[GaylordWilshire]

Elegance, functional: <This, maybe (South Central L.A., 1967)...but the "Lipstick Edition">?

See The Truth About Cars

Originally Posted by Retired_in_Texas:
And yes Gaylord less functional automobiles. More reliable perhaps, but none the less with less functionality. Anytime an average size person cannot sit in the back seat of a so called luxury car without their knees bumping the front seats and one's head bumps the roof, it is less functional.

Originally Posted by ProphetM

While true, passenger space is not the only measure of functionality. Modern cars are much more functional in many other ways. That a car works for much longer, with less downtime for repairs, is perhaps the very definition of more functional.

Possibly, but one thing is for sure no one wants me hitting their 2014 anything sedan with one of my 6,000 pound '76 Lincoln Mark IVs moving at 70-75 mph. I'll survive, they won't!

Originally Posted by ProphetM

That's quite doubtful. Your car would be in better shape than theirs, but you would not. In any crash the energy of movement must be dissipated. In a newer, more crushable car, that energy is purposely directed into deforming the body of the car outside the passenger compartment, with airbags taking over as the remaining energy reaches the passengers. In an older, more rigid car, the energy is dissipated more directly into you, as your body is deformed by the seatbelts and/or smashed against the interior of the car. Modern car design is very bad for cars, but much, much better for the people riding in them.

The Prophet knows... It sounds like Retired actually has more than one '76 Lincoln, each offering 6,000 lbs of functionality. That he can only drive one at a time, and since there are thankfully very few on the road, makes modern cars even safer.

Originally Posted by Retired_in_Texas

Hmm, examples that could have come from the Sears catalog between 1908 and 1940. Elegance Fail!

http://www.searsarchives.com/homes/1933-1940.htm

Between 1908 and 1940 Sears sold some 70,000 homes in kit form.

And yes Gaylord less functional automobiles. More reliable perhaps, but none the less with less functionality. Anytime an average size person cannot sit in the back seat of a so called luxury car without their knees bumping the front seats and one's head bumps the roof, it is less functional. Passenger capacity is also a lessening of functionality. Just bought a 2014 Chrysler 300C with all the high tech junk available. Bought that instead of Lincoln or Cadillac because they were worse in overall passenger comfort. I don't buy imports of any nature because I don't want the associated maintenance hassles from crummy parts support for dealers. Safer? Possibly, but one thing is for sure no one wants me hitting their 2014 anything sedan with one of my 6,000 pound '76 Lincoln Mark IVs moving at 70-75 mph. I'll survive, they won't!

Originally Posted by Retired_in_Texas

There is no elegance and little imagination expressed in the cookie cutter houses we see everywhere.... Isn't it exciting that one can look at a new home in Orange County and then buy the same or nearly identical home in Atlanta or the suburbs of Miami

As I said, one man's elegance is another man's tacky. The post of nationwide Craftsmans was obviously in reference to geography, not elegance. But compared to 1976 Lincoln Continental Mark IVs, those humble houses, sold by Sears or not, are unquestionably elegant. And I believe it's widely accepted that, campy as they are, mid-'70s Lincolns, with their very functional opera windows, absurd bulk, carburetor vs injection, 11MPG, and hideous designer editions--who can forget the hooker's dream, the "Lipstick Edition"?--were among the cars that drove Americans into German-car showrooms for functionality, quality, and...elegance.