Let's rant about car designs (post unpopular opinions in here)

RdKetchup

Snow Mexican Surender Monkey
DONOR
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
4,869
Location
Montreal, Qc, Canada
Car(s)
FoRS, Japanese touring triple
Possibly unpopular opinion: While I really like the car (and its engine!) for what it is, I feel like the Carrera GT isn't really a pretty car. Pretty as in racecar & form-follows-function-pretty, but not beautiful to the eye per se as it probably should, being the supercar that it is.
[...]
It is surely a very interesting car design and an approach, that has never been seen before (it could've been a random supercar design), but I feel like the 918 is the car design which Porsche always had in mind for the CGT but never achieved back in the day.
I'm going to rile some of the Ferrari fanboiz here, but the Enzo is plain ugly and the 612 Scaglietti makes me feel sick.
R32 and R33 Skylines, R32 is too boxy and if you look at the sedan version it's clear that the 2 door is just a sedan with some middle missing. R33 is too transitional, like it can't make up it's mind whether its an R32 or an R34.

I agree with all of those.
 

Labcoatguy

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 27, 2005
Messages
13,898
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Car(s)
#Jaguar #XKR, #Saab #9-3, #Toyota #MR2 #Spyder
The F-Type. Something about that front end just doesn't work. Maybe it's too busy, what with that glossy crossbar in the grille and the openings on the corners front bumper. It's the closest thing to "pretty" that Ian Callum has ever done at Jaguar, but considering the confused styling cues of the rest of his portfolio, that's not saying much.

3556283
 

gaasc

Desperately looking for a title
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
8,865
Location
Honduras
Car(s)
3 of them
The thing that strikes me about the F-Type is how they managed to have so many unique styling details and references to older Jags on it, yet somehow the finished product looks like what you get if you ask a designer at Rockstar to draw you a generic sports car for the upcoming GTA
 

bone

"bangle for president"
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
16,775
Location
belgium!!
Car(s)
Volvo V40 & Yamaha Banshee
nope, don't agree
i applaud them for coming up with a design that's undeniably jaguar, has clues of the E-type, yet still looks modern and fresh

i realy like it!
only problem is...90% of them seems to be driven by women?
 

93Flareside

Döner Kebab enthusiast
DONOR
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Messages
18,744
Location
42 miles outside of Chicago
Car(s)
‘18 VW Golf GTI, '87 Mercury Colony Park
1991-1996 Chevrolet Caprice.





Then there's the wagon.



This round bubbly shitbox that so many car nuts cream their pants over. It looks cheap, has a trash interior with only the finest of GM Plastic. I hate it so much how they took a classy design of the 70s and 80s and decide to ruin it like Ford did with the panther platform. They used Saturn levels of quality plastic/fiberglass body panels so they don't rust in some areas, only the paint fades. They also completely ruined the wagon by not allowing the rear window to roll down. Gone are the days of rolling the rear window down and opening the front to allow air to draw in and out the back so the interior cools down and you're not blasted with air in your face.

Theres not one thing I can put my hand on that I hate, mostly I think it has to do with the fact that its usually shoved in my face by car people in my area that can't get enough of them. The only redeeming factor was GM got their heads out of their asses and updated the engine so that you had some power and not a laughable amount where a 4 cylinder could smoke you.

This is car your creepy uncle drives and kids are abducted in.
 

Attachments

  • 75679700.jpg
    75679700.jpg
    178.1 KB · Views: 46

bone

"bangle for president"
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
16,775
Location
belgium!!
Car(s)
Volvo V40 & Yamaha Banshee
did chevy make ANY good looking sedan in that era?
 

gaasc

Desperately looking for a title
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
8,865
Location
Honduras
Car(s)
3 of them
Chevy? No. GM? Yes. In the early 90s they had at least three good looking sedans (Cadillac Seville, Oldsmobile Aurora, Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme, Saturn SL debatably). Personally, I like the Cadillac Fleetwood bloatmobile that came from that platform, but will readily admit it's not everyone's cup of tea.

only problem is...90% of them seems to be driven by women?

And what exactly is wrong with that? :p
 

Tram13

Active Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2019
Messages
470
Location
Croatia
I remember how much I got flamed on a certain defunct Need For Speed games related forum when I said 4th generation Camaro is ugly as hell...

Anyway, all this Jaguar talk reminded me of the Jaguar XJ220, which in my humble opinion just looks like a whale. I don't know how huge it is in person, as I've never seen one in person, but in the pictures it looks absolutely massive. The overhangs are just too long damn long, it's a supercar with side-mounted rubber trim, and it looks pretty generic for a supercar. The standard wheels definitely do not help with all the aforementioned problems. Neither does the fact that it was supposed to have a V12 engine and ended up having a twin-turbo V6 help. Nothing against the Group B-derived engine, nor the chassis, but they just don't match the body. It was obviously designed with a V12 engine in mind.



That being said, Jaguar did have a sexy V12-powered supercar just before the XJ220, it's just lesser known and produced in less examples. It's the Jaguar XJR-15. Funnily enough, the XJR-15's design was conceived in 1988, just two years prior to its production, which was also the year when the XJ220 was shown to public as a prototype, which was released in 1992, with somewhat of an afterthought engine. A much sexier car IMO, also being some 400 kg lighter:

 

Der Stig

is Der Slut
DONOR
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
7,555
Location
Misery Knob
Car(s)
Divorcée Mobiles

It certainly is a bizarre looking car. The interior is quite cheap looking as well. Also can't forget that said Group B V6 was out of an Austin Metro. And the tail lights are from a Rover.
 

