# Cars: The return of style?



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

With few exceptions (especially affordable ones), in general it seems that cars have all been evolving toward more or less one teardrop-shaped, wind-slippery wedges with little real style or variation, apart from grill design.

I wonder if... when it comes in particular to low-speed, urban electric vehicles, if aerodynamics will take second seat to a return to style?

I look at the classics... the cars of the 1940s, 50s, 60s.... even the VW Beetle (classic), and wish that they were options in today's car market (obviously, updated with modern technologies and materials).

Heck... I'm even considering picking up a last-model-year VW Beetle here in Mexico (there are SO many here, and lots of 'em are _mint_!) and doing an electric conversion.... Only problem lies with that big land mass between here and Canada... I'd have to drive across the USA..... 

M


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Reality Check: Parts of Canada have 6-8 months of winter!


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

Or you can get that new CityZENN electric car with a top speed and range of 125km/h and 400km.


----------



## sae (Feb 13, 2008)

I would love to also get a late model "Vocho" (beetle) from mexico. It has to be the old design though. I wouldn't do the conversion on it though, just straight gas, mileage would be very good anyway.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

dona83 said:


> Or you can get that new CityZENN electric car with a top speed and range of 125km/h and 400km.


Well, let's wait and see about that


----------



## Reveeen (Aug 26, 2008)

CubaMark said:


> obviously, updated with modern technologies and materials


I seriously question if "modern technology and material" can be called an "update". 

What are the cab, and car fleet owners running, and how are they "modifying" this modern material, and technology to get the greatest return? Because these are the guys that know what makes them money and what doesn't. I'm not talking about the guy that owns one, maybe one hundred, but not one.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

The shaping is partly due to fuel economy and competition. Too many businesses now just want to play follow the leader because it's safer than trying to become the leader. This is why you end up with every sedan looking like a Camry or Accord.

I think there's room for style and still be aerodynamic, but nobody wants to take too much risk these days. Personally I wouldn't sacrifice practicality for style. I'd have no problem driving an ugly car if it was roomy, had good fuel economy, and was of good quality. (real quality, not that bogus "Initial Quality")


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I would buy a stylish vehicle with worse fuel economy in a heartbeat--but I would want it to be new. I have tried to maintain a beautiful 72 Chev Caprice for a number of years, but I couldn't keep up with the body work.


----------



## K_OS (Dec 13, 2002)

Mark just make sure that whatever car you decide to bring back from Mexico that it's at least 15 years old that is the cutoff for imported cars like the Beatle.

Laterz


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

CubaMark said:


> I wonder if... when it comes in particular to low-speed, urban electric vehicles, if aerodynamics will take second seat to a return to style?


I doubt it because:
-Practical considerations win out over style these days.
-In a smaller market, there is less room for quirky niche vehicles.
-With platform and component sharing there is less to differentiate vehicles with.

I hope I'm wrong though, I think it would be more interesting to see a wide variety of car designs on the street...


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

K_OS said:


> Mark just make sure that whatever car you decide to bring back from Mexico that it's at least 15 years old that is the cutoff for imported cars like the Beatle.


K_OS: Hmmm.... I was thinking of the last model year of the Beetle, actually, 2003. Where does one find the import regulations for cars, anyway?


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Try these 2 sites for a start. Also as mentioned follow the links to make sure your particular vehicle meets various emissions and safety standards. Don't forget the bit about submitting the forms ahead of time. 

Import Car To Canada! Step-By-Step Guide to Importing a Car into Canada from the U.S.
how to import


----------



## K_OS (Dec 13, 2002)

eMacMan said:


> Try these 2 sites for a start. Also as mentioned follow the links to make sure your particular vehicle meets various emissions and safety standards. Don't forget the bit about submitting the forms ahead of time.
> 
> Import Car To Canada! Step-By-Step Guide to Importing a Car into Canada from the U.S.
> how to import


with all those rules that is why I only import Austin Mini's that are over 15 years old, 15 years and older cars are considered classics and are not subject to any of the import rules that 15 years or newer cars are. Also be careful as some provinces like mine in Ontario have smog laws that state that cars built in 1987 and after have to be tested every 2 years.

When you are importing a car just make sure that all the paperwork is taken care of ahead of time and all the paperwork from the originating country is clear as day. I had a Mini come trough from Portugal and the paperwork and ownership was old so I had to go trough allot of BS to get the car legalized.

