Scoop or no Scoop?
3/7/07, 05:33 AM
#21
3/7/07, 08:35 AM
#23
Black must look great ? why I say is where I picked up mine they just got a couple black GT verts in with the scoop right off the truck and they put them on the front lot Ewwww look awful , but I know when cleaned up they'll look great, wierd too that every vert they now have since ordered with a hood scoop & cloth top, makes for a great looking pony.
3/7/07, 09:40 AM
#25
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While obviously its your car, your money and your eyes, but since you asked...
I'm one of the "styling purists," wanting some level of actually function for some styling/desing element pretending to be something it really isn't. IMHO, there is an enherent falsehood in the fake hood scoop that, so some degree, undermines the credibility of the Stang. Sure, it might make the Stang look "mean' or "badazz," if you're into such pubescent posturing, but in the same way that a stuffed bra makes a girl look busty from afar. Sure, you'll fool the gullible and ignorent, or those who wish to be, but those who know will know it's nothing more than a stuffed hood with no underlying substance to it (hood scoop).
Rather, as some mention, save up for a functional shaker hood scoop if you want the retro flash. At least that is an honest design/performance element rather than a make believe one.
But again, your car, your money, your eyes...do what makes you happy.
I'm one of the "styling purists," wanting some level of actually function for some styling/desing element pretending to be something it really isn't. IMHO, there is an enherent falsehood in the fake hood scoop that, so some degree, undermines the credibility of the Stang. Sure, it might make the Stang look "mean' or "badazz," if you're into such pubescent posturing, but in the same way that a stuffed bra makes a girl look busty from afar. Sure, you'll fool the gullible and ignorent, or those who wish to be, but those who know will know it's nothing more than a stuffed hood with no underlying substance to it (hood scoop).
Rather, as some mention, save up for a functional shaker hood scoop if you want the retro flash. At least that is an honest design/performance element rather than a make believe one.
But again, your car, your money, your eyes...do what makes you happy.
3/7/07, 10:38 AM
#27
Cobra R Member
Join Date: April 22, 2005
Location: Lost Angels
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While obviously its your car, your money and your eyes, but since you asked...
I'm one of the "styling purists," wanting some level of actually function for some styling/desing element pretending to be something it really isn't. IMHO, there is an enherent falsehood in the fake hood scoop that, so some degree, undermines the credibility of the Stang. Sure, it might make the Stang look "mean' or "badazz," if you're into such pubescent posturing, but in the same way that a stuffed bra makes a girl look busty from afar. Sure, you'll fool the gullible and ignorent, or those who wish to be, but those who know will know it's nothing more than a stuffed hood with no underlying substance to it (hood scoop).
Rather, as some mention, save up for a functional shaker hood scoop if you want the retro flash. At least that is an honest design/performance element rather than a make believe one.
But again, your car, your money, your eyes...do what makes you happy.
I'm one of the "styling purists," wanting some level of actually function for some styling/desing element pretending to be something it really isn't. IMHO, there is an enherent falsehood in the fake hood scoop that, so some degree, undermines the credibility of the Stang. Sure, it might make the Stang look "mean' or "badazz," if you're into such pubescent posturing, but in the same way that a stuffed bra makes a girl look busty from afar. Sure, you'll fool the gullible and ignorent, or those who wish to be, but those who know will know it's nothing more than a stuffed hood with no underlying substance to it (hood scoop).
Rather, as some mention, save up for a functional shaker hood scoop if you want the retro flash. At least that is an honest design/performance element rather than a make believe one.
But again, your car, your money, your eyes...do what makes you happy.
3/7/07, 12:21 PM
#28
Bullitt Member
Wow, you don't seem pretentious at all...
While obviously its your car, your money and your eyes, but since you asked...
I'm one of the "styling purists," wanting some level of actually function for some styling/desing element pretending to be something it really isn't. IMHO, there is an enherent falsehood in the fake hood scoop that, so some degree, undermines the credibility of the Stang. Sure, it might make the Stang look "mean' or "badazz," if you're into such pubescent posturing, but in the same way that a stuffed bra makes a girl look busty from afar. Sure, you'll fool the gullible and ignorent, or those who wish to be, but those who know will know it's nothing more than a stuffed hood with no underlying substance to it (hood scoop).
Rather, as some mention, save up for a functional shaker hood scoop if you want the retro flash. At least that is an honest design/performance element rather than a make believe one.
But again, your car, your money, your eyes...do what makes you happy.
