Exner

[bluefury361]

Santa I NEED that.

WAIT.........! You don't like the excess styling of the forward look cars, but you like this Toro...... which is an exersize in excess, sans the"stabilizers", and follows most of Exners styling ques....?
Now your contradicting.

 

[70_NPORT]

Santa I NEED that.

WAIT.........! You don't like the excess styling of the forward look cars, but you like this Toro...... which is an exersize in excess, sans the"stabilizers", and follows most of Exners styling ques....?
Now your contradicting.

Not sure I follow.... I see BIG differences. Sure even the Toro STILL has a few elements I'd leave on the dwg board (perfection has yet to be achieved).....but when compared to Exner era cars...huge differences...close to a paradigm change between the two I believe.

 

[70_NPORT]

Other manufactures got the message as well.....more or less

 

[70_NPORT]

Example of the fuselage cues living on into the modern era.......(not the only example of course, but a very visible one)

 

[70_NPORT]

So basically imo we can see how less can actually be more. Unnecessary encumbrances are, unnecessary.

 

[Pete Kaczmarski]

I like both the '66 Toro and the '59 Imperial, that is why I own both. The styling of the Toro is more refined and the Imp is way over the top. At car shows the Imp gets more attention.

 

[commando1]

I like both the '66 Toro and the '59 Imperial, that is why I own both. The styling of the Toro is more refined and the Imp is way over the top. At car shows the Imp gets more attention.

View attachment 107658

That's a Double You Suck if I ever heard one....

 

[70_NPORT]

It doesnt surprise me that the imperial gets more attention.

 

[cantflip]

Yup. Absolutely nothing. Beautiful.

So...

Hates fins...

Want a car you couldn't find your *** in the rear view mirror in daylight...

Got it.

 

[70_NPORT]

well again I cant say im surprised.

 

[Pete Kaczmarski]

That's a Double You Suck if I ever heard one....

I really would like to see more on your New Yorker (pictured) is there a thread on this? If not please start one.

 

[Dobalovr]

I'm right brained.

That makes so much sense to me now....

 

[commando1]

I really would like to see more on your New Yorker (pictured) is there a thread on this? If not please start one.

I'm flattered. lol Seriously. Umm, no thread devoted to it. I don't think it justfies a thread in all honesty. There's some incredible cars focussed on here that just blow me away. The Critter SFGT saga was a book I couldn't put down. Sad ending tho. He finished it.
Alan's CHP car.
Vodka's Imperial.
Nick's Fury.
And dozens of others.

 

[67-Fury]

The 57 Plymouth Ad said "Suddenly, It's 1960!" Future, Style, Vision, Engineering sold these cars. Now, Having cars Driven By Hamsters is what People want.

I dont think America has made a Very Stylish car in a long time. Imagination, Creativity and having a Innate sense of Taste, Have all Disappeared from Our Culture.

 

[70_NPORT]

The 57 Plymouth Ad said "Suddenly, It's 1960!" Future, Style, Vision, Engineering sold these cars. Now, Having cars Driven By Hamsters is what People want.

View attachment 107701

I dont think America has made a Very Stylish car in a long time. Imagination, Creativity and having a Innate sense of Taste, Have all Disappeared from Our Culture.

Ive seen that ad, that was a pretty big statement...and youve nailed it.....the big three were all about "styling" in those days. Damn amazing what they could get away with.
Yeh I dont go for gerbil cars either, but ya gotta admit theres more thought for function in that car than the "suddenly its 1960" cars. But people have changed since as well, so it all works out in the wash IMO.

 

[cantflip]

Ive seen that ad, that was a pretty big statement...and youve nailed it.....the big three were all about "styling" in those days. Damn amazing what they could get away with.
Yeh I dont go for gerbil cars either, but ya gotta admit theres more thought for function in that car than the "suddenly its 1960" cars. But people have changed since as well, so it all works out in the wash IMO.

My DD is a gmc suburban mostly because of my use of some of it's potential function. I did use the third row seat once and I have had the back folded down to haul whatever for the last 4 years (I wonder if the seats are stuck by now?). Purchased for a variety of reasons that included the ability to haul a load of 4x8 sheets. Spoiled by it's general usefulness (to me), I don't see a replacement coming anytime soon.

The "killed in action" car likely has that appeal to someone who drags around smaller junk and occasionally hauls smaller friends. I know the fuel mileage is way different, but in my commute would take a long time to make up for the cost/lack of usefulness. I first saw one of these and admired it's potential to be a practical small hauler.

But I think the looks of it are another kind of birth control.

This is so damned sexy I would trade the missus in for it...

Of course if no one's going to take me up on the offer, don't you dare tell on me for making it...

 

[70_NPORT]

But I think the looks of it are another kind of birth control.

Haha, got news for ya...if those front seats tilt backwards, there's no birth control going on there, quite the opposite...don't ask how I would know, lol.

 

[70_NPORT]

This is so damned sexy I would trade the missus in for it...

Of course if no one's going to take me up on the offer, don't you dare tell on me for making it...

My lips are sealed.

 

[bluefury361]

there's no birth control going on there.
Taken out of context, I think.
Jeff was referring to styling ques.......

 

[bluefury361]

If car buying decisions are based on only function, well .... your probably not the life of the party.
Form is what makes function marketable....