- 1. Re: Rover woes (TR aside) (score: 1)
- Author: Max Heim <mvheim@studiolimage.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 14:41:12 -0700
- Yeah, I always thought the fussy B-pillar treatment was more of a detriment than the controversial 'side swoop'. The roadster looked fine, they just needed to have produced it right from the get-go.
- /html/mgs/2000-07/msg00427.html (7,167 bytes)
- 2. Re: Rover woes (TR aside) (score: 1)
- Author: "Kristian Chronister" <kchronister@earthlink.net>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 17:46:32 -0000
- Exactly. Everyone talks about the "wedge" and trashes the design in the same breath. I truly don't feel it's the wedge shape that is aesthetically "yucky" about the TR-7, but the coupe roofline and a
- /html/mgs/2000-07/msg00432.html (8,182 bytes)
- 3. Re: Rover woes (TR aside) (score: 1)
- Author: Max Heim <mvheim@studiolimage.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 18:41:41 -0700
- Uh-huh, and look at the original Mazda RX7 -- from the waist down it's a wedge nearly identical to the TR7 (hmmm, suspicious coincidence) without the 'swoosh', but its clean fastback roofline made it
- /html/mgs/2000-07/msg00448.html (8,739 bytes)
- 4. Re: Rover woes (TR aside) (score: 1)
- Author: Ajhsys@aol.com
- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 10:34:42 EDT
- << Exactly. Everyone talks about the "wedge" and trashes the design in the same breath. I truly don't feel it's the wedge shape that is aesthetically "yucky" about the TR-7, but the coupe roofline an
- /html/mgs/2000-07/msg00470.html (7,936 bytes)
- 5. Re: Rover woes (TR aside) (score: 1)
- Author: "David Hill" <Davhill@btinternet.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 18:37:40 +0100
- I recall that, on its launch, most of the motoring press disliked the TR7 because of those baroque swage lines down the side. They specifically had a go at the coupe because of the rear 1/4 treatment
- /html/mgs/2000-07/msg00483.html (10,000 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu