Fbodfather... or anyone else who can give some clarification.
...i was wondering if you could expand on the safety issue with the gas cap location.
I understand that the safety was 'part' of the issue...if i recall reading somewhere in here correctly. and it was even compared to the fact that lamborghini gets away with it. your reply was that the camaro and ghini are two different cars.
Forgive me, i'm trying to apply logic to this...but I'm falling short. It would sit easier with me, if were merely a cost thing. I can understand that the ghini is a different car...by class alone. So deducing that they are in different classes, i come to the conclusion (rather assumption) that regulations are different based on class. fair enough...
but why is it that the Audi TT or a VW Beetle can have a fuel door located essentially in the same place? i'm guessing that it can't be under totally different regulations, as it would seem to me that they'd be in perhaps even heavier restricted classes vs. the ghini...
Also if the location were truely a safety issue, then why was it even incorporated into the concept at all...was it not perceived that it would be a safety issue? I understand the word concept...but i would think a peice of eye candy like the location of the fuel door, the way it was so enticing, just as all other aspects of the car, that it was included with the intentions of having it look that way.
i mean....i'll take the camaro no matter where it is! i was wondering if you could/would dig into it a little more for those of us who will miss the original concept presentation of it.
maybe i'm reading into it too much... maybe its because of where the gas tank is located in comparison to all the other cars mentioned...or all the other parts are located that makes it a real safety issue... i'm just reaching for clarification. this is not a rant by any means.... so please don't take it that way. i'm just trying to compute!
