Reply to "Low rise headlights, Vader, Hella or something alike"

Of all the products displayed here, from what I see, they all have advantages AND disadvantages.
I don't see where any of you as manufactures should get your proverbial noses out of joint and call foul because it isn't you who are going to make the final determinations on which way to go, it is the purchasers.
I can see why and where the design positions and executions have emanated from. Frankly though, I can see where all have not taken design advantages that are available aesthetically.
There is an opportunity here to tie new technology to a common denominator of the original school of Italian design SPIRIT emanating from that era.
I am disappointed by that. Maybe I just expect too much?
To me, Wu's solution comes closer aesthetically to where the cover plate angle should be. Vadar II approaches it as well with the angularity of the cover plate but looses in the attempt to keep the bucket top too low and the bucket bottom not being even with the fender opening.
I think for me aesthetics ultimately will sell these kits.
This debate has been a tremendous help to me simply because I just don't see the kit that says, that's how the factory would have done it (or should have done it), that's it, that's the one, it's perfect, I gotta have it.
I have to admit that quality is really a great commodity to have, but I can't help but wonder if this is a case where design aesthetics have suffered from too much quality and this is an example of the Chinese proverb of don't set a cannon to kill a mosquito?