quote:
You going to discuss the point or just leave it hangin with a blank stare. It's not like we haven't been knowing this since uh, let me think, 1975.

Think about what you posted. Ford had to style the Mustang this way because all cars have to be a certain design in order to meet CAFE standards? Seriously?? Parts of that may be true...but you're insinuating that all cars will look the same in the future. Meanwhile, Dodge just updated the Challenger for 2015 and retained it's brick aerodynamics...and full size trucks are still a thing. I mean, I'm sure there is a certain design standard to be met for all cars going forward, but all cars aren't going to look the same...that's bogus

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by achenator

Member since Oct 2014

2963 posts

Posted on 11/8/14 at 12:19 pm to jordan21210

Ford designed the new Mustang to be a world car. The design has to be small enough and aesthetically pleasing as well and meet front impact standards around the world.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Redbone

my castle

Member since Sep 2012

18904 posts

Posted on 11/8/14 at 5:26 pm to jordan21210

quote:
Think about what you posted.

Back atcha. You said

quote:
...but you're insinuating that all cars will look the same in the future.

I "insinuated" nothing. Don't add to what I say. I said

quote:
Only one shape is the most aerodynamic.

Given a requirement for the size of the model (seating, cu. ft. needed to carry shite, etc.) there are is a minimal amount of leeway in the design to achieve the lowest drag. This improves mpg to help CAFE numbers. Therefore

quote:
Parts of that may be true...

Seriously!!
What I am saying is

quote:
All cars must stay close to this shape due to CAFE standards.

That is not in the future. That is right now and has been so for a very long time. Having come from an era where '59 Buicks were common, I see almost every car on the road today looks like just a minor few design cues from any other.
You bring up the Challenger(I owned a new 1970). Chrysler has stepped out of that cookie cutter cutter look farther than Camaro by designing the Charger and Challenger. I never addressed them because Chrysler is able to make up the difference in other cars in there lineup. It is a corp. average. Therefore

quote:
There is only so much the designers can do within these constraints.

still rings true.
Trucks and SUVs are a drag on the increasingly tightening averages.
Also I said

quote:
All cars look like some other car in one way or another.

I suppose you addressed this with

quote:
Challenger for 2015 and retained it's brick aerodynamics...and full size trucks are still a thing.

To this I point out that I did not mention trucks. Please don't add to my post.
The next part to discuss is

quote:
but all cars aren't going to look the same...that's bogus

This is more than insinuating. This is predicting. You killed this part of your sentence before you started it with

quote:
I'm sure there is a certain design standard to be met for all cars going forward,

Hell yes, there is. It's called CAFE and those requirements are scheduled to go up from the current 27.5 (23.5 truck) to 37.8 (27.8 truck) in 2016 and 54.5 mpg by 2025. Only so much can be done with mechanical advances and hybrids. Are you telling me that cars that look the same today won't look like each other in the future? Are you promising the Challengers won't fall to these standards? How far into the future are you thinking? And will trucks that you bring up not be a "thing"?

One more thing.

quote:
I don't need to. Quite a few independent drivers out there that are much more competent than those at Motor Trend and they know how to wring the real potential out of cars. Same thing with every Camaro and Mustang test, Motor Trend is always close to the bottom.

This entry that you