Quote:
Originally Posted by SleepWarz
Well tell me who the hell surveyed for the Malibu or Impala because those cars have been an insult to their names for many years now. Worst body styling ever. It looks like everything else, just like the current/going out impala. Its so sad so see good names like that tarnished by insanely poor body styling... 
For example I did like the 2002 Monte Carlo because it tried to look different and it does, you can recognise the car by its tail lights, unlike most vehicles today with the same v trunk with the boring lights they all look mostly the same. Case and point with the G.T.O, I cant believe they did that to the car. Front end was pretty boring but saved by the grill/scoop but the back end was but thats just my opinion. |
Those cars sell over 14,000 units a month. Each.
This is the problem with "car enthusiasts." They're so obsessed with heritage, with making sure that cars "live up to their name," that they completely ignore all the other factors that go into building cars.
To the majority of Americans, the new body style Malibu IS revolutionary styling, a welcome deviation from the camry and accord. Very few people today want their family sedans to look like they can go 120 MPH, rather, they want their family sedans to look more expensive than they actually are. The Malibu is a perfect example of this. European-like styling, smooth body lines, and premium materials are what consumers want in a car now.
And you can design a car to look as pretty as you want, but in the end, sales are all that matter.