Laterz


----------



## K_OS (Dec 13, 2002)

> The Registrar of Imported Vehicles program regulates only vehicles originally manufactured for the U.S. market. Vehicles originally manufactured to standards other than the U.S. or Canada, are inadmissible into Canada under the current laws. The program regulates passenger cars, trucks, vans, jeeps, chassis cabs, trailers, motorcycles, off-road vehicles and snowmobiles less than 15 years old and buses manufactured after January 1, 1971.


As the old Beatle doesn't meet these requirements it will have to be a 15 year or older model.

Laterz


----------



## JSvo (Nov 12, 2007)

K_OS said:


> ...I only import Austin Mini's that are over 15 years old...


I love old minis. Is that your main business?

I don't mind the new BMW minis, but I'd take an old one over new any day.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Oh man..... just had a look at those links. It looks like importing a 2003 VW Beetle from Mexico to Canada is simply.... impossible...


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Mark, I don't know your status in Mexico (work visa, etc) but there may be a way to bring the vehicle back to Canada as part of your personal belonging. I used to work for a auto transport company at one time and there was never any issues when people moved between US and Canada and took their vehicles back and forth. It may be different with Mexican cars, but I've seen "right-hand" drive cars here in Toronto plated in Ontario. So, anything is possible.

The only issue would be if the vehicle does not meet Canadian safety and emissions regulations.


----------



## K_OS (Dec 13, 2002)

JSvo said:


> I love old minis. Is that your main business?
> 
> I don't mind the new BMW minis, but I'd take an old one over new any day.


I love Mini's but importing them is not my main source of income I do bring them in from time to time but I usually buy 3 put them in a container get them over here sell 2 and I get the 3rd car for free.

If you're looking for a Mini in your area try Vancouver Mini Club they're a great club with allot of members that are sure to help you out.

Back to Mark's problem why not just get a 15 year old Beatle with the amount of old Beatles floating around Mexico parts should not be a problem to find.

Laterz


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Yeah... 15 year old+... may have to be the way I go... maybe a Cabriolet....? Any Beetle fanatics here? Of all the years of the VW, which would you import from Mexico, assuming you could find one in great shape...?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

I used to have two bugs. Had a 57 Chevy, a 55 Merc, a 61 TR3-A and a 70 Monte Carlo.

All I got left is this one, a 49 Meteor and it too is for sale.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

My dad brought a 2003 BMW 5 Series back from Mexico to Canada as part of "his personal belongings" when they moved back to Canada.

You are allowed "One Household." So one refrigerator, one stove etc. and I believe on car per household.

Hope it helps.

It is not based on your official status in the country but how long you have lived there for. 

Cheers


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

There may also be a requirement as to how long you owned the vehicle. It's been awhile and even if I could remember the regulations may have changed.


----------



## ScanMan (Sep 11, 2007)

Coupla nice 50s in my latest batch of scans. That Olds probably drove through the tree.


----------



## JSvo (Nov 12, 2007)

K_OS said:


> If you're looking for a Mini in your area try Vancouver Mini Club they're a great club with allot of members that are sure to help you out.


Thanks K_OS!


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

_Resurrecting this thread - so sue me!_

Found an interesting website that may be of interest for those who want to import a vehicle from the USA. This is (apparently) a firm that is sub-contracted by Transport Canada.



> Transport Canada has contracted with Livingston International Inc. to establish and operate Canada’s national program of vehicle registration, inspection and certification known as the Registrar of Imported Vehicles. This program aims to ensure that vehicles originally manufactured for the U.S. market and subsequently imported into Canada meet Canadian road safety standards.


Registrar of Imported Vehicles

Doesn't help me with my dreams of importing a Mexican Beetle to Canada... but a southern-US one looks more likely...


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Now this is style:


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

I can get into funky vehicles like that, eMacMan, but Chris should really update his renderings for the 21st century.... that sucker still has an internal combustion engine!!


----------



## imactheknife (Aug 7, 2003)

CubaMark said:


> With few exceptions (especially affordable ones), in general it seems that cars have all been evolving toward more or less one teardrop-shaped, wind-slippery wedges with little real style or variation, apart from grill design.
> 
> I wonder if... when it comes in particular to low-speed, urban electric vehicles, if aerodynamics will take second seat to a return to style?
> 
> ...