Labcoatguy

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 27, 2005
Messages
13,898
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Car(s)
#Jaguar #XKR, #Saab #9-3, #Toyota #MR2 #Spyder
I'm of two minds about the XJ220: yes it looks like an Oldsmobile Aerotech with a Jaguar grille, but somehow it works. The overhangs are what you'd expect from a car with that much focus on top speed and minimizing drag, and I still think it looks better than the XJR-15, which with its protrubing bubble cockpit is like a more generic version of the Yamaha OX99-11. Maybe it's because the XJ220 is a Keith Helfet design, and his cars were so much better than those of that hack Ian Callum, who gets credit for turning Helfet's XJ41 design (look it up) into the suspiciously similar Aston Martin DB7.
 

Mitchi

Sierras für alle!
DONOR
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
5,531
Location
Lüneburg
Car(s)
'89 C4
It looks awesome, but the wing still looks like an afterthought. :p

I get this impression, but when it's an actual race car design that works I cannot let that argument pass. :D

Race cars and stuff pretty much always get a waiver from me.

The thing that strikes me about the F-Type is how they managed to have so many unique styling details and references to older Jags on it, yet somehow the finished product looks like what you get if you ask a designer at Rockstar to draw you a generic sports car for the upcoming GTA

This is incredibly true.

That being said, Jaguar did have a sexy V12-powered supercar just before the XJ220, it's just lesser known and produced in less examples. It's the Jaguar XJR-15. Funnily enough, the XJR-15's design was conceived in 1988, just two years prior to its production, which was also the year when the XJ220 was shown to public as a prototype, which was released in 1992, with somewhat of an afterthought engine. A much sexier car IMO, also being some 400 kg lighter:


I honestly think the XJR-15 is one of the most underrated supercars ever. It's a bit like the BMW M1, everyone seems to just somehow forget this existed. Though it has to be said, compared to an M1, this being essentially a Group C racecar for the road makes it at least have some weirdness to it that might throw people off.
 

public

Volvomies, volvomies
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Messages
11,898
Location
Causticity
Car(s)
P26L XC70 D5 and a ton of crap
The XJ220 is probably the childhood dream supercar for me, so my view of it is biased. However, those overhangs are huge.
 

MWF

Now needs wood
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
28,283
Location
MWF HQ, Ukadia
Car(s)
MX-5 1.8i Indiana SE, update pending
You should see one in the metal. They are huge.
 

Tram13

Active Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2019
Messages
470
Location
Croatia
It certainly is a bizarre looking car. The interior is quite cheap looking as well. Also can't forget that said Group B V6 was out of an Austin Metro. And the tail lights are from a Rover.

I forgot about the interior. Yeah, the interior looks horrible. But the V6 is out of something that's only badged as an Austin Metro and marginally related to it. :p

I'm of two minds about the XJ220: yes it looks like an Oldsmobile Aerotech with a Jaguar grille, but somehow it works. The overhangs are what you'd expect from a car with that much focus on top speed and minimizing drag, and I still think it looks better than the XJR-15, which with its protrubing bubble cockpit is like a more generic version of the Yamaha OX99-11. Maybe it's because the XJ220 is a Keith Helfet design, and his cars were so much better than those of that hack Ian Callum, who gets credit for turning Helfet's XJ41 design (look it up) into the suspiciously similar Aston Martin DB7.

Woah, I didn't know about the Yamaha OX99-11. Certainly a bizarre looking car, but I don't see much resemblance between it and the XJR-15 apart from the cockpit. But if it's there for aerodynamic reasons, or for the fact it shares a lot with Group C Jaguar XJR-9, and I believe it is there for at least one of those reasons, I like it. I'll always support function over form. After all, the beauty is a subjective thing, function is an objective one. That being said, I don't dislike the way it looks, purely aesthetically-wise.
 

MWF

Now needs wood
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
28,283
Location
MWF HQ, Ukadia
Car(s)
MX-5 1.8i Indiana SE, update pending
It certainly is a bizarre looking car. The interior is quite cheap looking as well. Also can't forget that said Group B V6 was out of an Austin Metro. And the tail lights are from a Rover.

I seem to recall the only parts the 6R4 shared with the Metro were the tail lights and the wiper motors. Plus the engine was NA in the rally car; they added the turbos for the Jaaag.
 

Der Stig

is Der Slut
DONOR
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
7,555
Location
Misery Knob
Car(s)
Divorcée Mobiles
Yes, but the rally car was still badged an Austin :p

I like the XJ220 still, I have a 1/12 scale model at home. It is a neat car. Just deserved to have a V12.
 

Blind_Io

"Be The Match" Registered
DONOR
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
22,778
Location
Utah, USA
Car(s)
06 XTerra, '00 VFR800, '07 ST1300, '11 Multistrada
Ferraris in general just don't do it for me, especially modern ones. My inner 12 year old still loves the Testarossa, but the adult me hates it for being too wide, brutish, and unrefined. Most modern Ferraris are not pretty cars, they are the shape necessary to meet performance benchmarks, but that's it. Aston Martin is not nearly as good a car, but it is far better to look at.
 
Top