And how has this anything to do with my post? I don't like (modern) american cars for this very reason: they are essentially as uninspired as most japanese cars, but bigger, less efficient and without the formidable reliability.
OMG I hatez dse Multipla and all Toyotaz and dse Pontiak Aztec and all cheap carz under $50K.... OT: Overhyped 80's compact, often times tuned to death because anime God, that thing looks ugly Why?
Well, Shotgun Chuck was "offended" by the second part of my previous post, the one where I said I don't like american and german cars. You just said you were offended, too.
...To which TheAdmeister said: And then you said: \ To which I said: "I do, too." An innocent comment more in reply to what Monsieur Admeister said, than to what you had to contribute, I admit, but you continued on the conversation so I replied to you instead of Lord Admeister. Get it? Criminy... Anyway, OT: I hate this: And this:
The lovely family who live in the house next to mine have a 2nd gen Prius and a Mercedes c320 station wagon. My preachy, holier-than-thou vegan aunt has a Ford C-max hybrid.
This is how you DO NOT make an crossover SUV. It's called making it look like an deformed Citroen with Toyota styling. I don't even like that this started an horrible trend in their upcoming SUVs or new gens of pre-existing SUVs. (The only one that looks unique.... but it's ugly as hell still.) (The ones that followed this trend, and also look ugly.)
If modern means ugly, overweight, feature-bloated, and borderline untuneable, then you're right. Oh, I've got another example for the "borderline-untuneable" list: Nissan/Infiniti has put an end to 90 years of trying by introducing the world's first production variable-compression engine. It uses some kind of hinged connecting rod that can work at two different lengths. I'd say it's a good bet that if anyone even tries to tune that engine, those trick rods are going to become known as a major and expensive weak point before too long. More likely, people won't even bother to try. All this, just for a little bit of MPG. Another one I've used before: BMW ECUs that are made to accept remote updates, so if you try to load your own tune, they can just write more stock firmware over it any time they want, without even knowing they're doing it. If you want a performance tune that will actually last, you have to enlist the help of a factory-connected skunk works like Dinan. Oh, and some cars now (probably including BMWs) don't even have dipsticks, just a sensor so the computer can tell you when it's time to change/add oil. As for ugly, hatchbacks, especially the "short, tall, narrow" form factor pioneered in Europe and Japan, really just are, and really just need to die, at least in the US and Australia where space isn't at a premium. Liftback coupes/sedans can stay, but the scrunched-up "city cars" need to go, and so do the sawed-off neo-Gremlins that might actually look halfway decent if they were full wagons instead of hatchbacks. Yes, Europe and Japan do have some severely cramped spaces, but the rest of the world shouldn't have to suffer for it. I would also like to mention all crossovers. I will admit that the extra ground clearance is useful in places where it snows, but the rest of the year, they have exactly the same function as a station wagon but are heavier, clumsier, slower, and less fuel-efficient (there I said it) than an equivalent wagon.
So, what, somehow you're better for wanting more ugly, boring cars that you need a four-year degree to make anything decent out of? Because that's the attitude I'm seeing, and I see a lot of it around the internet. Seriously, though, think about it. Cars are getting stupidly complicated, so that you have to have a shop tune them if they can be tuned at all. They're heavier and full of stuff you don't need. All this garbage costs more money to fix when it does break. Ugly sawed-off hatchbacks and "height wagons" are becoming common even in places where such space-saving measures are unnecessary. If any of this is a good thing, then please explain why.
I have to agree with Shotgun Chuck here, at least on one point: the Gremlin was a "sawed-off" abomination that got the hatchback concept so wrong it makes me laugh... So, yeah, I agree. The US doesn't need hatchbacks - especially if american manufacturers are that incapable to make good ones - as much as the rest of the World doesn't seem to be in need of bloated american cars. To each their own, each market has its peculiarities, formats rarely work everywhere. Most mainstream european manufacturers abandoned the US ages ago. Similarly, only Cadillac is left in Europe to represent America, but it's condemned to marginality. Southern America and Asia - China in particular - favor asian and euro-style vehicles. Trying to uniform the offer doesn't work... but curiously enough only the Japanese got this right so far.
Z32 Nissan 300ZX Now I don't hate this car at all, (it's just some sports car made in the early 90's to me, nothing special.) But it's the fan base for it what ruins it fr me, Now the Twin Turbo model of this was faster than a early 90's Corvette, which gain it the name Corvette Killer, (to bad that name dated it self by 1994.) but to me it's nothing special, I mean I can name 3 cars off the top of my head that was faster than the Corvette of it's year, those 3 are, the 1987 Buick GNX, a well know one any dumbass than tell you that, the 1979 Dodge Little Red Express which is a fuckin' pickup truck in the 1970's that is like being black and winning a Oscar in the late 1970's, enough with that stuff that I know one of you guys will take it the wrong way, now for number 1 is the 1972 AMC Gremlin X. And all of those cars are not made to be sports cars, the GNX was based off the Regal, the Little Red Express was based off the D-Series, and the Gremlin is a 1970's hatchback. But the fans, (I just realize I wasted more time talking other cars that were faster can the Corvette than talking about what really ruin the car for me.) The fans will always say it's a Corvette Killer and defined it into their death.
Riced out FCs Especially if they feature this god awful BN Sports Bumper crap and big wangs .... just why ...
Crossovers/UVs/whatever they are called of all shapes and sizes Why? They are uglier, slower, thirstier than conventional cars, but what do they offer for that? A bit more centimetres of ground clearance and headroom - in other words, what most cars of the recent past had. Their fans argue that their higher seating position and ride height allow you to look over low cars' roofs. However, if 60% of other passenger cars on the road are crossovers, what's the use of it? Plus, higher height isn't mandatory in modern crossovers. Most crossovers have decorative plastic cladding around wheel arches (style yo!), which are extremely impractical. They cover places where rust tends to form (and even accelerate rust formation by collecting sand that rubs against the bodywork) and hide it from the owner's eyes until the rust hole becomes so large the car might be not worth repairing (although this problem is not severe yet since most crossovers are new cars, I can see it surfacing in the future).
And the silliest subgenre of them all: the "sport" SUVs and crossovers. Neither good as sportscars, nor as offroaders, they are just thirstier and more vulgar than their bread and butter counterparts...
