I don’t think I am a knee-jerk contrarian. I hope I am not a knee-jerk contrarian. Automatically rejecting things that are popular or mainstream doesn’t really make a person smarter than everyone else or better than everyone else or whatever. It just makes that person a knee-jerk contrarian, which is no more profound or insightful than being a knee-jerk conformist. Any “paradigm by rote” is usually counter-productive.
The top photo (from happycarz.com) is a 1967 Chevrolet Chevelle SS; the bottom (from en.wheelsage.org) is a 1968 Chevrolet Chevelle SS. The large Mecum Indianapolis auction just ended and I enjoyed watching it as always. However, the parade of the later generation of Chevelles—and Pontiac GTOs and Oldsmobile 442s and Buick GSs—is not that enjoyable for me.
I don’t like the way these cars look. The high rear quarter kick-up makes the back too chunky, too hippy for me. I don’t mean hippie, as in counter-culture, but hippy as in too much in the wrong place. The same type of design cue is why I much prefer the looks of the 1968-70 AMC Javelin to the looks of the 1968-70 AMC AMX.
I like the earlier generation Chevelle. To me it’s a much cleaner look, it flows better. OK, I realize that my view is almost certainly in the minority and that’s fine. The somewhat ironic twist is that my first car was almost a 1968 (or 1969, I can’t remember for sure) Chevelle SS. My father was going to buy one for me (for $500), but the one his friend had for sale had a manual transmission and my father thought I might be a clutch burner, so he wound up buying the 1967 GTO with an automatic, instead.
I am virtually certain I like the looks of the earlier Chevelle for intrinsic reasons and not for knee-jerk contrarian ones.
OK, which Chevelle generation do you like better? Please feel free to let me know.