I'm one of the "styling purists," wanting some level of actually function for some styling/desing element pretending to be something it really isn't. IMHO, there is an enherent falsehood in the fake hood scoop that, so some degree, undermines the credibility of the Stang. Sure, it might make the Stang look "mean' or "badazz," if you're into such pubescent posturing, but in the same way that a stuffed bra makes a girl look busty from afar. Sure, you'll fool the gullible and ignorent, or those who wish to be, but those who know will know it's nothing more than a stuffed hood with no underlying substance to it (hood scoop).
Rather, as some mention, save up for a functional shaker hood scoop if you want the retro flash. At least that is an honest design/performance element rather than a make believe one.
But again, your car, your money, your eyes...do what makes you happy.
3/7/07, 01:12 PM
#29
Mach 1 Member
While obviously its your car, your money and your eyes, but since you asked...
I'm one of the "styling purists," wanting some level of actually function for some styling/desing element pretending to be something it really isn't. IMHO, there is an enherent falsehood in the fake hood scoop that, so some degree, undermines the credibility of the Stang. Sure, it might make the Stang look "mean' or "badazz," if you're into such pubescent posturing, but in the same way that a stuffed bra makes a girl look busty from afar. Sure, you'll fool the gullible and ignorent, or those who wish to be, but those who know will know it's nothing more than a stuffed hood with no underlying substance to it (hood scoop).
Rather, as some mention, save up for a functional shaker hood scoop if you want the retro flash. At least that is an honest design/performance element rather than a make believe one.
But again, your car, your money, your eyes...do what makes you happy.
I'm one of the "styling purists," wanting some level of actually function for some styling/desing element pretending to be something it really isn't. IMHO, there is an enherent falsehood in the fake hood scoop that, so some degree, undermines the credibility of the Stang. Sure, it might make the Stang look "mean' or "badazz," if you're into such pubescent posturing, but in the same way that a stuffed bra makes a girl look busty from afar. Sure, you'll fool the gullible and ignorent, or those who wish to be, but those who know will know it's nothing more than a stuffed hood with no underlying substance to it (hood scoop).
Rather, as some mention, save up for a functional shaker hood scoop if you want the retro flash. At least that is an honest design/performance element rather than a make believe one.
But again, your car, your money, your eyes...do what makes you happy.
By the way you had a ton of typos. I liked what you said, and I quote you "pubescent posturing". What do you think a Mustang is. It's all about show, noise. I'm sure it brings the teens in most of us. Another thing I don't understand is when you call yourself a "styling purist". What in the world is that? I believe those two words cancel each other out. Let me see, "styling"...(the combination of distinctive features of literary or artistic expression). Let me see, "purist" (One who practices or urges strict correctness, especially in the use of words)...He, he, LOL I think you got a little carried away with your literacy.
3/7/07, 01:54 PM
#30
Member
Join Date: March 6, 2007
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
scoop/no scoop
Mine does not have a scoop, wish it did and think I will add it. I think it would be cheaper to buy it with the car. After market cost are high and then you have to pay to have it painted, and worry about paint matching. I like the look however it does not do anything unless you believe looking good is all it needs to do.
3/7/07, 06:31 PM
#33
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3/7/07, 06:53 PM
#34
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 3, 2007
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you everyone for contributing your opinions and stressing some valid points on the subject. I know that the scoop is obvisiously non functional and that all the GT appearance package does is add weight and drag; you also pay for the chrome tips twice when you order the GT/CS as some mentioned. But after seeing stormbring's vb gt/cs (shown above) I feel the scoop does add a sense of meanness or aggression to the car as others on the froum have stated and I love it. Right now Im leaning towards getting the GT appearance because of these factors but who knows what will be the final verdict, Im likely to change my mind again in a week lol. Once again thank you and keep the posts coming.
