Post

Matt Hardigree
@matthardigree.bsky.social

It's an interesting point. There are a great many sauceless cars and some major automakers of the era had more misses than hits, but the hits themselves are very good (E39/E46) and some of the weirdness is charming (HHR/PT Cruiser). It might just be a proportion thing.

internetracecar@hegaldia.bsky.social

if you have to ask, there is no reason for me to waste time explaining but i will. the 2000s is a largely sauceless and boring era, the babyfood and mcmansions of cars, and this is another symbol of the corporatization of radwood, something that used to be cool and is now just a dull car show

Fred Smith
@fredsmith.bsky.social

I think the 2000s is just as novel as the 90s and 80s for much of the same reason: Cars are pretty analog, digital features are primitive but adventurous, brands would go way outside of their comfort zone in desperate bids to make new segments happen.

Fred Smith
@fredsmith.bsky.social

This just feels like nostalgia moving forward at the same usual pace to me. An E39 M5 is closer in spirit to an E28 M5 than it is to anything BMW has made since 2010, a GMT800 feels charmingly old these days, and a Lexus LS430 is still a well-aged flagship.

kevin mccauley
@capturingthemachine.com

at one point I started thinking that 2000-2010 was a horrible time for car design (and it is if you only focus on some particularly ungainly DaimlerChrysler models), but there was enough wild stuff where companies were *going for it* that persuaded me otherwise. Much more than 2010-2020 IMO

3 reposts13 likes

James Gilboy
@jamiegilboy.bsky.social

I am begging car enthusiasts to recognize that culture is an ouroboros where anything old enough to be partially forgotten can be rediscovered and reappraised through a new perspective that lends new appreciation