GTPNewsWire
Contributing Writer
- 21,620
- GTPHQ
This is the discussion thread for a recent post on GTPlanet:
This article was published by Andrew Evans (@Famine) on August 24th, 2017 in the Automotive News category.
But think about it, those guys must know what they're doing, worked on terabytes of data about the market and had endless workshops to make those decisions.
A435
A130
A545
A640
A870
The only one which isn't a real road
I was going to do that gag in the piece, but it's a bit too BritishRoads
I was going to do that gag in the piece, but it's a bit too British
I'm not sure Mercedes' small MPV merits discussion.Can we talk about broads...er, B-roads?
Dumb. I will save the number off my trunk lid.This is the discussion thread for a recent post on GTPlanet:
This article was published by Andrew Evans (@Famine) on August 24th, 2017 in the Automotive News category.
This is way more confusing than Infiniti's Q system of naming. I much prefer the old system but with the power output in BHP added as well.
Really?No it isn't. Infiniti has the worst naming scheme I can even think of.
It's the same with Audi though - if not marginally worse.At least with Audi the model type is specified in the alpha of the alpha numeric. With Infiniti, there is zero intuitive way of understanding it aside from the X to denote suv-thing.
Really?
Q30 - C-segment hatch
QX30 - C-segment crossover SUV
Q50 - D-segment saloon
QX50 - D-segment crossover SUV
Q60 - D-segment coupe
QX60 - E-segment crossover SUV
Q70 - E-segment saloon
QX80 - Colossal SUV
Aside from the fact that the QX60 should be a QX70, I don't see the problem there.
It's a fairly uniform designation that avoids any quibbles about what's a full-size car if something 18 feet long isn't, and how much of a family you can fit into it.The fact that you mentioned "C/D/E segments" is exactly why we get these terrible model names.
Lexus is another brand whose names make sense for some cars (LS = Luxury Saloon, LC = Luxury Coupe, GS = Grand Saloon) and then is a complete Engrish nightmare with others (IS = Intelligent Sport, RX = Radiant Crossover). And I still can't think of the NX without first thinking of a small Nissan targa-roofed coupe.Lexus uses "I"
I definitely prefer names as a general rule. It's funny how the premium brands habitually go for numbers, which conceptually align them with basic consumer goods, while mainstream brands like Ford, Renault, Vauxhall etc choose names, more like you'd expect from luxury goods.
I wonder if that's an indicator of where Volvo and Mazda pitch themselves? Although I'd expect Mazda to be outrageously bad at naming cars - it's terrible at numbering them, with its 2-based crossover badged as a 3, its 3-based crossover badged as a 5, and a D-segment car badged as a 6, while the tiny car with the 2/crossover 3 interior is also badged as a 5.I definitely prefer names as a general rule. It's funny how the premium brands habitually go for numbers, which conceptually align them with basic consumer goods, while mainstream brands like Ford, Renault, Vauxhall etc choose names, more like you'd expect from luxury goods.