Mazda 5 vs Kia Rondo

Replies to this message:
• darkstar01 (Aug 20, 2007 11:56 pm)
  • winnieking (Aug 21, 2007 1:25 pm)
    • ramblin (Aug 21, 2007 7:34 pm) and 3 more...

Replying to: winnieking (Aug 20, 2007 5:26 pm)

Replies to this message:
• winnieking (Aug 21, 2007 1:25 pm)
  • ramblin (Aug 21, 2007 7:34 pm)
    • coolmazda5 (Aug 22, 2007 3:39 am) and 2 more...

Replying to: darkstar01 (Aug 20, 2007 11:56 pm)

Replies to this message:
• ramblin (Aug 21, 2007 7:34 pm)
  • coolmazda5 (Aug 22, 2007 3:39 am)
    • medicineman (Aug 22, 2007 2:50 pm) and 1 more...

Replying to: winnieking (Aug 21, 2007 1:25 pm)

Replies to this message:
• coolmazda5 (Aug 22, 2007 3:39 am)
  • medicineman (Aug 22, 2007 2:50 pm)
    • KarenS (Aug 23, 2007 8:11 am)

Replying to: ramblin (Aug 21, 2007 7:34 pm)

ramblin replied:
It's not a hideous looking car at all. Way too many cars you have to look at the name plate to tell what they are now.
 
I agree ramblin, it is difficult to tell what cars are now nowadays but, depending on how it looks, usually the first reaction is different:
 
a) Wow, nice, What is it?
b) Oh, geez, What the heck is that?
 
This, of course, as other members have said earlier, it depends of the eyes of the beholder

Replies to this message:
• medicineman (Aug 22, 2007 2:50 pm)
  • KarenS (Aug 23, 2007 8:11 am)

Replying to: coolmazda5 (Aug 22, 2007 3:39 am)

You know, I've always wondered why people like the things that they like. There always seems to be a general consensus on what's considered cool and what's not. But why is that? Is it inherently cool and good looking, or is this some sort of a herd reaction based on marketing, or is it something else?
 
For instance, flared jeans made a comeback a few years ago (what people used to call bellbottoms back in the '70s) and everyone (for women, at least) who didn't wear flares suddenly looked out of date. Now, skinny-legged jeans are back in style and flares are a fashion faux pas. So how did flared jeans suddenly become unattractive to women? How did "Oh, those are so cool" suddenly become "Oh, those are so awful"?
 
If something were inherently cool and attractive, you would think that it would always be so, but that rarely seems to be the case. So what, exactly, is driving the popular taste? Is something popular because a lot of people like it, or do a lot of people like it because it is "popular" (as defined, perhaps, by clever and persuasive marketing)? Are you really choosing what is attractive to you, or is it being chosen for you? And why do you feel apologetic whenever you go against what is cool when it isn't inherent or permanent in the first place?
 
BTW, the questions are rhetorical, so only answer them if you guys are as crazy as I am. Anyway, sorry for the extremely off-topic, self-indulgent, psychological BS (hope I didn't just break another forum rule), but you guys ought to be used to that coming from me by now.

Replies to this message:
• KarenS (Aug 23, 2007 8:11 am)

Replying to: medicineman (Aug 22, 2007 2:50 pm)

This is an interesting topic, however, it sounds like you're asking in a general sense of likes/dislikes and not strictly about the Kia Rondo, Mazda5, or any auto for that matter. SO, I'm going to suggest that you start this as a separate discussion in the Off Topic Chatter forum. I have a feeling you'll get a lot of response from other members there.

KarenS, there always has to be somebody who writes in to agree after you go to the work of suggesting people go elsewhere with a topic, huh?
 
Actually, medicineman brings up some good points about what appears to be in style or what is not.
 
I have noticed that with cars some people will only buy what they feel will be "safe". An example of this you may ask? In May of 1999 I bought a Kia Sephia. It looked better to me than either of it's competitors at that time, the Honda Civic and the Toyota Corolla. I liked it's looks better and I felt that Kia could build a competent car since they had been at it since 1944 and I liked a successful micro-car Kia built called the Ford Festiva.
 
Now, did other people want the Sephia for it's different looks at that time? Most people want good resale value, hence, they'd get the Civic or Corolla. What was popular at that time? The Civic or Corolla were more popular, the Sephia had only been in America since 1995 and most people didn't know much about Kia and/or their Sephia.
 
What pulled me in to want to comment was the notion that the thing that drives popularity often isn't even thought about. Civic or Corolla shoppers were told that the resale value of the Corolla and Civic was really good and that the cars were fairly reliable. The Civic and Corolla would cost you more then, yes. But to most of those buyers of Honda and Toyota the extra cost was well worth it. What are we really looking for in a rig, though?
 
Did they do their research before buying? Don't think so with a lot of them. I'm just going by what I've read in publications and on the net.
 
But those people's perception of the Japanese brands brought them to decide to buy the Civic or Corolla. Kia put out commercials at the time that were intended to start to change the perception about durability(example, the one where the college people took the Sephia and drive it 100,000 miles without problems, and attempted to beat up the car constantly).
 
If someone liked the Sephia's looks more they might have decided against buying it then because Kia wasn't "proven." Things are much different and Kia has done well recently in quality tests and awards.
 
The comment about "someone else choosing your car for you" has a lot of merit to it because I think that is what happens a lot in America. Thankfully there are car magazines and car web sites like this one where we can edumacate ourselves fully-completely about a potential car purchase and read early reviews on the car we like and know a lot more than we used to going in, eh? Excellent topic, medicineman!

Replies to this message:
• medicineman (Aug 23, 2007 2:13 pm)

Replying to: iluvmysephia1 (Aug 23, 2007 12:09 pm)

Thanks for the kudos, iluvmysephia1. Our generous host KarenS is right, though--if I were a mod, even I would have given myself a gentle kick in the pants to keep things more relevant. After all, I'm the Cliff Clavin (anybody remember Cheers?) of the forums set and I tend to go off on tangents.
 
I think the unspoken subtext to all of this is that the Rondo doesn't have that "wow" factor and the Mazda5 does. Sure, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but that's probably what the general consensus is. So the point of my last post, really, was to suggest that I don't think the Mazda5 is inherently any more dandy and purty, but that it conforms more than the Rondo to what is the fashion of the day--which is very fickle and driven largely by marketing (as per my jeans example, which I got from my nieces because I'm a real man and I wouldn't know about that stuff on my own).
 
Of course, I'm only saying this because I own a Rondo; otherwise, why would I bother?