How do you define a 'COOL' car?

[Rotary Junkie]

I've lost a lot of respect just now...

Respect for others or respect of others?

If the latter, I honestly don't see it.

 

[Jim Prower]

For. Particularly HFS for rubbing my mistakes in my face.

 

[Gil]

I agree with you to a point, Codename L
Yeah it counts to have the "crowd" like your car.

But in the end, you bought that car for you, not for them.

In a lot of cases, you have a nice car, and they have nice...shoes. You're riding and they are wearing out their Nikes.

I used to drive a sleeper of a Ford station wagon. I used to get some static for it. ("Dude, a station wagon? Really?)
But, it was wheels! I could carry 7 of my friends with me, in comfort.
OH, and it had a 429 SCJ under the hood, so I could blow the "cool" cars, (like my buddy's Z28) into the weeds.

Just another example of not being the coolest looking, but it really not mattering a whit.

 

[Lucas]

I agree with you to a point, Codename L
Yeah it counts to have the "crowd" like your car.

But in the end, you bought that car for you, not for them.

It does count to have the crowd like your car, but just because of that I don't consider a car to be cool.

You are right, though, that at the end of the day I bought the car for me, not for them. I wouldn't buy a car just for the sake of having one, I would buy it because I love it.

I used to drive a sleeper of a Ford station wagon. I used to get some static for it.
But I could carry 7 of my friends with me, in comfort. OH, and it had a 429 SCJ under the hood, so I could blow the "cool" cars, (like my buddy's Z28) into the weeds.

Just another example of not being the coolest looking, but it really not mattering a whit.

That's precisely why I consider every sleeper no matter what to be Cool. Nothing can reduce points from that, but points can be added based on other things.

 

[homeforsummer]

@ Jim - I'm not sure if you're feeling particularly delicate today or something but you seem to have got awfully worked up about this. I'm sorry if I upset you, but I do rather think you've let it (with "it" being the comments of someone on the internet you don't actually know) get to you a bit too much.

Which is why (if that's his exact point of view) I don't like when he said:

"It can't be a cool car made uncool by its brand. It's an uncool car because of its brand."

Which to me, sounds exactly like the first part of your story. Everyone drooling over the car, until the owner mentions it's a Hyundai.

What you've written makes sense. Which makes it confusing as to what your issue is - if people are drooling over the car until they find out it's a Hyundai, this still makes the car uncool. If they found out it was a Volkswagen, they probably wouldn't think the car was uncool. So however good or pretty the Genesis Coupe is, it's made uncool (IMO) by the brand. Sure, if people never, ever found out that it was a Hyundai, then it might be cool. But it is a Hyundai, so however much of a "wow" factor it has on first impressions, it's still uncool.

Which I think is what Famine was getting at. The whole thing seemed fairly simple to follow as far as I could gather.

 

[niky]

MatskiMonk is allowed to think whatever he wants about the SportKa. The subsequent argument wasn't about his decision to class it as uncool, but about the fact that he'd brandished it as 'slow'. Which a considerable number of people disagreed with.

This is the be-all and end-all of all cool wall arguments.

It doesn't matter how subjective your voting is... just that if you say you are voting a car "cool" or "uncool" for a particular reason, you've just got to back it up... Uncool because it's... slow? Says who? based on what? Compared to what? Does that automatically make all cars with acceleration less than "x" uncool? Because it's front-wheel drive? Why? Because FWD can't handle (which it can)? Or because subjectively, you don't like it? If you don't like FWD simply because... end argument... move on to the next post. If you have to create some outlandish rationalization for why it simply ain't all that... then you've lost.

I say that, in my opinion, ATs are uncool. I don't say that it's because they're slow, not fuel efficient, not involving, or any other such... I just don't think they're cool.

Debating on the cool wall threads is cool.

I give my pros and cons for a particular car... but in the end... I vote it cool based on whether I like it or not... irrespective of those factors. Which is why nobody picks on me... yet.

 

[Famine]

I have said it before. Not everyone takes the same aspects in mind when voting. Some people vote solely based on speed. Some people vote solely based on looks. Some vote based on various aspects. I can guarantee you that if we asked people to vote only based on looks, then we still wouldn't see a correlation between beauty/ugly and cool/uncool, because looks are subjective too. I find, for example, some Ferrari's to be hideous, regardless of what people say.

