This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Nice old cars other than x-fire

Blasphemy perhaps .... but I think I can put together 3 pedals there
 
 
Mustang concept. Obviously the one they should have built.
View attachment 124520

Yea I gotta say its pretty nice for a 'stang

But like a wise man once said about his wifes boob job .....

Just because you put new headlights on a mini van .... doesn't make it a Corvette ....

and whos that creeper in the middle of the wind shield ?....
 
I suppose it’s built like the McLaren F1 with the steering wheel in the middle. I do like it better than the ones you can buy. Ya , the guy in the driver’s seat does look somewhat sketchy…
 
Reactions: Vettenut
Mustang concept. Obviously the one they should have built.
View attachment 124520
Great post .... you know we always value your automotive insights ..... on the old and new

But wouldnt it be great if alot ...or even some... concept cars actually made it to production ?
 
Great post .... you know we always value your automotive insights ..... on the old and new

But wouldnt it be great if alot ...or even some... concept cars actually made it to production ?
For sure. I have seen some beautiful examples that make you wonder why they never got built. A crying shame.
 
From at least the mid-1940s to the early 1970s, General Motors used a system of XP labels to designate its concept cars and other design studies - a system that, at first glance, seems rather rational, but on deeper inspection was poorly or haphazardly implemented, to the point that we're not even sure which was the first project to warrant a GM XP label.

Most automakers - at least in their early years, that is - follow pretty regular naming conventions. Henry Ford (on his third attempt to start a car company) started with the Model A in 1903 and made it all the way through to the Model T with just a few gaps here and there. Ferdinand Porsche's Typ system was fairly well organized. So one would expect something similar from a company as complex from the outset as General Motors.

But after several years of compiling all the XP labels I can without traveling to Sterling Heights to research the topic in the GM Heritage Center's archives, I just have more questions than I do answers.

For instance, nobody seems to know where the XP labels came from or exactly what they designated. XP labels were already in use for experimental aircraft by the time GM started using them, and there's a high likelihood that GM's postwar designers took their inspiration from their aviation counterparts, but to date I've seen no hard proof to back that theory.

As for their use, I've seen individual XP labels assigned to concept cars and their duplicates (see, for instance, the question about the multiple iterations of the Oldsmobile F-88), to entire-vehicle design studies not intended for outside viewing, to clay models, and even to seat and interior studies. The labels generally increase chronologically, but occasionally skip entire blocks: There's nothing in the XP-10 to XP-19 range, for instance, and there's little in the XP-100s through XP-600s, but then a ton in the XP-700 and XP-800 range. Oh, and the handful of cars with XP names either do or don't have XP labels - there's no consistency.

 
Reactions: Vettenut
Buick Avista ...... concept .... what a sweetie ..... got the Aston Martin vibes going on a bit Never made it to showrooms

Did they think it wouldnt sell ? .... mabe because of the stigma surrounding the Buick name ? mabe its too cool to carry the Buick badge ? Not sure but ... I would buy that


 

Users who are viewing this thread