- 1,210
- Sydney
They both have the same general "Sport Coupe" shape, but if that's all that is needed to make two cars look a like then by that measure everything on the road looks like something else and designers would be out of a job.
The headlights on the Mustang are quite distinctive, and the 2 round lights in the grill are very iconic "mustang" features. The hood on the GT has a bulge, unlike on the Vantage which has venting cut into it. The doors on the GT have sharp lines that look similar to the fake rear fender vents on the previous gen, while the Vantage as very smooth rounded doors.
Again, both have 2 doors, 4 wheels, and a coupe styling which gives the cars small rear quarter windows.
These are two more sport coupes with 4 wheels, 2 doors, and small, angular rear quarter windows. Do these also look similar?
Perhaps we have very different views of "similar". If I see a glimpse of a 2011 mustang driving by I have little doubt that it's a 2011 mustang. I would never confuse a mustang of any vintage to be a Vantage unless the owner put on a Vantage body kit. At the extreme end of "similar" I could look at the current product line of Aston Martin, and at a quite drive-by glance it's quite difficult to tell if the car was a Vantage, V8 or V12, or a DB9 or a DBS, or a Virage.
Just so you know, its not my goal to offend you, so dont take it that way.
I completly agree with the points and principles you make in your in your text, but everytime you use an exmple it couldn't go further to convince me that we are miles from seeing eye to eye.
Both the BMW and cadilac look nothing alike. You grouping these cars yet again just shows to me either you are too obsessed with either the mustang or the Jag to see things clearly, or you have an extremely broad scope when it comes to determining details.
No one argue or mentioned anything about a coupe determining a certain look, everyone is alredy aware of that. Yet despite this, thee is a HUGE range even within a subgroup.
Those example you posted, Just wow, you shot yourself in the foot. IT jtust goes ot show how vastly different all these cars are, yet the JAG and Mustang may as well be the automive equivalent of brothers.
Look at the window/body frames and shapes, look at the wheel arches, curves, heck even the Pillars, they all match so nicely betwen the jag an dthe mustang, if you have an eye for this sort of things theres no missing it.
The Cadilac and BMW 1 series you showed, their features look completly differnet. You have massively sharp angular curves in the windows in the cadi, the Pillar is completly differnet, nose, bonnet, body shaping, wheel arches etc. Same applies for the 3 series. The framework and detailing in the body couldnt be any more different.
Like I said unless you are passionate about either the Jag or Mustang as orignially compared, or I need a term much stronger than you have no eye for detail to describe what I think is going on here
I mean to me the similarity is blatant. If you are focussing on things like headlights or grill details then I think you're complety missing the pointand theres not much point in contuing the argument.