Just because the results don't show it, it doesn't mean it's not there.

Objective would be to say that we all have different opinions, because it is a fact. Anyone disagreeing with that is simply wrong.

Saying that speed isn't related to cool is objective in most people's cases (as demostrated by the cool wall), but not everyone's. And thus, it is not objective, it's subjective. You said it yourself: "If I say speed isn't related to cool...". I have to be able to replace that I by everyone for that statement to be objective.

I don't care what the data on the cool wall says. As long as someone relates speed to coolness (as Adamgp does and me too, to a certain extent), then it's not a fact that speed is not related to coolness, because some people take it in mind when voting. That you don't, and other people (apparently the majority) don't either doesn't take away the fact that speed is related to coolness in some people's cases.

And all of that is a shame, because the Cool Wall is a function of turning subjective opinions into objective data. That's the point of it.

Ever wondered why the voting for almost every car follows a bell-shaped curve? The "Wisdom of Masses" effect irons out anomalous, extreme viewpoints which in turn removes operator error - the subjectivity of people voting. It doesn't work so well on Top Gear because the Wisdom of Masses effect doesn't work with just two people. What you end up with is a picture of what "people" say is cool and, after all, isn't that what "cool" actually is?


And the Cool Wall says that speed is unrelated to coolness. Who am I to deny data?

 

[Lucas]

And the Cool Wall says that speed is unrelated to coolness. Who am I to deny data?

Just got up of bed... got my head cleared a bit when I was playing GT4 last night... so my point of view may have changed, and a few contradictions may arise.

Anyways to the point. I believe I have finally understood what you meant: since not everyone's votes show that speed is related to coolness, then it is correct to asume that speed is unrelated to coolness. I believe that's what you mean, right?

 

[V8_Vantage]

The Seat is way cooler then a lame Silver Lotus. Sub-Zero even.

I disagree, the Lotus would be the perfect car if Lotus ripped out the back seats and put a supercharged V6 in.
But to define cool:
Something out of the ordinary:
eg. Scissor doors, gullwings, beauty
Something that isn't loud unless you want loud:
eg. Audi R8
Usually instantly cool if it's Italian, (apart from convertables or budget Alfa Romeos)

P.S. According to Top Gear, your car shows the size of your penis, so get a Range Rover.

 

[Leonidae]

who needs reality tv shows..

 

[MatskiMonk]

This is the be-all and end-all of all cool wall arguments.

It doesn't matter how subjective your voting is... just that if you say you are voting a car "cool" or "uncool" for a particular reason, you've just got to back it up... Uncool because it's... slow? Says who? based on what? Compared to what? Does that automatically make all cars with acceleration less than "x" uncool? Because it's front-wheel drive? Why? Because FWD can't handle (which it can)? Or because subjectively, you don't like it? If you don't like FWD simply because... end argument... move on to the next post. If you have to create some outlandish rationalization for why it simply ain't all that... then you've lost.

Since, I've been quoted a couple of times in this thread...

Why do you not have to qualify why AT cars are uncool, but yet you expect me to quantify an acceleration or speed at which a car is slow (or not).. yes there are slower cars than the SportKa, but then there are slower cars than the Ford Model T.... and for the record, my full post was as follows - I hope you can see that it's slightly under-whelming performance was not my main objection...

It is badly proportioned, its details are ugly, as an overall design it is awkward, it is mostly driven by learner drivers and very old people, but very rarely by car people, it is slow, it is ugly and it is also ugly, it is also quite slow, its quite ugly too, its also quite small in a cramped fashion, its ugly from every angle. I cannot see one single desireable point of this car, if I was offered one for less than a hundred quid I might consider it, but I'd go out with a bag over my head, and if it were to cost over £100, then there are hundreds of cheap but faster, cheap but better looking, cheap but more practical and cheap (as in cheaper to own) cars on eBay.

Added to that my inherant dislike for European Ford products, my ingrained dislike for hatch backs, and my inbuilt aversion to FWD... and this is one biblically hateful car in my opinion

I just don't want to be mis-understood, 's all.

