RE: Ugly wagons (Audi's competition)

[Henry Harper <hah@srv.net>]

> <snip>
> <The 5000w is exactly the same as the 5000 sedan, with the only difference
> <being the bottom edge of the window gets extended back, turned into a hatch
> <and that piece of metal called the "trunk" goes bu-bye.  It just doesn't
> <look right.
>
> Yes, true. The biggest difference beyond the obvious is the rear suspension.
> IMFO,
> the 5000/200 wagons look _excellent_ and in fact looks better Vs the sedans
> from some
> angles. When the wagon has the roof-rails removed they can really look very
> sharp indeed.
> This is one wagon I never feel embarrassed to be seen in and no excuses are
> needed!
>
> - -glen
>

Speaking of excellent-looking wagons.
Saw my first 91-200-q-avant last Friday (Wyoming plates, headed the other way 
on I-86, me in GTI), same color (bamboo) as my 91-200-q-sedan. I really dig 
those flared fenders! Dare I say they make it look a bit like the WMB touring, 
which I find to be not bad looking for a wagon. No, I better not say that. I 
probably better not also say that I find the flared-fender cars (V8, 91-200-q) 
*much* more attractive than the fleet-side ones (5K, 100 including avants). 
Because that would make me a victim of optic tuning, even though I could argue 
that I associate the flares with actual increased performance via more powerful 
engines and ability to fit wider tires. It's a Pavlovian thing, that's it.

ducking,
Henry Harper
http://www.srv.net/~hah
1991 200 quattro, 87k, metal fender flares, ding ding ding
1988 GTI 16v, 176k, plastic fender flares, what can I say...