quote:

---

Originally posted by: nameta9
" Anyways the fact is "progess" should mean "better" more choices, more comfort, more colors etc. So we had oldsmobile in 1970 offering 12 or so colors and cloth combinations and now mercedes , cadillac lexus offer almost "exclusively" one color, black-gray leather bucket seats that seem to have come all from one facotry! I have actually been to some dealers as someone hear suggested to check it out. And all the dealers had on their showrooms only black-grayish leather (or whatever it is , I am not sure, becuase it doesn't really seem luxurious to me, it seems very bland..).

Anyways mercedes didn't have an S at hand but an E. I was suprised to find out how cramped that car really was both up front and behind. I thought I was exaggerating, but the E at least is not comfortable. I am average hight, but I think those interiors had nothing attractive to them and were even small."

---

I guess I don't agree with your definition of better then. I'm perfectly fine with having two or three choices, black, grey, and a tan or ivory for my leather choices. My car has dark navy leather, which is interesting, but I probably wouldn't buy a new car with a blue interior anyway. Anyway, I definitely think that interiors are "better" than they used to be, even if they don't have as many colors.
The E-Class isn't cramped, if you thought it was cramped, try a compact car, but the rear seat isn't very roomy, either.

Were you planning to answer the questions that were presented since your last post, or were you just planning to continue to say the same things?
My promise to lock this thread still stands.

You basically just said what you've said in every other one of your posts. One more like that and I'm locking the thread.

Even though I made a point or three agreeing with the issue, I won't go sa ofar as to say that the reduced choices for interiors is good or bad.  It simply "IS".  The evolution of auto production has evolved, just as almost every other form of consumer goods production has.  Greater efficiency has kept costs from spiralling out of control, allowing prices to be contained while still permitting advances in technology to filter down from high end cars to the entry level.  As I noted, in the hey day of options, the late '60s and early '70s, there were often as many as 15 interior colors available.  However, 3 or 4 of those colors accounted for 80-90% of sales.  Producing those other interior pieces was HORRIBLY innefficient, both in resources and time.  The Japanese and Germans were slightly better, but all of the manufacturers slowly cmae to realize that if they reduced the combination of options, they could increase production efficiency, which also increased profits.

Okay, so you lose a few options.  But the cars over all are better, and saving money in one area of production is one of the things that has allowed the proliferation of safety equipment like ABS, Traction Control and side air bags.

A similar argument can be made about the exterior design of cars.  While there are a few REALLY beautiful cars on the market today, most main stream cars look remarkably similar, and to many buyers are also kind of bland looking.  For example, the Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Chevy Malibu and VW Jetta are all decent looking mid sized cars.  BUt very few people would be truly moved to call them beautiful.  In contrast, the cars from the '50s to mid '70s, American, German, Japanese, French, etc, were often wildly styled with lots of ornamentation, intricate detail work, scoops, ducts, coves and fins.  These cars were gorgeous to many people, but were also wasteful of resources, non-aerodynamic, unsafe to both occupants and pedestrians and had many ergonomic flaws.  These cars looked much better than they performed.  Todays cars, by contrast, may not look as exciting, but they are much better at serving the primary reasons for a cars existance: safely transporting people in comfort.

Its just me; I have an aesthetical taste that tells me the interiors of the american luxury cars from 1955-1989 where really top notch. Any interior today can't compare! The wide straight dashboards, all the leg room up front and back , plush velour seats etc.
The point is that yes the cars today are safe and are technically better, but the interior aesthetics today really suck even for the highest class cars! I saw a ferrari interior, it is a sports car so no one cares about the interior "luxury", but compared to an oldsmobile 98 of say 1970, it looks like the cheapest car imaginable!

You guys talk about production cost etc, hey we have had 30 years of computer evolution and research by loads of companies in US, Europe and japan, result is we can only have one kind of car seat and color.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: nameta9
"Its just me; I have an aesthetical taste that tells me the interiors of the american luxury cars from 1955-1989 where really top notch. Any interior today can't compare! The wide straight dashboards, all the leg room up front and back , plush velour seats etc.
The point is that yes the cars today are safe and are technically better, but the interior aesthetics today really suck even for the highest class cars! I saw a ferrari interior, it is a sports car so no one cares about the interior "luxury", but compared to an oldsmobile 98 of say 1970, it looks like the cheapest car imaginable!

