5 Cars That Looked Totally Different Just One Generation Ago

There’s something to be said about brand recognition — being able to tell what one car is from another at a glance. Companies have their trademark “looks” befitting certain models, sure — Jeep Wranglers are always boxy 4x4s with the seven-slotted grille and Ford Mustangs have the triple-taillight and a fastback coupe body shape. And these trends generally carry on from one generation to the next — a modern Wrangler still bears a superficial resemblance to the old TJ Wrangler from the 1990s, for instance. But every now and then, you get manufacturers trying something new. Whether it’s reusing a name on a brand-new platform or just a total ground-up redesign, sometimes you’re simply baffled to see the same logo on two seemingly completely different cars.

This is actually way more common than one might think. Take the Dodge Challenger, for instance, which went from a pony car in the early 1970s to a rebadged Mitsubishi Galant of all things. There are a few instances of this practice rearing its head, generally when automakers are chasing trends or undergoing large platform changes. An example of the latter is the Dodge Ram, which went from a Spartan, functional pickup in the 1980s to arguably the first modern production pickup truck in 1994.

We don’t see it as often today, with designs focusing more on minimalism and safety. But there are a few newer cars out there that will make you go, “Wait, it looked like that just one generation ago?” Let’s dive in and have a look.

What’s the first thought that comes to your mind when you think of the name “Chrysler 300?” Because the answer is generally all over the place; these cars (sadly now discontinued) once began life as midsize 1950s luxury sedans. Then they evolved into 1960s luxury sedans, then 1970s luxury sedans, and so on — the trend ran right up to their ultimate demise. But while these cars never changed their intended purpose, they most certainly changed their looks. Because the modern 2005-2023 Chrysler 300’s father is actually just a fancier Sebring — identical body shape and all, to the point where you’d be forgiven for mistaking the two without the presence of the badge.

Okay, granted, that badge reads “300M,” but it’s a Chrysler 300 — a car which, like its predecessors, prides itself on being refined and luxurious. Although you won’t find a Hemi anywhere near this car (unless you’re a lunatic who swapped in a remarkably inexpensive Hemi crate engine). Instead, you’ll find that classic Pentastar V6 in 3.5L form married to a front-wheel drive setup, all housed underneath a remarkably well-rounded body shell. It was Chrysler’s thing at the time; we all know that look from the Town and Country minivans.

The mid-2000s marked a pivotal period for Chrysler (and Mopar as a whole), with the entire range undergoing massive redesigns. These included the debuts of the new Jeep Wrangler JK in 2007, the Dodge Magnum in 2005, and many others. For the 300, it meant going from FWD budget luxury to intimidating, Hemi-powered RWD aspiration piece, a move that became so iconic that the car remained nearly unchanged right up until it was discontinued.

This one is also fairly obvious when you look at it, especially considering this was the first time we’ve ever seen a mid-engine Corvette in dealerships. It’s a car that has arguably marred a silhouette that was well over 50 years old, with the classic front-engine, rear-drive grand tourer coupe layout solidifying in 1963 with the Stingray fastback. Those classic lines of the long hood and sweeping rear end met their demise with Chevrolet’s modern rendition, for better or worse, marking a shift in design philosophy never before seen in the lineup — going from a grand touring sports car to supercar.

Typically the Corvette filled the niche of the former: a sports car. It was less money, less hassle, more practical, and generally more common than a lot of other high-performance vehicles of its era. Even today, you’re more likely to see a Corvette cruising down the highway than, for instance, a Lamborghini that’s more than double the cost (depending on where you live). But modern “fast cars” have a new image attached to them; think of modern Ferraris, the Audi R8, and so on. These are cars which typically command six-figure sums and hit 60 in three seconds or less. But not the Corvette (at least the base model).

The original design was revolutionary for the time, being marketed as “America’s First Sports Car.” And it’s a classic template, one which could easily continue into the future. But GM chose to depart from the “sports car” label, leaving us with what is ostensibly America’s budget supercar. Recognizable in name and performance, but hardly a trace when it comes to aesthetic presentation.

