So you think there is a significant difference in cost between a few square
feet of glass vs. sheet metal on the outside of the door and
plastic/fabric/sound deadening on the inside of the door? If anything, I
think a lower beltline would lower cost.
As for vision- Where are your eyes? I suppose the lower beltline might give
you a little better vision to the rear quarters, but it is probbaly only a
minor difference. In my opinion this is strictly a styling thing. High
beltlines are "in" right now. Wait a few years and low beltlines wil be
No. It is more likely the production method that saves the cost. And to
produce a lower car that meets the crash tests could cost more. As for
'significant' cost - that would be anything over and including one penny.
"C. E. White" wrote
..... a lower beltline might give a little better vision to the
rear, but it is probably only a minor difference. In my
opinion it is strictly a styling thing. High beltlines are "in"
right now. Wait a few years and low beltlines will be back.
Jim Warman wrote:
.... the Chrysler Crossfire looks like a regurgitated Gremlin
to me... I'm not going to buy one so it doesn't matter much.
Like the Pacer, the Gremlin, the Aztec, the Avalanche and
many others, there are cars that are bone ugly, cars that
only a mother could love.... and it is all a matter of taste.
That is it: just taste. Auto stylists try to predict the trend
and deliver what they think will sell. When the chopped-top
look was a big hit among retro fans, auto makers concluded
that everyone must want the high beltline's restricted visibility.
My favorite uglification was the 1960 Plymouth. Decorated
with a large tail fin and a chrome strip angling upward over
a two-tone panel at the front wheel well, it was an instant
eyesore. The insult was made made worse by TV ads
showing the car rotating on a turntable while a smirking actor
said, "It's beautiful ... it's ahead of its time ... it's 1970 new."
Best regards to all AAFers.
I don't like proscuitto ham.... why do they keep making it?
Because people buy it..... and eat it.... Since I don't like it, I don't buy
it and I don't consider it....
How about that Chrysler Crossfire? Looks like a regurgitated Gremlin to
me..... I'm not going to buy one so it doesn't matter much.
Here-in lies a great secret to todays consumerism..... if we don't like
something, we can avoid it.... complaining , in this context, serves no
purpose (other than to highlight that we have nobody at home to talk to). If
we hope to change styling trends, we could set our goals on achieving a job
as an automotive stylist... but, at that point, we run the risk that some
critic wont like our design....
Like the Pacer, the Gremlin, the Aztec, the Avalanche and God knows how many
others, old or new..... there are cars that are bone ugly... there are cars
that only a mother could love.... and there is the odd car that is an orgasm
on wheels... and it is all a matter of taste. I've seen cars that I thought
were ugly when they were introduced.... only to find that the styling did,
indeed, "grow" on me (unfortunately, there are occasions where I did an
about face when I decide they were growing like a fungus)
Like women... one mans "curvaceous" is another mans "fat"....
Like chili... one mans "hot" is another mans "ho-hum"....
That leaves us with two truths in this life... the "c" in crap music is
silent... if that doesn't apply, there is a good chance I don't know music
when I hear it.... but I do know shit when I hear it....
This gratuitous rambling has been brought to you by one really opinionated
old bastuhd that doesn't really give a rats rosy red what anyone thinks....
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.