You guys talk about production cost etc, hey we have had 30 years of computer evolution and research by loads of companies in US, Europe and japan, result is we can only have one kind of car seat and color. "

---

You continue to repeat yourself. You also continue to be the only person I've ever heard of thinking the "old plush velour" seats of the 70s, etc. are better than the seats in most luxury cars today. Ferrari isn't a car for beautiful interiors, most ultimate sports cars aren't. A flat dash with square hard plastic (or metal, in some cars) panels and absolutely no curves from the 70s certainly doesn't look more upscale to me than a current Lexus LS or Volkswagen Phaeton interior, and I'm really not sure how it could to anyone, but I'll respect that opinion. I will not respect the statement that "we only have one type of car seat and color" because it's not true. There are very few cars with one seat color, and normally it's black on a unique exterior color. Most high end cars still have at least two, normally three or four, interior colors, with even more wood combinations. And as for seats being the same, I have very, very, little trouble telling the difference in seats amongst competing cars. I don't know where you're getting that at all. Have you been in a high-end car that was made within the last ten years? Because it certainly seems like you haven't driven one, or your opinion would almost definitely be different.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: nameta9
"I guess if the demand was high enough, the manufacturers would introduce straight dashes and eliminate the central console, that I think really kills leg room. But that is the way it is. Yes some luxury cars today are nicer than others, but what I find strange also is that the back room of the cars vary alot amongst manufacturers. I don't think they pay enough attention to the back seat room in some cases. The Mercedes E doesn't have so much and yet it is a long car, while even VW Passat is more comfortable in the back. It may be my impression, but given the same length, the back seat room seems to vary alot."

---

It's all in the packaging, and a family sedan usually has more work done to ensure a comfortable rear seat than a Mercedes. Also, the Passat's FWD setup is more space-efficient in that area.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: nameta9
"
Take a look at what "luxury" really means:

http://www.fedrelandsvennen.no/amcar/brochures/buick/75_50.html

Well we won't be seeing anything even close to this kind of luxury anymore.
Compared to any luxury car today, this interior like many others on that site seem like science fiction!

It does give me the impression that we were much "richer" 30 years ago than today, or at least it looks so "aesthetically". It is even interesting to see how much the aesthetics has changed, where all the older brochures concentrated on what the driver and passenger experience within the car and very little on the "technical" (or sports) aspects. Granted this is USA 30 years ago, and I don't think any country will really ever reach this kind of luxury (even though many would say it is only superficial luxury, i don't agree; ). We will tend towards smaller cars probably and cars may end up becoming a luxury altogether considering all the problems involved (polution, gas prices, congestion) ...

"

---

I don't see cars becoming a luxury in the US as they are in Europe, thanks to the US's suburban structure. With that system, and considering the size of the United States relative to most European countries, automobiles will continue to be necessities for most people.

Also, I don't see cars getting smaller. When a car is redesigned, it typically grows in exterior and engine size, and focuses increasingly on interior packaging and efficiency at the same time.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: nameta9
"Interesting point. But that is also why at least in the US we should have stayed with that kind of luxury since we had the room to. Maybe China or Russia could concieve 1970 style cadillacs, they have the room and China seems to be evolving into a consumer society. I just don't think we will see that kind of luxury anymore; yeah, todays luxury cars are also nice and all but really I just loved those old luxury cars! I remember when I went to the showrooms in the 70s (south NJ) and sat in these cars, they really where great!

There is a problem though, is that if the other countries keep growing they will use more and more steel, gas, wood etc. and in the long run even the US will pay more for everything. I guess the era 1950 -1990 was when the US (with some Euro-Japan) was the sole world consumer of most resources, but that is changing and will have its effect."

---

We aren't going back to the cars of the 70s. People care too much about decent driving dynamics, which would be hard to manage on something that large. Also, such a size would limit acceleration and lead to horrid fuel economy. And people just don't want anything that big anymore, it isn't practical. Efficient packaging is the currently popular way of making roomy vehicles, look to the Scion xB and the Ford Five Hundred as examples of that.