Mk1 Mk2

[Hatman]

or, Classic/Facelift

 

[renegade79]

Mk1 and Mk2

 

[Anonymous]

Originality is always best

 

[DKZ5745]

Phase 1 / Phase 2 :eusa-think:

 

[Hatman]

Phase 1 / Phase 2 :eusa-think:

Phase is electricity, no 3 Phase, such a shame...

 

[Anonymous]

I would favour original & facelift. It was primarily a cosmetic makeover on the nose and some small tweaks inside, not enough IMHO to justify a whole new mk of RCZ. To my (admittedly small) mind, a new mk of car would mean revisions to mechanicals and interior fittings and a change, subtle or otherwise, to the silhouette via body panel changes. Tweaking the first 1ft of the car which we refer to as the face is literally a facelift to an already beautiful car :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

The two are totally interchangeable but I'm of a similar opinion to Steve.

 

[renegade79]

Agreed!

 

[DKZ5745]

Pre-op & nose job :eusa-whistle:

 

[tianorth]

To my (admittedly small) mind, a new mk of car would mean revisions to mechanicals and interior fittings and a change, subtle or otherwise, to the silhouette via body panel changes. :lol:

Does that mean the TT is still at Mk1?

 

[renegade79]

To my (admittedly small) mind, a new mk of car would mean revisions to mechanicals and interior fittings and a change, subtle or otherwise, to the silhouette via body panel changes. :lol:

Does that mean the TT is still at Mk1?

:wtf: there is a huge difference to the mk2 TT over the mk1 - new body, interior and engines... :eusa-whistle:

I sense a dig at TTie drivers again Chris :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

To my (admittedly small) mind, a new mk of car would mean revisions to mechanicals and interior fittings and a change, subtle or otherwise, to the silhouette via body panel changes. :lol:

Does that mean the TT is still at Mk1?

Well, the TT had all three of those criteria at each new iteration and the silhouette has been subtly different each time and with changes to body panels pretty much all round the car rather than just a nose job like the RCZ had. So for me personally, yes it qualifies as a new mk each time that happens.

I guess the key word is 'new' mk, I didn't feel there was enough of a change to the RCZ to call it anything other than a mid term facelift.

Of course now we know that 'mid term' has become 'end of line' maybe I should think of it as a separate mk seeing as there were only two versions!

 

[renegade79]

To my (admittedly small) mind, a new mk of car would mean revisions to mechanicals and interior fittings and a change, subtle or otherwise, to the silhouette via body panel changes. :lol:

Does that mean the TT is still at Mk1?

Well, the TT had all three of those criteria at each new iteration and the silhouette has been subtly different each time and with changes to body panels pretty much all round the car rather than just a nose job like the RCZ had. So for me personally, yes it qualifies as a new mk each time that happens.

I guess the key word is 'new' mk, I didn't feel there was enough of a change to the RCZ to call it anything other than a mid term facelift.

Of course now we know that 'mid term' has become 'end of line' maybe I should think of it as a separate mk seeing as there were only two versions!

yes I agree the nose difference on the RCZ is very subtle and hardly worth calling it a mk2 but the TT mk2 is vastly different from the mk1 but only marginally different to the mk3.

 

[Anonymous]

yes I agree the nose difference on the RCZ is very subtle and hardly worth calling it a mk2 but the TT mk2 is vastly different from the mk1 but only slightly marginally to the mk3.

True...and let's not even start thinking about, say, the 911 over the years...

 

[DKZ5745]

I know what your saying about the differences between Mk1 & 2 Z's, you can't even tell which is which unless you are looking from the front, but, if you are looking from the front, they are pretty much totally different, so maybe Mk1 & Mk2 is justified. :eusa-think:

 

[Anonymous]

I wonder how the non-rcz owning public would think of them? We're aficionados so we know the details and variations and we know what we each mean no matter which term we use...but everyone else?...

 

[DKZ5745]

Good point :eusa-think:

 

[2retro]

We had a group of French business men on a visit at work yesterday and when I went outside for my lunch they were all round my car taking pics with their phones. Obviously I started chatting to them for a few minutes and incredibly this is what they said: "We have never seen one of these in France. Too expensive!". :lol:

 

[renegade79]

We had a group of French business men on a visit at work yesterday and when I went outside for my lunch they were all round my car taking pics with their phones. Obviously I started chatting to them for a few minutes and incredibly this is what they said: "We have never seen one of these in France. Too expensive!". :lol:

that's interesting. I didn't see that many when I was in France on holiday but it did get plenty of attention. With such a stunningly beautiful car added to the fact that Les Francais appreciate the loyalty to the brand = lots of on-lookers

 

[renegade79]

I know what your saying about the differences between Mk1 & 2 Z's, you can't even tell which is which unless you are looking from the front, but, if you are looking from the front, they are pretty much totally different, so maybe Mk1 & Mk2 is justified. :eusa-think:

If I had a mk2 I would miss my fogs dreadfully :lol: Wouldn't you???

P.S. I do like the DRL's - they are the dogs danglies.....