This whole thing is such a logical fallacy I can't pick one name for it. How about fundamentally privileging the survivor hypothesis effect bias? If the 911 tu

This whole thing is such a logical fallacy I can't pick one name for it. How about fundamentally privileging the survivor hypothesis effect bias? If the 911 turned out to look shit or be unfashionable, they would have changed the styling/stopped making it completely, like most cars from the 70s. On the other hand, maybe it is still fashionable because they still make it? After all, generally what expert designers say is fashionable, is fashionable. On the gripping hand, so? Maybe the turnover of style in a niche (sportscar vs mass-market) is slower (as you would expect given fast fashion and volume of play). That does not mean that niche is any better designed, only that bad design takes longer to be recognised and/or fashion tastes change slower.