For the record though, I've given up posting reasons to back up my votes, I just vote and keep my gob shut... since I found myself arguing with Famine about letters and numbers making cars un-cool or not, I found my self questioning, is there really any point discussing this! - if GTP call-wall threads could be hooked up to generate electricity - then I suspect we'd have a perpetual motion machine on our hands, 'cos they will just keeeep going round and around forever!

What makes a cool/un-cool car for me? Well... People make blanket statements that truly defy logic sometimes, it can't be cool if it's a Ferrari, it can't be cool if you have to explain it, it can't be cool if it requires a chassis designation to identify, it can't be cool if it's a supercar.... Heck I'm guilty of it myself.. ("Added to that my inherant dislike for European Ford products, my ingrained dislike for hatch backs, and my inbuilt aversion to FWD...")... IMO a car is cool if it has something that overrides all the other stuff you don't like about it... in the case of the SportKa, there was nothing I liked about it.. but some cars, they can be bad, ugly, slow, even sometimes they can be FWD <joke> and they can still be cool, because there's something else about them that is just sooo much better than all the bad stuff.

My two cents, going back to a vow of silence now!

 

[NissanSkylineN1]

Also if it has done anything really good at its time or is iconic for whatever reason, it is a cool car.

 

[homeforsummer]

Usually instantly cool if it's Italian, (apart from convertables or budget Alfa Romeos)

Agree that Italian cars are cool, disagree that budget Alfas are uncool. The most cheapo, bottom-range MiTo is still cool. By buying even a basic MiTo you're cool because you aren't buying a Fiesta, or a MINI like the rest of the world. And ever heard of the AlfaSud? Epic budget cool. Not least because it has one of the best FWD chassis ever. A cheap car that's fun! Definitely cool. As long as it's not a pile of rust in your driveway, that does make it uncool.

P.S. According to Top Gear, your car shows the size of your penis, so get a Range Rover.

Unfortunately, the car size is negatively correlated with the size of your little fella. So the bigger the car you get, the more you're making up for something lacking down below. People who drive big AMG Mercedes or Cadillac Escalades only have Action Man-like mounds, there's literally nothing there at all.

 

[Lucas]

Unfortunately, the car size is negatively correlated with the size of your little fella. So the bigger the car you get, the more you're making up for something lacking down below. People who drive big AMG Mercedes or Cadillac Escalades only have Action Man-like mounds, there's literally nothing there at all.

I can't begin to image what Jondot has down there, then!

 

[Joey D]

Unfortunately, the car size is negatively correlated with the size of your little fella. So the bigger the car you get, the more you're making up for something lacking down below. People who drive big AMG Mercedes or Cadillac Escalades only have Action Man-like mounds, there's literally nothing there at all.

*Look outside at his car*



===

Really though I do agree, typically when you see someone driving around in some huge vehicle they are compensating for something. It might not be that they are small in the trousers but they could have other things they need to make up for.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Really though I do agree, typically when you see someone driving around in some huge vehicle they are compensating for something. It might not be that they are small in the trousers but they could have other things they need to make up for.

It depends on your definition of 'huge' but maybe they just like taking advantage of the benefits bigger cars can offer? maybe? Or, of course it could be that as the owner of a little car you just like to assume your better than other people..

.. not having a dig, bit it simply is one of the most ridiculous generalisations there is!

FTR, and I thought this was quite stunning...

My car (a 1983 E28 BMW 520i) is 4620mm×1700mm×1415mm and weighs 1260kg unladen.

That's narrower, lower and lighter than a new Ford newKa... I guess modern super mini's ain't that mini!

Source.. my handbook and http://www.ford.co.uk/Cars/NewKa/BrochurePricesSpecifications

 

[Joey D]

Right, I think I'm better than others because I drive a small car. Try getting your facts in order before making assumptions like that, especially since you just tried to call me on the same exact thing. A bit of a pot calling the kettle black is it not?

And where did I say all big vehicle owners are like that? I said that is typically the case, not always the case.

