Advertising fail...

[MinisterofDOOM]

Yep. F-150.

[AZhitman]

Hahahahahaha pwnt.

[nissangirl74]

[Dattebayo]

[AZhitman]

^ lol

[float_6969]

I had to look close. I think it's a Silverado...

[Dattebayo]

Yeah, I guess I don't know my trucks very well.

[Jesda]

all rook same

[MinisterofDOOM]

You can tell it's a Silverado because it's not covered in ridiculous amounts of overcompensating chrome and bulges.

[Dattebayo]

Fascinating! Tell me more about the chrome and bulge thing.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Fascinating! Tell me more about the chrome and bulge thing.

Well, you see, when some automotive companies see their truck models struggling, they get desperate to recover. And some truck companies aren't very good at determining WHY their trucks are struggling (despite mass feedback from the public). So their first conclusion is "TRUCK NOT MANLY ENOUGH ADD MORE MANLY." Each carmaker's interpretation of "manly" is different.

For Ford, it was "chrome, clear lamp housings, and more chrome, plus more flamboyant bodywork."

For Toyota, it was "steroid bulges, more chrome, plus more steroid bulges, and for some reason lower sills that contour like an old M3, plus an extra helping of steroid bulges for safe measure."

And for Dodge, it was "make the grille bigger because everyone else's is and ours isn't."

Meanwhile, Chevy didn't have these problems, so their trucks continued to be relatively simple and square, aside from the admittedly oversized grilles and goofy partly-chromed lower bumper covers.

[sx moneypit]

all rook same

[AZhitman]

Speaking of which, it's amazing how consumer perception hinges on such simplistic styling cues (like blocky fender flares or molded-in bumper guards). Look at a Jeep Compass with the body panels removed. You can't tell it from a Civic, yet somehow, it gets classified as a CUV. It's actually pretty pathetic.

[themadscientist]

Bulges, check.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Speaking of which, it's amazing how consumer perception hinges on such simplistic styling cues (like blocky fender flares or molded-in bumper guards). Look at a Jeep Compass with the body panels removed. You can't tell it from a Civic, yet somehow, it gets classified as a CUV. It's actually pretty pathetic.

Yep. Same with the Escape until the latest redesign. The escape was a 626, and the Compass is a Caliber (insert comedy vomit noise). Even after Dodge replaced the Caliber with the Dart, Jeep continues building Compasses and Patriots on the same platform. Nevermind the fact that they're rebadged Calibers...why does ONE COMPANY need TWO of the same car with different bodywork? It's not even badge-engineering like Merc/Ford or Buick/Olds. IT'S TWO MECHANICALLY IDENTICAL CARS WITH THE SAME BRAND ON THE BACK and different bodywork. Just mindblowing.

As far as car vs CUV, this is the same complaint I've been making since the Forester and Minivans started being considered "trucks" and "SUVs" by magazines and marketing. Altering ride and ceiling height does not transform a car into something else. Trucks and SUVs are engineered VERY DIFFERENTLY from cars and crossovers.
One of my favorite things about early Forester ads were the claims that it had better ground clearance than a Ford Explorer. YES, THAT'S BECAUSE THE EXPLORER HAD A SOLID AXLE WITH A PUMPKIN STICKING OUT BECAUSE IT IS A @#$%ING TRUCK!!!!! The Explorer's USABLE ground-clearance was still superior, with better suspension articulation and better ability to put the power to the ground.

Also, Jeep slapping "trail rated" badges on rebadged Calibers has undermined their offroad image ACROSS THE BOARD for many buyers...exactly the opposite of what they were going for. And I could have told you that'd be the result before they ever tried it. Struts and CV joints are not meant for offroading no matter how much travel you build into them.

Most people who buy REAL TRUCKS never take them off road, so I don't understand where the whole offroad capable thing comes from. I understand average drivers wanting AWD in the snow. But people knowingly and intentionally buy cars with advertized or suggested capability they will NEVER use. What the Hell is the deal? People confuse me so badly it's physically painful.

In summary, today's lesson:
1: Automakers spend HUGE sums of money trying to determine what buyers want and why. Then they spend even MORE money making sure their cars do exactly those things.
2: The reality is all that money is wasted, because buyers HAVE NO SMEGGING IDEA WHAT THEY WANT in the first place.
3: Which is why Toyota are geniuses. They do it the other way around: they design the car first, and then spend the money on TELLING their buyers they want it.

People like "us" go into a dealership and say "I want this car."
Everyone else walks into a dealership and says "I want a car that's economical and reliable and looks cute and makes me feel in control." Which is like saying I would like some food that tastes like somethign you should eat. You could sell most people a rototiller if you glued enough tall-waistlined sheetmetal on it and called it a crossover.

[Jesda]

I always thought it was weird to be behind an Escape or Rendezvous and see control arms instead of a pumpkin and solid axles. The Buick was particularly bad.



It's like a fat girl lifting up her skirt. You can't hide the Buick's U-body minivan origins.

[MinisterofDOOM]

It's like a fat girl lifting up her skirt.

EXACTLY what I think every time I'm behind one.

The Ecape's lower control arms are cartoonishly long and spindly. I'd be terrified to take one off a curb, let alone off road. Imagine snagging a rock on one!