RedHaze

Is there any difference?

I've seen pics of 94 red seats with fairly low miles and they look pretty bright. Too flashy.

I took a test drive in a 93 with red seats though, and the seats seemed much less bright. Not really flashy at all. It was the same exterior color, as well.

Are the 94s just brighter or is it the lighting or what?


-RedHaze

Munchy2000

Everything looks brighter with cameras... Maybe it had the flash on?

Try looking for a 1994 with red seats in real life.

gnobesav

Agreed, the seats in my '93 looked pretty bright red until I saw them in person.

7Sweety

I want Red Leather on my future FD. I got a couple of pics Pm me if you want them posted

rewill

RedHaze,

The pictures I sent you are admittedly bright as far as the seats go. The actual color is more of a darker red. The color in the '94's is the same as the the 93's. Blame my camera - I'm still new to digital scene and my G2 still needs mastering. If you like the 93 you saw, you will like the 94. I think the 94's are less flashy as they don't have the red doors and bins.

Eric

7Sweety

From downed gallery.

7Sweety

2

RedHaze

Wow, in that second picture you can really see how much the lighting effect what shade of red you see.

maxpesce

Yes the RED Leather and interior photographs MUCH brighter than it is in person. The seats are the same color for the 93s & 94s, BUT on the 94's only the seats and carpet are red, on the 93s the door panels, headliner, rear bins, rear pillars and cargo divider are RED and the carpet is BLACK.

JONSKI

SSM on burgundy