And I'm sorry if you drive around in something like this, I'm going to question your motives for doing so. A big 4X4 Excursion with a massive lift on it and never goes off road (nor could it).

 

[Radracing]

Intresting developements for the resent poll that closed on the Hyundai Genesis Coupe.
I would think Rhys Millen would be able to make a cool car out of a not so cool car company.

Rhys Millen Racing building midengine Hyundai Genesis Coupe
by Antuan Goodwin 2 comments


The biggest change lies under the hood, err, under the rear hatch.

(Credit: Hyundai/Rhys Millen Racing)

At the 2008 SEMA Show, Rhys Millen Racing (RMR) massaged one of the first available Hyundai Genesis Coupes into a wild, wide-bodied racer with a huge turbo and some crazy aero. For 2009, RMR plans to raise the bar with its RM460--a midengine, V-8-powered Genesis Coupe.

RMR started by yanking out the Coupe's stock 2.0T engine, as well as the rather useless back seats. After a good deal of bending, fabricating, and welding, the new engine bay (located just behind the driver's seat) was ready for the RM460's new ticker. Rather than reusing the stock I-4 or V-6 engines, RMR chose to use Hyundai's 4.6-liter Tau V-8, an engine that typically makes its home beneath the hood of Hyundai's other Genesis.

In stock form, the Tau V-8 produces 375-horsepower. RMR managed to coax about 125 more grin-inducing ponies out of the power plant, for a total of around 500 horsepower.

The Hyundai Genesis Coupe goes under the knife at RMR.

(Credit: Hyundai/Rhys Millen Racing)
Torque still reaches the road through the rear wheels, but now it flows through a Mendeola five-speed sequential automatic transmission.

The mods don't stop at the power train. The rest of the chassis has been stiffened to accommodate the new engine configuration and the suspension, wheels, tires, and braking system have been buffed up to make sure the RM460 Genesis turns and stops as well as it accelerates.

If the custom carbon fiber and glass hatch and V-8 rumble don't tip you off that this is no ordinary Genesis, perhaps the RMR Signature bodykit, Sparco seats, and Alcantara interior trim will cause you to take notice.

We'll be bringing you live shots and more info on the RM460 as part of our coverage of the 2009 SEMA Show. So, stay tuned.

 

[Jondot]

It depends on your definition of 'huge' but maybe they just like taking advantage of the benefits bigger cars can offer? maybe? Or, of course it could be that as the owner of a little car you just like to assume your better than other people..

.. not having a dig, bit it simply is one of the most ridiculous generalisations there is!

FTR, and I thought this was quite stunning...

My car (a 1983 E28 BMW 520i) is 4620mm×1700mm×1415mm and weighs 1260kg unladen.

That's narrower, lower and lighter than a new Ford newKa... I guess modern super mini's ain't that mini!

Source.. my handbook and http://www.ford.co.uk/Cars/NewKa/BrochurePricesSpecifications

For someone that thinks the car and manhood size correlation is a 'ridiculous generalisation', you sure are going a long way to prove that you don't own a huge car...

 

[MatskiMonk]

For someone that thinks the car and manhood size correlation is a 'ridiculous generalisation', you sure are going a long way to prove that you don't own a huge car...

That part was genuinely a shock to me! I got out my handbook to quote my cars dimensions and ask what people would conclude about me from the simple size of my car, but when I put them in context it was startling!

Right, I think I'm better than others because I drive a small car. Try getting your facts in order before making assumptions like that, especially since you just tried to call me on the same exact thing. A bit of a pot calling the kettle black is it not?

And where did I say all big vehicle owners are like that? I said that is typically the case, not always the case.

And I'm sorry if you drive around in something like this, I'm going to question your motives for doing so. A big 4X4 Excursion with a massive lift on it and never goes off road (nor could it).

Okay... where did I accuse YOU of accusing ALL big car owners of having such a syndrome ... easy I didn't!, I also said, IT COULD BE not IT IS..., I also said I wasn't have a dig -- because I didn't want you to take it personally... I was rather hoping you'd realise how irratating such statements can be... and understand my point of view of someone just defending peoples right to choice without being labelled as inadequate in some way.

