Re: Dander up!

[Josh Pinkert <flush@radix.net>]

At 09:31 PM 9/10/97 -0700, Michael Murphy wrote:
>Dave Head wrote:
>> 
>> At 02:15 PM 9/10/97 -0400, you wrote:
>> >Really, though...the 5000 is/was not a beautiful
>> >car, but it sure does drive nicely.  That's where the real magic is!
>> 
>> Whoa! Most people I know, including 'non car' people believe the styling on
>> 5K/100/200 is downright elegant. I like the XJ styling more ('series', not
>> 40) - but for a car designed in the late 70s/early 80s and produced in '84
>> with minor changes in 7 years of production, I have to throw the flag. As a
>> sport luxury sedan I believe the styling is classic - they still look good
>> next to many of the eggs on the road today. I see plenty of lines copied
>> from it in Hondas, Toyotas, Nissan etc...
>> 
>> ********************************AUDI FAN***********************************
>>                                    EMCM(SW) Dave Head
>> 87 5KCStq 205K miles                1.7 bar
>>     qcusa #3442                 Maitland, Florida
>>
******************************************************************************
>Bravo, encore. Oh, we're not at the Met.  But classic they are, so hold
>onto em.  Even my poor plain vanilla 89 100 turns heads (no wisecracks).
>MJ Murphy
>
>

Agreed...classic.  But classic does not mean beauty.  And beauty is in the
eye of the beholder.  Audi 5000, I don't behold...you do.  That's why you
like the way it looks.

Remember that the 'timeless' lines of the 5000 were a little controversial
when it first came out.  And those looks have been refreshed before...just
not this drastically.  How about the 20V hood change?  IMHO, a change for
the better.  My '88 90q surely would have looked better with the '89 hood
change as well.

Either way, the family lineage in the new A6 is still evident.  It still
looks like an audi...a few quirks, but still an audi.


--
Josh Pinkert
flush@radix.net
--