Friday Evening Question #7: Cars That Look All Wrong for the Part

"JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7" (jayzayeighty) 01/31/2014 at 23:45 • Filed to: friday evening question, feq

0

35

Everyone loves a good sleeper—well, maybe not everyone—but any decent person does (decent people being automotive enthusiasts). Others instead prefer a car that leads the buyer to believe that it is a better performer than it really is, allowing someone to own a flashy-looking car despite having shallow pockets. When designing a car, it is generally thought best to have its styling be !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . However, someone buying an inexpensive, reliable, economical car doesn't want their car to scream cheap and boring . Anyone would prefer styling that says the opposite; something that brings up positive feelings in others as well as confidence in his/herself.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

(Disclaimer: buckle up for the ride if you choose to read the writeup for this rambling FEQ, folks. It's a comparatively long one and especially mundane. Also, please don't take "look all wrong" as a negative thing. It can be as good as it can be bad.)

In reality, the idea that a car's styling should represent the car itself is far from being 100% true. Saying such a thing may be advantageous from an advertising standpoint, but really should not be followed when it comes to executing the design. The car's appearance should represent the target demographic itself. An soft-spoken, inconspicuous business executive in the 70s was not looking for a 911 or LS6 Corvette. They want their car to emanate an air of solidity and power, while having an understated presence and stealthy attitude—a car that embodied the quote, "Speak softly and carry a big stick." It must be a car that says about the person what they want people to think about them; an extension of that person. Really, our taste in cars is largely an extension of our own persona. Of course, the car must fit one's taste. We'll say the wealthy person in the 60s liked to go fast. Therefore, the aforementioned hypothetical person would want something like a 300SEL 6.3.

Behind the 300SEL 6.3 (and its 450SEL 6.9 successor which was less of a pioneer) was a fantastic formula. For decades prior to the car, people had loved the "big engine, little car" concept. It followed the idea of more is more . However, when you had to be an adult and put the toys away, more is more became something more like more is no more . Well, I'd imagine that when you had stacks of cash you didn't like that change. You had to have a mature person's car, now—but by no means did you want to compromise in the speed department! You had the money for a fast car that was big and cushy at the same time. Sacrifices were for paupers. Hence, the superluxobarge: faster than a speeding bullet, bigger than a middling midsize. No compromises, bitch.

However, it's not just the wealthy who get tired of sacrificing x bragging right for y. That's where we come into the "(insert category here) bargains" department. Performance bargain? Mustang. Fun bargain? Miata. Styling bargain? Volkswagen. Luxury appointments bargain? Fuck if I know—I never cared. Anyone can get a Camry and pay reasonable money for all-round good , and almost anyone does. Look down the street and tell me differently. Sure, there are plenty of cars that are derivatives of the Camry idea; however, it's a popular item just about anywhere. The Camry's styling definitely represents the car itself: satisfactory, sufficient, logical, un-bothersome, and without quirk. But who's to say your reliable, satisfactory, and logical economy car can't have a little more appeal? Maybe take trade your logic points in for some satisfaction. One (rather poor) example of what you're left with is the Civic (yes, Civic) Del Sol. Far less logical and far more bothersome, with 90s quirky zaniness pizzazz to boot!

There are plenty of examples of these two types of cars, as they have been produced up to this very day. So, for the official FEQ:

Which cars' appearances are misleading in their representation of the car's purpose or performance?

Questions of Friday Evenings past (there wasn't one last Friday):

#6: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

#5: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

#4: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

#3: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

#2: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

#1: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Brian Silvestro > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 18:01

0

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > Brian Silvestro 01/31/2014 at 18:03

0

So true. Aussies are experts in this area.

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > Brian Silvestro 01/31/2014 at 18:04

0

that is the worst split gril thing

Brian Silvestro > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 18:04

0

I want that car sooo bad. It's just so out of reach it's not even funny.

Brian Silvestro > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles 01/31/2014 at 18:05

0

It would look better (and more aggressive) if the middle silver splitting the grilles wasn't there.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 18:06

1

1992 Crown Victoria Touring Sedan with the "Handling and Performance" package, better than the cop cars of the time.

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > Brian Silvestro 01/31/2014 at 18:06

0

It is the forbidden fruit of the forbidden fruit for us. I just want to park my Daihatsu in the back of my sports car... is that too much to ask?

dogisbadob > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 18:07

1

Easy.

All the modern sedans with stubby-ass trunks that should really be hatchbacks. And the subcompact class is the worst.

Brian Silvestro > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 18:07

1

Just looked it up, it is, in fact, too much.

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/31/2014 at 18:08

1

I'd totally forgotten about this. I would want one so badly... and with so many 5 speeds from Foxbodies out there for swapping in, it would be a crime to not make a manual transmission one of these.

