- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why are there no car companies that make cars that looks as good as expensive...
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:47 am to PrimeTime Money
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:47 am to PrimeTime Money
quote:
Why are there no car companies that make cars that looks as good as expensive...
...cars but at an affordable price?
I think if you weren't already pre-conditioned to assume the luxury brand is better looking, you would think some of the non-luxury look-a-likes were pretty close to doing exactly that.
Ford and Audi
Mazda and Alfa Romeo
Kia and BMW
1
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:47 am to JumpingTheShark
quote:
Maybe stop being one of the shittiest posters on this website you fricking tool. Admire your consistency though
Maybe eat a dick.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:48 am to fisherbm1112
quote:I'm not talking about putting expensive brakes and a 500 HP engine in a Camry.
The wheels and brakes on that Maserati cost more than a base Camry. It is not the lines that make the car look good. It is quality materials that make it obvious that it is a quality vehicle.
I'm talking specifically about the styling.
Nice rims are important in making a vehicle look good, but they won't increase the price all that much just to make them look good compared to 15" basic wheels.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:49 am to SlowFlowPro
do you still have the Rodeo, jake?
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:49 am to elposter
quote:
I think if you weren't already pre-conditioned to assume the luxury brand is better looking, you would think some of the non-luxury look-a-likes were pretty close to doing exactly that.
DinG ding ding.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:49 am to PrimeTime Money
Ford fusions actually look pretty nice
This post was edited on 4/7/16 at 11:50 am
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:49 am to LNCHBOX
My girlfriend just bought some Jaguar XF and I kid you not, the selling point to her was that the woodgrain inside all comes from the same tree and not different ones. That was literally what tipped it into her favor.
I mean yeah, Acura and fricking Kia aren't going to do that. Ever. But that's just a bit ridiculous.
I mean yeah, Acura and fricking Kia aren't going to do that. Ever. But that's just a bit ridiculous.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:50 am to PrimeTime Money
The nissan 370z is basically a poor man's German sports car. They MSRP for $30k. I don't like them, but it's not a bad looking car. Same with the Mazda RX8. These are "stylish" cheap sports cars.
The reason that most generic sedans look like generic sedans is because the people who buy them are looking for generic sedans. To make them more "stylish" would push away some of their base customers. Most people don't want stylish, progressive design, they want bland shite. That's why companies make bland shite. It could cost Ford a lot of money to redesign the Ford Taurus to look like the new 2016 Mercedes C63 AMG Coupe, when the majority of its customers are looking for a plain car to drive their plain family around in.
The reason that most generic sedans look like generic sedans is because the people who buy them are looking for generic sedans. To make them more "stylish" would push away some of their base customers. Most people don't want stylish, progressive design, they want bland shite. That's why companies make bland shite. It could cost Ford a lot of money to redesign the Ford Taurus to look like the new 2016 Mercedes C63 AMG Coupe, when the majority of its customers are looking for a plain car to drive their plain family around in.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:51 am to Goldrush25
quote:
A lot of those companies that offer affordable car lines also have luxury car lines. Doesn't seem like good business sense to make your low end model look just as good or better than your high end model.
In a somewhat related question, the angle some of the manufacturers have taken in their advertising (namely Buick and Mini Cooper) as saying that their previous models were more geared toward old people (or according to Mini in their super bowl ad, "that's a gay car") seems peculiar to me. I wonder if that has helped sell more cars?
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:51 am to PrimeTime Money
Mazda does a good job of this with their new line of cars. Love the CX-5 for a crossover/mid-size SUV for a chick.
Hyundai’s are doing a damn good job of doing this too. They even don’t put the Hyundai logo on the higher end ones
But they aren’t even cheap anymore. They have a 100k Hyundai.
2016 CX-5 I bought my wife (hers is white and the interior is super luxurious):
Hyundai’s are doing a damn good job of doing this too. They even don’t put the Hyundai logo on the higher end ones
But they aren’t even cheap anymore. They have a 100k Hyundai.
