I looked but didn't see a thread like this so here goes. There are so many cars that over the generations they became bloated, ugly and almost appliance-like. But some come back in later generations back even stronger than their original models. So what models do you think would qualify for coming back from the low side, here's a few that I can think of quickly.

Corvette
Bad - 3G
Fair - 4G
Great - 5G and now 6G

Nissan Z
Great - 240/260/280Z
Bad - 280ZX, 300ZX 1G
Good - 300ZX 2G
Great - 350Z

Ferrari
Good - 308/328
Bad - 348
Fair - 355
Great - F360, F430
Awesome - F458

I'd say the 350Z was good and the 370Z was great. The 370Z is so much better than the 350Z in every way.

Ford Mustang is definitely one of them ... Great early cars, then the whole Mustang II debacle, the 80s Mustangs were fast cars for the day. Then a bunch of years of mediocrity followed by signs of life with the retro-restyle that still needed help. Now the current Mustang is the best since the late 60s.

Any manufacturer make/model made in the late 70's thru the 80's that's still made today can't compare. They did the best they could at the time due to economic conditions and government restrictions that were placing on autos.

The C3 Corvette started off strong with the 427 and 454 Big Block, then in the mid 70's the government stepped in mandating 85 mph speedometers and hp and gas restrictions. I'd take an '68-'72 C3 over any C4, but the '92+ C4 was better than any of the later ('77-'82) C3's.

The first 300ZX had a 200hp turbocharged V6 and digital dash, back in '84 that was 5hp less than a vette and was groundbreaking for an import. This was one of the cars that to me started the hp war, as it hasn't stopped since the mid 80's.

Ferrari's only gotten better without the need for a $5,000 tuneup every 7,000 miles. They were always on top of technology and price.

To me looking back it's all relative as most models still around have always been on top of their game, just looking back we see how crappy some were. If Acura is still around in the future, they will be on this list as they can only fix their front ends to improve their look!

The regulations did make life difficult in the late 70's, but I find it amusing to see how bad even in their day some models were.

The Supra is a good example, 1G was a 6 cylinder Celia cruiser, the 2G was a great car, the 3G became bloated, and the 4G went back to the 2G roots. Similar story for the RX-7, 1G captured the essence of a sportscar, 2G became bland and bloated, then 3G came back.

One model to me that never had a low point would be the 911, really can't think of any period where it lost it's edge as it evolved. Where as to me the Ferrari 348 was a drop from the 328 it replaced, it took another 2 generations back to the 360 to see it return to form.

You could almost say the Camaro went about this in the right way and at the same time, wrong way. The original Camaro was considered to be an affordable, compact sporty car. While it is still relatively affordable, more sporty than ever, and the quality seems to have gone up, it's size has bloated to obscene proportions.

Rumor has it that the next (6G) Camaro will be on the same platform as the upcoming smaller-than-CTS-size Cadillac ATS, which is supposed to be a 3-series fighter (not too sure on that) but if true, and GM continues to improve on it's quality, it'll hopefully mean the 6G Camaro will be considered great.



What I've noticed though is that some cars that have extended model cycles (typically 7 years or longer) tend to start off good and lose that designation towards the tail end of their lives... especially if they don't undergo significant changes. As an example, when the NSX was first introduced it was considered a world beater. It made Ferrari and other supercar manufacturers step their game up, but at the end of it's production, 15 years later, it was in essence the same car it was a decade and a half earlier. It was still an amazing car, but for the price ($90k) there was more that was expected of it.

The S197 Mustang (2005+) nearly fell off the face of the resurgent "muscle car" segment before Ford introduced the new 5.0 Coyote engine and all the other changes that the Mustang underwent. IMO, Ford did it the right way... they nearly completely revamped the 2005 model, imbuing it with new life.



Ugh, I sound like one of those "buy American" folks I hope my bias isn't showing too much.

Lots of people think the 964 911s were piles of crap ... But they could be snooty 3.2 Carrera 911 owners too. I think you can get a 1990 964 cheaper than a pristine 1988 911.

