Jason

This is another good point about the car. I would agree the styling is not overly sexy or exciting, but nicely done. Having said that, I think the car looks terrific now and it will continue to look good in five or ten years. I think the 3-series is similar in that regard.

You're not crazy, excluding the NSX the TSX IS the best looking Acura ever made.

AcuraFan

Though I like the look of the TSX, I think the Legend looked/looks better.

XPLORx4

Speaking of styling that ages well, I still think the late-eighties Honda Prelude models (you know, the ones with the flat rear deck and the flip-up headlights) is a sharp-looking car. The 90-93 Accords also have nice lines enough to keep them from appearing "dated" as well.

Some cars tend to have a more gracefully aging shape than others. It is those cars whose designs are "trendy" which appear dated after a few years.

Brad

Other cars that stylistically will age well include some BMWs (the 3- and 5-series, but NOT the grotesque 7-series) and the Audis. Why? They all qualify as "bland", if we call clean and trim lines to be bland. Simplicity in understated styling is simply classy and ages well.

Has anyone seen the new 2004 Solara coupe? I saw one two weeks ago at the Toyota dealer in Oakland, California. (I was there to buy wiper inserts for my pick-up, not to drool over Toyotas.) It's one UGLY mama! That grill reminds me of someone who sucked a sour rotted lemon. It looks gauche and gaudy! Too bad!!! Had they fixed the styling weakness of the Solara, I might have been in the market for one because I couldn't stomach the '03 Accord coupe. (I'm a two-door-kind-of-car guy.) Thank god for the TSX--even tho it's a 4-door.

AcuraFan

You're talking about when I said "Arrogence" instead of "Arrogance"? I didn't know I we had people running spell checker...

You're getting on my case for typing an "e" instead of an "a"? One vowel in a 15 line post? Now THAT'S Arrogance.

I'll try not to make such a horrible mistake again. And don't worry though, now that I know you're watching my back there...I'll watch yours.

swami

I feel a little snobbish driving my TSX, and ya know what? I like it.

jcg878

Chill dude, nothing personal. Just trying to put a bit of irony in that post, which you obviously got.

bluesky

Brad I had to look it up after you mentioned it and man is that Solara hideous!!! Yuck!!! I rather liked the previous style and it's a shame they had to mess it up. Now there's a car that looks bloated...

darth62

Easy, Francis.

adam fiooz

"TSX is superior to a 325." Not!!


the accord coupe is art compared to the "tsx"

and the 325 owns the Accord coupe.

Brad

The car looked more grotesque in person than in the attached picture. The pictures don't reflect the glaring grill. In fact, the grill that I saw had an all chrome grill.

Toyota Solara

larchmont

Why not, flooz?

vitocorleone

Perhaps a mod changed his tagline for him? It's at least a step in the right direction that he can admit he's not to be taken seriously in any way, shape, form, or time. Ever. "Hello. My name is Adam Fiooz, and I'm an Accord-aholic". Of course, how do I even take myself seriously if I'm posting a comment about him? Hmm. A conundrum wrapped in an engima.

finalheaven

oh man... all i can do is laugh lol

rb4580

That Toyota needs to be recalled

TSeniorX

Oops, I must be in the wrong thread. I wanted to post something in the "TSX projects luxury and class" thread, but when I started my reading with the last page, I couldn't seem to find much of a reference to the subject!.

majormojo

Since we seem to be wandering off with this thread anyway, I'll throw this in. Seems to me that Toyota never quite seems to hit the 'home run' with its styling. While they come close to good designs now and then (current Celica is starting to grow on me, though I hated it at first), they mostly seem to alternate between drop-dead boring (Camry, Corolla - though the current ones are both better than their predecessors) and weird/goofy (Echo, Matrix, Prius).

Solara is a good example of this - the old one was boring, the new one is goofy. The Camry's always been boring. (My wife's comment on the current Camry was "this is an old man's car - we're not that old yet!" )

'Course style is pretty subjective so no hard feelings to you if the Echo or Solara is what ignites your autolust. It certainly doesn't do it for me.

iNteGraz92

thank you! there are so many bland cars out there, people overlook them i guess. except for honda of course. it's programmed in peoples minds that honda = bland.

XPLORx4

Blechh! It looks just as grotesque in the picture, too!

