|
travisray2004 posted:I think it was just a bad attempt at a troll. Yes, very poor indeed. Beaten on the clownshoe. I think it is absolutely stunning.
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2011 03:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 21:52 |
|
|
2012 New Beetle   http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2012-volkswagen-beetle-spy-shots/#3824655 Second picture has PT Cruiser written all over it. The whole design seems to have a hint of Porsche-meets-ugly-stick in it, although I can’t quite put my finger on what exactly it is that makes me think that. VW Beetle meets Porsche would make sense on a few levels, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 20:55
|
|
|
I don't think it looks like a beetle anymore. They moved the hatch area too far back and now it really looks like a very bubbly hatchback. It also has hints of TT in there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 20:58
|
|
|
Holy poo poo. Least interesting redesign ever. E: Why do the headlights have a foreskin?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 21:36
|
|
|
travisray2004 posted:Holy poo poo. Least interesting redesign ever. Jewish tradition, German car.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 21:44
|
|
|
looks like a cross between a PT Cruiser and Crossfire. Not good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 21:56
|
|
|
Fayez Butts posted:Love the new Ferrari but I thought the back was a bit too 'swoopy', so... Good job, you threw the rear end end of a Renault Megane onto it and managed to make it look even worse. eames posted:2012 New Beetle I'm not sure where you see PT Cruiser, I certainly can't see this car pulling off faux-wood body paneling as well as the PT. And the roofline is all wrong. Its the current New Beetle, but with an elongated front end/more conventionally placed greenhouse, with the end result being that its proportions look completely wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 22:46
|
|
|
Has the New Beetle been on sale continuously since it was introduced? I haven't noticed many. Doubt this will make much of an impact.redscare posted:Good job, you threw the rear end end of a Renault Megane onto it and managed to make it look even worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 23:07
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:Has the New Beetle been on sale continuously since it was introduced? I haven't noticed many. Doubt this will make much of an impact. I see a whole bunch of them around Wichita, in fact one of my co-workers drives one (that's hellaflushed out with 18" rims)
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 23:11
|
|
|
eames posted:Glad I'm not the only one who thought this. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2011 23:45
|
|
|
rscott posted:I see a whole bunch of them around Wichita, in fact one of my co-workers drives one (that's hellaflushed out with 18" rims) There's a couple million of the drat things here in Seattle as well. That and loving Priuses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 01:36
|
|
|
I wonder if the dashboard has been increased in length thanks to the longer hood. Because it already felt like you could park a jumbo-loving-jet on there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 02:22
|
|
|
redscare posted:I'm not sure where you see PT Cruiser, I certainly can't see this car pulling off faux-wood body paneling as well as the PT. And the roofline is all wrong. Its the current New Beetle, but with an elongated front end/more conventionally placed greenhouse, with the end result being that its proportions look completely wrong. I don't know, my dad had the same reaction when I sent it to him; "So it's a PT Cruiser now..."
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 04:38
|
|
|
eames posted:2012 New Beetle This car is not the finished product. It is much closer to production than the last mule photograhped, but it still has tacked-on front and rear fascias from the current model. You can tell that the curve of the front wheel arch is not continuous and there is a second seam between the rear fender and rear bumper. It's a test mule.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 05:59
|
|
|
Jork Juggler posted:This car is not the finished product. It is much closer to production than the last mule photograhped, but it still has tacked-on front and rear fascias from the current model. You can tell that the curve of the front wheel arch is not continuous and there is a second seam between the rear fender and rear bumper. It's a test mule. So, the body cladding might change slightly. The roofline won't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 06:26
|
|
|
Yeah, changes there wouldn't change the awkward profile seen in the middle pic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 06:30
|
|
|
I look forward to Clarkson pointing out the Porsche-ness of it to Hammond.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 06:34
|
|
 Totally personal preference, but i made a slight modification that I think makes it look a bit nicer. I just can't stand those weird kinks in the roofline of cars.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 07:38
|
|
|
Morphix posted:I wonder if the dashboard has been increased in length thanks to the longer hood. Because it already felt like you could park a jumbo-loving-jet on there. I think the effect is just the opposite. Since the the windshield isn't as far forward as it was, less of the engine bay will be under the dash, having the practical advantage of not being such a pain in the rear end to work on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 07:39
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:Has the New Beetle been on sale continuously since it was introduced? I haven't noticed many. Doubt this will make much of an impact. heh. And I will continue to defend my redesign as at least I like it and that's good enough for me 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2011 08:05
|
|
|
Alfa teases with a mid-engine, rwd, 850 kg convertible concept:  http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110202/COPY01/302029991/1164 Autonews posted:TURIN -- Alfa Romeo plans to build a rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive coupe that would become the brand's halo car.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 17:51
|
|
|
That is one stunning design, I hope they actually go through with it and make it better than the X1/9.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 18:22
|
|
|
Guys, I don't know how to feel about this: http://www.autoblog.com/2011/02/02/report-2012-honda-civic-si-getting-new-2-4l-engine-with-200-hp/ quote:Known internally as "K24," the 2.4-liter engine slated for Civic Si use will be very similar to the powerplant currently used in the Acura TSX. No official power numbers have been divulged, but this engine currently makes 201 horsepower in the TSX, so we'll bet that Civic Si output will be somewhere between 200 and 210 hp. That isn't a huge increase over the 197 hp currently available from the Si's 2.0-liter four, but the 2.4-liter engine should prove to be a bit torquier. Look for something along the lines of 170 pound-feet in the 2012 model, whereas the current car only produces 139 lb-ft of twist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:10
|
|
|
Left Ventricle posted:A Civic Si with torque?! Cats and dogs living together! Mass hysteria!
