Hey guys after that last post I did, on my crazy idea. I was searching around on google images for the new cuda concept. Now when you do this you see that one ugly a$$ thing that is supposively a concept all over the place! But I also found another one and it said that chrysler revealed this at a sema show. I think the tail end of it could use a bit of improvement and think they should ahve went with the '71 cuda but if they go with this concept then they just might have someone working up there that might know something about what he is doing. And I dont know if someone has posted this link yet, anyways here it is. Much better. http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2007/10...oncept-at.html

 

I see that and it makes me wish I had waited a little before I got my Challenger lol. It's just me Rck, but I sure like the look of the '70 cuda more than the '71, to me, the '71 had too much gingerbread and too many frills on it. The 70... it just looked rough and mean.

 

i see only a small market for them . & that's for people who have a bit of to splash around , in this very trying time . they won't sell enough of them to haul them selves out of the mud . how much are they ??? give us a no frills budget 1/4 mile machine , that we can pimp up to own tastes as we can afford to .

 

exactly deadkelly, dont know how much yet. If you read the article they said there was no talk of them doing a production model. But I'm sure the idiots they are, it will not be an affordable one. And dead I read your other post you said people in Aussie can buy a brand new truck for 14k to 17k lol we can only dream about that here. Which is probably why we have such a crappy economy. Over here a brand new truck would cost anywhere from 20,000(if your lucky) to 35,000 and up. And as far as tax write offs... lol thats a wet dream over here. I'm thinking about moving to aussie myself now lol. And buckneccid I understand what you mean abou the 70 and 71, the reason I prefer the 71 over the 70 or any other year is mainly the headlights, I was never a fan of the 70 72 73 and 74 because they only have one headlight and I thought the addition of the other headlight in 71 really just made it look mean as hell. And other thing is the fender gills were killer looking. And The grill I like it because it was so different than anything else, and they really made it look like they based it off of the fish a barracuda, I thought that was extremely cool that someone could base a car off of a fish like that and make it work. But then again the 70's had the aar, And if I had a choice of a 71 and a 70 aar, I would go crazy not being able to decide cause I probably like them equally. The aar had that hood and the stripe package that really set it aside from anything and made it look just killer. I really wish they made an aftermarket hood like the aar for challengers! I know it would be nothing original but it would sure look bad a$$! It's all just a matter of opinion though. I play guitar, lots of people like gibsons, I prefer fender. And actually I think a gibson is an over priced piece of junk that isn't meant for anything but looking good. Not meant for sound or playability (what matters). A brand new gibson les paul can run anywhere between 2,000 and 10,000 probably a couple out there that are higher. A brand new american fender stratocaster will run anywhere between 500 and 4,000 (if you want a custom shop). But yeah just a matter of opinion, different tastes call for different things.

 

Ugh, don't belive everything you read on the internet. That car was custom made off of an LX platform for a customer after the Challenger Concept came out and before production of the Challenger was confirmed