2016 CX-5 I bought my wife (hers is white and the interior is super luxurious):
This post was edited on 4/7/16 at 11:52 am
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:51 am to LNCHBOX
quote:That is such a load of crap.
IF the Mercedes you posted had always looked like the Camry you posted, you would likely think it is more stylish. It's grade school level psychology.
We'd be saying "wow, Mercedes has really gone down hill".
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:52 am to PrimeTime Money
quote:
I'm talking specifically about the styling.
You are missing what I am trying to say. I am by no means trying to bash you. What I am trying to say is that when you look at at luxury cars wheels you see high end wheels and brake rotors and know that they are by what they look like. You cannot mimic that look without actually using high end materials to make it. The styling is not what makes the cars price. It is the materials they use to make what we call "styling". In the end no high end car manufacturer will allow lower model vehicles to look high end because most high end vehicles own or are owned by the lower end companies.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:52 am to PrimeTime Money
quote:
That is such a load of crap.
We'd be saying "wow, Mercedes has really gone down hill".
OK, sure, Whatever you need to tell yourself.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:53 am to PrimeTime Money
quote:
I am ignorant. That's why I'm asking the question.
I assumed it was because of a more powerful engine, better suspension, higher quality interior pieces, features like heated seats, navigation, etc, and different brands charge more for the name.
Is it more expensive to make a Camry look like a Mercedes?
For example... why does Camry have to look like this:
Image Link
Could they not make it LOOK like this if they wanted to?
Image Link
Image Link
FYI you can get a new Mercedes for 30k if all you care about it looks
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:54 am to Pecker
quote:
The reason that most generic sedans look like generic sedans is because the people who buy them are looking for generic sedans. To make them more "stylish" would push away some of their base customers.
I don't know if this is true or not, but it seems like the best answer in the thread.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:54 am to eScott
quote:
FYI you can get a new Mercedes for 30k if all you care about it looks
This is true and you are essentially buying a Camry motor in a more expensive to maintain "stylish" body. FTR I think they are ugly as shite and show why you can't put Ferrari looks in a Civic budget.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:55 am to PrimeTime Money
Kia and Hyundai are the same company.
The Kia Soul is a fairly unique exterior design, see lots of them going down the road.
Chrysler has, in my opinion, uneducated as it may be, a design shop that turns out pretty vehicles. It's my impression that once under the skin, their vehicles are cheap and unreliable. Forbes put out an article which I saw just yesterday of the # of Vehicles to Avoid in 2016, and nearly every Jeep and Chrysler product was on it, save for the original Jeep, and the Challenger.
The Kia Soul is a fairly unique exterior design, see lots of them going down the road.
Chrysler has, in my opinion, uneducated as it may be, a design shop that turns out pretty vehicles. It's my impression that once under the skin, their vehicles are cheap and unreliable. Forbes put out an article which I saw just yesterday of the # of Vehicles to Avoid in 2016, and nearly every Jeep and Chrysler product was on it, save for the original Jeep, and the Challenger.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:56 am to LNCHBOX
quote:So you are saying:
OK, sure, Whatever you need to tell yourself.
1. If a Mercedes logo was on the Prius instead of the Toyota logo, people would love the design?
2. Luxury car companies have never made a vehicle that people think is ugly simply because of the logo on the grille?
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:57 am to fisherbm1112
The 30k millionaires all start crying when they have to maintain the things they couldn't afford in the first place.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 11:58 am to PrimeTime Money
quote:
So you are saying:
1. If a Mercedes logo was on the Prius instead of the Toyota logo, people would love the design?
2. Luxury car companies have never made a vehicle that people think is ugly simply because of the logo on the grille?
If that is all you had ever known, yes absolutely. For you to act like you're surprised branding has an influence over perceived quality is just astounding to me.
Page 3 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News