Thread: Car Talk
View Single Post
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2010-01-10, 17:22

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quagmire View Post
A lot of people are saying its fake. Notice the passenger rear wheel or lack there of.....
Yeah, I noticed that after I posted it. Oh well. It doesn't change anything, about me wanting to see the ATS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iago View Post
Larry David: So, this is the GTS model...
Customer: What does GTS stand for?
Larry David: Uh... Guaranteed Tremendous Safety...
Customer: Oh. So what does the GT model stand for? Just Guaranteed Tremendous?
Larry David: Uh... yes...


Some people hate the alphanumeric nomenclature that it seems like every luxury automaker is adopting (except, notably, Buick and Mercury, both of which are intended to be softer antecedents to the more hard-edged Cadillac and Lincoln). I'll be honest -- I don't. In fact, I think "aspirational" car names are kind of silly. Regal? LeSabre? Lucerne? I'm not trying to hate on just Buick here, but there's nothing "regal" about a low-end Buick. Or even a high-end one, for that matter.

I prefer alphanumeric nomenclature...when it makes sense. BMW and M-B have been at it the longest, and have the benefit of owning individual numbers (BMW) or letters (M-B). Everybody else needs to use multiple letters (ES), multiple numbers (9-5), or a combination (A4), but that's okay -- probably a good thing, because it helps each "scheme" be ownable. (In other words, when you hear of a sedan labeled [something]TS, you know it's a Cadillac, without even hearing the make.)

The important thing is that designations A) are consistent, B) are identified with the brand and C) give a clear sense of progression, from lowest-end to highest. BMW, Audi, and Saab are the best at this, as they have the benefit of a progression of numerals paired with, in the case of Audi and Saab, universally reconizable prefixes ("A" and "9-", of course). M-B requires you to know their class designations but it's mostly alphabetical, from worst to best (as is Cadillac).

But then there's Lexus. Quick, arrange these Lexus models in order from lowest-end to highest: ES, GS, HS, IS, LS. That's not it, though that's the alphabetical arrangement. Only people who "know" Lexus are going to get the hierarchy, but everybody knows a 7 Series is better than a 3 Series. Thus, Lexus fails at the third requirement. Acura does too. (They have other problems, which I won't get into here. No, their new corporate grille isn't what I meant ).

Lincoln fails at everything. First of all, they are just now arriving at a scheme that is consistent, and still not completely (Navigator and Town Car still exist). They've used, again, four different schemes in recent memory, and their first attempt at an alphanumeric name was the short-lived Lincoln LS. Yes, they straight-up ripped the name of the flagship Lexus. So they fail at the second requirement, because nobody ever hears "LS" and thinks "Lincoln." After "LS," they had "Mark [something]," which I would have stayed with...and then "MK[something]," pronounced "Mark something," and then "MK[something]," pronounced "Emm-Kay-something." Just rolls off the tongue, doesn't t?

Anyway, I'll shut up now. In short, Japanese automakers are good at lots of things but alphanumeric designations aren't one of them, and Lincoln fails at life. That is all.

and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong
  quote