MX-5 are bought by a different crowd for the most part, therefore it is bought for a different purpose.(that purpose being more of weekend driving car rather then a car that has presence which is the MR2 for the younger crowd) Most MR2 (MKII) buyers will not consider an MX-5 and vice versa.
As far as design, that MX-5 has sleek simple forms that don’t conflict with it’s purpose. I personally don’t like the design, for the same reasons you mentioned that it’s a very feminine car, but for those buyer of the MX-5 that is not a big issue.
|
Your assuming that the point of the MKIII was to sell to that demographic. The reality is, the demographic you describe couldnt afford a new MKIII even if it had been marketed to them. That MX-5 crowd is where the money is. If Toyota wasn;t marketing it to the crowd you just described, which ironically is the market that would buy the design you described so they obviously were, the car would go away anyway. They marketed as such but their price point was too high.
In other words, your arguing its different from the MX-5 based on what you view as the point of the car... Not what Toyota nor the general populace felt it was or should have been.
Never forget, us call nuts are a niche. For every V8 mustang theres 2 v6s... For every corvette theres millions of carrolas.
Threaded Mode