I remember when I was in mexico I saw a VW dealership selling the original looking bugs and those awesome vans! I really wanted to buy one and drive it home but yeah it's along ways back to Canada from manzanilllo.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Actually THIS was style, way back in 1949 and 1950 when Studebaker was turning heads:


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

That stuff predates me by a long way, but I see real beauty in those designs, but scarcely anything at all in the utilitarian jelly beans that come off the assembly line now--all built within a narrow scope of aerodynamic drag.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Yep, but there were some pretty drag efficient stuff back then as well though as these two 1960 models show.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Not a fair comparison, MF, considering how much more price-conscious most consumers are these days regarding fuel costs. When gas was dirt cheap mileage as a buying factor wasn't even on the radar scope.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Max said:


> Not a fair comparison, MF, considering how much more price-conscious most consumers are these days regarding fuel costs. When gas was dirt cheap mileage as a buying factor wasn't even on the radar scope.


Not sure how that squares with the continuing dominance of urban SUVs on the streets...

I think as much as some people would be willing to sacrifice fuel economy for those monsters of urban auto fashion, so too would a sector of the population sacrifice efficiency for style.


M


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

I don't know about continued dominance of urban SUVs on the streets, CubaMark. I'm not seeing that in my neck of the woods at all. Instead I see a lot of mid-size crossovers - that, and a rising tide of compacts and subcompacts. But then again, I'm not in Rosedale or Forest Hill... tonier neighbourhoods are going to absorb the fiscal crunch of rising fuel costs better, over a longer period of time.

I also think people make the mistake of believing that efficiency and style are mutually exclusive terms; that's a rather old school take on the market.


----------



## talonracer (Dec 30, 2003)

While I definitely agree there has been an unfortunate sameness to current car designs, there have been some wonderful designs coming from unlikely sources.

1) Kia - The Soul has fantastic lines to it. The Forte is also a great looking vehicle.
2) Hyundai - The Genesis coupe, while not groundbreaking, looks impressive, and is fast as heck.
3) Nissan - The upcoming Juke looks sharp, but to really see its beauty, take a look at the interior. Wonderful.
4) Mazda - Although it's been around for quite a while, the RX-8 is still a marvel. Whether you're discussing the rotary engine or the fact that it's a 4-door car without B-Pillars, it stands apart from the crowd.
5) Mitsubishi - I flat out love the Lancer Evo. Rally car performance in a 4 door. *This one is just my own preference.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> Not a fair comparison, MF, considering how much more price-conscious most consumers are these days regarding fuel costs. When gas was dirt cheap mileage as a buying factor wasn't even on the radar scope.


It was on the scope. I have extensively looked over car ads from the 1950s in which a certain segment of fuel-conscious sorts were being catered to with smaller, lighter cars--which were also more stylish than those of today.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Oh, really. This I very much doubt. Please supply examples of these alleged fuel-sippers from the good old days that were allegedly more stylish than today's offerings.

Stylish - a scientific, quantifiable term if ever there was one.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Max said:


> Oh, really. This I very much doubt. Please supply examples of these alleged fuel-sippers from the good old days that were allegedly more stylish than today's offerings.
> 
> Stylish - a scientific, quantifiable term if ever there was one.


The Nash Metropolitan turned in mileage that would make even some of the current Detroit Irons envious.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Max said:


> Oh, really. This I very much doubt. Please supply examples of these alleged fuel-sippers from the good old days that were allegedly more stylish than today's offerings.
> 
> Stylish - a scientific, quantifiable term if ever there was one.


Gladly Max.

eMcMan is right on with the Nash Metropolitan and pictured top below, and just what is not stylish about the Chevy Corvair Monza couple back in 68 that also sipped fuel in the lower shot? 

Not to mention the Mini Minor (middle shot) of 67. 

And there are many more examples if I took the time to look.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

FWIW The 61-63 Pontiac Tempests came with a 194.5 CID 4 Cyl. engine. It was the normal 389 V-8 sawed in half. It was mated via a normal drive to a Corvair transaxle.

Fairly potent little power plant especially with the 4 Barrel, but if you needed a bit more Mickey T. made a hemi head and I believe a blower to replace the stock set-up


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Nice cars, Sinc! I especially like the two-tone one at the top.

I still don't believe the notion that today's little cars are any less stylish than those of decades back. Body styles, like car colours themselves, change in cycles. It's a whim of fashion, not proof that some kind of superior aesthetic was at work in the 40s and 50s - that's fine myth-making, perhaps, but little more. An example of small and medium-sized contemporary cars that I think sport cool lines and stand out from the dull pack, I offer up the Smart and the Mazda Miata. Or if you really want to see some amazing cars with a sense of style, hit up autobloggreen. Some of the coolest stuff is the stuff not yet arrived. I believe the motoring landscape is about to change radically over the next 10-20 years, and that will entail different concepts of style and beauty.

