Jump to content
Create New...

Coupe, Not a Coupe


Recommended Posts

Found this story on Jalopnik and thought we should have a lively debate on if this is accurate or not.

https://jalopnik.com/screw-you-carmakers-you-dont-get-to-ruin-the-word-co-1827480939

sqcvivkx0og9awkavp2k.png

r3adr9dik3mc3wjwd9k5.png

To quote the story:

The word “coupe” comes from the French word “couper,” which means “to cut” because a coupe was a sort of “cut down” version of a car: smaller, leaner, lighter, sportier, shorter, and, significantly, less doors. As in two where the non-coupe version of the car would have had four.

bxz9ytzzoarlgcohro86.png

Do you go with the change in definition of what a Coupe is or do you still agree that this is a true coupe?

h9nq0udoy66kwv4sdd7l.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree that the greenhouse has to be smaller than the sedan, I disagree that the rear seat has to be small. Even the roofline bit, while not wrong, is not a rule....

but I agree with most other things. 

A Coupe Deville was anything but sporty... but it was, somehow, marginally sportier than the Sedan Deville. 

1974-cadillac-coupe-deville-for-sale-2016-08-17-2-1024x682.jpg

1734_6.jpg

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Volvo P1800 w/ the definition is what would be considered truly a coupe by the old definition. Short roof, small back seat area.   The Coupe de Ville was a 2dr sedan after they stopped building hardtops.  

In some eras, cars had coupe versions at the same time they had other 2dr versions...like the '40s cars--the coupes were 2drs with short roofs, often without a backseat.  The 2dr sedan had a longer roof w/ a backseat.  The '40 Ford or '49 Ford are a good examples. 

As far as modern '4dr coupes' and coupe SUVs, well, that's marketing...they are expanding the meaning of coupe. 

Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

But in this case, are they wrong about what they're complaining about?

3 of their 5 bullet points are opinion based. 

"small" is subjective. What's small to dfelt is very likely not small to me. 

Roofline is "likely" to be sloped.

"generally" sporty.

Plus, did you rear the link? They wrote that article as if they were writing to a friend. Seemed less professional than a high schooler's homework assignment. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

3 of their 5 bullet points are opinion based. 

"small" is subjective. What's small to dfelt is very likely not small to me. 

Roofline is "likely" to be sloped.

"generally" sporty.

Plus, did you rear the link? They wrote that article as if they were writing to a friend. Seemed less professional than a high schooler's homework assignment. 

So true, but then working in a heavy area of English as a second language, I tend to not bother with the whole grammar / writing style thing.

For me it was the points of what makes a coupe a coupe or not a coupe.

Agree TOTALLY with you that what is small to me, My Trailblazer SS is probably huge to you. :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I hate to admit it, but if you go by definition of the original French word:

"1825–35; < French coupé (in defs 1, 2 short for carrosse coupé “cut-off or shortened coach”), past participleof couper “to cut off,” verbal derivative of coup coup"

Then, even those abomination CUV's with cut roof qualify to be named as a coupe.

  • Haha 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dfelt said:

Agree TOTALLY with you that what is small to me, My Trailblazer SS is probably huge to you. :P 

Perspective is always relative. Dave is 6'6", I'm 5'8". To me, his 204" Escalade is 'small' ('64 GTO is 203"), when my cars are 213", 217" and my DD is 237".

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Perspective is always relative. Dave is 6'6", I'm 5'8". To me, his 204" Escalade is 'small' ('64 GTO is 203"), when my cars are 213", 217" and my DD is 237".

LOL, my friend you must be thinking regular Escalade which is 204", I drive the ESV which is 222" :P 

I be right there with you on the long length. :D

Wife drives the TB SS.

Course I grew up driving the Family Station wagon, 1976 Olds 98 which was 232.2" long. So length never mattered to me. :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most, if not all, of body designation terms come from other industries, such as architecture, sailing, railroading, etc. Therefore, these terms have no origin, or 'correctness' in automotive usage other than how OEMs have appropriated them. Which has been varied to say the least.

 

Anything less than 205 feels small to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Most, if not all, of body designation terms come from other industries, such as architecture, sailing, railroading, etc. Therefore, these terms have no origin, or 'correctness' in automotive usage other than how OEMs have appropriated them. Which has been varied to say the least.

 

Anything less than 205 feels small to me.

that's what she said....

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, balthazar said:

205 mm = 8.1"

Latest New England Journal of Medicine studies find the average partner in the US wants 8.5" long.

Guess you do know what a partner wants! :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings