Iceberg Chart: /o/ Edition

File: 060.jpg (104KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 400x400px

much better

We've been a board for like a decade, and we only now think to do this?

Brands like TATA and Ssangyong are the most common brands in their respective countries but are unheard of most countries outside of their own hence why they are in the "casual scum" category.

Please feel free to tell me where to move certain brands or to name a few brands I may have missed. I know that lot of the brands here deserve to be better than casual. I think I put them there because of their sheer popularity.

I'll use this name for now.

>Porsche, VW and Land Rover are still not enthusiast level
Not an improvement at all.

do tuning houses count for this

>>16748868
Lada was debatable seeing as around 65% of Russia drives one or a variant of one and they are still relatively popular in Eastern Europe, so it obviously isn't something an outcast would drive(besides in a western country). but at the same time they still face significant backlash and are often the butt of many jokes.

Should it be casual or weird?

File: Manufacturer depth levels.png (784KB, 770x1280px) Image search: [Google]

784KB, 770x1280px

I prefer my own because I'm an egocentrical faggot (>>>16748121) but your knowledge of obscure brands certainly makes this work. What about dividing some of them between eras to reach a more cohesive ranking? Modern Alfa Romeo doesn't really compare to classic Alfa, for instance.

>>16748834
Just noticed,
>Midget
>Hardcore
They're literally the British equivalent of the Miata, I wouldn't but them below "that weird guy".

File: caralikes.jpg (27KB, 309x309px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 309x309px

Ruf should be in enthusiast. They are technically a car manufacture, even though it's a Porsche body. Singer Vehicle Design is another one you could add under enthusiast

..or maybe both of those are "Weird Guy" .. I don't know.

>>16748888
I had to add brands and do a general survey before I actually go and move brands around. I have to redo the whole thing to preserve the iceberg picture. If you notice, none of the other brands moved either. Don't worry, they'll move.

>>16748910
Your chart revolves around /o/ culture in itself, hence the individual car models. I think both charts serve a valuable purpose but I think the eras would be better suited on yours.

>>16748888
how is Land Rover and VW an enthisiast car you didn't reply to the list of normie trash VW cars and everyone knows Land Rovers are literally soccer mom garbage.

File: 919fa7f61564c6c1094df4e13ffa0985.jpg (108KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 720x540px

>>16748940
>Land Rovers are literally soccer mom garbage
Fucking wot? Also, I don't think I really owe you an explanation as to why Volkswagen is, at the very least historically remarkable and worthy of petrolhead praise it gets, you'll just have to figure it out for your own.

>>16748959
What else should come out or go lower on casual?

>>16748986
Citroen and Renault might be really common around Europe but both of them also produced some incredibly fun and creative cars. Worthy of enthusiast grade, at the very least.

>>16748959
>Historically has the bug and minivan, the most generic "that's a car" cars on the planet
>Currently a go to first car becuase golfs and bugs are cheap and plentiful
>Currently a go to family car because Passats are cheap as fuck

Insecure Golf owner detected

>>16748997
So did pretty much every generic Japanese car brand, outliers don't mean it should be moved.

>>16748959
read
>>16749040

>>16749018
>the most generic "that's a car" cars on the planet
Can you even articulate as why they're "generic"? Maybe it's because the original Bug and the Kombi had a cultural impact of sorts? I'm not even the greatest VW fan around but you have to be really fucking stubborn to refuse their historical importance. Literally all you can say is that they are "go to firs car" because they're cheap but you can't deny that they are good machines nonetheless.

>>16749040
But I mean, aren't the important Renault and Citroen cars remarkable for enthusiasts nonetheless? Are you really going to drown out the DS3, the Traction Avant, the 2CV, the Alpines, etc., as "outliers"?

>>16748834

switch AMC and delorean

>>16749064
There's a dumb amount of 'remarkable' Japanese enthusiast cars from Mazda, Toyota, and Nissan but that doesn't make the brands any less normie teir.

File: icecar3.png (885KB, 680x1073px) Image search: [Google]

885KB, 680x1073px

>>16748997
Land Rover And Porsche are going on enthusiast without a doubt. Brands like Volkswagen, Citroen & Renault do have rich automotive history and have definitely made more than their fair share of enthusiast cars, the only thing is that their current lineup is primarily based on passenger cars for the general public. I'm American so I wont put anything about those three brands until I get some more perspective on how these brands are seen in Europe. Chevrolet and Ford make sports cars and have a vast history, but most of the cars that they sell are just basic transportation. Hence why they would go to the casual section. Both brands have decent communities regarding aftermarket tuning too but it doesn't change the fact that most of their market is towards the average car buyer. VW is on the same level as GM and Ford, where that is is up to you all.

File: tmp_1580-P9302181757306625.jpg (61KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 480x360px

>>16748834
>Level 7: Frazer Nash

File: icecar3.png (885KB, 680x1073px) Image search: [Google]

885KB, 680x1073px

Revised:the top of "enthusiast" is really for most expensive modern cars that are popular with the rich and sought after by the average person, but also have a dedicated community for their classic models as well.

