Cars... they get TALLER and TALLER and TALLER

[Jesda]

There's a disturbing trend in automotive style where cars keep getting taller without getting wider to compensate. Harley Earl's "Longer, lower, wider" is becoming "Shorter, taller, weirder"

The new Sentra... WTF.



I saw a white 90-93 Q in the far left lane today and fell back in love. The whole body is athletic, low, and aggressive from nose to tail. I don't understand why car designers don't think tight, clean styling is attractive anymore.



Even the new M is a big squatty blob. The space between the top of the rear wheel arch and the beltline is hideous.

And whats with the lack of any well-defined rear deck? A sedan without a clear trunk lid looks like a four-door hatchback to me.

[qship96]

I totally agree,the G looks way too tall for its width & length,almost pontoon or canoe looking, the same for the M-and the new Mbody color tail treatment between the tailpipes just adds to the bulk and height of the rear-sort of barge looking back there!

[BMAR240SX]

I agree, especially with the sentra

[BadQ45t]

But for the Sentra it drives quite nice, I took one for spin while waiting for my X-Terra to get out of the shop for an oil change. Than ingress into the back seat, you are not ducking into it like my wifes 99' Senta, you simply slip in and at 6' I can sit straight up and down without issue. I think that is part of it. Same thing with the M........

[ScottJackson]

The first thing I thought of when I saw that sentra pic was my little grey kitten... hunched up as it takes a crap.

[VJ1]

I've got 2 G50's, and now also a 2007 sentra as my work vehicle. When you look at all three together, your first impression is...WTF... why is that little car so much taller than the big ones?! It's very easy to get in and out of and plenty of head room, but the seats and distance from door panels to center console is way too narrow. There is too little room for comfort.I,m 6' tall, 160 pounds and I feel cramped in it. A person 6' tall and 260 pounds would be very uncomfortable.Very smooth at 80 mph and excellent resonse on the steering, but I don't care for the CVT. Maybe I'm old school, but I love to feel the shift on my transmission.Great for work but makes me appreciate the G50 so much more.Vandi.

[MinisterofDOOM]

There's a disturbing trend in automotive style where cars keep getting taller without getting wider to compensate. Harley Earl's "Longer, lower, wider" is becoming "Shorter, taller, weirder"And whats with the lack of any well-defined rear deck? A sedan without a clear trunk lid looks like a four-door hatchback to me.

AMEN!

This is definitely one of my biggest gripes with modern car styling.

I was sitting behind a car (don't remember what it was, but it was no more than 3 years old) at a red light yesterday and realized that the top of it's rear bumper was higher than my hood.

Tall cars suck. Tall was a tradeoff for headroom in old compacts. Why on earth is it being adopted in big cars? One of the reasons I love the G50 and E38 so much is because they're low, wide, long, and flat.

The lack of rear decklid is, I imagine, a way to give rear seat passengers a lot of headroom without making the car longer. But it's an easy way out, and looks bad. It's one of the things that separates the 6th generation Maxima from it's many lookalikes: the Max has a flat, clean, defined decklid where cars like the GS you posted just sort of end. Seems like cabins of cars are growing while exterior visible trunk/hood space is shrinking. The problem with that is that even large sedans are looking like FWD compacts. Long noses are few and far between these days, even in RWD cars.

I personally like the new M, but I definitely think it could loose 5 or 6 inches of height at the rear deck/beltline. I really don't like how vague the decklid is. It's at a totally different plane/angle to anything else on the car, and it doesn't go anywhere. It's just sort of there.On the subject of the Y50: the new tail lights are a HUGE improvement over the old ones.

I'm NOT a fan of the recent trend of sedans being wedge-shaped, tilted forward/downward, even if it's just an illusion of windows or other lines. It makes them look fat in the the rear. Perfect example is the original Lexus IS. Or look at the Sentra. Look how angled forward the window sills are. Why?

One of the worst side effects of taller cars is driving position. In my Maxima, even though it's not a sports car, I'm sitting very low. But in new cars, seating is more trucklike. I HATE it. If I wanted to sit on a tall bench I'd get an SUV. I want to be as close to the floor as possible.And even with the seat height increase, window sills are STILL too high to use as arm rests anymore. It's stupid. Makes me wonder how many designers actually end up driving the cars they pen.

