Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Captain Slow

WTC or Petronas Towers

World Trade Center vs. Petronas Towers  

62 members have voted

  1. 1. Petronas Towers Vs WTC Towers

    • Petronas Towers
    • World Trade Center


28 posts in this topic Last Reply

Recommended Posts

My Vote Goes To The World Trade Center.

It was just brilliant in it's simplicity. The Towers proved that boxes could be gorgeous if done right. (Sears' would be another example) Plus, I love how massive they looked from any vantage point. And the symbolism!.they were a symbol of Business, Prosperity, Capitalism and Power!

lightmatter_wtc.jpg

wtcbfor1.jpg

its hard to believe that their gone :cry:

240016259_a30e67b4d9_o.jpg

The Petronas Towers are nice too but its not my style :)

petronas_towers.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My friend, you are a Bauhaus aficionado. The Petronas tower(s) are anything but. I am a contrafan of all tall buildings, so I won't tell you what I really think of both of those monstrosities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • My friend, you are a Bauhaus aficionado. The Petronas tower(s) are anything but. I am a contrafan of all tall buildings, so I won't tell you what I really think of both of those monstrosities.

    what do u mean? :uhm:

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    The Petronas Towers, because:

    - They are not just a simple set of boxes. I always found the WTC a bit dull looking because it was geometrically dull. The Petronas Towers are star-shaped, which makes them more interesting. Besides, the tapering tip makes it also more interesting.

    - The bridge between the towers link the two towers together as one...

    - Concrete man, lots of concrete is used for this building. It's one of the very few concrete-dominant skyscrapers, which makes it kind of special.

    - Country doesn't matter for me. Unlike quite some others, the USA is not my favourite country. It would fall behind Scandinavia, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany, Luxembourg and the UK.

    - You can actually admire these towers today. Not a significant argument, but due to the unfortunate events that happened to the WTC we all know, you can't see them today. And I would like to see the Petronas Towers some day...

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    This is actually a very tough choice. I love both of the twin structures! And both projects became a symbol of the city they were built.

    But because they are older and more legendary, i vote for the WTC twins. They represent the American capitalistic power (now faded and compromised).

    Yet, Petronas twins are my favorite among contemporary (last 10-20yrs) skyscrapers!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    WTC...... Expect they were a target of a terrorist attack by the united states government, who trained the terrorists. The cia created bin laden and used him as a boogi man. The towers were brought down by nanothermite, since jet fuel can't melt steel. Steel melting temperature is 2795 degrees fahrenheit, jet fuel burns at 1472 degrees Fahrenheit (actual temperature when the fuel was burning in the world trade center ). Building 7 fell and it wasn't by a plane. They used explosives on building 7. The attack was an inside job to bring in a world wide new world order. blame the elites for the attack.

    there's a lot of knowledge on the web about the truth. that's why they want to shut the internet down...

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    The Twin Towers of the WTC from a distance were pretty much towering boxes, but up close you'd get a different feel. Their design actually separated them from most "bland" buildings of the 60's and 70's.

    eg8ymf.jpg

    The arches at the base and entrances were a lovely touch, and inviting if you ask me.

    20gmb8h.jpg

    The top floors had an interesting arch design or lattice up here as well. Most buildings of this style wouldn't really do things like this, just keep it so simplistic.

    And of course, I loved just how the New York Skyline looked with them.

    28jk17c.jpg

    I enjoyed how shiny they appeared. At sunset they would appear to have a gold-like tint to them.

    Just trying to better explain why I love these two towers so much. I could go on and on, and even post the essay I wrote about them for my college English Composition class but this would suffice for now I hope. :)

    Despite not being able to see them in person, the videos and innumerable photographs of the Towers are enough for me.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Both, ;) The Petronas Towers are actually taller than the WTC. Both Petronas Towers stand at 1,484 ft while the WTC stood at 1,368 ft. So if the WTC were still standing today, the WTC is 2nd place in the tallest twin tower category and 14 and 15th tallest buildings in the world.

    for the WTC: despite being just two boxes, they still look great!

    for the Petronas Twin Towers: taller and not boxes. Looks really good.

    Ultimately.....

    The WTC wins :P

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • The Petronas Towers, because:

    - They are not just a simple set of boxes. I always found the WTC a bit dull looking because it was geometrically dull. The Petronas Towers are star-shaped, which makes them more interesting. Besides, the tapering tip makes it also more interesting.

    - The bridge between the towers link the two towers together as one...

