Jump to content

Ford CEO pushing speed to shake up automaker


Recommended Posts

 

I wouldn't even call it retro at all....not even an attempt at it aside from dredging up the GTO name.

It was a Holden Monaro with a Pontiac grille and an iconic muscle car name,

no one would have been upset if GM had just called the thing G8.

 

True story about Monaro,

it was developed by engineers in their own time and given the green light for development,

it cost a measly AUS $66 million to develop off Commodore and a further AUS$20 million to federalize.

 

The problem was that the VT Commodore was delivered in 1997 but Monaro didn't arrive until nearly 2000

and GTO in 2001 and by 2006 the styling was terribly dated...

 

it is what it is, a coupe developed off a sedan.

 

2006-pontiac-gto-side-shot.jpg

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

.....let's not pretend any name is sacred in the automotive world.

 

 

 

 

Mercury Montego

 

maxresdefault.jpg

 

 

also Mercuru Montego

 

1200px-05-07_Mercury_Montego.jpg

 

 

Mercury Monterey

 

maxresdefault.jpg

 

 

 

 

also Mercury Monterey

 

 

241256.jpg

 

 

Dodge Charger

 

331991-1000-0@2x.jpg

 

also Dodge Charger

 

 

56058d1360847207-1985-dodge-charger-1500

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So back to the thread topic-haven't read ANYTHING in press about "strategic moves" of any sort Hackett has initiated. Maybe that is a good sign-he is actually looking at things and deliberating before making change for the sake of "change" and "look what I've done" coverage.

Changes are definitely happening. He's just not crowing about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a Holden Monaro with a Pontiac grille and an iconic muscle car name,

no one would have been upset if GM had just called the thing G8.

 

True story about Monaro,

it was developed by engineers in their own time and given the green light for development,

it cost a measly AUS $66 million to develop off Commodore and a further AUS$20 million to federalize.

 

The problem was that the VT Commodore was delivered in 1997 but Monaro didn't arrive until nearly 2000

and GTO in 2001 and by 2006 the styling was terribly dated...

 

it is what it is, a coupe developed off a sedan.

 

2006-pontiac-gto-side-shot.jpg

 

That's sort of what happened to the soon to be discontinued Ford EXP in 1985. The workers thought they could make a better car, so they grabbed one off the assembly line and put an Escort front on it and showed it to their boss and Donald Peterson looked at it and was liked it and it got produced that way until the Probe came out and Ford didn't want to spend recourses on three coupes.

 

...This is probably the first time in history a car was stolen, and everybody was happy about it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That's sort of what happened to the soon to be discontinued Ford EXP in 1985. The workers thought they could make a better car, so they grabbed one off the assembly line and put an Escort front on it

 

Hmmm not beliving that story:

 

Escort

1986-escort-1.jpg

 

EXP

1986fordexp.jpg

 

Escort GT

ea3202b2f9fe3cd231947000f125ce62.jpg

 

The 1986 EXP stole the lower Cladding from the Escort GT (which it really was mechanically identical to and got a new grill that wasn't shared with anything else...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the previous EXP:

800px-Mercury_LN7_Sport_Coupe.jpg

 

Right, but its apparent the 86 EXP was part of the Escort Refresh that happened at the same time. The Stampings for the roof and rear end where different then the Escort.

 

The 83-85 EXP wasn't winning any beauty contests with that maw on it.

 

It reminds me of the the '82 Mustang to a point

 

[/img]https://assets.hemmings.com/story_image/597111-1000-0@2x.jpg?rev=2[/img]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the previous EXP:

800px-Mercury_LN7_Sport_Coupe.jpg

 

Right, but its apparent the 86 EXP was part of the Escort Refresh that happened at the same time. The Stampings for the roof and rear end where different then the Escort.

 

The 83-85 EXP wasn't winning any beauty contests with that maw on it.

 

It reminds me of the the '82 Mustang to a point

 

597111-1000-0@2x.jpg

Edited by silvrsvt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, but its apparent the 86 EXP was part of the Escort Refresh that happened at the same time. The Stampings for the roof and rear end where different then the Escort.

That doesn't mean that it wasn't saved by some folks from the line sticking an Escort nose on an EXP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't mean that it wasn't saved by some folks from the line sticking an Escort nose on an EXP.

 

Yes, I think they one that was taken off the line looked like a hack job with the different nose on it, but everyone could probably see that with a little work like matching the body cladding and such it would work.

 

Hell, even on the 1987 EXP I owned, it looked like they styling lines didn't match up 100%. I could tell the front fenders and hood weren't designed for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hell, even on the 1987 EXP I owned, it looked like they styling lines didn't match up 100%. I could tell the front fenders and hood weren't designed for it.

 

That's because they where from the escort. I know the Roof/C-pillar/rear end was from the first gen EXP, not from the updated 1985 1/2 refresh of the Escort.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...