All-New 2022 Subaru BRZ Makes Global Debut

[Vides990]

Originally Posted by ZDan

"Flow" is subjective.

Ehhhh Flow isn't really subjective. Its both calculated mathematically and in the classical design sense (hundreds and hundreds of years here) has been used to describe the way lines and curves can create organic looking beauty. The picture someone on this forum made where they over-traced the lines of both cars showed the disjointedness of the Gen 2 quite clear in comparison to the Gen 1. Now what someone finds beautiful or good looking is certainly subjective and you can obviously like the gen 2 design more lol.

The upper fender plastic "vent" on the Gen 1 helps continue the hard line, soft curve design features of the car that started at the front and swept through the rear. And, if you get ballsy with a saw work very well for actual underhood cooling lol compared to the tacked on mpg inspired subaru outback "functional" vents that are best case aero only.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Vides990

And, if you get ballsy with a saw work very well for actual underhood cooling lol compared to the tacked on mpg inspired subaru outback "functional" vents that are best case aero only.

It has been done already by the factory on a special spec model for additional engine cooling. Not that hard to be done by an enthusiast too.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Vides990

Ehhhh Flow isn't really subjective.

Cars looks = subjective.

IF you wanna get extremely pedantic and talk about the technical mathematical meaning of "flow", for sure the first gen's front fender profile consisting of a flat line from the cowl to a constant-radius curve "fender bump" doesn't "flow" as smoothly as the 2nd gen's continuously-variable (prolly cubic) curves.

The picture someone on this forum made where they over-traced the lines of both cars showed the disjointedness of the Gen 2 quite clear in comparison to the Gen 1. Now what someone finds beautiful or good looking is certainly subjective and you can obviously like the gen 2 design more lol.

OK, we're in the subjective realm, and yeah, I found the line scribbles on the 2nd gen to look better, FLOW better, and look less pinched vs. 1st gen.

For me, I think they both look fine (well, 1st-gen really has to be lowered to achieve coolness...). Not 240Z or S2000 greatness, but pretty good. To my eye, the 1st gen looks more mecha/aggro, and 2nd gen looks more organic/sculpted.

[Vides990]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Cars looks = subjective....a whole bunch of English language bastardization.

I said car looks are subjective, however the use of the word flow when describing design elements is not. If you can't grasp that, I can't help ya.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Vides990

I said car looks are subjective, however the use of the word flow when describing design elements is not. If you can't grasp that, I can't help ya.

'Did you even read the rest of my post?

And yeah, FLOW is also SUBJECTIVE, particularly when talking about looks. If you can mathematically categorically precisely *quantify* "flow" for 1st and 2nd gen styling, go right ahead.

[Vides990]

Originally Posted by ZDan

'Did you even read the rest of my post?

Yes I did, did you read mine?

And yeah, FLOW is also SUBJECTIVE, particularly when talking about looks.

No it is not, this is incorrect.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Vides990

No it is not, this is incorrect.

Of course it is subjective. If it isn't, again I invite you to share with us precisely what "flow" objectively *is* for the 1st and 2nd gens. Take it away...

[Dake]

YES IT IS

NO IT ISN'T

I think one of you is arguing flow as in the properties of fluid dynamics and the other is arguing flow as in an aesthetic collection of lines and curves. An item can flow aesthetically yet have terrible "flow" where air movement is concerned or vice versa. For example, many of the "aerodynamic" automotive stylings from the fifties and sixties were anything but. One could argue that they both flowed and did not flow.

In connection to the twins, the earlier version has an appreciably low Coefficient of Drag, so it could be argued to "flow" in both manners. We don't have numbers for the new one yet, leaving only the subjective aesthetic version available for comment at the moment (and I do personally agree that the front half and the back half don't quite fit together for me, even if it's growing on me a bit).

So you're both right, calm down.

[Vides990]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Of course it is subjective. If it isn't, again I invite you to share with us precisely what "flow" objectively *is* for the 1st and 2nd gens. Take it away...

The person below you didn't have any issues understanding, maybe you just need a solid re-read, as it's already been stated.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Vides990

The person below you didn't have any issues understanding, maybe you just need a solid re-read, as it's already been stated.

You're talking out of your *
The End

[Wally86]

Originally Posted by Vides990

The person below you didn't have any issues understanding, maybe you just need a solid re-read, as it's already been stated.

Originally Posted by ZDan

You're talking out of your *
The End

Get a room!

[Vides990]

Originally Posted by ZDan

You're talking out of your *
The End

[DarkSideFRS]

Originally Posted by ZDan

You're talking out of your *
The End

fanboys need to learn when they have been put in their place

[Willpower]

DarkSideFRS you are indeed a hateful, soulless and humorless bastard with little of value to offer. Having said that, you have to admit that ZDan’s previous “the hate is strong with this one” regarding you was pretty damn funny. I do understand however that you may be angry due to his clever quip that describes you adequately in just a few words, and at your expense. Still, you should let these two fight amongst themselves, because in wading in to subjects that are clearly over your head, you risk drowning in your own stupidity and general lack of couth, while entertaining us with your floundering in a sea of relative intelligence and more refined sensibilities.