    - Concrete man, lots of concrete is used for this building. It's one of the very few concrete-dominant skyscrapers, which makes it kind of special.

    - Country doesn't matter for me. Unlike quite some others, the USA is not my favourite country. It would fall behind Scandinavia, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany, Luxembourg and the UK.

    - You can actually admire these towers today. Not a significant argument, but due to the unfortunate events that happened to the WTC we all know, you can't see them today. And I would like to see the Petronas Towers some day...

    i know the WTC has more Concrete than the petronas towers :/ thats why its like a nuclear winter when the towers collapsed....

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Phew, that's next to impossible to judge for me.

    One difficulty is that WTC is loaded with symbolic meanings and forever connected to its tragic fate, and it is simply more "palpable" for most of the world due to the predominance of US culture and affairs. Compared to this, Petronas Twin Towers are just another supertall, but otherwise a blank sheet of paper in most people's minds. This makes it hard to say something on the building alone.

    Secondly, context matters. I can imagine that the WTC would have looked horrible in the skyline of Kuala Lumpur, wheras the PTT would probably have looked totally out of place in Manhattan. In contrast, they are quite nice when viewed in context with Kuala Lumpur's skyline.

    Finally, the shapes and styles are so different... maybe I prefer elegant buildings over very massive ones, so this would speak for the PTT - then again, WTC surely has a presence... but no, I can't really tell which one is "better". IMO, it doesn't even make sense to rank them in any way, although this doesn't mean that I want to keep anyone from doing so or spoiling anyone's fun. For me, it's like having to rank two awesome music bands that I both like in their own right, knowing that I would not give up one of them for the other if I could help it.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    My friend, you are a Bauhaus aficionado. The Petronas tower(s) are anything but. I am a contrafan of all tall buildings, so I won't tell you what I really think of both of those monstrosities.

    what do u mean? :uhm:

    Bauhaus architecture is defined by "Form follows function". This results in boxes usually. The Petronas tower has some style that is of a different order than just a square box or cube. The WTC has a lot going for it because it was so large and utterly clean except for the entry arches, but I dislike tall buildings of any kind. I don't much care for cities at all, in fact. People heaps are disgusting.

    Unfortunately, the WTC no longer exists, and it cannot stand on its own merits. While it was an NYC icon while it existed, it has become an American icon now, and therefore sacred.

    I was actually in NYC on a business trip and we had lunch at Windows on the World. A very nice restaurant, and I am sure it is missed by many.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • My friend, you are a Bauhaus aficionado. The Petronas tower(s) are anything but. I am a contrafan of all tall buildings, so I won't tell you what I really think of both of those monstrosities.

    what do u mean? :uhm:

    Bauhaus architecture is defined by "Form follows function". This results in boxes usually. The Petronas tower has some style that is of a different order than just a square box or cube. The WTC has a lot going for it because it was so large and utterly clean except for the entry arches, but I dislike tall buildings of any kind. I don't much care for cities at all, in fact. People heaps are disgusting.

    Unfortunately, the WTC no longer exists, and it cannot stand on its own merits. While it was an NYC icon while it existed, it has become an American icon now, and therefore sacred.

    I was actually in NYC on a business trip and we had lunch at Windows on the World. A very nice restaurant, and I am sure it is missed by many.

    OMG!! i envy u!! :((( my dream is to go there!!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    I know the WTC has more Concrete than the petronas towers :/ thats why its like a nuclear winter when the towers collapsed....

    Actually not. The WTC did have concrete, but was only the concrete elevator core; the main floor structure was steel. In the Petronas Towers, almost everything is made out of concrete. They can not get mass-produced construction steel quite easily in Kuala Lumpur, so they used concrete instead.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    The Romans used a lot of concrete too. A lot of their buildings are still standing.

    Most of the damage to the Colosseum was done by earthquakes. They also didn't put re-rods in the concrete which will eventually destroy the concrete as they become open to water then rust, expand, and continue the cycle until the concrete dies.

    The main material in Roman concrete was pulverized volcanic tufa instead of silica (sand). We haven't learned much in 2000 years. We really have forgotten how to build with stone and concrete.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    WTC...... Expect they were a target of a terrorist attack by the united states government, who trained the terrorists. The cia created bin laden and used him as a boogi man. The towers were brought down by nanothermite, since jet fuel can't melt steel. Steel melting temperature is 2795 degrees fahrenheit, jet fuel burns at 1472 degrees Fahrenheit (actual temperature when the fuel was burning in the world trade center ). Building 7 fell and it wasn't by a plane. They used explosives on building 7. The attack was an inside job to bring in a world wide new world order. blame the elites for the attack.

    there's a lot of knowledge on the web about the truth. that's why they want to shut the internet down...

