jamesqf -
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
Huh? The CRX is most definitely not a fat-butted car. It has a definite taper from the doors back. And, being a hatchback, it doesn't really even have a trunk - unless you count the under-floor spare tire space as such.
|
In some ways I think you could argue that the CRX is "all butt".
I guess I'm using trunk and hatchback interchangeably. In both cases, the "
interior volume behind the passengers for the purpose of cargo" applies. My POV is practicality, so I am less worried about the semantics. Before the CRX, a 2-seat sports car was not "practical". The CRX broke that rule by essentially cutting the car off at a point where other designers would have extended the car. A normal solution would have eschewed a 2 seat car in favor of a 2+2, creating a bigger car and lower MPG. Here is what the CRX might have looked like if it was more conventional :
Arguably not tooooo different from a Nissan 240SX :
In terms of CRX DNA, I think that the rear vertical window, while not originated by the CRX, became a "CRX trademark" that made its way into other cars like the Prius, Insight, MB C230 hatchback, Mazda MX-3, and Volt. Having this window makes it easier to "cutoff" the car at a certain point while maintaining rear visibility.
I *love* the design of the CRX, but there are people out there that made fun of it over the years. I remember someone talking about how they thought the CRX looked like it came out of the factory with a built-in rear end collision.
CarloSW2