80’s that happened to be cheap and practical enough for me when I needed a decent family car. (It’s my 13th Sierra I think)
A 1968 Ford Taunus 20m would be more of a dream to won, preferably with the drivetrain from the Sierra, or even a 2.9 Cosworth with an auto for Sunday trips.
Again, mostly because I grew up in Taunuses (taunii?) and owned a rusty one as a teenager.
But when I get older, get my garage finished, and the kids grow up, I will build a hot rod, since no production car can ever beat the awesomeness of an empty tin can bolted to a supercharged big block, with a suspension that is constructed more or less only so that the wheels can be bolted on 🙂 Unless I somehow grow an affection for handling, which may get me to build a Lotus 7 replica instead, same difference…
Offcourse I forgot what I was going to write, but any really conventional lightweight tin can with decent seats would be great, as long as it’s practical, ( no I don’t want a car where the rear window doesn’t open with the hatch, how silly isn’t that) Come to think of it ,my 2003 Cr-V isn’t really that far off…If only the headlights were less silly, and there wasn’t a spare-tire on the rear hatch, which also opens the wrong way…
I’d like to take the Challenger’s LC platform, restyle it, and call it the Mercury Marauder. Offer it with the 3.5L Ecoboost and the 6.2L V8 out of the F-Series.
On the more plausible front, just take a Fiat Strada and turn it into a Dodge (Ram) Rampage. Offer it with the 1.4L turbo and maybe a multi-jet diesel.
I’ve deployed my rusty skills on trying to draw an Imperial coupe on the Challenger template. Kind of a hybrid of the 64-66 and fuselage styles, with slightly less silly overhangs. Would make a much more appealing convertible than that pathetic 200.
If AMC had been able to hold out one more decade, they would be just in time for both the retrocar boom and the fiftieth anniversary of their most influential car, so mine would be the 2000 AMC New Rambler. Also, the other day I noticed that from certain angles the Dodge Caliber, with its oversized grille and odd proportions, recalls the original Plymouth Valiant, so there might be a way to transform that design into something interesting.
Also, I did a rough design for a 2012 Corvair about six months back, this design is based on the Chevrolet Cruze (wheelbase and overall length), but with some obvious modifications.
I think it would be cool if they made a retro version of the ’57 Bel Aire. I like fins and chrome.
Bob Lutz had a concept built in 2002 called the Bel Air. It was built as a direct response to the new, 2-seat Thunderbird, but when the Ford failed to meet sales expectations, the Bel Air was quietly shelved.
No fins and not much chrome, but it still would have been nice if the Bel Air had made production.
If I understand correctly, all the best styling features like tailfins, hidden headlights, and sharp creases have been essentially outlawed because they pose too much of a safety risk to pedestrians. I’d love to see a new Bel-Air (and although the concept wasn’t great in my opinion, I would still love a full-size rear wheel drive six passenger convertible), but we will probably never see real tailfins on cars again, and as brands like Acura and Lexus have proven, chrome looks awful on an aerodynamic car. I guess there is a small amount of hope, since once we switch to a cheap environmentally friendly fuel like hydrogen or steam, we won’t have any use for aerodynamics anymore and some of the great styles of the past can return.
I wouldn’t mind seeing a retro take on the mini trucks of the 70s. Something small, reliable and good enough fuel economy to make a reasonable commuter.
I don’t know what I would retro-icize, but I know damn well it wouldn’t be a Chevette.
A new Corvair could be built with front wheel drive (like the New Beetle) It would create a car with a nice big trunk. The car would be compact size and could share running gear with the Cruze.
Amen to the Volvo 544, 122 revival.
A Corvair must have a rear engine. The New Beetle is nothing more than a fashionable Golf, its only purpose is as an extremely expensive accessory. Volkswagen may be able to get away with that, but unfortunately the American industry can’t afford to do that right now (just look at what happened with the Thunderbird). A new Corvair would have to satisfy a real market, and keeping the rear engine would place it in the sports compact segment just like the original.
The New New Beetle is where VW would have been by now if they had evolved the Beetle instead of ditched it. It was unwise in the long run to lose that shape, it was their brand, like Coke’s bottle.
Rear engines made no sense once FWD got cheap enough. Makes even less sense now, at least in an internal combustion car.
