At 01:38 AM 8/19/97 -0400, you wrote:
> But when your emotions cloud your vision of the
>world, you've lost something. I think that is what
>has happened here.
>-- -
>Trevor Boicey
Ah, but Trevor, the same can be said about yourself and your defense of
modern iron. Let me be the first to acknowledge that modern cars are
generally safer, and much more efficient. But from the 70s on they began to
look more and more alike because form was beginning to follow function
(stoopid Germans) and that sort of evolutionary process was bound to begin
producing 'like' results in that passanger cars became boxes and sports cars
became wedges. The process continued with the rounding of corners into the
teardrop shapes of today. . . or of EX181 (stoopid MG?). The NSX, last of
the Nissan Zs, and the Mitsibushi whatever look far more alike than did the
MGB, TR6 and Fiat spider...and if you think not -- check your quote above.
Homogenization has been the price of progress, but change is in the air!
Chrysler's specialty products, the Elise, that weirdness coming from Fiat.
And I for one hope that quickly and cheaply electric cars become the wave of
transportation. . .just maybe smog laws will become less important as
relates to the automobile and then small production sportscar companies such
as existed in days gone by might begin to emerge again.
Working on cars today is more difficult than working on my Land-Rover or
MG, but not that much more so than my Jensen. . .excepting fuel injection
and computer hookups. Note, I said more difficult, not impossible. I think
the explosion of low-riders/neon lighted/funky-wheeled rides is partly due
to the fact that it represents the only self expression regulations leave a
young owner of a young car -- whatever their taste, they are defying
homgenization. Good for them. . .I think.
Michael, New Bern, NC
|