Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutt_78
Hmmm. You're "master Eco-modder" status makes everything you said here sound like an idiocy. If you truly cared about the "essence" of some sports car, you would drive a miata, or an 86, and you wouldn't be on a forum specifically tailored to people pushing economy to the furthest possible consumer limits. Toyota sees that economy is quickly becoming the name of the game. Thus why the supra is probably coming back (based on Toyota renewing the supra trademark last year, with the copyright only lasting till 2015) and the fact that they need a omething to compete with the new HYBRID NSX. If you want to get angry about a cars lineage being soiled, think about that for a second. A hybrid NSX. The poor mans super car getting the underpinnings of something much less... super.
Selling cars is NOT about upholding the essence of something so distant. More cars are sold in the name of PROgression, rather than REgression.
|
If car companies don't care about honoring their past, why do they create spiritual successors to their famous cars? It is important. You might not care, but there are those that do. And for people like me it's a shame to see marketing departments soil a name that represents a significant part of the companies history. Challenger, Camaro, Mustang, etc. These are all cars that stick to what the name represents. They have a loyal following of people that care about what those names mean.
Honda CRZ and Honda NSX are examples of progression in a car. In the 1990's the NSX was advanced with an aluminum body, variable valve timing, and handling unlike any production car at that time. The new NSX is going after the same thing. Technology that hasn't been seen before in a super car that is made to be daily driven. The CRZ is much different from the CRX, but anyone can see how Honda tried to recreate a CRX for modern times, with efficiency and fun in mind. They chose not to use the CRX name, but their intentions are clear.
What is not progression is taking a car Toyota intended to be a spiritual successor the the AE86, adding a couple doors and new power train. Why even call it an 86 or FR-S? When you make those changes it's a different car. I'm not saying that it would be a bad car, I'm questioning why it needs the 86 name. Call it a new name. If names don't mean anything, why use something that represents the past? If it's suppose to be progression, why not find a new name to represent the change?
I'm not going to guess how old you are, but trust me when I say that things from your past represent a lot of things. You'll continue to appreciate the movies, music, cars, and things you had when you were young as you get older. To the younger generation it seems silly, but only you know what it represents. It would be like if Metallica started selling rap albums instead of rock. Names and history have meaning, and it isn't always appropriate to change things around.