The new Mitsubishi EV is rear-drive, which does make more sense since an electric motor is so much smaller and lighter than an engine+trans. Rear drive is the simplest way to build an EV, given a clean sheet of paper.
So make it an Electrovair III and I’m totally with you!
I’m thinkin’ a retro 2CV would be pretty awesome. Love the idea of something a bit bare bones and characterful in the spirit of the original, but with automatic transmission an option and some music playing capacity; is that too much to ask for?
I’ve often thought the same myself, but sadly Citröen seem intent on evoking a very different part of their heritage with the DS range.
I’d have thought the 2CV offered a great template for a super-lightweight runabout using an alternative drivetrain – along the lines of some of the entries in Renault’s recent “re-imagine the Renault 4” competition:
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/the-renault-4-gets-reimagined-for-design-competition/
On the Duster, you could do it on the Chrysler 200 platform. The only problem is that with modern airbags, you could never re-create that really thin-spoked steering wheel.
My vote would be a retro early 50s pickup from either Ford or Chevy (or Dodge). A fairly straightforward body on a modern frame, I would think.
A ’65 Corvair was my first car, and I would like to see it again. To keep it with the flat six air cooled theme, I’d like for it to be powered by a Jabiru 3300. I’d considered maybe a Lycoming, but they’re just too big- although an 8 litre flat six sounds cool, I think it might make a Corvair a bit tail happy.
Likewise, I think a Volvo 240 would be great to bring back, or any Volvo that is properly engineered and built to last.
My perefect ‘retro’ car is not about a pastiche of styles of the past, but rather about engineering- simple, owner repairable, and with development time spent actually making the car better, rather than devoted to cheapening and reducing life spans of components.
A full-size, luxury Chrysler product, be it a New Yorker or an Imperial. Stretch and beef up the LX platform, give it the eight speed and 392 V8, and maybe AWD. Make the looks a hybrid of 1964-6 and 1967-8 models, perhaps with some of the silly details from the early sixties and mass of the fuselage Imperials. Give it a properly done interior — lots of real wood, real metal, and real leather. Price it from the low fifties. Make sure it’s done tastefully (unlike most 300s.)
I made this about the same time as my Corvair mockup. Its a Chrysler 300 that has a proper hood and trunk, vinyl roof, and turbine wheelcovers with whitewalls. Its not perfect, but I think its a lot better than what Chrysler came up with.
Holy overhangs, Batman!
Sign me up! Must have four cigar lighters to be legit.
Rear overhangs are underrated these days; keep up the good work. Send this to Chrysler.
Yes! I would pass on the vinyl roof though, and I’d rather have some polished smoothie rims that look like like the Imperial hubcaps of the era.
I want a retro of that gorgeous ’46 Pontiac in Laurence’s post today. Aerodynamics is critical now, so it’s time for that Streamliner look to come back.
I suspect a retro Airflow could be done easily on a Chrysler minivan chasis.
http://www.amarlen.com/Hot%20Cars%20Pictures/Chrysler%20Airflow%202.jpg
Just use the VW Routan chasis tuning.
Yeah, I think any kind of fastback sedan would be cool, that’s why I’d even vote for a P544 revival. I’m going to point to Buick, to bring back the Special.
I’d want it on the new ATS architecture though, if that’s lighter than the Epsilon or Sigma platforms, they could debore the 3.6L v6 to 3.2 or something and make it a low stress 225hp smooth quiet V6. Make it 25-30K in cost and I’d be willing to sign up.
If not a big American Streamliner, then I’d like the retro Saab 92 that Spyker wants to build. Nissan Leaf drivetrain. If only….
Now that in EV form would be cool an all alloy body to keep weight down.
A modernized version of this with the current GM small V8 and modern suspension would be delicious:
I saw a ’76 ish Seville yesterday. A real head turner. I wholeheartedly agree.
The 1960-1 Falcon is begging to be a retro. Its cute and bubbly and came in a wide variety of classic pastel colors. The retro could be built on a Mustang platform. First, though, Ford needs to get to work on a straight six and a bench seat.
Here’s a nice new one in an old ad.
