Welcome Guest

New Post
Hot Topic
New Poll
Moved Topic
Sticky Topic
No New Post
Old Hot Topic
Old Poll
Announcement
Closed Topic

   

100 Ugliest Cars…

Avatar for risdo

Abnormal User

RankRankRankRankRankRank

Total Posts:  3931

Joined 

Oh, and I agree with Mr DB: the poor little Bugeye Sprite should never have been on that list.

Signature:

Ego is the anesthetic for the pain of stupidity.

Speed Freak

RankRankRankRank

Total Posts:  486

Joined 

Let's remember that these cars should be at least partially judged in the context of their own time; most 1958 and 1959 American cars were not considered ugly at the time they were produced. The 1959 Cadillac was considered a work of art when it was new. Today, it's largely admired for it's "too much is never enough" hubris. Likewise the Virgil Exner designs . . . viewed against their contemporaries, they are no worse than most and better than many. Some designs age gracefully, some don't. Cars such as the Avanti were considered beautiful by many, and abysmal by others. It's largely a matter of taste (or the lack of it). Cars such as the E-Type Jaguar, the 300SL Gullwing, or classic Duesenbergs and Mercedes were rightly considered masterpieces when they were new, and time has not diminished that fact. Sure, the mark of a true classic beauty is timeless design . . . and cars such as the Pontiac Aztek were undeniably ugly even as they rolled off the production line. For a challenge, try to think of a car that wasn't especially admired or considered good-looking when it was new, but is now. There aren't many.

Avatar for boffam

Abnormal User

RankRankRankRankRankRank

Total Posts:  2394

Joined 

fyreline - 03 September 2008 10:58 AM
Let's remember that these cars should be at least partially judged in the context of their own time; most 1958 and 1959 American cars were not considered ugly at the time they were produced. The 1959 Cadillac was considered a work of art when it was new. Today, it's largely admired for it's "too much is never enough" hubris. Likewise the Virgil Exner designs . . . viewed against their contemporaries, they are no worse than most and better than many. Some designs age gracefully, some don't. Cars such as the Avanti were considered beautiful by many, and abysmal by others. It's largely a matter of taste (or the lack of it). Cars such as the E-Type Jaguar, the 300SL Gullwing, or classic Duesenbergs and Mercedes were rightly considered masterpieces when they were new, and time has not diminished that fact. Sure, the mark of a true classic beauty is timeless design . . . and cars such as the Pontiac Aztek were undeniably ugly even as they rolled off the production line. For a challenge, try to think of a car that wasn't especially admired or considered good-looking when it was new, but is now. There aren't many.


275 GTB?

Signature:

Originally Posted by Rootski
Every time you buy an automatic, Jesus kills a baby seal. With a kitten.

Speed Freak

RankRankRankRank

Total Posts:  486

Joined 

The Ferrari 275 GTB "wasn't especially admired or considered good-looking when it was new, but is now" ?

Wow, that's harsh. It isn't my favorite Ferrari either, and nearly all early Ferraris are more treasured now than they originally were - but I think it would be hard to make a case that the car wasn't pretty highly thought of from day one.

Avatar for Mr. dB

Abnormal User

RankRankRankRankRankRank

Total Posts:  2339

Joined 

The Plymouth Prowler surely deserved a slot on this list.

And the 1960 Valiant/Lancer.

Speed Freak

RankRankRankRank

Total Posts:  486

Joined 

OK, how did my reply to the post BELOW this one get in ahead of it? Oh well - computer gremlins, no doubt.

Not a bad example, but the 1983 Thunderbird actually previewed the "Aero Look" that the 1986 Taurus featured. I certainly agree that Ford styling took a real chance with that whole theme, but hit a solid triple if not a home run. As you say, they set the trend for the next ten years. I recall when that '83 T-Bird first came out, it was pretty well liked by the press and the public alike. I believe the original Taurus was as well.

Avatar for McMike

Abnormal User

RankRankRankRankRankRank

Total Posts:  1194

Joined 

fyreline - 03 September 2008 10:58 AM
For a challenge, try to think of a car that wasn't especially admired or considered good-looking when it was new, but is now. There aren't many.


First gen Taurus? People gasped when they saw it, thinking it was just terrible looking. Little did we know that everything in the next 10 years would start looking like a half-melted block of ice.

Was it good looking then or now, no. I do, however, admire Ford for taking that chance in styling.

Signature:

~ Mike
David Hobbs Kablammo Consortium Member #104

Avatar for ok_66

Rookie

Rank

Total Posts:  20

Joined  04/19/2008

While some are truly ugly many are just bland, a good example on the list being the '80's era Mustangs, I wouldn't consider it ugly, but it lacks the character of the original '65 model. Compared to the Camaro of the time the Mustang was roomier and more practical for day to day driving.

Avatar for LongHack

Ultimate Insider

RankRankRankRankRank

Total Posts:  919

Joined 

88 - Aston Martin Bulldog
Aston Martin Bulldog

Built in 1979, this 235mph prototype was always destined for low-volume production. In the end they built only one.

Can't get any more low volume than that.

Signature:

No.1 FAN of the Porsche 917

Avatar for romanmaroney

Rookie

Rank

Total Posts:  12

Joined  04/04/2008

Yeeesssshhhhh2cv-Cb72.jpg

Signature:

Use your head for something other than a hat rack!