This was probably one of the most startling and controversial redesigns of the past couple years, with the Charger going from a pure-bred modern muscle car to a two-door EV (with the Hurricane turbocharged straight six available in model year 2026 onwards). Some might call it blasphemous to release a muscle car with no V8 option available for the masses, but whatever you think about the powertrain, it still wears the Charger badge — and looks almost nothing like its predecessor, with only a passing resemblance in four-door form.

Granted, the Charger was never exactly a svelte sports car in terms of its looks (as you can see in each generation). It was more of a brick on wheels than anything. The original Charger was a full-size sleeper coupe, looking more like a salesman’s car from the outside but potentially hiding a massive engine under the hood. The second-gen is what we generally think of when we hear of a classic Charger, but they both share certain key traits like that iconic, stone-faced grille and fastback roof. The modern Charger takes these elements and reimagines them in a 2020s context, returning the two-door configuration, flat nose, and vintage roof line. It’s a retro-flavored design, for sure, arguably returning the Charger name to a more traditional aesthetic.

Redesigns rarely hit without backlash, as we see fairly often in website facelifts for instance. And the new Charger was met with tons of it, though that generally revolved around its powertrain, not its aesthetics. The actual look of the car is, in fact, far more in-line with vintage Charger design philosophy, which may not be to everyone’s taste. But it’s certainly more faithful than the 2000s-era four-door sedan look, which is arguably its own unique thing.

We have yet another sports car entering the chat, this time a Japanese-German chimera born from a BMW — and yes, the Supra has a BMW engine. The B58, to be specific, the same engine as the BMW Z4. Of course, the body is quite different from the Z4, though that doesn’t stop people from calling the MK5 Toyota Supra a BMW. It’s yet another controversial car in this regard, but aside from the question of whether or not it’s a “real” Toyota, one fact still remains consistent: This thing looks nothing like the MK4 A80 Supra, from just about any angle.

One might suggest that such a design departure is obvious enough. After all, the A80 itself looks almost nothing like its predecessor either, trading the boxy pop-up headlights look for that timeless rounded shape. Regardless of what you think about the car (it’s arguably seriously overrated for what it provides), that body shape is instantly recognizable and looks correct even in modern traffic. By contrast, the MK5 is certainly not a bad-looking car in its own right, with exceptionally sporty design language. That said, good luck finding commonality, aside from the 2-door fastback styling.

By contrast, the MK5 Supra is a car with a contemporary aggressive fascia, plenty of vents, a svelte body with bold accents, and a long nose hiding that straight six. The FT-1 concept it was based on was well-received for its looks, with the production Supra basically being a watered-down version. Is it bad? Absolutely not — neither it nor its ancestor were. But you really have to stretch the definition of “similar” to marry this car’s aesthetic language to the MK4’s.

Typically when a car totally jumps from one segment to another, you get some sort of differentiation in the name — Ford Mustang Mach-E or Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross, for example. Other times it’s a revival of a far older nameplate banking on recognition, such as the Ford Capri or Maverick. And then there’s this thing. The Chevrolet Blazer at a glance looks like it fills a similar role to the previous S-10 Blazer. That car was produced until the mid-2000s in North America, supplanted by the TrailBlazer in the midsize segment. Neither model bear even a passing resemblance to the modern crossover, however, either in form or function.

The S-10 and TrailBlazer alike were both unquestionably SUVs, with the S-10 in particular being more off-road oriented with its traditional high ground clearance, optional full-time 4WD, and features on-par with competitors like the Jeep Grand Cherokee. Additionally, Chevrolet even offered it in performance truck trim, with street-oriented option packages like the Blazer Xtreme. Its versatile SUV platform suited many roles well for its day, but its design is certainly dated on modern roads.

Chevrolet’s answer wasn’t to remake it as an SUV but rather as a crossover, debuting in 2019 to mixed reception (putting it mildly). The design proved controversial with the Blazer crowd, expecting a plucky, utilitarian 4×4 to rival the Bronco and getting a decidedly road-oriented unibody instead. It is almost nothing like the Blazers of old, only sharing the rough physical footprint they take up on the road. The Blazer is essentially the reverse of the Chrysler 300, going from a RWD or 4×4 truck to a FWD or AWD midsize that blazes rental fleets nationwide.