Cars that would have been cool, EXCEPT...

[Geetex]

Always liked the 1981-1983 Chrysler Imperial, but what kept me from buying one:

1) no performance (drivetrain or suspension). Transverse torsion bar front suspension is weird IMO.

2) not a sporty interior and the instrument panel is horrid.

3) rear styling was a bit unusual, but I would have turned a blind eye towards it if it weren't for 1) & 2) above.

THE GOOD
View attachment 1486797

THE BAD
View attachment 1486798

THE UGLY
View attachment 1486799

***
Glad I kept my '79 Chrysler 300 which I bought new in 1980 after I couldn't find a Magnum GT.

All that being said, wouldn't it be great to find one of these Imperials and turn it into a holy terror? Maybe get a Frank Sinatra Edition and do it my way.

If you're serious, this one's been for sale around here for a while. You might be able to beat the guy down on the price to a point that you're into it cheap enough that you can chop it up and make it into a holy terror.
1983 1982 1981 TOP Chrysler IMPERIAL 83 Luxury MOPAR 318 - cars &...

 

[Kern Dog]

Chrysler ripped off the styling that Cadillac used on the Seville.

What a stupid move, too. The design looked dumb as ****.

 

[YY1]

Back in the day it was kinda cool.

The Mopar version actually looks a little more manly.

About 10 years ago I saw a "bustle back" seville at the street corner near my house.

Blue with a white leather interior, riding on traditional Cragar mags with wide rear tires and raised up in the rear.

Also had a blue glitter "500" style steering wheel.

I thought it was pretty cool.

 

[Budnicks]

The retro 2002-2205 T-birds were horrid
valent effort to bring back the 50's retro 'baby birds' stying
but a total failure, in looks & design, fugly *** cars
the convertibles didn't look too bad/or as bad with the top down

modular motors weren't bad
but the body was fugly as hell
especially the HTs

the 2002 Chevy SSR was the same deal
good retro idea, done very wrong
I liked the convertible HT was cool, the thing was ugly still
nice drivetrain especially the 6.0 LS, but fugly designs/body

 

[YY1]

Those revival t birds would have looked much better IMO if thay hadn't made them get smaller moving towards the rear.

Just that one change IMO and it would have looked and likely sold MUCH better.

 

[Kern Dog]

It is weird how your personal tastes change.
In the late 80s, I loved the look of the Camaros. Now, they look horribly dated and unpleasant.
I have always loved the 72-78 Dodge trucks.

To me, the ones I drove always had high interior noise and too many rattles compared to same year Chevrolets. Maybe I'm imagining it but it seemed like Ma Mopar focused strongly on the drivetrain and paid too little attention on comfort.

I did like the '78 Trail Duster I had.

I got stuck off road in one of those rare and unusual situations....

That truck was an original "Sport" with a 440, the last of them.

S L O W !! It had 3.21 gears.....What a bad choice for a heavy truck with 33" tires.

 

[eldubb440]

anything with a V10 would be cool if they didn't sound like a V6......

 

[eldubb440]

Chrysler ripped off the styling that Cadillac used on the Seville.

View attachment 1486825

What a stupid move, too. The design looked dumb as ****.

but they nailed it when they ripped of the 69 Camaro and made the 70 and up Cuda

 

[Budnicks]

I hated when the Power Wagons & Traildusters/Ramchargers
went big *** square headflights
68-71 were cool, 61-67 prior were a bit bulbous,
they made them much better, the next rendition
the 1972 - (74 Ramcharger/Trailduster) to 1978 I really liked
until they went to square headlights, low power & ugly-er lights/grill
that isn't a good deal or look...
I didn't mind the grill & square lights so much on the 79 & later
Ramchargers for some reason

I really liked my 95 & 98 Power Rams,
& the new Rams are stylish IMO
it took a while to get used to, now I like that body style
I'd rather have a 68-71 W100 Sweptsides, Power Wagons
or 72-78 W-series, especially the shortbeds 4x4s

it's a love it or it's just OK deal to me

I didn't like the 1996 & prior Dakotas, when they 1st came out
it was cool you could get a V8
& some were convertibles too, even a Shelby Edition
but;
they have grown on me over time now
but;
I liked the 1997-2000 styling much better

 

[Kern Dog]

anything with a V10 would be cool if they didn't sound like a V6......

Yeah....The Viper engine sounded like a UPS truck with a glass pack muffler.

