Actually, CAFE resulted in manufacturers discovering aerodynamics,
resulting in near total loss of automotive styling.
Elliott DeGraff
2 71Bs
"Lundy, John D." wrote:
>
> David notes below the attractiveness of his BGTs...
>
> One reason I could not resist a "unique fixer-upper opportunity" that has
> become
> my 79 RB Midget Project and has already started to drain my bank account is
> that
> every day on the road you see nothing but UGLY, UGLY, UGLY....
>
> It seems that all the cars made today are cut from the same mold, with only
> minor tweaking.
> Gone are the days of my youth, where you could easily tell a Mustang from a
> GTO from a
> Camaro from a Monte Carlo from a Z Car. They all look about the same now.
> I know they are
> also much more reliable and last longer, but gee whiz, eventually you have
> to be SEEN in them!
>
> I think the source of this problem is the fashion gods, who really think
> that people are so dumb
> that if they change the "look" every 5 years, we will all rush out and dump
> what we have in order
> to look like all our friends. You see this with clothing fashions (which
> must of necessity rotate,
> since there are only so many practical variations to dress the human body),
> even with eyewear
> (when did little glasses become required?), and now with automotive
> fashions.
>
> I would like to think that we are not so gullible as to let a handful of
> fashion gods dictate what
> is attractive, but it seems that, in general, the public DOES rush in to
> fill their pockets by
> "biting" on these. In the aggregate, we really ARE that dumb...
>
> As for cars, there have always been the terminally ugly ones (like, say,
> Pacer or Gremlin), but
> I seemed to note the "rounded" look started with the Ford Taurus, which I
> deem to be brutally
> ugly, but I'm sure some others will adore. All recent model cars seem to me
> to be morphing
> toward fusion with the Taurus....and the mini-vans, well, don't get me
> started....
>
> SO................
>
> When you see a little car that is UNDENIABLY ATTRACTIVE, and that you just
> have to look at
> a second and even a third glance, well, you just can't resist. It's a
> natural survival instinct -
> a reaction to the mass of ugliness on the road!
>
> When it promises to eke out the $20 - 30K over many painful weeks, months,
> and years (I paid only
> $1,000, but have already doubled that just to "fix it up") instead of one
> big bank-financed bite,
> it's even more attractive!
>
> The younger generation, while of course steeped in massive compliance
> exercises all in the name of
> non-compliance, still might recognize the spark of genuine, natural,
> attraction, and I really think we
> all know deep down when we see a great-looking car like the MG....
>
> Just my opinion. I offer it as a Friday observance, but I'm sure if I am
> thinking it, maybe millions are.
>
> So when will they bring out the 2000 MG line?
>
> JL
>
> >On the bright side, I make it a point that my BGTs get seen around town.
> >And I make sure when I am at work, my 67 BGT is parked so it is visible to
> >traffic on one of the main streets going into the downtown area. It draws
> >some attention - oddly enough, it seems to be quite the draw to some of the
>
> >teenage crowd, more so than to the older generations.
>
> >David
> >67 BGT
> >71 BGT
>
> > ********************************
> > John Lundy
> > Senior Astrodynamics Engineer
> > Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)
> > PHONE: (719) 637-8740 x248 FAX: (719) 573-7936
> > EMAIL: john.d.lundy@cpmx.saic.com
> >
> > ********************************
|