OFFICAL "I've decided that the new BRZ isn't that bad looking" REGISTRY

[Slade]

Honestly I love it!

[AnalogMan]

Originally Posted by ZDan

For all the crying over the loss of the bumps, just pointing out that maybe they shouldn't be considered a requirement...

I agree that while they're not a requirement, I'm also totally with @Vides990 -

Originally Posted by Vides990

And while the bumps may not be a requirement, they were beautiful and helped the car look like nothing else in their families lineups, and we're a throw back to numerous classics. The '22 took generic to a new level.

There's nothing "wrong" with 'no bumps'. The look of the second gen car is either growing on me, or more likely I'm just getting used to it and imagining what it might be like to drive with the torquier 2.4 engine. As I and many others have said, aesthetics are a purely personal thing, few 'rights' or 'wrongs'. I personally think the second gen car looks fine. Depending on how it drives, it might even be enough to temp me away from my current 2019.

But to my old-school aging eyes, I find the first gen car better looking, in large part because of the 'bumps'. They both made the car distinctive from others on the market, a bit like the front fenders of the Cayman (not a bad thing), and like @Vides990 said, echoing the curvaceous, rounded, sensual styling of cars from the past (of course not 'retro' or a copy of 50's/60's designs, but enough to trigger a bit of nostalgia in me for my long lost and missed Opel GTs).

I think the first gen car is also a more cohesive design. The design is based on curves. The second gen car is a mixed bag. It combines some curves with some straight lines with some (to me) extraneous elements that I just can't understand, like the gigantic rocket bunny on steroids side sills that could stand in as running boards. It's almost channeling Chris Bangle and the Z4 (which I'm sure many people loved, but I'm not one of them).

Many people will like the second-gen car more than the first specifically because of the disparate styling elements, and that's perfectly fine and their personal choice. But I think it's hard to argue with it being less distinctive than the original.

[Dirty Harry]

Lol. Maybe this early test mule should’ve been the 2nd gen. Has the humps and the functional vents without the side skirts. Might’ve even had the 2.4l in there at the time of testing too.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by AnalogMan

But to my old-school aging eyes, I find the first gen car better looking, in large part because of the 'bumps'. They both made the car distinctive from others on the market, a bit like the front fenders of the Cayman (not a bad thing),

My psychosis compels me to point out that the Cayman is a nobumps car, with fenders more similar to the '22 than the current-gen!

nobumps:


nobmps:


bumps:

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by ZDan

My psychosis compels me to point out that the Cayman is a nobumps car, with fenders are more similar to the '22 than the current-gen!

I have a built in bias against Porsches because from the side view all I ever see is a Volkswagen Bug drawn by Chip Foose before he turns it into a street rod.

Yes, I know I just lost what little credibility I had.

[AnalogMan]

Originally Posted by ZDan

My psychosis compels me to point out that the Cayman is a nobumps car, with fenders more similar to the '22 than the current-gen!

Of course you're right, the Cayman is a bump-free design. But the front fenders are more of a pontoon than a bump. From the driver's seat (depending on your height), you get a nice view of the tops of the front fenders, similar (though greatly toned down) to the view through the windshield of the 911.

I can't tell if the second-gen BRZ front fenders are pontoon designs like the Cayman, or just generic 'fenders' closer in height with the hood.

[AnalogMan]

Originally Posted by Dirty Harry

Lol. Maybe this early test mule should’ve been the 2nd gen. Has the humps and the functional vents without the side skirts. Might’ve even had the 2.4l in there at the time of testing too.

That would have been my ideal next-gen BRZ (as long as it had the 2.4 engine).

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by AnalogMan

Of course you're right, the Cayman is a bump-free design. But the front fenders are more of a pontoon than a bump. From the driver's seat (depending on your height), you get a nice view of the tops of the front fenders, similar (though greatly toned down) to the view through the windshield of the 911.

I can't tell if the second-gen BRZ front fenders are pontoon designs like the Cayman, or just generic 'fenders' closer in height with the hood.

PonTOOOONS

[Vides990]

Originally Posted by AnalogMan

I can't tell if the second-gen BRZ front fenders are pontoon designs like the Cayman, or just generic 'fenders' closer in height with the hood.

They seem flatter to me from the matte black camo car and this picture, which I think is the most realistic looking one I've seen. Might be a little bump or pontoon up near the front, I don't expect it to be very visible to the driver, whether that matters or not

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Vides990

They seem flatter to me from the matte black camo car and this picture, which I think is the most realistic looking one I've seen. Might be a little bump or pontoon up near the front, I don't expect it to be very visible to the driver, whether that matters or not

The more realistic shots are with paint that isn't matte black, and with natural outdoor lighting instead of an indoor setting with light coming from every angle, which even flattens out and mostly invisibleizes the spats in front of the rear wheel.

This is what the car actually looks like, in real life:


Yes, you'll see pontoonage from the cockpit. I mean, you see the current-gen fender bumps, right? And they're actually not all that big/protuberant...

[AnalogMan]

Originally Posted by Vides990

They seem flatter to me from the matte black camo car and this picture, which I think is the most realistic looking one I've seen. Might be a little bump or pontoon up near the front, I don't expect it to be very visible to the driver, whether that matters or not

As crazy as it sounds, for me the pontoons or bumps or curves or whatever you want to call them just HAVE to be visible to me from the driver's seat. It makes all the difference.

One of the (many, many) things I loved about the 1992 Porsche 911 I once owned (and NEVER should have sold, just another in a very long line of mistakes and bad choices I've made in life...) was the ability to see those delicious, sensuous front fender pontoons through the windshield from the driver's seat. It's one of the little things that gives be a bit of a thrill with the styling of my current BRZ, a tiny little reminder of my long lost 911(hey, I'm old, I've got to get my pathetic little thrills wherever I can find them).

If I could see real pontoons from the driver's seat in the new car, it just might seal the deal for buying it (providing of course that the new engine is as much of a seat-of-the-pants improvement in driving feel as many of us are hoping it will be). But no visible pontoons, and I'll probably keep my current car.

Bumps matter.

[Sport-Tech]

+1 on being able to see something of the front corners of the car. I've driven a few modern cars in which you can see absolutely nothing of the front end beyond the base of a (ludicrously canted) windscreen, and I would NEVER consider buying a car with such a forward view.

[e30kawi]

I don't mind it and from the front I think the car looks fine but the backend looks like they just cobbled on some stuff. Doesn't seem to flow to me. But overall I think it looks nice, not gonna get rid of my current one for it.

But in all reality I initially didn't like the first gen in pictures (because of the fender bumps) but in person it won me over.

[Willpower]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I have a built in bias against Porsches because from the side view all I ever see is a Volkswagen Bug drawn by Chip Foose before he turns it into a street rod.

Yes, I know I just lost what little credibility I had.

Beg to differ. I find this post incredibly credible.