Hi, I kind of like the way the new bmw's look. I keep reading that the lines will get old and the S2K should keep looking nice. What makes a car's lines look dated? I love the way the S2K looks, but the new BMW looks nice to me. Why do you say the lines will date it? Sorry, I'm not a car buff, what is it about the "lines"? I do love the S2K's front looks, seems to flow well, but the BMW's looks are pretty nice to me also? The new BMW roadster seems to date the S2K to me? Well, except for the rear end, that view really does suck, but the side is very nice, the front is very cool also. Please educate me on "lines".

 

Personally, I don't have any problem with the Z4 (again, except for the nasty rear.)

But what I think a lot of people are saying about the Z4 is that it's gimicky, rather than being based sensible design aesthetics. So they think Z4 will fade away into being "dated," while other cars as they get older retain the lable "classic." There are plenty of old cars out there styled nothing like today's cars, but in no way do they look dated.

Anyway, those aren't particularly my personal views. Just what I hear other's saying.

 

"Clean lines" mean, in the case of our S2000, the way the car was designed; wind-tunnel designed for maximum down-force and minimum drag; the slope of the long hood, the short windshield, the way the fabric top was designed, the high tail, the way the front fenders arch over the wheels. Our S2000 was influenced by Formula One cars, so the idea was to keep it conservatively styled for maximum handling and racing spirit.

 

When I refer to *lines*, they are the elements that draw a higher attention level. The S is very understated as far as *lines*. It's more hinted at rather than explcitedly presented. Very sexy yet very plain and it takes on a completely different vibe depending on the angle. That is because, imo, it is a very clean design that leaves alot for the viewer to fill in the blanks. A car like the Z4 calls too much attention to itself, imo, to the side lines, the nose and the ass; all elements of the S2K design that, again, are rather understated. Just like any fashion/design, new is always interesting, but anything that screams *look at me* (as I think the Z4 does) will grab the spotlight for a short while but quickly become overexposed and a self-parody. The S's design gives it more shelf-life, I'm predicting, and will stay on stage long after the others are boo'ed off simply because it's *lines* are simpler and more interactive with the beholder. It's timeless.

 

Very true.

The Z4 looks like it's trying too hard. There's too much going on there. The S2000 is much more "traditional." That's the way I like it!

 

I would hardly call your car's styling anywhere near "traditional". How many previous sports cars look like puff adders with thier mouth open on the road. very pretty, but striking. if you have seen a viper or a rattlesnake square head on, you'll know what I'm talking about.



AND YOUR DAMN HID'S PISS ME OFF!

i had to get over two lanes just to get relief from the brightness. I saw him coming 1/2 mile back. It was ridiculous. no head lights should be that bright, without the brights being on.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kamehamaha
[B]I would hardly call your car's styling anywhere near "traditional".

AND YOUR DAMN HID'S PISS ME OFF!