- 11,143
- Central Coast, NSW
- Com_Fox5
- EelX 5
Hey, its my already opened Parcel .Probably one of the weirdest convertibles around, in my opinion:
View attachment 1159188
I'm unsure who thought this was a good idea.
Hey, its my already opened Parcel .Probably one of the weirdest convertibles around, in my opinion:
View attachment 1159188
I'm unsure who thought this was a good idea.
Yes that's true. In a way that reminded me of what Clarkson said about convertible supercars over a decade agoSomething I have thought for a long, long time. Pretty much since day one.
Almost all convertibles look absolutely horrible. Almost all.
There are so few cars which suit the style and it's pretty much two-seater roadsters like an MG F or Mazda MX-5. Everything else is so fugly. Every time I see a convertible BMW, Audi, Aston Martin, Lamborghini, Porsche, whatever, the convertible looks so ungainly.
Frankly, I'm not sure why anyone would change the aesthetic appearance of trim on a fairly new car unless it's already worn out. Audi did used to offer different trim types but maybe not so much anymore."Blacked out" trim makes a car look cheap. Why would you want to remove the chrome/aluminium trim pieces and badges? Here's an example:View attachment 1159807
View attachment 1159808
The BMW S54 engine is better than the RB26 and 2JZ.
Mercedes EQC, VW Golf, and many more. I have to agree, it looks tacky AF.I hate the new trend of lighting extending all the way across the front and/or back of cars.
examples: Volkswagen id6, Dodge Charger
With the way legislation is going in Europe, EV's are 100% the short-term future. In the long term, things like hydrogen fuels and clean-burning synthetics are more likely to overtake EV's. But I agree there are some very cool EV's - Porsche Taycan, Audi e-tron GT, Polestar 2, amongst others.Electric cars can be very, VERY cool, but I don't think they're the future. Instead, I'm much more interested in what Porsche is doing, with fuel made from carbon capturing.
I would hope for this and that there's a better solution to come along than just simply giving cars electric motors.Electric cars can be very, VERY cool, but I don't think they're the future. Instead, I'm much more interested in what Porsche is doing, with fuel made from carbon capturing.
In the same veign, luxury SUVs - I'm looking at you Bentley, Aston Martin, Ferrari, Lamborghini - are stupid and destroy the image of a good supercar or luxury car brand. How long til we get a Bugatti or Koenigsegg SUV? I hope never.Unsure if this would fit here or "just plain ugly" thread, but extended formerly 2 row SUVs to be a three row look terrible. Without extending the wheelbase, it just looks like it crapped it's own pants.... Only two examples that really come to mind are the last generation Lexus RX350L/RX450hL and the new Land Rover Defender 130.
I get families want a third row in a popular model, but man do these look like half-assed jobs compared to purpose built extended SUVs where the wheelbase is actually different from the shorter model. I love the current Defender 110 (and 90 for it's stubbiness), but the 130 looks like an afterthought. The Lexus RXL (as I call it) does not look good when parked side by side with the shorter model as well.
What annoys me more is how many people say they "need" a 3-row SUV for two kids, but even then most smaller 3-row SUVs have an abysmal amount of space in the third row that even a small child would hate. Glad that my brother and I grew up with parents who got a minivan instead of something horribly cramped as a three row crossover of the early 2000s. My friend's mother had a first generation Toyota Highlander and the third row was absolutely awful, with no cargo room either. Then there's the other spectrum of the gargantuan full size SUVs like the Ford Expedition and Chevrolet Suburban that have the space of a minivan, but are excessively large.SUVs are stupid in general, and always seem to only have one person in them.
As much as I can "understand" it as the Porsche Cayenne complex of helping a brand survive.... I question the point of them, not for the image of the supercar/luxury brand, but the point of them. Are all these wealthy people growing their families or something? I'm sure there's lots of factors behind such decisions behind these people, but SUVs on the level of exotic cars just seems overly excessive.In the same veign, luxury SUVs - I'm looking at you Bentley, Aston Martin, Ferrari, Lamborghini - are stupid and destroy the image of a good supercar or luxury car brand. How long til we get a Bugatti or Koenigsegg SUV? I hope never.