I don't think the 348 was a step backwards. It just wasn't a step forward of the magnitude Ferrari was capable of making at the time. Certainly not what they're doing now ... But I'd still love to have one

I think the rustang made a comeback.

The 355 became more than fair when it became the F355. That was a great, little Ferrari & showed the company still had it in them to build great cars.

camaro

Agree on the 964, I forgot about that.

On the 348, one person who thought it was not good was Montezemolo. Interesting story when he took over as CEO after having been away from Ferrari for awhile.



It's not widely recognized that di Montezemolo turned Ferrari around, and then some. Ferrari is such a sparkling name, and his burnishing of it has been so effective, it's been erased from folk memory that, when he arrived as chairman and CEO in 1991, the road car lineup had lost its way, the race team was going through an unprecedented lean patch, and the brand's finances were shaky.

Di Montezemolo illustrates what happened with an anecdote. He'd finished the World Cup flushed with its success and decided to reward himself with a yellow Ferrari 348. But just after taking delivery, he was beaten away from the lights by a Fiat Strada hatchback-the hot Abarth version admittedly, but an indignity nonetheless.

"So, at my first meeting as Ferrari chairman, with the MD of our road car division, he asked, 'How is the 348? Fantastic?' I said, 'Listen, don't say this to me because I'm a customer.' I knew well the problems with the car, and I made a list of them."

One model that I know someone who worked on that had a dramatic comeback was the Ford Thunderbird. A former co-worker was a S/W engineer on the 8G design team and it was widely regarded as a failure within Ford. Look at the production figures at Wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Th..._generation%29

Again the 9G was very successful.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Th..._generation%29

The GTO made an attempt at being one, but unfortunately when Pontiac finally started getting it to where it should've been they were no longer.

new charger = biggest fail

Ford did things the right way. The styling of the 2005 along with the GT500's was enough to spark a sales blitz for the Mustang. Ford was able to take the formula to the next level and prove that Americans can still compete in the affordable sports car segment.

i say the 300zx was great and the 350z was good then the 370 is great

Challenger, duh

Camero.

Mustang.

Speaking on looks alone, the 350Z has got an edge over the 370 IMO.

+1, except I think I like the 350z a little better than 370. Not sure why, maybe I am more used to 350z and 370 is a new thing to me so I have to get used to it.

*grinds teeth*

It's Camaro

4 doors, wheel wells made for 24" wheels.. size of a bus. yup they nailed it.
even offer them in awesome neon colors!

the perfect rap video car I'd say.

at least most people forgot about them when the challenger came out.

still the modular engine, based off of the 4.6 and 5.4 engines

nothing "super" special about it (basically the same as out "J" series motor, with the different displacements)

assholes and opinions...

does the Mini count?

My hand is raised in disagreement for good reason.

Mercury Cougar: this storied nameplate, founded in 1967, went from having a 390 4-barrel V8 (1969) to the shitty grandpa mobiles in the late 70s thru the early 90s, to the 1999-2002 2.5L V6 (170hp) shitbox.





My wife (gf at time) owned a 1999 Cougar and it was a rattling POS. Perhaps the worst cupholder design in the history of automobiles.

ok thats a pretty good contender.. i agree

Worse than BMW cupholders?

Pretty much, but they made enough changes that they could call it such. Yeah sure, back in the 90's the J-series V6 in the 2.5TL was only putting out 200hp, and in 2008 it put out 305 at 3.7L, but in a few short years Ford went from a meager ~300 bhp output in both the 3V and DOHC 4V Modular to well over 400 bhp (dynos show that the engine is cranking out quite a bit more than just 412) with a moderate bump in displacement. The Mustang would be a joke today compared to the Camaro if it weren't for the changes Ford made.

The J-series is a relic.... it's still a great engine, but at this point it's time for an all new powerplant. I don't think we'll see Honda revamp the engine to put out 350 horses unassisted any time soon.

After the 328, I felt an immediate disappointment when I saw the 348. I love the 308/328s, but felt the 348 was a step away from Italian appeal and more in the direction of Japanese mass production. The first time when I saw one firsthand, and noticed the black plastic behind the grills (it was all for appearance), I remember being pretty disgusted.