Besides, does anyone remember the unspeakable boxy blandness of those wretched K cars? That was the nadir of North American car design. Viewed from that era, we are moving forward!


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

^^^ +1 Max I agree 100%. Times and tastes change. I think there are some awesome looking cars out there now. The oldies are nice as well. But neither are better, just different. To each their own.


----------



## tilt (Mar 3, 2005)

Over the years cars have become narrower and taller. Earlier there used to be cars that were wide and short. In my opinion wide and short cars were more stylish (look at the pictures you yourselves have posted in this thread).

I prefer cars that are wide and short, plus have really thin A, B and C pillars in order to improve all-round visibility.

That said, there are some European cars that even today tip a hat to style rather than pure utility. Take the Peugeot 207 for example.

Cheers


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Being on the tall side I prefer tall rooflines so I don't feel so claustro when I'm in a car. Short and squat looks cool, I'll give you that. But physically, it's a no-go for me.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> Some of the coolest stuff is the stuff not yet arrived. I believe the motoring landscape is about to change radically over the next 10-20 years, and that will entail different concepts of style and beauty.


I think this statement needs to win some sort of award. The coolest stuff has not yet arrived? History is littered with concept cars.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Max, here is a very low slung classic that you would have loved as it had ample room for tall guys in comfort as you can see. It's called the "Bubbletop", a 1961 Chevy Impala and if the had the infamous "409" V-8 engine with four-on-the-floor it was scalding hot too!


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Loved those long, sleek boats... a real ride, for sure. And dig the funky textures on the upgholstery! I'd forgotten how cars could be like that, back in the day.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Macfury said:


> I think this statement needs to win some sort of award. The coolest stuff has not yet arrived? History is littered with concept cars.


Sure it is. History is also littered with dismissive skeptics. Your point? And when you can, please clarify the nature of the award you want to give me.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> Sure it is. History is also littered with dismissive skeptics. Your point? And when you can, please clarify the nature of the award you want to give me.


My point--there are concept cars announced each year that are never built--the coolest is _always_ yet to come. This year is no different. 

Your award? It had no name. You get a free side of Yukon Gold fries when you order breakfast at Sunset Grill.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Droll Barney, very droll.

And yet there are cool concepts which go on to become realized and mass-produced, which is more my point.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> Droll Barney, very droll.


Whale on the beach, whale on the beach!


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Found a picture of that elusive Pontiac Tempest here:
June 2008 Time machines


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

I loved grills from that era. Miles of chromed metal.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Max said:


> I loved grills from that era. Miles of chromed metal.


The car that held the record for the most chrome ever was the 1958 Oldsmobile. Here's a look at it:


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

_Oy._ That's a monster car.


----------



## Gerbill (Jul 1, 2003)

Reveeen said:


> I seriously question if "modern technology and material" can be called an "update".
> 
> What are the cab, and car fleet owners running, and how are they "modifying" this modern material, and technology to get the greatest return? Because these are the guys that know what makes them money and what doesn't. I'm not talking about the guy that owns one, maybe one hundred, but not one.


The cabs around here are almost 100% Toyotas, mostly Prius with quite a few Corollas.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*One wonders where automotive style would be today, if Fuller's car had become commonplace...*

*Bucky Fuller's Dymaxion hits the road*





> In 1933, Buckminster Fuller designed the Dymaxion car, a concept vehicle that could hold 11 passengers and had a fuel efficiency of 30+ miles per gallon. Three prototypes were built, but the only survivor is in the National Automobile Museum in Reno, Nevada. Recently though, renowned UK architect Norman Foster, one of Fuller's colleagues late in his life, commissioned construction of his own Dymaxion car. Right now, it's on exhibition at the Bucky Fuller & Spaceship Earth exhibition in Madrin, Spain.


(BoingBoing)


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

It was an accident at the Chicago World's Fair that primarily ended the career of the Dymaxion. You can certainly see how the VW was influenced by it.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Macfury said:


> You can certainly see how the VW was influenced by it.