[image]http://www.toyota.com/images/vehicles/index/solara_mainlg.jpg[/image]

I think cars of the mid-2000's (2003-2008 or so) will have a distinctively "dated" appearance in a decade or so. Infiniti, Nissan, Toyota, Honda... all seem to have adopted a peculiar look that's neither here nor there. They will be as easy to pick out as a late-80's car: square edges, square headlamps, square taillamps... except these models will be known simply as "the butt-ugly years".

finalheaven

Im sure however all the new cars will grow on us. Although the new solara is just nasty... But im sure like how the celica did grow on me, so will the accord and other weird looking cars at the moment.

jcg878

I think Toyota has a brilliant approach to styling. Nothing is offensive, and nothing is really eye-catching. It may not be what pulls you onto the lot, but it won't push most people away. This in the middle approach appeals to a broader audience than cars that are more bold.

Now that I typed all that, I just checked the Solara out on edmunds... and DAMN it is ugly!! Still 'middle of the road' styling though. It can compete with the Accord Coupe for honors in the 'most similar to a bubble on wheels' category

MotownTSX

And this only matters if you give a shit what other people think of you. And they can think whatever the hell they want of me since they're about 40 yards behind me by now anyway.....

RA..........................HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! !!!

teombe

That Solara truly offends me... Looking at it's rear end is like cutting open an onion. :'(

That tailpipe hanging about 1/2" off the ground on most new toyotas is pretty eye-catching. WTF did they do that for? It looks broken!

MotownTSX

I like the RL for this honor. Subtlely sharp.

MotownTSX

That's truly a horrible approach if you ask me. "We are striving for mediocrity!!! Toyota!"

Booooo!!!

Solara, Echo, Prius, new Celica (old one was 100x better looking) DEFINITELY turn people away...

teombe

IMO, the one they screwed up most was the current generation ES300.. Ugh-lee!

MotownTSX

You decide:

No contest to me. If I wanted a laxative, I'd go to the drug store, not the local Honda dealer....



Tried to find a clean shot of the back end. Didn't exist. I wonder why Honda wouldn't have any clean shots of that? Hmmm...

jcg878

I guess I don't share many opinions with the resident Wings fan.

Toyota's styling may not appeal to you or me, but it's generic enough that they sell a shitload of cars. That's the brilliance. The styling is not offensive, so people won over by the merits of the cars (reliability, fit and finish, safety, etc) make decisions based on that alone. They think "sure that other car looks nice, but this Camry/Corolla/whatever looks ok and will last me forever."

1SICKLEX

I think it depends. If someone owns a Civic and sits in a TSX, hell yeah they think it's hella expensive. If someone owns a 540 and sits in the TSX, they will say "nice car" but not be blown away.

It depends on who the person is and what they have experienced and what they know. Some people can spot fake wood a mile away and instantly say YUCKKKK. Some people don't know the difference and add more fake wood to their cars.

It really all depends.

Concerning styling, it is UNIVERSALLY RECOGNIZED, Honda/Acura makes the blandest, most boring, witness-protection program looking cars. Every magazine, every writer states this on every Honda except maybe the NSX and S2000. Why? Honda has stated they WANT to make bland looking cars and that all Hondas and Acuras will look alike.

Toyota makes bland cars, yup they do, but they make ugly cars (which means AT LEAST they TOOK A CHANCE) and Awesome looking cars.


They ain't the 3rd soon to be 2nd largest auto maker for nothing.

SPUDMTN

Nicely said

Jason

I agree but I think the RL passes the torch, so to speak, to the TSX. I realize you can't compare a 2004 RL to a 2004 TSX, but my take is if you compare the RL when it was brand new to the TSX today, the TSX is still a more subtley sharp automobile. It may not be fair because of the evolution of design but it is what it is.

Jason

I disagree. Go back to the first post of this thread and read what I said about the S500 owner. He thought it was "hella expensive." This car can be appealing to a very wide range of people. I can see just about everyone I know driving this car. Both of them.

SPUDMTN

But let's face it--the entire Acura line is subtlely sharp. The RSX, TSX, TL, MDX, RL, and NSX are all beautifully sculpted cars. None of them are drop-dead gorgeous (save for the NSX, kind of) nor do they start trends--but they are clearly something special.

