Anyone who loves the 757 (or Boeing really for that matter) can thank Harry Stonechipher. He shut down the 757 with a big dick battle with Mullally. The 757 wasn't selling, Stonechipher called out Alan's cajones, challenged him that he didn't have the balls to shut down the 757 line - and Alan did, wanting the top job at Boeing Commercial. Such a shame. Imagine the 757 with a new wing and engines. The A321NEO is still a dog.

If you mean a cockpit with no commonality between the rest of the Boeing fleet when you wrote "orphan", I believe that it might not be completely true. The 787 and 777 are operated as a single fleet by several operators. It's safe to assume Boeing would design the 797 to have a common cockpit with the 787, the current and future 777. I think (and hope for Boeing and Boeing pilots) that the 737 is and will be the only "orphan" left in their line up.

It'd be an uncomfortable narrow cabin with a new wing and engines that matches the new wing and engines of the wider cabin competition.

Exactly. The 75 is as revered as it is because of its wing and engines and that's it. Its tube isn't anything special at all. The only reason a re-winged and re-engined 757 would make sense to anyone its because BA could save some money keeping the same POS tube yet still have to do the lion's share of the R&D for the harder and more expensive parts of it anyway, and then when they're done they'd still be half a step behind.

IOW its hardly the pent up panacea many are nostalgically pining over.

The 757 seems marginally nicer/wider than the 737-1000 or whatever 73 they try to replace it with. At least the 75 JS kicks the 737's JS butt daily and twice on Sundays.

Agree on the JS, but again we're talking about stuff literally no one cares about except us because it doesn't benefit the job/mission/cost of the plane at all.

As for the tube, I'm not sure if the 75 is even wider. The -200 is barely acceptable on longer flights and the -300 is awful especially at the gate. Even worse than the -900. Its too bad 2+ door deplaning is absolutely impossible from a spirit of ingenuity point of view with the limited technology we have in this day and age. Maybe some day.

Most of the cramped cockpit in the 73 is self induced by sadistic engineers who didn't care and just wanted to go home on a Friday. Early, because it was a 3 day weekend Friday. If they moved the breaker boxes back a bit (or just made them thinner), rerouted some of the fan ducts and did away with that huge bottom screen that only displays a couple things and literally doesn't need to be there and calmed down the buzz saw trim partial collider it wouldn't be that bad.

The sticker price on a new 757 would be significantly higher, than a new A322. Also, the Airbus wins on pax comfort hands down, it's not close either.

I'm not sure why this perception exists. Is it noise or seat width? According to seat guru, so check my source, please, the coach seat on a 320 is .2 inches wider than the 737 at the mothership, and the first class seat width is identical. Slightly more comfortable on a longer flight to be sure, but not that big of a difference. Not trying to start a huge Boeing vs. Airbus thing, just curious what the hands down part is all about.

I think, and this from hundreds of deadheads, that there is an optimal cabin width for a seating configuration. E.g. 2x2 is the E175, 2x3 is the Cseries, 3x3 is the Airbus.

7 inches wider is my understanding, seats ate same width as well, makes a bigger aisle. Which is nice. For wide flight attendants, boarding and kicking people off, staying away from therapy geese, and when two people try to pass each other in general.

Like mesabah says, I'll take the e jet cabin any day, then 2 seat side of 88, then Airbus,
then 737/757.