So close, yet so far away...

[phiebert]

Why do I so prefer the 2003 Concept GTS to the RT when typically I prefer RT's? I keep looking at the pictures comparing them and really can't come up with the reason. It's just the overall package (wing, top duct, etc.)... I don't know. Thoughts?

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

 

[Frank 03SRT]

I think the big items, in order of importance for looks of the GTSR over the RT, are:
1. Great roof.
2. Stripes.
3. Lowered effects, with meaner looking front grille.
4. Rear end (even without wing - imagine it missing).
5. Ducts over rear wheels.
6. Mirrors a little different too.

It sure doesn't take much to make a big difference.

 

[Performin Norman]

I agree. I don't care much for the 03 RT/10 but the GTSR Concept gets my goat. It is awesome. It is still "OUTRAGEOUS". Just as Chrysler originally intended. I hope they build that car because I want one really badly.

 

[Hisser]

The car is unmistakeable. Which is exactly one of the reasons I have one. The increase in horsepower. The gen 3 convertable looks wimpy but the GTS-R has that mean look like the body style we have now and even more. Put the GTS-R up against the gen 2 and the gen 2 looks tame.

 

[Daffy]

For me it is the lines of the fenders (the top also plays a role, but).

When I look at the concept, the fenders are very agressive, they make me think of haunches of a great cat, a lean fast panther, haunched & starring at its prey. The flared fronts and significantly bulging rear fenders of the concept, coupled with its low stance just make me feel like it's "going to strike" - for the throat.

The rt on the other hand, with its straight edges, tame rear and significantly reduced fender lines just doesn't evoke any of those feelings for me. In person, I believe the car will be meaner looking due to its reportedly wide & low posture. But, the lacking fender bulges and hard straight lines are the wet blanket for me. I am holding my final judgement until I see on in person though.

Dave.

 

[Joseph Houss]

Please someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the production 2003 HAS the SAME fender contours as the concept...

The big difference is the front facia, side ground effects, and flat rear.

That, combined with the soft top vs very agressive coupe top makes for the illusion (in photos) of a less agressive, softer look.... but in person.... much more powerful looking.

 

[Dixter]

If you guys like the GTSR in the pictures... you'll realy like
it when driving the GTSR simulator just released for the Sony
PS2... Gran Tarismo has the GTSR and it is just fantastic if
every way.... after you drive the car the simulator plays back
the track run and you get to see just how the car looks on the
track or street... it is fantastic.....

Dick Bell

 

[2charmed]

It's the differance between a Lion and Lioness! The GTS Concept
is just an awesome machine the RT leaves something to be desired,
like DC is holding back. Which obviously they are after seeing the GTS!

Build it DC they will buy it! (I would)

Regards,
Steve

 

[Joseph Houss]

OK Guys,

I'm not a photoshop guru...

but this picture started out as the roadster...

I added "hard top" (Autoform, Vmania...are you out there?), ground effects and wing from gts/r:

You must be registered for see images

 

[treynor]

Hmmm... that's a definite improvement in my book. I suspect there'll be a big aftermarket for wings & effects for the '03s.

 

[dblankenbaker]

Joe, lower it an inch and you're there.

 

[Daffy]

Well, I dunno, but looking at the nice comparo photo Joe put up I'm even more convinced that my "softer" feeling for the RT is from the fenders (coupled with the missing roof & scoop). It might be a photo-illusion, I haven't seen either car in person, but they look quite different to me in the photo's.

The gtsr has such agressive front fenders that the flare almost comes to the top of the hood line IMO, the wheels are huge in the wells, the flare edges are dramatic with pronounced flat edges. The rear fender swoop appears steeper and more forward on the gtsr to me, plus that brake duct exagerates it.

I could be way off, maybe it's just a photo thing, or my demented way of looking at it, but that's what I see, maybe something else is causing a perception of that, I dunno. I really can't wait to see this thing in person - it's so hard to get a perspective of the genIII in a photo (for me). Folks who have seen both probably have a much better sense of what it might be.

Dave.

 

[Joseph Houss]

lowered & lights on:

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

 

[phiebert]

Hey Joe, you are on to something there! Maybe I will get the RT and just put a hard top on it and the wing. That makes a huge difference.

I also agree with your point that the RT has the same fenders (apparently identical) to the GTS-R. That was one reason why I was confused in the first place. With a car that is virtually identical except for the top and wing, why was one so much better looking.

At least now I know if I get the 2003 RT, I can make it look meaner fairly easily. The problem though is you could do that with an S2000 too! When the first Viper came out, I don't think people sat around wondering what to change to make it look better, they were simply in awe. And with the Gen I Viper I have now I know that people don't quietly say while I drive by ..."Oh yeah, that one looks great but you should see what they look like stock, pretty boring."

 

[Gerald]

Winshield Slope not aggressive as coupe and not lowered?


Gerald

 

[Joseph Houss]

Gerald,

I cut & pasted the windshield off of the coupe! What do you mean it's not the same!