Not to mention this look alike:


----------



## imactheknife (Aug 7, 2003)

SINC said:


> The car that held the record for the most chrome ever was the 1958 Oldsmobile. Here's a look at it:


thats a sick car Sinc! That is a one of a kind....very nice


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

_*Wow. Just... wow. This thing is gorgeous....*_

*Edsel Ford’s 1934 Model 40 Speedster*





> Edsel Bryant Ford's 1934 Model 40 Special Speedster has been the subject of an extensive restoration which returned it to how it originally looked in 1940 after its final redesign by Ford and Ford's lead designer E. T. Gregorie. That a 77-year-old vehicle can have aged as gracefully as it has is testimony to the talent of those that built it. The restoration was completed by RM Auto Restoration in Ontario, Canada


(GizMag)


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

*Cadillac Unveils Convertible Hybrid Concept Car*

Right down to the suicide doors . . .



> Cadillac designers pulled the wraps off the luxury division’s new Ciel concept car at a sneak preview prior to the official public debut, which will take place in Monterey, Calif. this Sunday, August 21, on the concept lawn at the Pebble Beach Concours d'Elegance.
> 
> Without saying "retro," General Motors chief designer Ed Welburn described the Ciel's “hint of a fin.” The striking show car touches on its heritage while providing a vision of where Cadillac design might be headed in the near future. GM claims the open-top four-seater could be powered by a twin-turbocharged version of the company's "3.6-liter direct injection V-6 engine, paired with a hybrid system using lithium-ion battery technology."


Cadillac Unveils Convertible Hybrid Concept Car - Yahoo! Autos


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Just bought a 2006 Mazda 6 Sport Wagon GT for my wife... It may not be to everyone's taste but as far a modern cars go and a wagon I think it is a beauty...


----------



## Kazak (Jan 19, 2004)

CubaMark said:


> _*Wow. Just... wow. This thing is gorgeous....*_


A big +1.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

I love a wagon, I used to have a Volvo 240 wagon back in 1984,
Loved that car, Now if only ford would bring back the Focus wagon.

I've rented a Ford Focus wagon in the past and loved it,
Can't understand the stigma of why they don't like them anymore.

Never liked a hatch back or a sedan, Gotta be a wagon.


----------



## vancouverdave (Dec 14, 2008)

Was admiring a car on the road today for it's unique muscle car looks. Thought it might be a mustang. Turns out it was just a camaro. Kinda like camaro grew-up.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

> *Ferrari 340 Competizione*
> 
> _It's one thing to take a classic car and make it look modern — but it's quite another to take a new car and make it look classic. That's the idea behind the Ferrari 340 Competizione ($TBA). Built to pay homage to the 1952 Ferrari 340 Mexico — which was limited to just three examples — the Competizione is a one-off that began life as a Ferrari 456 GT, and kept its 470hp, 5.4L V12 and six-speed manual while gaining new aerodynamics, suspension, brakes, an interior that recalls the 340 Mexico while retaining some modern niceties, and, of course, new aluminum bodywork._ (via UnCrate)


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

*Hyundai Veloster*

This car made caught my eye today and was interestingly styled to make me walk out of my way to see what "kind of car" it was parked over in the corner of a parking lot.

Hyundai Veloster

It has one door on the driver's side and two doors on the passenger's side.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

The reviewer at the Globe & Mail wasn't impressed with its road manners...

*Hyundai Veloster: style over substance
*


> ...the Veloster’s rather mediocre on-road behaviour. With power coming from the same “Gamma” 1.6-litre, four-cylinder engine found in the Accent, the Veloster could definitely use a shot in the arm in the power department. During a day of driving in and around the Vancouver area, in all kinds of driving conditions, this non-Generation Y baby boomer found Hyundai’s newest to be kind of unresponsive, slow to rev and shy on reserve power.


(Globe Drive)


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

I was only pointing style as this "new" car caught my eye. If it's looking fast but going no where, it would be the first car in this old world to do so.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

vancouverdave said:


> Was admiring a car on the road today for it's unique muscle car looks. Thought it might be a mustang. Turns out it was just a camaro. Kinda like camaro grew-up.


I test drove one of these brutes on the open road and have to admit I was shocked by its gutsy acceleration. The current Camaro has more HP than the first model released in the 1960s.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*If more automakers bring out gorgeous designs like this for EVs, the move away from gasoline will go much faster...* 





> The Morgan Aero SuperSports is a pretty impressive automobile, even in its standard form. It has a lightweight aluminum body, a hardwood and leather cockpit and a top speed of 170 mph (273 km/h). It also has a 4.8 liter BMW V8 engine, although in a project currently being undertaken by the British automaker and Zytek Automotive, that power plant will be replaced with a 70kW electric motor. The result will be known as the Electric Morgan +E. Although only two of them will be made, the company says that if the experience proves favorable, "further developments" could result.


