GTP Cool Wall: 2006+ Chery QQ6

[NLxAROSA]

Last time you did such a thing a heated discussion lasting more than seven pages erupted. I'm pretty sure it was a rhetorical question too, and it's not like you're the only one with privileges to find out who voted for what, people can do it themselves.

Heated discussion? What did I miss? Anyway, I don't see the problem with his post?

 

[SVX]

Heated discussion? What did I miss? Anyway, I don't see the problem with his post?

In the McLaren F1 cool wall thread, people were shocked people were voting something other than Sub Zero, someone wrote the names down and then there was a huge heated discussion as to why Sub Zero or nothing wasn't allowed.

 

[Aphelion]

The third river styx car... that will be 10 drachmas. Enjoy your trip!

 

[Wolfe]

I already gave an explanation for my vote:

It's just a car, a cheap Chinese car. On its list of failures, you can add that it fails to offend me. The "we don't give a 🤬" attitude behind its design and assembly actually makes it kind of cool. Meh.

I do think people are voting SU only because that's where they expect everyone to put it, but hey, "automatically SU because crappy Chinese car" is as valid of a vote as any.

The way I see it, the QQ6 can't be that uncool because it didn't even try. It doesn't try to be fast, it doesn't try to be stylish, it doesn't try to be cool. Chery didn't even try to make it well-built (by western standards). It's just a cheap car. I certainly expect a cheap FWD 4-cylinder sedan to earn a number of SU votes, but I don't quite understand why it was expected to be unanimous. Because China?

 

[mustafur]

I already gave an explanation for my vote:

I do think people are voting SU only because that's where they expect everyone to put it, but hey, "automatically SU because crappy Chinese car" is as valid of a vote as any.

The way I see it, the QQ6 can't be that uncool because it didn't even try. It doesn't try to be fast, it doesn't try to be stylish, it doesn't try to be cool. Chery didn't even try to make it well-built (by western standards). It's just a cheap car. I certainly expect a cheap FWD 4-cylinder sedan to earn a number of SU votes, but I don't quite understand why it was expected to be unanimous. Because China?

With these chinese cars, its more then just being a cheap car it's the level of what they will take to make it as cheap as possible(See asbestos), they are clearly trying to make a big profit on these cars because they are barely cheaper then significantly better made cars.

A Dacia Sandero is a cheap car, but it's harmless, this is Cheap to the point of danger.

 

[Wolfe]

With these chinese cars, its more then just being a cheap car it's the level of what they will take to make it as cheap as possible(See asbestos), they are clearly trying to make a big profit on these cars because they are barely cheaper then significantly better made cars.

A Dacia Sandero is a cheap car, but it's harmless, this is Cheap to the point of danger.

Building a car with asbestos because you just don't care about the dangers is pretty cool, if you ask me. "Not following the rules" is one of the definitions of cool, the black leather jacket and sunglasses kind.

 

[Tyger]

Lots of stuff still contains asbestos nowadays, for example fireproof filing cabinets. It's how asbestos is treated or worked with that can make it dangerous. I'm not sure anyone who drives this car is going to be breathing in asbestos dust. Other parts of cars are dangerous too, such as fuel injection systems and even the locking mechanisms on seatbelts.

 

[niky]

With these chinese cars, its more then just being a cheap car it's the level of what they will take to make it as cheap as possible(See asbestos), they are clearly trying to make a big profit on these cars because they are barely cheaper then significantly better made cars.

A Dacia Sandero is a cheap car, but it's harmless, this is Cheap to the point of danger.

As I've already explained, the asbestos was an honest mistake.

No car manufacturer goes out in the morning and says: "Hey, lets go build some cars with arsenic-laced washer fluid, mercury-filled light-fixtures and asbestos-lined ceilings just so we can kill off some Australians."

Instead, asbestos is still the material of choice for exhaust gaskets and wraps out in countries that are not US/Europe/Japan. I drove a prototype last month with asbestos exhaust wrap. Hell, I had it on my car.

Complaining that Chinese manufacturers make cars "as cheap as possible" because they use asbestos is like complaining European and Japanese manufacturers are eco-terrorists for not making DPF mandatory outside the US. It's just not a widespread requirement, yet.

-

That said, the QQ6 really is as cheap as possible... but not quite as cheap as some.

 

[SagarisGTB]

I do think people are voting SU only because that's where they expect everyone to put it, but hey, "automatically SU because crappy Chinese car" is as valid of a vote as any.

The way I see it, the QQ6 can't be that uncool because it didn't even try. It doesn't try to be fast, it doesn't try to be stylish, it doesn't try to be cool. Chery didn't even try to make it well-built (by western standards). It's just a cheap car. I certainly expect a cheap FWD 4-cylinder sedan to earn a number of SU votes, but I don't quite understand why it was expected to be unanimous. Because China?

This.

This car doesn't incite any feelings for me, it's pure meh.

 

[Roger the Horse]

It's just plain bland utilitarian transport. It's not especially ugly, it's not a ponzi scheme, it's not the vehicle of choice of any sort of subculture, it's just a car. Probably not a very good car, but it doesn't do anything to warrant being seriously uncool in my books.