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:26
|
|
|
Left Ventricle posted:Guys, I don't know how to feel about this: Watch your mouth, next thing you know they'll put a turbo on it and for the first time ever there will be a Si with torque steer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:31
|
|
|
"Hey guys, we just built the Kia Forte Koup with a little more horsepower and no torsion beam in the rear!" "Let's charge $2-6k more for it!" I do dig the centre exit exhaust though. From the comments: quote:Actually...I just went over to ToVTEC to read what was going on there, and I have to agree JPcar. This is just a bean-counters car, and apparently will have a cast-in exhaust manifold without VTEC on the exhaust side. What a joke. Honda lost their way, as all car companies do, when they let the accountants make the decisions and not the engineers. With their engine tech they could easily be screwing ~300 HP from 2.4L but just can't be bothered. I know I won't be buying another Honda until they change their ways...which is sad, since I love my Prelude. Seat Safety Switch fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Feb 2, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:34
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:That is one stunning design, I hope they actually go through with it and make it better than the X1/9. I'd be really impressed if they could keep those proportions. The engine is gonna be squeezed in pretty tight. Still, this might be the thing to offer some genuine competition to Miatas, which are going to be lighter in the next iteration.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:45
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:I'd be really impressed if they could keep those proportions. The engine is gonna be squeezed in pretty tight. Still, this might be the thing to offer some genuine competition to Miatas, which are going to be lighter in the next iteration. With Miatas? I doubt it. I don't cross shop by 20 grand. Maybe competing with the Boxster and Z4M. But it'll be priced so far above the Miata that I don't think you can even compare the two, unless the Miata is somehow a quicker car.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:48
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:I'd be really impressed if they could keep those proportions. The engine is gonna be squeezed in pretty tight. Still, this might be the thing to offer some genuine competition to Miatas, which are going to be lighter in the next iteration. Hell, they could make it front-engined and easily keep those lines, I sure wouldn't mind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:48
|
|
|
At this point we should consider ourselves lucky that the Civic Si isn't a regular Civic with an electric motor stuck onto the side a la CR-Z.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:53
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Hell, they could make it front-engined and easily keep those lines, I sure wouldn't mind. I wouldn't mind its being FR, which it probably could be, going by the generous hood length (the concept there looks like a rebodied S2000, which ain't a bad thing), but the engineering team is probably locked down with MR already. Yeah it might be a lot more expensive than a Miata, but I really don't think Alfa can pull off the incredible handling dynamics of the Boxster, or even be as good as the Z4. People would be upgrading from the Miata on the basis of style alone, which is a legit thing when looking at roadsters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 19:55
|
|
|
If they're using the Spyder as the spiritual ancestor, why wouldn't it be FR?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:07
|
|
|
DoLittle posted:Alfa teases with a mid-engine, rwd, 850 kg convertible concept: Aren't those photos of the concept 2uottenta (or-whatever-the-hell it was called)? I had heard that the 4C would be based on that concept but there's just zero room for a MR or RR layout there. Checked: Yep, that's the old concept, no images of the 4C yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:21
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:If they're using the Spyder as the spiritual ancestor, why wouldn't it be FR? MR gets you more buzz, I suppose. ^^^ It's too bad the new concept has the potential to be uglier, then. I mean it might look great in that weird MR layout way, but it probably wouldn't look as sleek.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 20:58
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:^^^ It's too bad the new concept has the potential to be uglier, then. I mean it might look great in that weird MR layout way, but it probably wouldn't look as sleek. Agreed, I would have preferred they stuck with the FR as well, the long nose on that concept looks stellar and the proportions in general are perfect. Can't wait to see what this new concept is going to look like, I have a feeling it's going to completely change my mind about the MR/FR change.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:04
|
|
|
Left Ventricle posted:Guys, I don't know how to feel about this: From the article: "And while these new Si numbers aren't leaps and bounds better than what's currently available, the easily flickable driving dynamics and rev-happy power should still make it an engaging steer." I don't understand how a 2.4L engine with only 200hp could possibly be rev-happy. If it was making good torque at 8000rpm (like the current k20) it would have at least 240hp.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2011 21:46
|
|
|
Have you driven a car with the high output K24? Sure its not a K20a but peak power is still at 7000rpm (which is still what I'd call rev-happy compared to most other stuff in the class like the Mazda 2.5 and the Nissan 2.5 V6)
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 01:55
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:MR gets you more buzz, I suppose. Now the rumor is that it's gonna be based on the KTM X-Bow which actually... almost makes sense? If it is MR and has inboard front dampers and poo poo that will be cool as gently caress. With the X-Bow design the proportions could look FR ish I think: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 01:28
|
|
|
Jeez, I can't see that vehicle being worth the support costs to bring it to the US.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 01:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 21:52 |
|
|
Ruh roh, the Mahindra pickup's fuel economy sucks: http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/02/mahindra-tr40-rated-at-a-disappointing-1921-mpg.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2011 03:24
|
|