(via GizMag)


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

CubaMark said:


> *If more automakers bring out gorgeous designs like this for EVs, the move away from gasoline will go much faster...*


Not at a base price of $185,000 for the gasoline version.  :yikes:


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Morgan has made a car or two I would love to own, were it not for the minor detail of co$t


----------



## ertman (Jan 15, 2008)

CubaMark said:


> *If more automakers bring out gorgeous designs like this for EVs, the move away from gasoline will go much faster...*


Not for me, I do not like the look.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

ertman said:


> Not for me, I do not like the look.


+1; - fugly doesn't begin to describe this.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Lars said:


> +1; - fugly doesn't begin to describe this.


Interesting comment by one far too young to have ever seen, nor appreciate the true classics of the automotive world. Time to do some research on your part on the models of the past that put the glitz and pizzaz you think the current crop of crap stuff has for consumers to shame. Perhaps educate yourself on the true beauty and functionality of cars as far back as the airflow Chryslers of the late 1930s. Carry-overs from a classic design period that has escaped your notice entirely seem to taint your opinion. Do some research and see for yourself.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

SINC, you're being a bit of a fuddy-duddy there   But I agree with the sentiment. Most automobiles produced in the last 30 years or so have been moving toward the same wind-wedge / teardrop shape. Very little in the way of style (the whole point of this thread).

The classic car designs from the early decades of the car industry were amazing... Form over Function. Art.

If "kids today" are content with the blasé stuff that major automakers put out, well good for them. Me? I'd love to have more choice of style in the next car I buy (once I get home to Canada - in the meantime, my Mexi-Beetle sates my needs).


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

I like the Morgan's, esp the craftsmanship that goes into building them. They really are works of art.


----------



## ertman (Jan 15, 2008)

SINC said:


> Interesting comment by one far too young to have ever seen, nor appreciate the true classics of the automotive world. Time to do some research on your part on the models of the past that put the glitz and pizzaz you think the current crop of crap stuff has for consumers to shame. Perhaps educate yourself on the true beauty and functionality of cars as far back as the airflow Chryslers of the late 1930s. Carry-overs from a classic design period that has escaped your notice entirely seem to taint your opinion. Do some research and see for yourself.


I find that generally (not always), the cars people like are based on their age and when they became interested in cars. The appreciation of the style of a vehicle is dependent on the perception of the individual, it is a kind of art.

I do not appreciate the styling of the Morgan, I wouldn't call it ugly, but to me, while it is nicely made, it doesn't look very nice. I also do not think that styling relics of the past make any difference when comparing vehicles today.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

ertman said:


> I find that generally (not always), the cars people like are based on their age and when they became interested in cars. The appreciation of the style of a vehicle is dependent on the perception of the individual, it is a kind of art.


Well, all of the following cars, Chrysler Airstreams, Cord and Chrysler concept cars were produced about 10 years before I was born (1944) and 30 years before I began buying cars, yet they have obvious design trends still in use today. All three models are from 1936 and 1937.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

It all comes down to taste and there is no accounting for it... no one needs to account for what they like or don't like when it comes to aesthetics... live and let live, beauty is in they eye of the beholder and a dozen other cliches that are all true...


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

SINC said:


> Interesting comment by one far too young to have ever seen, nor appreciate the true classics of the automotive world.


Hence my perspective on the matter.



SINC said:


> Time to do some research on your part on the models of the past that put the glitz and pizzaz you think the current crop of crap stuff has for consumers to shame. Perhaps educate yourself on the true beauty and functionality of cars as far back as the airflow Chryslers of the late 1930s. Carry-overs from a classic design period that has escaped your notice entirely seem to taint your opinion. Do some research and see for yourself.


I've seen plenty of the older style cars you older folk call classics. And I can't appreciate any of them, sorry. I'm far more into modern designs.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

You're a modern type of individual? I don't get it. This just feels like an empty, self-serving statement to me.

Design tends to be a cyclical thing. Often what looks brand new today has had its predecessors decades, sometimes even centuries before we are born. What is modernity for you anyway - in a car, I mean? What defines it? Does it lie in the geometry? Materials, surfaces? Most of what passes for cool now can be matched with stuff on the drawing boards of car designers from decades back. Ain't nothing new under the sun, although it often feeds the ego to assume otherwise.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Yep Max, you and I are also 'modern type of individuals' with one helluva lot more experience than younger 'modern type of individuals'. History speaks to us, but not to them yet. As they mature, they too will become 'more' modern.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

LOL

I'm all for people embracing modernity, Sinc. I just want our friend to define what he thinks it means, car-wise. Otherwise all this talk of modernity feels kinda ambiguous and decidedly slippery.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

*Edited to make more sense.