The bottom of enthusiast is more for /o/-tier type stuff.

I don't know why but I would love to own a yellow brickin sv1 i, wouldn't put it that far down, it's somewhat known

>>16749147
I'll put it slightly below Delorean
>>16748917
Alright

File: titanic.jpg (365KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 1600x1200px

>>16748834
Guys...
I found Mitsubishi...

File: tmp_1580-1936_Bugatti_Type57SCAtlantic31063204452.jpg (232KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1024x683px

>>16749138
Bugatti belongs there, then. You've got retards who drool over the jewgatty oyveyron, and the people who appreciate their history.

>>16749188
Babbys first rap career car

File: icecar3.png (887KB, 680x1073px) Image search: [Google]

887KB, 680x1073px

>>16749188

File: icecar3.png (888KB, 680x1073px) Image search: [Google]

888KB, 680x1073px

Saturn was moved from causal to weird seeing as it has been defunct for almost a decade and are really only seen as beaters. The once vibrant and active online Saturn community is now a desolate shadow of its former self. GEO is self explanatory. (hypermiling owners moved on to the Prius, Brian Wells, general stigma)

>>16749281

This is the opposite of progress here..

>>16749411
How? It's a renovation from the ground up.

>>16749424

I fully support the recreation of the iceberg chart, but I personally don't think you simply generalize ALL of Lamborghini, Maserati and - more significantly Ferrari and Porsche - right at the top of Level 2 for what seems to be the sake of convenience. The latter 2 along with 100+ years of Bentley weirdness should be either broken down further or analyzed more specifically by era.

>>16748834
You do know most Geos are literally Suzukis, right.

File: icecar3point5.png (888KB, 680x1073px) Image search: [Google]

888KB, 680x1073px

>>16749471
Where would you put them? Keep in mind that this is also based on public perception too, these cars are popular with the "online celebrity/oil rich" car crowd and are sought after by millions of teenagers. I also have to make this correspond to other enthusiast brands such as SAAB and bands that aren't casual but aren't weird like Oldsmobile. I'll work on this tomorrow too, but this is where I left off. Tell me what to change an where to put brands.


>>16749496
>>16749375

>>16749554
*and where

>>16749554

Is it public perception or /o/'s perception? More importantly I'm not saying I have all the answers regarding placement, I just think throwing what looks like a list of >75% of European auto manufacturers that produce at least 1 car worth more than $100k 2017 USD all in one conglomerated category is just a little hasty.

>>16749611
This list can be reassembled at any time, I can delete and rearrange brands to wherever formation you want them in. The problem is that this is a case by case thing. Is a Ferrari more casual than a Volvo because it is admired by a wider variety of people? Is a Volvo more casual than a Ferrari because they are cheaper to own and have a much higher rate of ownership? I can't really make these decisions without input from all of you.

>>16749666
This is why you need to include models.

Liking a McLaren P1 is top normie shit.

Liking a McLaren F1 is patrician.

>>16749496
Two Suzukis, two Isuzus, and a Toyota.

>>16749672
>Implying the F1 isn't normie tier as well
Come on, at least fap over the XJ220 or MC12. Not that either is particularly obscure, but literally everyone over the age of 20 remembers when the F1 was the equivalent of the Veyron today (granted, it's much less hideous than the Veyron).

File: Yamaha-Sports-Ride-concept-101-876x535[1].jpg (100KB, 876x535px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 876x535px

Where is Yamaha?

>>16749554
AMC, eagle, yugo put them in the outcast box.

>>16748834
I think Factory Five should be put fairly deep down because you have to be crazy enough to build one of the damn things to own one 95% of the time.

>>16748834
Rover should be weird guy level

>>16750182
>tfw no Yamaha V12
Why live?

File: tmp_1580-p1-55f6e0949e500-55f844bbd1045249000649.jpg (76KB, 1200x630px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1200x630px

>>16750648
Derp, forgot the picture as usual.

>>16748834
it's Wartburg, not Watburg

File: 1404785308427.gif (2MB, 399x274px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 399x274px

>>16748834
>want to get a mazda rotary weekend car and an Ion Redline dd
>no one anywhere in this area has any idea what something like an Rx8 is and thinks a redline will be shit because Saturn
>somehow I'm casual scum

>>16748910
You should put Tesla up at Casual Scum and other mass production EVs down where Tesla is.

Then put pre-2015 EV conversions upside down on the back of the png.

>>16748834
>2nd to last level on this because french
>>16748910
>last level because also french
hue

>>16749134
I work for the same enterprise that owns Frazer Nash, they are now an engineering consultancy

>>16748910
>volvo
>that weird guy

scary accurate

>>16748834
I'm not seeing Triumph which could fit in 2 or 3, but I may just be blind. Also Puch could go in 4 or 5.

need to put Ultima in 3 or 4

Where do GM F-bodies go? The newest ones are 12 years old at this point, though there's still a very strong community.