So Why Don't We Like The 11th Gen Tbird Agin?

"noise" (noise) 03/30/2015 at 17:43 • Filed to: None

3

34

I know we, generally, don't on this site, but i'm not sure why really. I mean sure, its not pretty, and those circle windows are hilarious, but most cars from 2000 weren't pretty either, and this one is RWD.

just wondering cause i drove one and it was pretty ok

E. Julius > noise 03/30/2015 at 17:45

0

I don't mind it. I'm not crazy about it but I don't there's anything wrong with them.

HammerheadFistpunch > noise 03/30/2015 at 17:46

4

Panther - Old man, full of piss and vinegar.

T-Bird - Old man who's pants are full of the same.

Anima > noise 03/30/2015 at 17:46

4

Because it looks like a Mini concept car:

Oh.. Wait.. I got that the wrong way around.

Galileo Humpkins (aka MC Clap Yo Handz) > noise 03/30/2015 at 17:47

0

I've driven one and certainly, while not great, it was not the worst thing I'd ever driven or been in. My dislike comes from the poorly done retro styling. I'm not sure how to best describe it, but a lot of designers tried for mod-retro design in the early and mid 2000's and failed miserably. This is one example.

Laird Andrew Neby Bradleigh > noise 03/30/2015 at 17:48

0

I bet it's OK to drive, but it's ugly as BEEEEEP. And I bet you could get a better handling better looking car for the same money.

TheHondaBro > noise 03/30/2015 at 17:49

0

That T-bird is for those who've won radio contests or The Price Is Right. Also it's painfully retro, and that makes it look disgusting.

Alfalfa Romeo > noise 03/30/2015 at 17:52

0

It was kind of fugly at the time, though it has aged well. The engine had similar output as the previous gen's V8, but the car as a whole was heavier.

Wobbles the Mind > noise 03/30/2015 at 17:59

0

Made me realize that the fifth gen lends well to Lincolns design cues. I regards to the early 2000s thunderbirds...the 1964-1973 seems to be where we like our retrostyling to come from. Plus they were too expensive if I remember correctly, like the prowler.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:00

1

I like how they look. The 03 and later models had more power and they are all Jags underneath. But fuck were they too expensive and the transmissions are garbage.

OPPOsaurus WRX > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:01

1

I like it.

JR1 > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:03

0

Frankly I love it and would own one in a heart beat.

noise > JR1 03/30/2015 at 18:04

0

Thats kinda what I was thinking when I drove it. New set of wheels and I could get used to that car

noise > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 03/30/2015 at 18:05

0

I figured the slush box was the root of a lot of the general ambivalence

JR1 > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:07

0

How was the acceleration and handling? There are cheap and would make a cool DD

noise > JR1 03/30/2015 at 18:09

0

The transmission wasn't doing it any favors by any means, but for cruising it seemed more than adequate. Honestly, and i'm not sure how well founded this is in facts, but to me it felt like a RWD version of mrs Noise's taurus of the same era, though maybe a but less mushy. Not quite as fun as a contour of the same era

JR1 > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:11

0

So you wouldn't enjoy a brisk Sunday morning outing in this car?

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:16

0

Seriously one of the worst autos ever made

BoxerFanatic, troublesome iconoclast. > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:17

0

Stock, it is a bit heavy, it is a bit softly sprung and tuned, it is platform-shared with sedans, and retro styled for a 1950s car that mostly elderly folks remember, and automatic-only, as were platform-mate Jaguar S-types, and Lincoln LS V8s.

Lincoln LS V6s offered the only manual gearbox on that DEW platform, and didn't sell well, either, IIRC. I am not sure why there was no manual gearbox suited for the 3.9 AJ-V8 that those cars used.

Modified.... can look cool enough for Chip Foose to have one as his own personal ride, the Speedbird.

There is a black one somewhat similar to this, in the parking lot where I work... lowered, and runs a flat-face 5-spoke wheel set that I think is either aftermarket, or a Jag S-type fitment, that resemble 2000 SVT Cobra R wheels, but can't be those, as they aren't the same fitment. They certainly are not the chunky OE wide-7-spoke wheels. It also has some blackout treatments also.

Not a common car, and if it isn't reliable (early 2000s Jaguar with Ford looks, basically) it could be expensive to keep in shape.

The porthole windows were an art-deco bit on the hardtops, for style in a way to check the rear quarters, rather than a blind-spot.

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:22

1

In terms of pure looks, I think it's okay. But there are many things that are cheesy about it... like the fake hood scoop that says "supercharged V8 like original", but in reality, there is only a weaksauce 3.9L 252-280HP version of the JLR 4.2L V8.

And given that this Thunderbird is supposed to be a sporty (though retro) car, not having a manual transmission is also cheesy.