What comes across as modern is subjective. A vehicle built in the '70's is a classic to you two, and, supposedly, good looking. To me, it's fugly and unappealing based entirely on its appearance. The car I previously criticized resembles the look of cars built over 50-60 years ago with its long hood -- that isn't modern to me.

To put this into perspective, this is modern to me:


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

I like the AUDI R8 4.2L Spyder

The powerful Audi R8 4.2L Spyder can sprint from 0 – 62mph in 4.8 seconds,
reaching a top speed of 186mph. This supercar is as comfortable on the racetrack
as it would be in your driveway.

I wouldn't buy it, But I'd love to drive it.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Lars said:


> To put this into perspective, this is modern to me:


Not so much for me. It 'borrows' much too heavily from a 10-year-old Chrysler 300 to suit me. Just one more 'cookie-cutter' design.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Lars said:


> *Edited to make more sense.
> 
> What comes across as modern is subjective. A vehicle built in the '70's is a classic to you two, and, supposedly, good looking. To me, it's fugly and unappealing based entirely on its appearance. The car I previously criticized resembles the look of cars built over 50-60 years ago with its long hood -- that isn't modern to me.
> 
> To put this into perspective, this is modern to me:


Where did I say that a vehicle built in the 70s is a classic?

So a car with a short hood is modern? Is that the defining characteristic?


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

Max said:


> So a car with a short hood is modern? Is that the defining characteristic?


All I'm saying is the car I previously criticized resembles an old design, with a few minor changes. That's all. 

Everything about the Audi looks modern - the body design, LED light strips, the wheels, the curves. Again, subjective. It's perfectly fine if you can't see what I see in that car, simply as I can't see what SINC appears to admire about that Morgan.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

SINC said:


> Not so much for me. It 'borrows' much too heavily from a 10-year-old Chrysler 300 to suit me. Just one more 'cookie-cutter' design.


I once rented a Chrysler 300 for a weekend - I think it was the 2nd year they were on the market.

HATED it. Zero peripheral visibility. Like driving a tank. 

Interestingly, two weekends later I had a Pontiac G6 with the V6 option - if I had been in the market to buy, I would have considered it...

But neither of them appealed to me on a style level.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Lars said:


> It's perfectly fine if you can't see what I see in that car, simply as I can't see what SINC appears to admire about that Morgan.


Ah, but that's a much more carefully neutral way of putting things than your saying any given car is, by your standards, "fugly."

Still trying to get to the bottom of precisely how you judge the looks of a vehicle, how you ascribe modernity to you one you claim to admire. Short hoods? LED strips? Really?


----------



## ertman (Jan 15, 2008)

SINC said:


> Well, all of the following cars, Chrysler Airstreams, Cord and Chrysler concept cars were produced about 10 years before I was born (1944) and 30 years before I began buying cars, yet they have obvious design trends still in use today. All three models are from 1936 and 1937.


What I was referring to was that generally people prefer car styling from around their youth, this is not a rule, and it doesn't apply to everyone. Generally I find that the older one is the more they find that current vehicles all look the same.

For example, I appreciate much of the older styling, but I also enjoy the looks of many modern designs too. And while do find that there is many design similarities between models, I have found that there is still styling and I appreciate it.



SINC said:


> Not so much for me. It 'borrows' much too heavily from a 10-year-old Chrysler 300 to suit me. Just one more 'cookie-cutter' design.


And the same could be said about the Morgan. While the car may look different than the mass produced cars now, its designs is heavily borrowed from yesteryear. New or old, they can all be considered cookie cutter for their time as all the companies borrowed styling from each other.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Volkswagen Buggy Up Concept*





> ...the Buggy Up features a reinforced underbody, a roof-less and door-less exterior, neoprene-covered seats, a completely waterproof interior, and an iPod-powered infotainment system that pulls out to serve as a portable sound system. Sadly, there's no word yet on a production model...


(Uncrate)


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

_*Okay then - how do you folks feel about this beauty?*_












> *Wiesmann GT MF5 Roadster*
> Mixing a powerful engine and race-ready components with timeless design, the Wiesmann GT MF5 Roadster ($TBA) is a unique drop-top that's sure to turn heads no matter where you drive it. Built atop an Aluminum monocoque chassis, the MF5 features a fiberglass body shell, front- and rear-double wishbone suspension, a mid-mounted TwinScroll Twin Turbo V8 cranking out 555 hp, a 0-62 mph time of just 3.9 seconds and a 19-inch rear wheels that power it to a top speed of 193 mph.


