Why don't cars look like this anymore?

>>17598460
Because muh aerodynamics.

cucking for fuel mileage and pedestrian saftey
every car has to look like a bar of soap now

>>17598460
Because compact cars.

https://youtu.be/nYSCG46aL0E

File: image.jpg (106KB, 660x440px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 660x440px

>>17598460
You could have at least picked a good looking car.

File: 6b6f48d83a6ce791dfacce8ae479c80f--s-car-family-cars.jpg (84KB, 736x612px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 736x612px

>>17598480
Not necessarily. You think sports cars can't pass legal muster? You can still make a good looking car, but automakers have this thing called forced market segmentation. It's how the rich define the culture of the poor.

The only cheap cars they make are soap bars. There's no actual cost difference. The designer makes the same amount of money, even. But because you are not paying them an extra 100 grand, you get a bar of soap. This is an incentive for you to save up and buy their more expensive, less soapy looking models. It's also a solid business model.

This has been going since before soap. People post higher end cars of years past, but econoboxes of the time were no more attractive in the public eye than altimas are today. If anything, they still looked like soap, even if your milennial mind thinks anything old is automaticall cool.

Oh yes, every now and then, there's a cheap car that looks nice. Every now and then. But it's the exception, not the rule.

File: bobby.jpg (47KB, 558x564px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 558x564px

>aerodynamics
>on the ground

does not matter
especially following the speed limit

>>17598502
Go get yourself a cheap motorcycle. Full fairings. 250cc. Tuck in and go 60mph. Now sit upright so you're right in the wind and watch your speed drop, necessitating more air/fuel burned (power) to achieve the same land speed.

File: images (2).jpg (5KB, 248x203px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 248x203px

>air doesn't exist on the ground

File: 800x0_1_q87_autohomecar__wKgH21g9TgSAJshAAAW4V4Im9PQ799.jpg (77KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 800x600px

>>17598460
The new kinda has an old school vibe, maybe if the trunk was longer

>>17598460
daily reminder that these threads are just as cringe as redditors dressing like al capone

File: trk.jpg (131KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 1920x1080px

>>17598502
Yes it does.

>>17598528
The concept car was actually very good looking... but the production model looks like a fucking taurus

>>17598460
because it looked like shit. american car design has always been dog shit.

>>17598460
isn't this the car from the first matrix?

>>17598528
not really, it looks like a generic modern saloon car
It isn't stately

>>17598460
>Why don't cars look like this anymore?
Because the government wants car manufactures to make cars that are fuel efficient, but at the same time require cars to be safer and safer which requires more and more weight.

>>17598502
It matters more since the air is thickest near the ground :^)

>>17598460
cultural marxism

>>17598496
>forced market segmentation. It's how the rich define the culture of the poor.
This, so much this.

This shit has driven me up the fucking wall my entire life.

When I was younger I wished somebody would come in and disrupt this bullshit. Leverage the fuck out of economies of scale and deliver cheap cars that are styled well with good driving dynamics. Then I got older and realized things are the way they are for a reason. Normies are so used to this shit they are convinced that good stuff can't be cheap, and they wont buy it.

>>17600937
the air in the sky is thicker because it is cold
have you heard of a cold air intake