On a side note, I think the 2002 TL revision was much needed and looks amazing--seems to me like they actually simplified the overall look of the TL (those pre-2002 wheels are pretty bad).

As for whoever said the current 3-series will hold up well style wise...I'm not sure about that. The side profile of the 3er has plenty of little creases and folds that will help it withstand a beating from father time.

Sooo...in summary...Acura = understated elegance, that is simple, but clearly something special.


SPUDMTN

majormojo

Not sure I'd call that "brilliant". Unless I were a Toyota shareholder, that is. For the auto enthusiast, I'd call it "dissapointing" because they seem to just miss making cars that people want on an emotional level by this --><-- much.

jcg878

Ok, ok. Perhaps brilliant is too strong a word. As I said, I don't much care for Toyota styling. But I still think it is intelligent for them to make it middle-of-the-road. The bulk of their customers are not auto enthusiasts, they are people who just want a decent car to get them from point A to point B. If enthusiasts think their cars are bland or even boring BUT the shareholders are happy because the cars are selling, then the company could care less about what anyone else thinks.

Roadrunner_RENAMED

The last car Toyota produced that I loved was the previous Supra.
Now that was a car!
They have taken some chances with cars like the Spider but that car is really ugly! Compare it to the S2000. There is no doubt which car 99% of us would take.
I drove a Camry 6 mos. ago. Talk about vanilla drowning in vanilla sauce plain! But it would do as a commuter vehicle just fine.
Most people just want a car that they never wash, ding the doors, dent the fenders and runs for 100k without an oil change.
They just want it to start and get them there. They are the majority so the automakers cater to that market.
Toyota also gets points for the current Celica since it broke out of the vanilla mold.
Honda also has the vanilla mindset so many of there cars fall into
that category. The Civic is very plain to me but many chics want one!? Why, who knows better then Honda marketing.
Honda is experimenting in ugly with the Element. Not quite as ugly as G.M.'s Aztec but that would be a hard feat to overcome!
The Insight has unusual lines. Again, taking a chance.
You get my point, it can cost a company everything if they screw up a design. Case in point is Nissan that almost did not survive the 90's design flaws. JMHO

vitocorleone

You forget that the advantage to these supposedly "bland" (very subjective) cars is that they still look good after the next model comes out, and often even the model after that - and possibly beyond. Why? Because they are subtle and don't stand out and therefore don't get "dated" as quickly. Go take another look at a G35 sedan - pretty cool when it came out but it's already getting tiresome, but maybe that's just me.

Brad

Product-line identity is what fails Toyota, Honda, Chevrolet, Cadillac, Ford, Chryzler, Dodge, and others. Their designs--good or bad--are like a game of "52 Card Pickup". It's a mixmatch that yields little continuity in styling themes across their respective product lines. You would thinkg that product identity isn't important, but you think it should be.

In contrast, look at the BMW, Jaguar, Mercedes, and maybe Audi product lines--regardless of whether you like or dislike them or their styling--and you can generally see some family line styling continuity (with a few exceptions) that even if the badges were missing, you would know you were looking at a BMW or Jaguar or maybe an Audi--many of whose products simply mirror VW products with a different facia. (Lately, a few Mercedes and Chryzlers are showing signs of styling cross-polination, so there's a risk of product identity dilution there.)

I guess both approaches--styling continuity or lack thereof--have their advantages and disadavantages.

On the other hand, what's worse are those cars whose front ends and rear ends look totally unrelated stylistically--not that they should look the same. The styling theme should hold, however.

Also, disjointed off-balance trapezoids that some cars show today will be a ugly novelty in the years to come. Those cars will have to rely on the goodness of what's under their sheetmetal skins to save their resale values. But who designed those interior counter-ergonomic dashes of the new Nissan Quest? The French?

1SICKLEX

I disagree. If your car BRAND is strong enough, you don't need your cars to look alike. Critics are still amazed at how well Lexus does and NONE of the models look like one another. It shows if the product is right and you treat people right, they will buy it.

IMO, looks are in the eyes of the beholder, like girlfriends, cars look good to different people. I for one think the Acura Legend is still the best looking Acura sedan ever. It all depends.

larchmont

It was, until this year.