(UnCrate)


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

CubaMark said:


> *Volkswagen Buggy Up Concept*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My uncle back in the early 70's had a dune buggy that looked a lot like that. He took me out for a ride and we went up a hill that was so steep I was sure we were going to flip over backwards... scared the hell out of me until we got to the top in one piece and then it was just such a thrill...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Screature, are you sure you weren't just watching TV and fell asleep:


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Screature, are you sure you weren't just watching TV and fell asleep:


LOL, Nope it really happened, I couldn't believe it myself at the time.... it was orange too... do all dune buggy's have to be orange?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> LOL, Nope it really happened, I couldn't believe it myself at the time.... it was orange too... do all dune buggy's have to be orange?


I imagine all dune buggies to be orange as well--could be a federal regulation.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Where Have All The Beautiful Electric Cars Gone?*









*(NOTE: Image of the Miluira Retro not sourced to story. This report had a shot of a Leaf, which ain't exactly eye candy...)*



> ...where are all the beautiful electric cars? What happened to the concept of automotive aesthetics, and why does it seem to have deserted the electric car industry? We've had enough, which is why we've come up with a list of themes we no longer want to see variations on.
> 
> It's certainly not a claim that can be leveled solely at electric cars, but with so few on the market the industry will fight a losing battle if it can't come up with designs that people desire.


(GreenCarReports)


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Well now that is a really practical design for the 21st century... right down to the squeeze ball horn.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Oooooh, baby!*





> This custom — but fully road-ready — ride offers a full carbon monocoque and a 3.0L inline six good for 306 hp. It sends that power to the rear wheels via a six-speed manual or seven-speed dual clutch transmission, making for a 0-62 time of 4.3 seconds and an estimated top speed of 155. Still in the development stage, it has yet to receive a price — but something tells us the attention it will draw will be worth every penny.


(UnCrate)


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Just looks like a classic Jag to me... not that it is a bad thing.. just sayin...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

And I see a lot of the Dodge Viper in it as well:


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

SINC said:


> And I see a lot of the Dodge Viper in it as well:


Jag was there first though in terms of design... Again just sayin...

Kinda like the song goes... "everything old is new again"....


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

screature said:


> Just looks like a classic Jag to me... not that it is a bad thing.. just sayin...


I agree - and in my eyes, that's a good thing. As noted in many posts above, I'm a big fan of style, and I find contemporary cars to be largely "Bleh!". This HB has a nice modernized retro look..


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

CubaMark said:


> I agree - and in my eyes, that's a good thing. As noted in many posts above, I'm a big fan of style, and I find contemporary cars to be largely "Bleh!". *This HB has a nice modernized retro look..*


Sure, I can buy into that...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

CubaMark said:


> This HB has a nice modernized retro look..


Yep, that sits right with me too. A tad like the retro treatment of the new Camero as well?


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Sweet..... 

*Dub box introduces retro-styled trailers for campers and foodies*





> Dub box USA offers a new solution for nostalgic folks yearning for a camper as cool as the Volkswagen Type 2 of the 1950s and 60s. Its line of camping trailers is inspired by the classic VW buses, and is offered without the expense and headaches of restoring an old Type 2. You get out-of-the-box convenience with timeless, retro looks.


(GizMag)


----------



## The Doug (Jun 14, 2003)

I hope it doesn't have the timeless retro road dynamics of the original.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Yummy. Brand-new tech, great classic design.*






> the Atalanta marque was relaunched as a tradtional sportscar built to modern standards with modern electrics, brakes, suspension, chassis and a modern 185 bhp 2.5 liter VVT engine.
> 
> In reviving the Atalanta, the company has employed modern technology to enhance performance and safety, but the authentic look and feel of a 1930's English sports car has been retained. All parts used in the construction of each car are new, but they have been "sensitively packaged within traditional hand-crafted aluminium over ash coach built structure."





> "Many great things have come from 75 years of automotive evolution, but equally many things have been lost in the pursuit of performance and safety; over powered, over rubber, homogenous styling, electronically controlled machines with poor visibility and disassociated communication and feel from the mechanical elements all contribute to a numb driving experience.





> The price will be under GBP100,000 (approx. US$157,134)


(Gizmag / Atalanta Website)


----------