Ford have a really good straight 6 in the current Falcon, it would be crazy to use a mustang platform when the Falcon is better already
I agree Ford could probably do this with minimal investment. It will be a relatively brief fad, but I think it would sell well enough for Ford to recover its investment. Bringing the straight 6 from Aussie is probably too expensive though, as it’s not federalized. The current 3.5l V6/ ecoboost would be fine as the powertrain. Maybe the 2.5l 4cylinder as the econo version. It probably already more powerful even compared to the top Falcon back in the day! It certainly makes a better business case than the resurrected Thunderbird a while back.
I did a Photo Chop Ranchero and Squire Falcon when the 05 Mustang came out.
I like the Corvair idea…because it can become a platform for some revisited concepts which maybe have come to their time.
Look. We’re all agreed, are we not, that front-wheel-drive offers bland, neutral handling with heavy understeer, on a car that’s generally nose-heavy to start with. Acceptable in some applications; but not the thing enthusiasts dream about.
And it’s sold as something it’s not. I remember an early Audi magazine ad…claiming that FWD made the car power-steer around corners. Which is laughable…powering the steering wheels only puts another force on them, ready to break traction. At which time, the car goes STRAIGHT AHEAD. So, in any situation other than loose snow or mud, FWD is not going to be much of an advantage.
Okay…RWD. Hang the drive wheels over a typically unloaded or underloaded part of the car; with a long, heavy shaft running the length of the car. Engine set longitudinally; wasting space. lowering the driveshaft position with sliding hypoid gears in the rear differential, offering power losses.
NOT a winner. It can drive well, depending on the hardware; but it’s not a study of practicality.
So. REAR engine. Drive wheels separate from steering wheels. Engine weight over the drivers. No shaft; no gear losses. Good concept…but air-cooling works against that studied efficiency.
So…WATER cooling. Howzabout…a modern engine/transaxle package from a FWD vehicle…installed in the rear?
Cooling? Engineers have played with rotary heat transfer units in the past. One Popular Science blurb suggested it would be an ideal setup with the new Wankel engine. Let’s dig that one out of the mothballs, too…have air channeled up from under the car and into the heat transfer unit.
And just for shucks and giggles; and to avoid the Old Corvair’s tortured fan-belt contortions…let’s do away with belts.
A big-old gear-driven alternator. Off the crankshaft. Water pump and heat transfer unit, all run with electricity
But-but-but…CRASHWORTHINESS? All that empty space up front? It’s a challenge, sure. Body design would have to incorporate an impact-compression frame structure that either holds the trunk position, or allows it to collapse as part of the crumple zone. But there’s no reason, with computer modeling and high-strength, lightweight metals, that it couldn’t be done.
Styling? I leave that to others; except that it should evoke the original…like all good retros. The upright seating and tear-drop vent windows, would be an excellent touch.
“engine/transaxle package from a FWD vehicle…installed in the rear”
It nearly happened in the early 60’s – google Hillman Swallow. They ended up doing the conventional layout Hillman Arrow/Hunter
The first Fiero suspension is an X-body subframe turned 180 degrees…
Agree, there are lots of examples in sports cars, Toyota MR2 & Fiat X1/9 are the other two really common examples
The crashworthiness argument against rear engine isn’t really an issue. The engine and transmission absorb little or no energy in a crash. In a front engine vehicle, they act as a battering ram that can end up in your lap. The entire front end of a rear engine car can be engineered to absorb impact. Actually one of the problems with a rear engine car is from being hit from behind, due to the stiff structure.
Actually, that leads me to an interesting thought. The engine/transmission absorb no energy; but they ARE a big part of the mass that drives the vehicle into the opposing object. They of course need no cushioning; crumple zones can be behind them, as the rest of the carbody follows in and stops.
But with a rear-mounted engine…the weight of the drivetrain is propelling the carbody forward into the object. Crumple zones have to take into account the weight of the drivetrain as well as of the rest of the carbody.
It’s an interesting problem – this one, I’m not sure could be easily overcome.
The other aspect of a rear engine is what is or may be in the front-mounted trunk, and what impact that might have on a crumple zone (working on the premise that it would be impractical or ridiculously space-inefficient to completely separate the space into which bodywork would crumple from trunk area)
This is easy – a new 1964 Impala convertible or a 2 door hardtop. Personally, I’m sick and tired of every car looking like a door stop, aerodynamics be hanged! Give me a car I can see out of, but also a car I want to be seen in. Oh yeah – if it’s an Impala, it had better have three tail lights, too.
