Quote:
Originally Posted by FryCookOnVenus
Nice writeup! Thanks.
I just got back from the local dealership where they have a ZB M2 and a TR X3 MComp. I don't want to start my own thread and hope this isn't considered "threadjacking" but thought I'd build on Krogh1's thoughts on the color/appearance . . .
Back in October, I was leaning towards ZB but as pictures became available and the blue appeared washed out in bright light, I began to pivot towards TR which was growing on me. However, seeing both cars in person today brought me back around to ZB. Firmly so.
Today was as an extremely bright day and the M2 was sitting outside, directly under the sun. Despite the conditions, the ZB looked as deep and rich as the more flattering photos I'd seen, and no matter what angle I viewed it from, it never looked washed out. Certainly, baby blue is not for everyone, but if it's a shade that interests you, the ZB is a very good example of it and I thought it looked amazing.
Conversely, I found the TR less appealing in the flesh. It was inside on the showroom floor and it was decidedly orange/rust. What was most interesting was that when I'd take a photo, it looked quite red. But, when I lowered the phone, looking from the identical vantage point, the orange/rust came through. It's not an inherently bad color, but it was not for me.
In a nutshell: ZB was far more blue than pictures led me to expect and TR was more orange than pictures led me to expect.
The M2's design looked gorgeous in person. It was bigger than I expected, but it looked low and wide and purposeful and even the chunky butt made more [...]
|
I don't think it's thread jacking, definitely within the topic of the title. I've been trying to say similar stuff about the lines/shape and ZB. It's all stuff that makes WWAAYY more sense in person. ZB doesn't have the most depth, but a lot more than most photos, a lot more full, still "baby blue" though. The shape too, in person it has a presence, and slightly more flow from one feature to the next compared to photos.
