Quote:
Originally Posted by shovel
Pretty much any time I see a website/editorial/opinion/whatever listing "WORST (things) EVAR!!!" I find myself disagreeing, but that's normal. It's just entertainment.
Calling something "WORST!" or "UGLIEST!" when it's clearly built to purpose seems like a weak argument. There's a class of cars that exist almost exclusively to look good - or at least to convey an elegance of form and function. On the other end there are function first cars - like how HMMWV's are more-or-less excused for their chunky appearance because they have a job to do, in my eyes the same applies to most functional cars. You can call the Yugo GVL ugly, but its job was to be the cheapest car on the road, it did that job and really there was nothing particularly ghastly about its appearance.
They listed this thing as one of the "WORST" ever...
 It's a minivan, its job is to fit 7 adults and also fit in an ordinary garage and be easy to park and navigate.. how else would you have it look?
I think a certain male anatomical feature is ugly, doesn't mean I mind using mine.  |
I always liked the looks of that gen Kia van. Then again I really liked my '90 Plymouth Voyager (turbo) also.