You're right Dave, that was my reply. I messed up the format. Sorry.
It should have looke like this:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A convertible top is not a styling anachronism. A convertible top
is as appropriate on a new car as it was as far back as you want to go.
Any automotive styling feature is as appropriate to its time as the
pocketbooks of its buyers makes it. This is the logic of the market
place, which noone can argue with.
Cheers,
CR
David Breneman wrote:
> Here's an execrise in logic. If today Chevrolet introduced a new
> Camaro with a vinyl top, one could rationally state that such a
> car contained a styling anachronism that was more appropriate to
> cars of an earlier age. Simpy the fact that the car was introduced
> in 2005 would not make that observation illogical; in fact it
> would demonstrate the anachronism that the observation is
> meant to reflect. A styling faus pas does not make its
> own correction non sequitir, it requires the very correction
> itself. The fact that a US government regulation lead to the
> reconsideration of the design is only marginally relevant.
> Could the design have been better? Sure. Am I an irrational
> idiot for believing that the design is better than the
> 1950s-style dashboard that it replaced? I'll leave that an
> an exercise for the student. :-)
>
>
> =====
> David Breneman david_breneman@yahoo.com
|