3/7/07, 07:03 PM
#35
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey man, you don't have to use big words to get your point accross<!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shapetype id="_x0000_t75" coordsize="21600,21600" o:spt="75" o
referrelative="t" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" filled="f" stroked="f"> <v:stroke joinstyle="miter"/> <v:formulas> <v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"/> <v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"/> <v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"/> <v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"/> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"/> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"/> <v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"/> <v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"/> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"/> <v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"/> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"/> <v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"/> </v:formulas> <vath o:extrusionok="f" gradientshapeok="t" o:connecttype="rect"/> <o:lock v:ext="edit" aspectratio="t"/> </v:shapetype><v:shape id="_x0000_i1025" type="#_x0000_t75" alt="" style='width:45pt; height:11.25pt'> <v:imagedata src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\GEOFFR~1.RHO\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01 \clip_image001.gif" o:href="http://forums.bradbarnett.net/images/smilies/stickpoke.gif"/> </v:shape><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><!--[endif]--> By the way you had a ton of typos. I liked what you said, and I quote you "pubescent posturing". What do you think a Mustang is. It's all about show, noise. I'm sure it brings the teens in most of us. Another thing I don't understand is when you call yourself a "styling purist". What in the world is that? I believe those two words cancel each other out. Let me see, "styling"...(the combination of distinctive features of literary or artistic expression). Let me see, "purist" (One who practices or urges strict correctness, especially in the use of words)...He, he, LOL I think you got a little carried away with your literacy.<!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shape id="_x0000_i1026" type="#_x0000_t75" alt="" style='width:11.25pt;height:11.25pt'> <v:imagedata src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\GEOFFR~1.RHO\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01 \clip_image002.gif" o:href="http://forums.bradbarnett.net/images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif"/> </v:shape><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><!--[endif]-->
referrelative="t" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" filled="f" stroked="f"> <v:stroke joinstyle="miter"/> <v:formulas> <v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"/> <v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"/> <v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"/> <v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"/> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"/> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"/> <v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"/> <v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"/> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"/> <v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"/> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"/> <v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"/> </v:formulas> <vath o:extrusionok="f" gradientshapeok="t" o:connecttype="rect"/> <o:lock v:ext="edit" aspectratio="t"/> </v:shapetype><v:shape id="_x0000_i1025" type="#_x0000_t75" alt="" style='width:45pt; height:11.25pt'> <v:imagedata src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\GEOFFR~1.RHO\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01 \clip_image001.gif" o:href="http://forums.bradbarnett.net/images/smilies/stickpoke.gif"/> </v:shape><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><!--[endif]--> By the way you had a ton of typos. I liked what you said, and I quote you "pubescent posturing". What do you think a Mustang is. It's all about show, noise. I'm sure it brings the teens in most of us. Another thing I don't understand is when you call yourself a "styling purist". What in the world is that? I believe those two words cancel each other out. Let me see, "styling"...(the combination of distinctive features of literary or artistic expression). Let me see, "purist" (One who practices or urges strict correctness, especially in the use of words)...He, he, LOL I think you got a little carried away with your literacy.<!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shape id="_x0000_i1026" type="#_x0000_t75" alt="" style='width:11.25pt;height:11.25pt'> <v:imagedata src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\GEOFFR~1.RHO\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01 \clip_image002.gif" o:href="http://forums.bradbarnett.net/images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif"/> </v:shape><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><!--[endif]-->Perhaps what I mean by purist is that stylistic elements ought to be either that, or design elements ought to be that. I guess what gets my goat is stylistic elements trying to pass off being what they are not, i.e., a hood scoop that isn't. I would expect that such a thing would be somehow genuine, real or authentic, but a fake anything obviously is none of those.
I'll stick with my stuffed bra analogy.
A nicely done stylistic element on the other hand would be the "C scoop (or whatever you might call it) contouring on the side of the Stang. While it might evoke in some highly-stylized, abstract way a side scoop, it quite obviously isn't much less pass off as one.
Question: so how's a fake hood scoop on a Stang any different, much less any better, than, say, a equally fake hood scoop on a Riced-out Honda Prelude (disregarding the underlying cars)? Seems one is as equally functionless and affected as the other, yet many will rant on about how ridiculous ricers are for all their hollow decorations that make them look silly and then, the next moment, rave about how their functionless scoops make them look so mean and badazz.
As for me posturing, a definition from Merriam Webster:<o></o>
: to assume a posture; especially
: to strike a pose for effect
: to assume an artificial or pretended attitude<o></o>
Seems sporting fake performance adornments comes closer to that definition than me giving frank and forthright opinions, especially when asked by the original post.: to strike a pose for effect
: to assume an artificial or pretended attitude<o></o>
As for being prententious:
1: characterized by pretension: as
Again, seems like a pretend hood scoop - a purely stylistic element passing itself off as an actual performance enhancing design element - would fall well into those definitions more so than someone honestly stating his own personal opinions.
a: making usually unjustified or excessive claims
b: expressive of affected, unwarranted, or exaggerated importance, worth, or stature
b: expressive of affected, unwarranted, or exaggerated importance, worth, or stature
3/8/07, 03:58 AM
#36
Mach 1 Member
Awright, I'll try to use easy little words and double-check my grammar, spelling and definitions a bit more so as not to confuse anybody.
Perhaps what I mean by purist is that stylistic elements ought to be either that, or design elements ought to be that. I guess what gets my goat is stylistic elements trying to pass off being what they are not, i.e., a hood scoop that isn't. I would expect that such a thing would be somehow genuine, real or authentic, but a fake anything obviously is none of those.
I'll stick with my stuffed bra analogy.
A nicely done stylistic element on the other hand would be the "C scoop (or whatever you might call it) contouring on the side of the Stang. While it might evoke in some highly-stylized, abstract way a side scoop, it quite obviously isn't much less pass off as one.