TheBaron2112 > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 18:09

0

I take issue with using a Fiesta ST as the lead image.

The FiST is perfect in every way, looks-wise and performance-wise.

BlazinAce - Doctor of Internal Combustion > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 18:10

1

Appearance and name both. I've put a lot of tire rubber to these on my morning way to work/school, all of them belonging to colleagues who have no idea how a current model called Veloster can be slower than a Fiat piece-o-junk from the 90's.

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > TheBaron2112 01/31/2014 at 18:11

0

So is the 300SEL 6.3. No need to take offense! I concur that the Fiesta ST is a fantastic, extraordinary car.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 18:13

1

T-5 swaps should happen.

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/31/2014 at 18:21

1

How about a 351-powered LTD Crown Vic on a Handling and Performance package-equipped car's chassis with a T-5 and Foxbody Mustang GT seats along with some 351 goodies from the Mach 1 for better output?

#UltimatePantherstang

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 18:24

1

offroadkarter > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/31/2014 at 18:30

1

No, T-5's are garbage

T-45 and T-3650 swaps happen all the time. And now a bolt in (mostly) T-56 swap kit is available.

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/31/2014 at 18:33

1

I remember posting a 5MT Crown Victoria like that a while back here, thinking it would get plenty of attention. While no one cared then, Offroadkarter somehow got his post about one FP'd and got like 100,000 views on his post :P

A Cobra motor is especially choice. That must be a blast.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > offroadkarter 01/31/2014 at 18:35

0

You can always rebuild a T-5 to be better, but at that price, the T-65s become widely available, hell even a TKO might work.

offroadkarter > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 01/31/2014 at 18:36

1

Someone I know online has a world class T-5 in his 89 box crown vic, after his original T-5 blew the fuck up. The world class is only rated for around 300ft/lbs tq at the crank IIRC.

The TKO-600 is beast, but its not as smooth as the T-45 or T-3650, which in themselves aren't the strongest transmissions either but they are certainly stronger than a T-5.

I am going to be doing the T-56 swap when I have 5-6 grand to blow on this.

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > Brian Silvestro 01/31/2014 at 18:37

0

Ha! You've always been the bearer of bad news when I ask, "is it too much to ask?"

Brian Silvestro > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 18:40

1

Is it weird that I have to look it up every time? I keep forgetting.

DeltawingGothamDeserves > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 18:49

0

*yawn*

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > DeltawingGothamDeserves 01/31/2014 at 18:59

1

You should probably sit down, as I have some troubling news.

Your photo was Kinja'd.

I'm so sorry for that this extremely rare problem affected you.

Pitchblende > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 19:01

1

I'm a fun and sporty coupé, really!

I'm just another boring and slow rep-mobile, honest!

DeltawingGothamDeserves > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 19:03

1

Was supposed to be a Holden Monaro:

pdthedeuce > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 22:10

0

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > pdthedeuce 01/31/2014 at 22:12

1

Good one! I imagine that, as an uninformed person, I would be pretty disappointed driving the Regatta. Seeing them as a kid, they looked like fun cars.

DeltawingGothamDeserves > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 01/31/2014 at 23:45

1

Saw one today and thought about throwing it through some cones...

Forgetful > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 02/01/2014 at 00:15

1

Super widebody for homologation... Stock drivetrain. 300hp.

syaieya > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 02/01/2014 at 00:41

1

Alex, I'm gonna say "What is AMG?"

PetarVN, GLI Guy, now with stupid power > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 02/01/2014 at 01:28

1

If we're gonna talk about misleading looks, then we're gonna have to include these two!

The Grand prix ssei is, in my eyes, the ultimate 90's sleeper. There is only one that can rival it, and that is it's big brother, The Regal GS!

Both looked like your dad's or grandpas car. Both were relatively cheap. But most importantly, both had a heart of gold, the 3800 series II supercharged.

The buick could make the 0-60 sprint in 6.6 seconds. This is actually pretty decent even by today's standards! and remember, the Pontiac version of this car was twenty years old last year! It was an American rocketship, with it's 240hp/280ft-lbs powerplant. Also of note is that the engines were very underrated, and were said to be actually making closer to 270hp!

Every time I see one of these on autotrader (for about $3-$5K) I want to buy it, but I just can't do it!

NoahthePorscheGuy > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 02/07/2014 at 21:39

0

Yes. Asshole.

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > NoahthePorscheGuy 02/07/2014 at 21:41

2

Whoa, it was a compliment for its sleeper status and performance that is not shown through stupid styling decisions!

NoahthePorscheGuy > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 02/07/2014 at 22:08

0

I know, i just didn't feel like reading when i saw the pic