Just exactly who does Chevrolet think they are fooling with the design of the early 1990's Camaro? There is little dispute that the design bears more than a passing resemblance to the Geo Storm, an Isuzu produced vehicle which predates the Camaro design of the current generation by two or more years. Do they pay royalties for the use of that design? On a side note, where do you put your luggage in one of these things anyway?
The same goes for the current redesign of the Mustang. Do the Ford engineers have a photograph of the fourth generation Celica taped over their drafting board for inspiration? It certainly appears so. With the exception of the exposed headlamps and the fake rear brake vents in the rear quarter panels, the current Mustang design could be easily mistaken for the Celica. I suppose this is Ford's way of paying Toyota back for the first generation Celica which was a knock-off of the late sixties Mustang.
How about the latest generation of Corvette? This drastic styling departure for Chevrolte appears to have been totally inspired by Japanese models. It appears to be a stylistic collage combining the Mazda RX-7 and Acura NSX. In fact, a case could be made that the two chief Chevrolet designers appear to have had a disagreement on which Japanese model they would plagerize in their design (the RX-7 or NSX), and resolved their disagreement by combining the two into one for the current generation Corvette.
Auto makers should know by now, that giving any vehicle a model name designation with a Roman numeral behind it, is the kiss of death. Mustang II. No further explanation is nessicary.
Did the designers of the Saturn and several other GM models consciously design the daytime running lights on those vehicles in such a way to make them look cross-eyed?
Why did Chevrolet go to all the time and effort to finally design one piece aerodynamic headlamps into the late 1990's Camaro and then do such a poor job of it? The whole idea of aerodynamic, one piece headlamp assemblies is to give a more unified and simplified appearance. Despite this, Chevrolet went out of their way, in the form of their creation, to express a one piece headlamp assembly as two distinctly seperate units, totally defeating the whole purpose of using a one piece, aerodynamic headlamp assembly in the first place.
Big aftermarket rear spoilers that sag in the middle. Somebody obviously cared enough about the vehicle to add a spoiler to it, they should have taken the care to choose a good quality product that won't deform over time.
Big aftermarket spoilers which obviously weren't designed for the car that they are attached to. This becomes obvious when the spoiler is a foot short on each end of meeting the left and right edges of the trunk line, or if the curviture (or lack there of) of the spoiler totally clashes with the curviture of the trunk line. Again, somebody obviously cared enough to add a spoiler, they should have payed attention to what they were buying.
"Powered by (Blank)" stickers. Who is trying to fool whom here? If the vehicle is using an engine that was manufactured by the same company that manufactured the rest of the vehicle, then a sticker saying as much becomes quite redundant, doesn't it?
To go back to the ISUPAGE Directory, Click Me Now!
