Classics dwarfed by moderns

Author
Discussion

NotNormal

2,363 posts

216 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
I'll just leave this one here from the same set then....



300bhp/ton

41,030 posts

192 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
900T-R said:
I think they do align, albeit at the back side...
Well the 10" rim of the classic Mini seems to be just under half the height of the Countrymans. If the Contryman has 20"+ rims then fine. But I didn't realise it did.

Also as you can see the shadows are not aligned.


RichB

51,898 posts

286 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
300bhp/ton said:
Well the 10" rim of the classic Mini seems to be just under half the height of the Countrymans. If the Contryman has 20"+ rims then fine. But I didn't realise it did.

Also as you can see the shadows are not aligned.

Oh no you're right, the rear of the BIG MINI is set back a few inches from perfect alignment with the Mini thus further proving the point biglaugh

NotNormal

2,363 posts

216 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
Especially for you 300.....




PS. And yes when I aligned my own 10" mini wheel against a modern alloy funnily enough it did look exactly like the image you constructed above.

pcvdriver

1,819 posts

201 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
paulodivichio said:


Too right! My "real" mini and a mates BMW mini!
I'll need to find a pic of an original 3 series BMW next to the latest 3 series BMW....

RichB

51,898 posts

286 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
NotNormal said:
Especially for you 300...
Feel the love www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGuNsiSZ9RIbiggrin

300bhp/ton

41,030 posts

192 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
RichB said:
Oh no you're right, the rear of the BIG MINI is set back a few inches from perfect alignment with the Mini thus further proving the point biglaugh
Well it all hints at a bit of camera trickery. Even looking at the pic the classic looks further away from the camera.

I suspect something like this:


NotNormal

2,363 posts

216 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
bangheadbangheadbanghead

RichB

51,898 posts

286 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
300bhp/ton said:
RichB said:
Oh no you're right, the rear of the BIG MINI is set back a few inches from perfect alignment with the Mini thus further proving the point biglaugh
Well it all hints at a bit of camera trickery. Even looking at the pic the classic looks further away from the camera.

I suspect something like this:

I get it now - You're on a massive wind up aren't you hehe

LordBretSinclair

4,288 posts

179 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
RichB said:
I get it now - You're on a massive wind up aren't you hehe
I think the wind up is comparing the lovely little BMC original with that awful thing produced by BMW.

They share a name that's all - you might as well compare a Supermarine Spitfire to a Triumph of the same name irked


completetangent

1,165 posts

154 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
While not wishing to stir further, the art director of any magazine photo shoot has an agenda. So if he or she wants to emphasize something, a few yards between them, careful camera positioning and the use of a 'non-natural' focal lengths will all help.

nicanary

9,849 posts

148 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
Mr Viking said:
I suppose it's my opinion but I think in most of the pics the newer car looks worse. Probably the same as why, being fat, I don't look as well as my thin friends
Absolutely agree - except when I'm hitting an immovable object at more than 30mph. Back then you died.A certain poster on this thread thinks cars are bigger because the makers are aiming at a different sector - I think you'll find it's because of all the safety equipment they have to carry now.

RichB

51,898 posts

286 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
nicanary said:
I think you'll find it's because of all the safety equipment they have to carry now.
That plus all the extra crap that people eexpect and take for granted these days even in a standard car; air-con, sat-nav, electric windows, all sap power meaning a bigger engine plus as you say air-bags, SIPS, ABS etc. etc.

CDP

7,473 posts

256 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
RichB said:
nicanary said:
I think you'll find it's because of all the safety equipment they have to carry now.
That plus all the extra crap that people eexpect and take for granted these days even in a standard car; air-con, sat-nav, electric windows, all sap power meaning a bigger engine plus as you say air-bags, SIPS, ABS etc. etc.
Everybody says that and then you get stuff like the Toyota Aygo and IQ demonstrating it doesn't have to be that way.

evil len

4,398 posts

271 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
nicanary said:
I think you'll find it's because of all the safety equipment they have to carry now.
And the fact that slightly larger cars are, by their nature, just a little bit safer. And they can build bigger cars for the same weight due to modern materials. And they can do more complex and funky shapes now with modern materials. And probably a whole bunch of other reasons (I wonder if our desire for more and more comfort means that seats are bigger, more padded and luxurious, meaning by default the car has to be a bit wider ... I'm stretching the point here a bit, but you know what I mean)

ajprice

27,931 posts

198 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
evil len said:
(I wonder if our desire for more and more comfort means that seats are bigger, more padded and luxurious, meaning by default the car has to be a bit wider ... I'm stretching the point here a bit, but you know what I mean)
The front seats in a Rover 75 were armchairs from DFS (possibly not actually true hehe )

Mr Viking

90 posts

139 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
CDP said:
RichB said:
nicanary said:
I think you'll find it's because of all the safety equipment they have to carry now.
That plus all the extra crap that people eexpect and take for granted these days even in a standard car; air-con, sat-nav, electric windows, all sap power meaning a bigger engine plus as you say air-bags, SIPS, ABS etc. etc.
Everybody says that and then you get stuff like the Toyota Aygo and IQ demonstrating it doesn't have to be that way.
The Aygo and IQ were designed to be as small and light as possible, yet are heavier than the cars from the past designed in the same way.

evil len

4,398 posts

271 months

Friday 23rd November 2012
quotequote all
Was just watching this video ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedd...

... and Jay Leno makes a good point ... he goes on about liking thin doors on older cars, and of course modern doors have all the safety beams, electric motors, airbags etc in, which make them really fat. So a fatter door has to go somewhere, and it cant go in so it has to go out, and thus the whole width of the car has to increase proportionately.

Cledus Snow

2,096 posts

190 months

Saturday 24th November 2012
quotequote all
Hows about classics dwarfed by classics?


Wuzzle

9,658 posts

139 months

Saturday 24th November 2012
quotequote all
CDP said:
RichB said:
nicanary said:
I think you'll find it's because of all the safety equipment they have to carry now.
That plus all the extra crap that people eexpect and take for granted these days even in a standard car; air-con, sat-nav, electric windows, all sap power meaning a bigger engine plus as you say air-bags, SIPS, ABS etc. etc.
Everybody says that and then you get stuff like the Toyota Aygo and IQ demonstrating it doesn't have to be that way.
You're right, cars have got bigger because manufacturers think that is what people want.