|
I changed my profile to update my current job at lockheed, not the job I had at sprint 2 years ago when I created my profile,as I figured your so intent on "winning" the argument you would most certainly check my profile for any edge.
The most you have done is talk yourself in circles and claimed I am trying to insult you, while trying to discount any quantitative properties I asked that made you come to your conclusion. It was a simple question and not a attack on your person. I found your opinion interesting because of all the cars we looked prior to purchasing the lancer I found it to have a better quality interior than many in its price range.
Your original post claimed compared to the current model evo, the new lancer interior quality was sub par
the quality of the interior plastics was rather disappointing. They felt thin, hollow, and cheap. Honestly, I did not feel like its quality was as good as that of the CT9A.
Ok so its worse than the evo even though
However,
I'm fully aware the interiors are almost the same, which makes the new Lance even more of a step in the wrong direction (in this respect). Again, that has zero relevance to the thrust of my comments.
?
I'm not a plastics expert, I work with forming textiles that don't have stopping power for fragmentation and ballistics into compounds that do, using a wide variety of materials, however I'm familiar with many things automotive.
You've taken my wording out of context to suit your argument. I guess I should have been more specific, but for automotive trim parts application, plastic is plastic in my opinion.
Perhaps the particular car you sat in was a poor example, I suggest you check out a few more before drawing a concrete conclusion, as I'm sure your aware that one is not always a representation of all.
|