    Really? You couldn't just discuss the buildings on their own merits. You *had* to bring in some cocka-mania conspiracy theory. Yes, there is lots of "truth" out there on the internet to read; just as there are lots of C-grade "documentary" films on You-Tube. Most of it is poorly researched crap unfortunately.

    As for style, I am a minimalist. Simple will always win in my book, so I vote for the WTC (old and new).

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • WTC...... Expect they were a target of a terrorist attack by the united states government, who trained the terrorists. The cia created bin laden and used him as a boogi man. The towers were brought down by nanothermite, since jet fuel can't melt steel. Steel melting temperature is 2795 degrees fahrenheit, jet fuel burns at 1472 degrees Fahrenheit (actual temperature when the fuel was burning in the world trade center ). Building 7 fell and it wasn't by a plane. They used explosives on building 7. The attack was an inside job to bring in a world wide new world order. blame the elites for the attack.

    there's a lot of knowledge on the web about the truth. that's why they want to shut the internet down...

    i respect for wat u believe in! but please! make this topic friendly and stop posting conspiracy things here. respect this topic!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    I am prefer to choose Petronas Twin Tower because of the unique design and sky bridge. For the information, the current design of KLCC was suggested by our previous PM Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamed..He suggested the Islamic symbol as official religion of Malaysia...

    KLCC_Vthian.jpg&sa=X&ei=-uaYUKfKD8XhrAfi3oEY&ved=0CAoQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNEB8TKWu-rfGU-y6jLc0D3Frg2xVg

    Egypt213.jpg&sa=X&ei=IueYUJ6sDonMrQeOj4CgCQ&ved=0CAoQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNGpIvmvMSxdi5dkfq5rJMlXNS-YtA

    Design of Petronas Tower are base from this design..

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Some people consider a cube to be one of the purest forms you can using in architecture, but I prefer spheres or domes. Least surface for most volume.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Some people consider a cube to be one of the purest forms you can using in architecture, but I prefer spheres or domes. Least surface for most volume.

    Cubes are a bit too simple to construct, and therefore you see them a lot, which makes the WTC less special. Now domes and spheres are more challenging, and therefore, more interesting. I mean, I find this much more impressive, despite being 1/4th of the height and still a very basic geometric shape:

    globen1.jpg

    I've actually see this thing from the inside, and it looks grand from the inside. Mind you that most of this structure is hollow...

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    ^ Neato! A stadium I suppose?

    You should have heard the screaming when I first put up my It is a dome with a special spiral. Made my own surface texture from a small patch of the Sistine Chapel ceiling. This was also made before night lighting was available. I no longer have the model and my system is having a problem getting gmax to run properly. I spent a long time fooling with this one, because it was really my first non-experimental BAT. If you read the comments, you'll see some interesting reactions from the non-BATting fraternity who probably never bothered to try it. The lot base is the Maxis City College.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    I cannot vote on this. There is no way someone can hold a "beauty" contest between a pair of buildings that were destroyed in a terrorist attack, which thousands of people died, and any other building or structure. It's like comparing Auschwitz with a Boy Scout Jamboree camp. If you want to judge the Petronas Towers with another skyscraper or skyscraper pair, pick something that still exists or was not destroyed violently.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an Account  

    Sign up to join our friendly community. It's easy!  

    Register a New Account

    Sign In  

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

    Sign in to follow this  

    • Recently Browsing   0 members

      No registered users viewing this page.

    ×

    Help Keep Simtropolis Online, Open & Free!

    stexcollection-header.png

    Would you be able to help us catch up after a bit of a shortfall?

    We had a small shortfall last month. Your donation today would help us catch up for this month.

    Make a Donation, Get a Gift!

    We need to continue to raise enough money each month to pay for expenses which includes hardware, bandwidth, software licenses, support licenses and other necessary 3rd party costs.

    By way of a "Thank You" gift, we'd like to send you our STEX Collector's DVD. It's some of the best buildings, lots, maps and mods collected for you over the years. Check out the STEX Collections for more info.

    Each donation helps keep Simtropolis online, open and free!

    Thank you for reading and enjoy the site!

    More About STEX Collections