Question: so how's a fake hood scoop on a Stang any different, much less any better, than, say, a equally fake hood scoop on a Riced-out Honda Prelude (disregarding the underlying cars)? Seems one is as equally functionless and affected as the other, yet many will rant on about how ridiculous ricers are for all their hollow decorations that make them look silly and then, the next moment, rave about how their functionless scoops make them look so mean and badazz.
As for me posturing, a definition from Merriam Webster:<O></O>
As for being prententious:
Perhaps what I mean by purist is that stylistic elements ought to be either that, or design elements ought to be that. I guess what gets my goat is stylistic elements trying to pass off being what they are not, i.e., a hood scoop that isn't. I would expect that such a thing would be somehow genuine, real or authentic, but a fake anything obviously is none of those.
I'll stick with my stuffed bra analogy.
A nicely done stylistic element on the other hand would be the "C scoop (or whatever you might call it) contouring on the side of the Stang. While it might evoke in some highly-stylized, abstract way a side scoop, it quite obviously isn't much less pass off as one.
Question: so how's a fake hood scoop on a Stang any different, much less any better, than, say, a equally fake hood scoop on a Riced-out Honda Prelude (disregarding the underlying cars)? Seems one is as equally functionless and affected as the other, yet many will rant on about how ridiculous ricers are for all their hollow decorations that make them look silly and then, the next moment, rave about how their functionless scoops make them look so mean and badazz.
As for me posturing, a definition from Merriam Webster:<O></O>
: to assume a posture; especially
: to strike a pose for effect
: to assume an artificial or pretended attitude<O></O>
Seems sporting fake performance adornments comes closer to that definition than me giving frank and forthright opinions, especially when asked by the original post.As for being prententious:
1: characterized by pretension: as
Again, seems like a pretend hood scoop - a purely stylistic element passing itself off as an actual performance enhancing design element - would fall well into those definitions more so than someone honestly stating his own personal opinions.a: making usually unjustified or excessive claims
b: expressive of affected, unwarranted, or exaggerated importance, worth, or stature
3/8/07, 08:50 AM
#37
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess the hood scoop on a Mustang hood is now like a hairpiece on a bald head, reliving the style if not the substance of a bygone day.
Personally, I think the Stang is fully capable of both reflecting, though not necessarily through recreating, the spirit and heritage of the past all while keeping fully modern, fresh and genuine in its design aspects.
The GT500 is a good example of this, with its fully functional hood vents and a quasi-functional and pretty well integrated duck tail. The GT500 strongly evokes the past yet without compromising present-day function by trying to relive the past. There are plenty of purely stylistic elements too, mostly stripes and that sort of thing, but that's fine as they're not trying to pass off as something they aren't and are thus very honest design elements.
If Ford does insist on resurrecting old styling relics like a hood scoop, at least do it properly by cutting a hole in the hood under it - they even designed in an open area in the underhood framing for just that - like Pontiac did with the GTO. Sure, it might only be about 10% functional -- heck fire, with the Stang's aerodynamics and underhood pressures, it would likely blow air OUT of the scoop -- but that's better than 100% fake and at least the guise would be ostensibly plausible instead of a complete charade.
Personally, I think the Stang is fully capable of both reflecting, though not necessarily through recreating, the spirit and heritage of the past all while keeping fully modern, fresh and genuine in its design aspects.
The GT500 is a good example of this, with its fully functional hood vents and a quasi-functional and pretty well integrated duck tail. The GT500 strongly evokes the past yet without compromising present-day function by trying to relive the past. There are plenty of purely stylistic elements too, mostly stripes and that sort of thing, but that's fine as they're not trying to pass off as something they aren't and are thus very honest design elements.
If Ford does insist on resurrecting old styling relics like a hood scoop, at least do it properly by cutting a hole in the hood under it - they even designed in an open area in the underhood framing for just that - like Pontiac did with the GTO. Sure, it might only be about 10% functional -- heck fire, with the Stang's aerodynamics and underhood pressures, it would likely blow air OUT of the scoop -- but that's better than 100% fake and at least the guise would be ostensibly plausible instead of a complete charade.
3/8/07, 09:25 AM
#38
Cobra R Member
Join Date: April 22, 2005
Location: Lost Angels
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rhumb,
have you removed your "fake" gas cap yet? You know, the one that says GT on it?Just on a sidenote, when I purchased my hood scoop, I had intentions of making it functional - well ,semi-functional anyhow. I don't want to come off as a "poser" with only 500+ hp.
3/8/07, 09:32 AM
#39
Shelby GT350 Member
Join Date: January 17, 2006
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 2,061
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3/8/07, 09:43 AM
#40
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: May 24, 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 7,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