Now, is that too much to ask? Well…
I’ll go with my first choice for a 30 year car. 70 Fury GT.
Going by what they did with Charger and Challenger I’m guessing it can’t be done..
A 1961-63 Lincoln Continental. I prefer to think of it as “timeless” instead of “retro.”
You could, obviously, put a Continental body onto a modified Panther (Town Car) platform. Technically that’s a cheat, because the Continental was unibody. Is there an existing RWD unibody platform that would work?
I think the Panther is just too archaic to invest in. How about the Mustang? A convertible is already in the lineup. I bet the hard points would work for a retro Continental. I bet we could squeeze a Mark IX out of it too… How long will the platform’s wheelbase go?
Let me throw one out on my own… How about a badge engineered Cordova out of the Challenger? New front clip, new rear quarters and tail lights, luxury car rims and a retro-seventies interior done right with real wood and such?
The last Panthers are far from archaic Hydroformed frame, SLA with coil over front suspension, and parallel 4 bar with watt’s linkage rear suspension other than the basic rear suspension geometry nothing is older than 2003. So it actually more “up to date”, modern and came off of the drawing board after a good chunk of the Mustang which can trace some of its roots to the 1998 DEW98 platform, or the Chrysler LX cars that were designed before 3 generations of Panther platforms back in the 80s.
FALCON not the awful mustang
There one guy who did a rendering of a “neo-retro” Argentinian car, the IKA/Renault Torino
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMqBf1QlQTo
I have also a soft spot for the Holden Efijy based on the Holden FJ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSzf9ZI-v5M&feature=related
Make a Falcon out of the Mustang? How ironic! I was proposing to make a Continental and a Mark out of the current Mustang. It has been done before… In the 80’s …
I really like Paul’s choice of car to resurrect. I was trying to think of something that would be a good car, fairly maneuverable, fairly roomy inside, utilitarian but not dowdy. At first I thought of things like Fiat 128’s or VW Jettas, then I remembered one of my all time favorite cars… My old Dodge Lancer Turbo.
2600 lbs, 103 inch wheelbase, 4 door hatchback body style, with 100 HP 2,2 Trenton SOHC motor. 23/37 MPG with the atmo motor. 150 HP 2,2 Trenton turbo motor, 21/34 MPG. These were the original stats for the car.
With the advances we’ve had in 25+ years in engine making, we could probably substitute a 2.0L World Motor rated at 150 HP as an atmo motor or the 2.4 World Motor at 175 HP also as an atmo motor, as an upgrade. For fun, we could come up with a SRT version with the 285 HP turbo motor from the SRT Caliber, but that would be almost completely out of this car’s mission as a useable FWD driver’s car.
Six speed manuals, 6 speed autoboxes, upgrade the chassis to 4 wheel disc brakes, but one major alteration to the chassis itself: increase the length of the wheelbase. Add another 6 inches to it, to 109″, and it would be the same wheelbase as the (ugly) 2005 Chevy Malibu, which was plenty roomy in it’s own right. Add that space to the backseat, and allow the backseat to move fore and aft, like the Malibu Maxx.
I know I say it often that I’d like cars with less stuff on them, but I find the electronic assistants, when done well (meaning minimal intrusion), are very useful. I could see this car coming with a package not unlike OnStar, or uConnect, but a minimalist one.
Four doors, hatchback, FWD packaging, but with a performance edge, good fuel mileage, a liveable size. This is what I’d like to resurrect.
Ooh, H body.. Nice choice!
Yep I like this idea too.
“hot retro-mobile” eh? I’ve always liked the 2nd generation (’67-’69) Barracuda, or the 2nd generation Chevy II Nova (’65-’67). Both would make excellent platforms for new versions in my humble opinion.
However, I have always lusted for a (Lincoln) Continental Mark II, and would sell my soul for a new version of one (given that it didn’t stray too far from the original concept).
