My How You Have Grown

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by niky

And, adjusted for inflation, you get MORE car for your money with the 2017 Civic than you did with the 1997 Accord.

Depends on what exactly you mean by more. In this case, I think "less is more" applies. It's rather like adding 100 lbs to your Sports Illustrated swimsuit model or Chippendale dancer - not something most of us would think of as an improvement :-)

[Xist]

100 pounds of clothing? That seems excessive.

[seifrob]

This comes a bit late, but still:
from fiat 500 article at driving.ca:


and from mini article at motoringfile.com:

[RedDevil]

Would be tough to reverse-park that Mini towards the other Mini, as you would not be able to see it!

But these graphs don't exactly show the growth of cars per se. Just the inflation of cars bearing a certain type name.

I had an '85 Civic. When I got a lift in an older Civic that was a completely different car.
Then I got aboard an '82 Accord I recognised a lot from my car.

Honda did not increase the size of the Civic at that time.
They downsized (and seriously restyled) the Accord and rebadged it Civic.

Volkswagen's Golf used to be their smallest car just as the Beetle it replaced.
Then they introduced the Polo to have a smaller car.
The current Polo is already a lot bigger than the original Golf, so they introduced even smaller cars like the Lupo, which got replaced by the Brazilian Fox and even smaller Up!.

So as the models grow, smaller ones are introduced to fill the void their growth creates.

Honda's Accord has all but outgrown the Dutch market and is rarely sold. The sub-Civic Jazz (Fit) may be their best seller here. The Legend is long gone and forgotten.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

So as the models grow, smaller ones are introduced to fill the void their growth creates.

Except that the new "small" models are still bigger than the original model, E.g. the first generation ('70s) Civic: 146.9 x 59.25 x 52.25 inches, 1,500 lbs (hatchback), vs the Fit: 157.4 x 65.9 x 60.0 inches, 2,390 lb.

[freebeard]

This one tells the story. Even though people may have turned into indistinct blobs of protoplasm, our skeletal structure is still the same. So things like the H-point and sight lines are unchanged.

I still think the VW Beetle is right-sized for humans.

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

Except that the new "small" models are still bigger than the original model, E.g. the first generation ('70s) Civic: 146.9 x 59.25 x 52.25 inches, 1,500 lbs (hatchback), vs the Fit: 157.4 x 65.9 x 60.0 inches, 2,390 lb.

Yes, because if the new small cars were built like the old ones they would not be allowed on the road.
Also our expectations have changed. Even in a 'cheap' car we want A/C, stereo, power windows, adjustable seats with headrests, power to get to 100 mph, ...

[freebeard]

Like this?



Real race economy cars don't have doors.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

Also our expectations have changed. Even in a 'cheap' car we want A/C, stereo, power windows, adjustable seats with headrests, power to get to 100 mph, ...

I'd be surprised if a modern stereo (not "infotainment" system*) isn't lighter than a '70s radio, even without the 8-track tape player. Put one in the Miata a couple of months ago: weighs about a pound, and instead of a box of 8-track or cassette tapes, or even CDs, I can put hundreds of disks worth of audio on something the size of my thumbnail.

Same applies to most of the rest. Given modern materials & engineering, just about everything could be made both lighter & stronger. Consider the Insight: it can get to 100 mph (at least if you don't have a headwind) using an engine that I can lift with one hand. (128 lbs per Insight Central)

*FTM, what does one of those "infotainment" systems do that can't be done by your average tablet, weighing in at a pound or two?

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Like this?

More like this: Welcome to ArielAtom.com