A lot of big cars now seem to be trying to stretch small car design onto a big car. Lexus' 2nd gen GS is one of my favorite examples of this. It looks squatty, fat, and disproportionate. It reminds me of a cartoonishly fat child.

[maxnix]

It's all about packaging the riders in the day of the cross-over SUV.

For its antithesis, behold the Lamborghini Espada.





My favorite 4 place V12 hatchback.

When I was younger, driving with my legs straight out parallel to the floor was my preferred drving position. Now that I am older, I much prefer the upright comfort of the G50 driver's seat.

First saw a Y50 next to my wife's FY33. The sheer bulk of the YH50 made the FY33 appear very svelte in comparison. One needs to realize that high rear decks are for aerodynamic considreations, and also help with trunk space. Bangle wasn't the first, but everyone is imatating him now, and it is for engineering reasons more than style.

Anyone remember the 1949-1951 Mercury?

[Haitian_King]

Totally right.

I have a '97 Sentra and the new ones look like crap.

They look narrower and taller. Yuck. I'm still upset about the M being Infiniti's flagship. they should bring back the Q. Maybe for it's 20th anniversary, bring in a new design.

You know how BMW designates "Series" and Mercedes-Benz gives it's models "Classes". What do we call the Infiniti line-up? I want to say "Q-class" and "M-Class", but MB has an M-Class. And The Q isn't really a series because there was only one Q45 (numerical badge) as opposed to the 7xx of the BMW. (i.e., 735, 740, 750, etc.)

[Peterofdevon]

Yesterday I parked the Black Q next to a brand new Alpina B-7 at the famous Circle liqours in NJ.

My friend saw me oogling the bmw and she said it looked "over" modified with car bling fashion. When you looked at them side by side the Q had stately looks and clean lines, the bmw looked like a mish mash.

I'd love to have the bmw given to me though...I'd drive it for a week, sell it and buy more Qs.

Peter

[AlabamaDan]

You know there are very few new cars that I like. The Q is a classic in my thoughts, and don't kill me here, but reminds me alot of the 1960s muscle cars - specially from the rear end. Those fat rear fenders, the sweeping glass back to a trunk lid....

It's odd however, I remember a friend of mine bought a J30 new in 1996 and I said, "I don't like it." Now, it's one of my favorite cars too. In retrospect I think I just resented her having the cash to buy such a car.

I don't know who picks the designers of these cars, but they all seem to have the same. Before you say "well people are buying them," I go ahead and say that ifyou want a new car you have to. They all look that way. What the automobile industry needs is a manufacturer bold enough to step outside the Jestsons cars.

I take it back about not liking any cars. I like the looks of the new Mustangs. I haven't driven one however.

[maxnix]

I take it back about not liking any cars. I like the looks of the new Mustangs. I haven't driven one however.

Almost totally based on the 67 model with some 69 highlights.

Still has that wonderful cast iron soid axle out back!

[szh]

Still has that wonderful cast iron soid axle out back!

I have to admit that the 1964 Mustang was the reason I got interested in cars. I loved the look of that car from the moment I saw pictures of it ... if I could find a pristine working red one, I would consider buying it in a heartbeat.

Z

[Jesda]

Almost totally based on the 67 model with some 69 highlights.

Still has that wonderful cast iron soid axle out back!

Drag racers love it. If you want IRS, you can shell out more cash for a more adult Mustang.

[maxnix]

I have to admit that the 1964 Mustang was the reason I got interested in cars. I loved the look of that car from the moment I saw pictures of it ... if I could find a pristine working red one, I would consider buying it in a heartbeat.

Z

Had a 1964.5 loaded and a 1967 with disc front brakes. The 1967 essentially adopted the front suspension pick up points that Ken Miles revised on the Shelbys.

[StarPD]

Mustangs are secretaries' cars, no matter how many horsepower they stuff in that primitive chassis.

[Haitian_King]

I smoked a newer Mustang on the PA Turnpike. I can't respect them.

I've noticed the agressive "muscle car" look in the G50, especially from the back. That thing is vicious. Today, I walked out of work, the Q was under a lamp in the lot, and it had rained while I was in. There it was shining, glistening, beautiful. The first words out of my mouth were "Damn, my car is sexy."

I'm in love with my car.

[Razi]

Haha I guess I'm not crazy for loving my dad's Q45. Love that car to death. Although it feels heavy at times.