They're 100% jumping on the bandwagon of people buying SUVs for no genuine reason other than they like them - you're up high, feel safe, and can drive like a lunatic (apparently) and people will move out of your way because you're in a big shiny SUV. Most of the time there's one person in the car, and even when the whole family are in there's way more car than they need. It's a weird market where they're really popular but hugely unnecessary on the whole. Exotic supercar brands that resort to SUVs are simply trying to boost sales and take a share of the SUV market. I mean, really, does anyone who needs an SUV really need a V12-powered Ferrari SUV? Just buy a Ferrari for fun driving and a proper SUV if you really need the thing...As much as I can "understand" it as the Porsche Cayenne complex of helping a brand survive.... I question the point of them, not for the image of the supercar/luxury brand, but the point of them. Are all these wealthy people growing their families or something? I'm sure there's lots of factors behind such decisions behind these people, but SUVs on the level of exotic cars just seems overly excessive.
Seems like it is the manufacturers wanting a cut of the pie and keeping these customers within their brand. Despite the fact these wealthy owners likely own several different brand of cars, as a marketing exec or whatever....it'd be appealing to see your loyal customer keep everything within your own brand. Range Rover has long dominated the luxury SUV market, but why not have people brag they own a Ferrari SUV along with their Ferrari supercar/sportscar. But yeah, I struggle to see that mindset when your "daily" SUV should be something different than your toys. But these folks want their cake and to eat it as well.They're 100% jumping on the bandwagon of people buying SUVs for no genuine reason other than they like them - you're up high, feel safe, and can drive like a lunatic (apparently) and people will move out of your way because you're in a big shiny SUV. Most of the time there's one person in the car, and even when the whole family are in there's way more car than they need. It's a weird market where they're really popular but hugely unnecessary on the whole. Exotic supercar brands that resort to SUVs are simply trying to boost sales and take a share of the SUV market. I mean, really, does anyone who needs an SUV really need a V12-powered Ferrari SUV? Just buy a Ferrari for fun driving and a proper SUV if you really need the thing...
I hate that my 4Runner has the third-row, but I had to take what I could get in the used market. I don't use it and will likely never use it. As soon as the kits to perform a third-row delete gets back in stock, I'm going to get one so I can remove it and use the space for a covered cargo compartment. Why anyone willingly ordered a third-row 4Runner is beyond me unless you have a family without legs.What annoys me more is how many people say they "need" a 3-row SUV for two kids, but even then most smaller 3-row SUVs have an abysmal amount of space in the third row that even a small child would hate.
I do miss the days of more midsize body-on-frame SUVs, at least smaller ones than the gigantic ones I listed earlier. Considering how our infrastructure isn't getting any better in the United States at least, I can understand why it's such a popular thing.SUVs work for families, especially if they have a kid still in a car seat. For the life of me I can't understand what car seats are designed to be so big and bulky when they could be better designed to provide just as much protection while fitting in the vehicle. My wife had a Mazda CX-5, and we had to push the front passenger seat so far up to give my son room and stay within the manufacturer's specs that it was unusable. It also made the middle seat in the rear useless as well. When it was rear-facing, it was even worse.
I like my 4Runner though, mostly because it's a body-on-frame SUV instead of a car-based unibody. It has ample towing capacity, a good 4WD system, and is structurally pretty stout. Could I get by with a car? Sure, but given that we live in the middle of nowhere and the winters in northern Michigan are brutal, I think I'm going to be pretty happy to have something with good ground clearance and proper 4WD. My Volvo S60 worked in the snow around Salt Lake, but it sat so low to the ground that anything over 6" of snow was trickier than I wanted it to be.
I do wish more companies made body-on-frame mid-sized SUVs though. I mean I'm probably always going to buy Toyota, but having competition wouldn't be a bad thing.
I hate that my 4Runner has the third-row, but I had to take what I could get in the used market. I don't use it and will likely never use it. As soon as the kits to perform a third-row delete gets back in stock, I'm going to get one so I can remove it and use the space for a covered cargo compartment. Why anyone willingly ordered a third-row 4Runner is beyond me unless you have a family without legs.