 

[KiwiKid72]

1973 Chrysler Imperial Lebaron. Would have been awesome if it was three feet shorter so that it could fit in my shed.​

 

[DeltaV]

1973 Chrysler Imperial Lebaron. Would have been awesome if it was three feet shorter so that it could fit in my shed.​

View attachment 1486847

And had been a coupe


Just kidding!!!

 

[Photon440]

Chrysler ripped off the styling that Cadillac used on the Seville.

View attachment 1486825

What a stupid move, too. The design looked dumb as ****.

Both Imperial and Cadillac based their trunks on vintage 40's British bustle style trunks, I think it was just a coincidence that they looked similar. The Imperial was already in the works before Iacocca entered Chrysler, they wouldn't have had time to make major tooling changes when the Cadillac was introduced for 1980.

 

[Kern Dog]

Yeah, well Cadillac Sevilles were introduce well before that styling was integrated into the Chrysler.

 

[Ron H]

one change IMO and it would have looked and likely sold MUCH better

Agree, my folks had two 57 Birds back when. Thought the 57 was much nicer than the 55-56. The revived birds looked crappy and think they could have done better too. Done right was the revived Mustang the 1st couple years they were out. Then they got less attractive to me as they smushed the body style around. Another tragic deal, MO was the revived GTO...dang the designers had their chance and..

 

[Builderguy]

How about the Buick Reatta? If not for the ugly *** end, it might have stayed around a little longer. Lasted from 12/88 to 05/91

Year	4EC97 Coupe	4EC67 Convertible	Total	Notes
1988	4,708	0	4,708	First year. Early '88s had suede seat bolsters. Only year for remote glove box​
1989	7,009	0	7,009	Larger hood ornament, keyless entry, sunroof option (mid-88 addition)​
1990	6,383	2,132	8,515	First year of the convertible. Revised interior with new instrument panel, console, and steering wheel-mounted airbag. Select Sixty model gets 16 inch wheels.​
1991	1,214	305	1,519	16 inch wheels, tuned-port "L-code" engine and electronically controlled transmission, and a new ABS system. Twilight Sentinel, and a cup holder​
Total:	21,751

Initially (1988–89), the Reatta featured a touchscreen computer interface, marketed as the Electronic Control Center (ECC), that included radio and climate control functions, date reminder, trip computer and user-configurable overspeed alarm, as well as diagnostic access to the vehicle's electronic systems and sensors. Later models were equipped with conventional push-button stereo and climate controls. The new system eliminated the trip computer functionality and the climate control buttons could access diagnostic information, replacing the diagnostic scanner capability formerly provided by the touchscreen.

 

[eldubb440]

some Fords could be pretty cool if they weren't Fords

 

[Cheapsunglasses]

GLH-S Omni turbo

(not the Chargers they looked OK), but FWD is the killer for me
View attachment 1486745
now as a PS, not too shabby

View attachment 1486746

Rampage was sort of cool looking
again FWD, killed it for me, if they made it in a RWD I'd have owned one

View attachment 1486744

GLH other than the drivetrain, has no redeeming looks or quality
the badging & graphics help some, looks wise...
I know some people love them... Some people like fat chicks too
I'm not one of them, cool niche' car, but too many doors, too fugly & FWD
kills it for me

(it's just a Chevette on steroids)

but they were fugly *** cars, a box with a nose & 4 wheels & 4 doors
with good drivetrain

View attachment 1486737

never been a big fan of FWD cars, even them

That was going to be my answer. The Daytona/Laser, Omni, chargers. They had the completely 80s cool looks to them. But they put the drive axle in the wrong dang spot! . We weren’t ready for fwd yet. If they were rwd, the history books would be different

 

[33 IMP]

Chrysler ripped off the styling that Cadillac used on the Seville.

View attachment 1486825

What a stupid move, too. The design looked dumb as ****.

And Cadillac stole that styling from early 50s Rolls Royce. Somehow it looks much better on a Rolls.

 

[HawkRod]

That was going to be my answer. The Daytona/Laser, Omni, chargers. They had the completely 80s cool looks to them. But they put the drive axle in the wrong dang spot! . We weren’t ready for fwd yet. If they were rwd, the history books would be different

I'm still not ready for FWD cars.

Look at every true performance/ racing car ever built. Which wheels are driven? The REAR. Yes, there are some great all wheel drive performance cars now, but really very few FWD cars that are involved in racing. There's a good reason for that IMHO!

Years ago, my wife had a Taurus SHO. Actually a really nice and damned quick car. BUT when you really put your foot in it you were fighting the steering wheel as all that power went through the front wheels. I am definitely a rear wheel power kind of guy!