And while it was retro on the outside, on the inside, it's just "generic modern car". It's like they ran out of budget to do a proper NICE retro interior to match the exterior.

On top of that, the fact that this thing shared mechanical bits with Jaguar (DEW98 platform), made it a less reliable and more expensive-to-repair compared to other Ford and Lincoln products.

It was really a half-assed attempt at a new Thunderbird with lots of cut corners.

themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:24

0

High cost to buy when new plus no real redeeming qualities and "meh" styling compared to the concepts. It's weird but the devil was in the details. The overall design is bang on - simple, elegant, timeless, and handsome. But the production car got a ltitle too.....parts-bin in my eyes. It's like the SSR for me. I love the SSR as an idea, but the execution ruins it. THe interior for that car is lifted out of an envoy with the exception of a small handful of touches. This comes off as even worse because it says "Someone DID realize that was important but then decided not to bother due to cost or something and threw the rest of the ideas out". I feel that's what happened here. It was a great 30k car. It was just priced in the 40k bracket.

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > HammerheadFistpunch 03/30/2015 at 18:26

0

I think this is more accurate:

Panther - Old man, with an adult diaper full of piss.

T-Bird - Old man, with a more expensive adult diaper (Jaguar-style reliability/repair costs) full of the same.

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:27

1

And the ignition coils.

Bandit > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:28

0

I like it...

and 100 more > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:35

0

Because they epitomize a couple bad traits:

"Retro desperation", wherein a car company tries to resurrect or resuscitate an old marque with overly-inspired designs from previous iterations (sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't)

Large coupe - large for large sake. They could've made the same car at about 80% scale and 500 lbs less steel.

Snazzy exterior, humdrum drivetrain.

Handling like the Crown Vic it's based on.

All this being said, I'd like to point out something very idiosyncratic about the Oppositelock community as a whole... There's an inverse bell-curve regarding the love for a specific vehicle and it's acceptance in the overall auto market.

Top-of-the-line cars get typically tend to be praised, as you would expect. Midrange, high-volume cars are branded "toasters" and subjected to a chorus of "meh". Low-end econoboxes tend to inspire an almost inquisitive, thoughtful reaction that tends toward the positive.

The 11th gen T-bird tends to fall in the middle category. It sold enough to become common on the roads for a short time, and it wasn't designed to be a stellar performer. However, I predict (and I think you're probably just tickling the wave here with this post) that as time goes on, these will see a spike in nostalgia and start reappearing on the roads, albeit with some modifications for sake of pulling them out of that bland image they started with.

We shall see.

Textured Soy Protein > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:39

0

Poofy retro styling riding on the coattails of the VW New Beetle, pastel colors throwing back to the original T-bird, a halfway decent but unexciting platform shared with the Lincoln LS & Jaguar S-Type, and the dash from the LS that doesn't flow at all with the poofy retro styling.

Dean Beyer > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:40

0

I don't hate it but I don't want one.

Steve in Manhattan > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:53

0

I never really thought about this car. Katie Couric bought one.

Here's what I'll say - if you going retro, go retro. The Beetle, Mini, Fiat 500, Challenger, Mustang, Camaro, for better or worse, went there. Some were more successful designs than others, sure, but they're right in there honoring the original design.

The T-Bird? Bland, no special switchgear that I could see - when you sat in it you couldn't tell it was different on the outside - it could have been a 2-door Taurus. At least that was my impression from sitting in one at the NY Auto Show years ago.

ranwhenparked > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:56

0

I think because enthusiasts usually hate retro cars, and also the Thunderbird was a personal luxury car, as opposed to a sports car (even though Thunderbirds were always personal luxury cars and never sports cars, but whatever). Also, when it was new, it was probably overpriced for what it was.

desertdog5051 > noise 03/30/2015 at 18:57

0

OK. *places order for new glasses* What part of ugly do you not understand? BTW, those glasses are for you. Hope the Rx is right. They should be there in a few days.

Baeromez > noise 03/30/2015 at 19:11

0

Specifically the port hole window. It's a fucking car, not a ship.

Manic Otti > noise 03/30/2015 at 19:22

0

I don't hate it, but think it could have been much better.

noise > desertdog5051 03/30/2015 at 20:58

0

No way, its blandly retro if anything. Its not offensive on the eyes like some other cars

desertdog5051 > noise 03/30/2015 at 21:42

0

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I have one in the neighborhood that I see frequently. I just can't see how this does justice to the tri 5 birds. IMO.

noise > desertdog5051 03/31/2015 at 00:00

0

oh its not pretty by any means, and i'm a huge thunderbird fan, i mean for reasons i don't fully understand myself i'd take an 87 TurboCoupe over almost every other car, but i don't cringe like when I see an aztec or a lexus from a couple years back.