BTW: you can question anybodies motives for buying the car they buy, but you have no authority to pass judgement on it!

 

[Jondot]

That part was genuinely a shock to me! I got out my handbook to quote my cars dimensions and ask what people would conclude about me from the simple size of my car, but when I put them in context it was startling!

Actually I'll concede that it was a bit of a surprise to me too. Although I did just look it up and 1200kg is the gross weight for the Ka. Unladen it's 940.

Thought something wasn't right there... My old 1.6 weighs in the 900s, so I was beginning to wonder what Ford had stuffed the new 1.2 with to make it 300 kilos heavier

 

[homeforsummer]

It depends on your definition of 'huge' but maybe they just like taking advantage of the benefits bigger cars can offer? maybe? Or, of course it could be that as the owner of a little car you just like to assume your better than other people..

.. not having a dig, bit it simply is one of the most ridiculous generalisations there is!

Indeed it is I'm well aware of that, and I'm sure it's unfair on a large majority of owners who have a big car because they need it - I for one wouldn't really want to ferry a family around in a supermini, even though it's technically possible.

I brought up the generalisation though as it's also no less ridiculous than the "bigger is better" attitude when it comes to cars, and for those who assume that a small car is rubbish automatically because it's small (I've nothing wrong with people disliking small or less powerful cars, but decreeing that they're rubbish because they're small or not very powerful is a big pile of horse manure).

It's just another part of an automotive debate that will never really be resolved - people with big cars like to assume that all small cars are rubbish, people with small cars retort by insulting their manhood. It brings a nice balance to the world

 

[///M-Spec]

I've thought about this for a little bit and have come to this conclusion: the way I see it, there are two kinds of cool.

There is what I call "personal cool" or "Type A Cool" if you'll pardon a silly term. It is what is cool to you, without any consideration for what the valet attendant, potential dates, passer bys on the road, old friends at your high school reunion or your mom might think of you or your ride. "Personal cool" is based on your own values, outlook or tastes and are wholly subjective.

What is my personal cool? Cars that are exemplary at what they do, executed with honestly and integrity and go about their business with passion and a single minded purpose are cool to me. Thus, cars such as the Ford Taurus SHO --which GTP has relegated to the 'uncool' side of the wall-- I would personally consider cool.

Now. Does that mean if I go cruising down Ocean Drive in South Beach, Miami in a 1985 SHO, that I would consider myself to be perceived as looking cool? No. I would expect to look like a total dork to 99 out of 100 people.

The other side of cool, the Type B if you will, is "socially cool". The coolness not determined by you, but by everyone else around you. Not your judgement, but your neighbor's. Not your taste, but the guy next to you. This is the cool that is determined by the law of averages. Reduced to the lowest common denominator. It is cool as designated by committee.

Which to me, is not cool at all.

Let me paraphrase P.J. O'Rourke from the late '80s for a moment when talking about things that are decided by majority rule; every pair of pants would be blue jeans. Every meal would be pizza. And because women are the majority of the population, we would all be married to Mel Gibson.

When this whole Cool Wall thing started, I was accused of "not getting it". This is probably true. That's because I was going by my own definition of coolness, not "how cool would the rest of the planet see you when you drive this car". This probably explains why I've had a series of BMWs --good cars that are perceived to be driven by total pricks --because while I know how people perceive a BMW owner, I couldn't be arsed to care. Maybe that makes a prick. I dunno.

I would encourage people who vote in the polls to be pricks and go with what THEY consider cool. Not what your cousin's totally hot roommate and her three friends might consider cool.


M

 

[homeforsummer]

Or, there are those of us that are realists and we realise that there are cars that we like that are still uncool.

Is not "our own personal opinion on what is cool" not just "something we like"?

My old Fiesta was "cool" to me. It was my first car. It gave me freedom. It drove really well. It took me and my mates to various different places. It never missed a beat. I think all of those things are pretty cool in a sort of wider-picture perspective. But was it a cool car? Really? Hell no.

I believe that you have to consider the opinions of others when deciding on something like coolness. If you did everything in life by your own decision you'd never get anywhere because at some points in your life you have to take action that will have been influenced by somebody else.