I always thought 1940’s sedan delivery/station wagon style would work very well as a crossover. They’re about the same size/height, and a heck of a lot more stylish than today’s slab-sided conveyances. I’d like the Big 3 to resurrect these, it’s been tried before with PT cruiser/HHR of course, but the problem is that they used a compact chassis for these, so they’re like a shrunken version of the real thing. Plus the PT cruiser was actually a successful product, so there’s a good business case for it, the problem is that they let it linger forever without updates. GM should use the lambda chassis for their version, or maybe the new colorado chassis. Chrysler could use the 300/Charger chassis, and Ford could use the Flex/explorer chassis. These would be the ideal vehicle to bring back fake wood sides as well. And two tones! Gotta have two tones!
Ford Mk1 Escort or really any C segment rwd car. Make it a sedan/hatch/wagon, 4cyl only. I bet if you turned the drivetrain 90 deg it would fit an existing fwd with only a small recess in the firewall and a slightly enlarged central tunnel to add the tailshaft to the exhaust they currently run, if the platform doesn’t offer awd anyway.
Pinto all the way!!! If we are limiting it too cars anyway.
Otherwise I’ll take a new version of my namesake. However it was originally marketed as a Car, though of course by they time my Scout II were sold one of the tag lines used was “Anything less is just a car”.
Of course having spent the lst two days being a FIRST ( http://www.usfirst.org ) robot inspector and in all my dealings with them, since it was “marketed” as a car it IS a car.
I’ve heard rumors that the next generation of the Camaro after this will move to a smaller rear-wheel-drive platform that’s being developed for Cadillac.
If/when that does happen, I propose using the old Camaro platform to re-make the Chevelle.
Start with the 1970 Chevelle as inspiration styling-wise, but (compared to the current Camaro) give it a higher roof-line and more glass all-around, and more overhang in front and back, especially in back, give that thing a proper trunk.
That should fit on a Holden platform easily enough the Camaro &Cadillac CTS do so why not
Les how does the Holden Coupe 60 concept strike you?
Needs more rear overhang, and a big gawping grill. 😀
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/fords-021c-concept-the-falcon-reincarnated/
I would buy one of these in a heartbeat!!
I was wondering when someone would mention this car… Great choice!
I’d like to join the party a little late and bring a BRAT along. Hack the back end off of a Forester or Impreza hatch (I’m not picky), face the rear seats backwards (and make them removable), and correct a wrong made by the interesting but incomplete Baja. You gotta have the roof and windows over the back end be removable, too. I think it would be screaming good fun to include the 2.5L turbo boxer along with a 300+ hp STi halo option. Offer another version jacked up as another halo vehicle to indirectly challenge the Wrangler.
It’d probably be the only vehicle I’d ever buy new, because good luck finding one on the used dealer lots after it doesn’t sell.
I lost track of who got the rights to the Morris name in the long drawn out collapse of the British car industry, but it’d be fun to see a retro re-imagining of the Morris Minor.
More than that though I’d have LOVED to see the project to resurrect the AC Ace using the (canned) Smart Roadster as a basis get off the ground. The little Roadster was a cracking wee car, stupidly cancelled in its prime by Daimler, and the proposals for reskinning it as a retro-Brit looked promising…
I’d correct the mistake that Ford made in 2002 and bring back a ’50s-inspired Thunderbird, but the four-seater, not the two-seater. People–including the people at Ford–forgot that Robert McNamara believed that the four-seater would sell far better, and he was right–the ’58 sold about as many as ’55-’56-’57 put together. Two-seaters are a dud for anyone who has more than one friend.
Boxy, light, and simple. Don’t care what brand. Get rid of the smog junk by powering it with LNG or LP. Honda has been making one since (maybe) 97 and I understand the exhaust has been registered as cleaner than the intake air (L.A.).
Safety? Not as smart as y’all but people survive accidents at high speed in race cars and I doubt they are very heavy.
I think I would be happier if Ralph Nader, the EPA and all the other alphabet soup bureaus stayed out of the car business. I saw stuff running around Costa Rica, Panama, and other places that I would be happy to drive. I can think of any number of cars that I owned and would be happy to drive today. Honestly though, the ones I liked the best were all made before 1968.
Einstein said something about the biggest problem with the younger generation was that he wasn’t part of it. I feel the same about their cars.