Terry

A friend (who's also a SCCA instructor) has a 328, and I've looked at it in detail and been ridden in it a few times. It's a true Ferrari from the shift gate to the angled steering wheel (that's non- adjustable).

Besides the looks the 348 also had a fair amount of parts bin engineering, that's OK for certain things (Porsche 928 shared the same hood latch as a VW Rabbit) but not for very visible things. The 348 used same switches out of Fiat for the center console and I believe the stalks also, whereas the 328 had unique switches.

Take a gander at the photo below. This wretched design was only in the 1999-2000 models as in 2001 they realized people actually expect a cup holder to hold their beverage (unfortunately this design perpetuated among other vehicles including the Contour and Mystique).

Place any type of beverage in the round plastic "holder", then try cornering at any speed above what a Grand Marquis can handle and said beverage will end up on your pants.

I totally forgot about the 2000s cougar...I hardly even see one on the road anymore.

I agree that the Mustang suffered one of the greatest let-downs and rebirths in automotive history.

First Gen (1964-1973): Iconic and trend-setting
Second Gen/Mustang II (1974-1978): Regarded by 'Stang fans to be an abomination...one model was available with an 83-horsepower engine.
Third Gen (1979-1993): Slightly better but still way off target
Fourth Gen (1994-2004): Began to return to the core values of the Mustang.
Fifth Gen (2005 - Present): The first true Mustang to come out since the original, even more so with the 2010 redesign.

You do know that the "awesome neon colors" they offer are the same colors that were available in the car's hay-day right? The fact that they offer colors and paint schemes on today's model which were the same as in the 60's and 70's would be the exact opposite of fail...

cars are not what they used to be.. the same colors on today's cars looks cheap.. which is why it's avoided for the most part. I'm fully aware of the oranges, greens and yellows of yesteryear. a 4 door whale of a tale doesn't deserve the charger tag.

and I'm willing to bet that selling a neon green charger has nothing to do with nostalgia. most I see on the lots are already coupled with crazy enormous oversized wheels to go along with it.

a nice car? perhaps.. but a acceptable rehash of a classic muscle car.. you gotta be on some serious shit to think so.

would a 4 door vette or viper be acceptable? don't think so. and neither is the charger IMO.

I love how a 23 year old is trying to make the same "a 4 door charger is blasemphy" that all the 50-60 year old people from that actual generation are trying to make.

Honest truth...yes chrysler slapped the Charger name onto their new sedan at the time because it was available. But the nameplate fit...and knowing the criticism they received for it from the OGs they have gone to lengths to make this new 2g version live up to its name even more...and they succeeded.

That would be Sub-Lime Green and it's all about nostalga. Same color and same name that was available on the original Chargers. 4-door vs 2-door is subjective. The current Charger is only ~6" shorter then the original. Plus, coupes sell at a much lower rate then sedans today, so auto makers have to adapt to the consumers wants and needs so they can move product. The Charger was always a family car... and now families want 4-doors... so that's what they did. I really have no problem with the move to 4 doors. What does bother me is the creamy vanilla V6 base model. That is an insult to the Charger name. But a properly dressed up SRT8... much more like it. And the new Charger steps it up even more...

As for the wheels... well, people have been messing up nice cars for generations.... so that really doesn't mean much either...

Right-- it should'a been an inline 6 or Slant 6 like the original B-bodies.

I think every muscle car and ponycar started with an in-line 6 as a base car back in the '60s and '70s.

FWIW, I think the current V8 M3 is a blight on the M3 name because a proper M3 should have a 4-cylinder or 6-cylinder.

so now there is an age limit on automotive appreciation?....

i grew up around cars stemming back to model A's... i've seen a lot of cars and inherited the interest from my father(although not his mechanic abilities). i dont need an age of approval to have an opinion on a classic car any more than you do..

you wanna believe that you're owed some type of seniority on the subject b/c of your age, fine.

but dont think b/c of one's age, that im limited to having an opinion on cars from 1987 and up...

i dont hate dodge, or their current line-up, im simply disappointed that they would badge the current car a charger. to me, it doesnt capture the essence of what the charge was.

now you're starting to understand