To put it another way, if everyone had their own definition of cool and only their own definition of cool, you'd never had social interaction. Everyone would be too far up their own backside to care about what anyone else liked.

Or in other words, people driving around in convertible BMW M3s thinking (or maybe even knowing, to themselves and only themselves) they're cool are exactly why they really aren't cool.

 

[Jim Prower]

And I'm sorry if you drive around in something like this, I'm going to question your motives for doing so. A big 4X4 Excursion with a massive lift on it and never goes off road (nor could it).

I'm sorry for the OT...but what a waste of those gas shocks. Same sort you see under a monster truck, if i'm not mistaken...and yet he still has leaves beneath. Chrome leaves.

 

[///M-Spec]

I can't be sure, but was your post a response to mine, HFS?


M

 

[homeforsummer]

I can't be sure, but was your post a response to mine, HFS?

Yup. I'm just disagreeing that deciding coolness based solely on your opinions is really that cool. Sometimes it's nice to have the opinions of others - hell, if we were all too self-centred over our own opinions, none of us would have any friends... I believe you have to take others' views into account with regard to things as subjective as coolness.

I'd argue that "our own view on what's cool" is simply "something we like". And stuff we like isn't always cool.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Actually I'll concede that it was a bit of a surprise to me too. Although I did just look it up and 1200kg is the gross weight for the Ka. Unladen it's 940.

Thought something wasn't right there... My old 1.6 weighs in the 900s, so I was beginning to wonder what Ford had stuffed the new 1.2 with to make it 300 kilos heavier

Ah to be fair, I din't read the Ka brochure too carefully.. the ready to drive, full tank, etc. weight of my 5 series was to hand, but I didn't seem able to find a reliable source for the equivalent weight of the Ka.. other than the one figure quoted on Fords ebrochure, to be fair even Gross weight is an ambiguous term unless it clearly states maximum, or limit!

l

 

[///M-Spec]

Or, there are those of us that are realists and we realise that there are cars that we like that are still uncool.

Is not "our own personal opinion on what is cool" not just "something we like"?

My old Fiesta was "cool" to me. It was my first car. It gave me freedom. It drove really well. It took me and my mates to various different places. It never missed a beat. I think all of those things are pretty cool in a sort of wider-picture perspective. But was it a cool car? Really? Hell no.

I believe that you have to consider the opinions of others when deciding on something like coolness. If you did everything in life by your own decision you'd never get anywhere because at some points in your life you have to take action that will have been influenced by somebody else.

To put it another way, if everyone had their own definition of cool and only their own definition of cool, you'd never had social interaction. Everyone would be too far up their own backside to care about what anyone else liked.

Or in other words, people driving around in convertible BMW M3s thinking (or maybe even knowing, to themselves and only themselves) they're cool are exactly why they really aren't cool.

Choosing to allow other people's opinions to influence your own is a personal choice. In this context, you choose to allow it. In this context, I choose not to. In life, there are an infinite number of contexts.

If you were a doctor and I was your patient, I'll most likely take your opinion on whether or not I should be anesthetized for my open heart surgery under, um, strong advisement. But if I were at an ice cream store and you were behind the counter, I don't really want to know what flavor YOU like, unless I were treating you to some.

I believe that in matters of taste and anesthetics (as "coolness" is no doubt part of), one should make their own decisions. Does this mean I care nothing about the opinions of others? No. My wife's opinion on a great many matters is important to me. I also have many friends whose expertise on numerous subjects, ranging from finance to health I value greatly. The thing these people have in common though, is they have proven to me their opinion is worth valuing.

But should I consider the opinion of some random person on the street (or the internets) whether or not I should consider XYZ car 'cool' or not? Nope. Why should I?

It is my firm belief that just because anyone can have an opinion, doesn't make that opinion worth anything to everyone else. I respect your right to have an opinion. But I don't have to respect the opinion itself.

And no. Equating "I like it" to "I think it's cool" is an oversimplification. I like my Audi. Sometimes I even love my Audi. But I don't think it's cool. Based on my own criteria, it's far too compromised a car to be "single-minded" in it's approach. But it does everything I need it to do at a level which satisfies me, so therefore, I like it.

