...which I don't need, if I'm talking about external appearance of vehicles, which is what I'm talking about.
If you're going to compare two COMPLETELY different vehicles in a debate, you DO need that knowledge... or you'll come across as not knowing what you're talking about...
No, one does not need said knowledge, when the discussion is restricted to external appearance. In that case, the lineage of the car is irrelevant. Same for performance, engine size, transmission, fuel octane requirements, etc.
Others have said that the 1982 trans am was chosen not because of its drivetrain or engine or performance or lineage, or anything else that only a car enthusiast would know or care about, but rather its external appearance.
If you think the G5 would make a great KITT... that's fine and dandy in my book.
Great. So, what would your suggestion be for a car with 4 seats that looks like a modern day equvilent of KITT (not with KITT's performance features, which is obviously impossible)? That's what you should be saying in this thread, instead of these hostile ad homenim arguments.
I'm fairly certain that very few fans, or KR film producers, will agree with you.
Your point? There appears to be no purpose to this statement other than hostility.
Jim Belushi COULD have played the new James Bond or Batman... but it wouldn't have made any sense. Same situation.
That's not the same, jim belushi's external appearance does not connote an ability to be Batman, but in the eyes of some, the G5's external appearance does connote an ability to be KITT, certainly more so than the boxy, non-aerodynamic Shelby Mustang. In my opinion, the Shelby Mustang appears externally to have the aerodynamics and performance of a brick. The Pontiac G5, in my opinion, looks much more aerodynamic and has the appearance of a vehicle that could potentially go 0 to 60 in 0.2 seconds, certainly more so than a 2008 Shelby Mustang. You disagree, but you're stating it as if it is a matter of fact, rather than a matter of opinion.
...which became the Sunbird... which became the Sunfire... which became the G5.
Which has nothing to do with the current external appearance of the vehicle. I don't care what it is derived from, I care about what it looks like today. Your picture looks completely different from the 2008 Pontiac G5, sir. The two cars may have technical similarities in terms of performance, engine size, transmission, etc., but one can't see many similarities evident in that picture.
KITT was a sports car, aesthetically speaking (not performance-wise, which is not what I was talking about in my previous post)...
At least you admit the problem; I was talking about appearance and you were talking about performance.
If I say a car LOOKS like it could be a KITT type car, I don't expect someone to tell me it doesn't LOOK that way because of engine size or performance, neither of which you can see by LOOKING at the car.
I would expect them to say "well, it doesn't look like a kitt type car to me. It is too small" or something along those lines.
wide stance, low center of gravity, sleek and sweeping lines... all of which are NOT present on the economy vehicles, such as the G5.
What you should have said was "all of which, IN MY OPINION, are not present on the Pontiac G5". The omission of the phrase "in my opinion" makes it sound as if you're stating some universally recognized fact, and the phrase "economy vehicles" is a reference to performance, not external appearance.
In any case, you need to consider that "sleek, sweeping lines" is determined by individual judgment: some may think a given car has that property, others may disagree. As the famous saying goes "beauty is in the eye of the beholder." For example, there are many on this board who think the Shelby Mustang does in fact look like a KITT type vehicle. I disagree with them, but I don't state it as a matter of fact about which reasonable people cannot reach different conclusions.
You don't see the Pontiac G5 and/or G6 as a KITT type car...that's perfectly fine. Instead of attempting to portray me as being mentally deficient, or at least generally inept, because I disagree, how about making your own suggestions as to modern cars which have that KITT appearance to them?
That would be much more pleasant, which is what I think everybody wants on here, a pleasant experience.