Are all squares rectangles? Yes.

Are all rectangles squares? No.

Do I like all cars that I think are cool? Yes.

Do I think all cars I like are cool? No.

I did think my M Roadster was a pretty cool car though. I guess that makes me uncool or something. Honestly, I can't be arsed to care about that either.

As for the "there won't be social interaction if everyone had their own view on what is cool": I have no idea why you would draw this conclusion. I think you're making too many assumptions, as you did with the "anything I like is cool" bit.

Not sure what the M3 driver has to do with this either, but I think I can clearly delineate our philosophical differences in this way: you think the M3 driver should care what people think of him. I ask why he should care what anyone thinks of him.

BTW, I find your characterization of yourself as a "realist" based on your opinion as dubious. It implies those who do not see things your way as out of touch with reality, which I find highly presumptive and more than a little condescending. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, so I'll presume you didn't consciously mean it in that way.

Yup. I'm just disagreeing that deciding coolness based solely on your opinions is really that cool. Sometimes it's nice to have the opinions of others - hell, if we were all too self-centred over our own opinions, none of us would have any friends... I believe you have to take others' views into account with regard to things as subjective as coolness.

I didn't say it was cool.

I said allowing the opinions of others dictate or even unduly influence your own opinion is uncool. How can anyone who worries too much about what other people think be cool?


M

 

[niky]

Since, I've been quoted a couple of times in this thread...

Why do you not have to qualify why AT cars are uncool, but yet you expect me to quantify an acceleration or speed at which a car is slow (or not).. yes there are slower cars than the SportKa, but then there are slower cars than the Ford Model T.... and for the record, my full post was as follows - I hope you can see that it's slightly under-whelming performance was not my main objection...

I do qualify. I think, personally, that torque-converter automatics are uncool. I've voted cars cool despite this, as the coolness of a car is not just in the transmission, but that's just me.

To Famine, according to his statistics-based coolness meter, a Hyundai is uncool.

In both of these cases, the delineation is clear. A car either has a torque-converter type automatic or it doesn't. There's no in-between. A car is either a Hyundai or is not (so far...).

Neither opinion needs further clarification, since both opinions are based on fairly objective metrics.

You can complain that a car is slow, based on objective metrics, compared to other cars of the same class and time period. If you simply say slow, slow compared to what? If you say slower than other cars in the same class and price range in terms of acceleration and track times... then that's a clearly defined argument.

And again... FWD... if you vote against FWD simply because you don't like it. Fine. If you vote against it due to some imagined inadequacy compared to RWD cars of the same class and time frame... you'll have to back it up.

By the way... I wasn't picking on you personally... I was talking about arguments in other threads.

I just don't want to be mis-understood, 's all.

For the record though, I've given up posting reasons to back up my votes, I just vote and keep my gob shut... since I found myself arguing with Famine about letters and numbers making cars un-cool or not, I found my self questioning, is there really any point discussing this! - if GTP call-wall threads could be hooked up to generate electricity - then I suspect we'd have a perpetual motion machine on our hands, 'cos they will just keeeep going round and around forever!

All the more reason to participate.

What makes a cool/un-cool car for me? Well... People make blanket statements that truly defy logic sometimes, it can't be cool if it's a Ferrari, it can't be cool if you have to explain it, it can't be cool if it requires a chassis designation to identify, it can't be cool if it's a supercar.... Heck I'm guilty of it myself.. ("Added to that my inherant dislike for European Ford products, my ingrained dislike for hatch backs, and my inbuilt aversion to FWD...")... IMO a car is cool if it has something that overrides all the other stuff you don't like about it... in the case of the SportKa, there was nothing I liked about it.. but some cars, they can be bad, ugly, slow, even sometimes they can be FWD <joke> and they can still be cool, because there's something else about them that is just sooo much better than all the bad stuff.

My two cents, going back to a vow of silence now!

And... I agree with you, on that part. As long as we're talking personal coolness, and not Famine's statistical coolness.

Both of which, note, are equally valid, as statistical coolness is measured by the counting of all these personal coolness votes. Can't accurately calculate statistical coolness if people of dissenting opinions don't vote at all.