Jump to content

Beautiful Cars Appreciation Thread


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

 

Ive been thinking about this all this time.  And although I do agree with you that some lines, like how David pointed out on that C pillar, is awkward, I feel that THIS car's beauty is MORE than the sum of its parts.

1964 Ferrari 250 GT/L Berlinetta Lusso - Sports Car Market

 And although at this angle, like you say, the undercarriage seems to be unfinished as you could see the ugly pipes of the exhaust system too much, it could have been done better, the lines, ALL lines do flow smoothly from front to back. 

I will disagree with @David by him mentioning that those bumperettes are not pleasing to the eye, they are no more "vulgar" or unnecessary than what Cadillac did with their style of bumperettes to try to beautify their front ends of their cars of mid 1950s.  Or even Chevy's 1957 Belair.  

This SWB version seems to be tidied up quite a bit from the one above

1963 Ferrari 250 GT SWB Berlinetta by Scaglietti - Sports Car Market

Model Masterpiece: Ferrari 250 GT SWB

 The rear of the 250 SWB is less flattering, uglier and bulkier than the  25 GT Lusso, which is not very pretty itself, between the two, I prefer the 250 GT Lusso. 

In comparison, a 1962 Corvette's lines were not that cohesive either  (year for year)

'50s front end with '60s back end styling made for a bumble bee behind. Fat.

 

1962 Chevy Corvette Convertible Selling At No Reserve

1962 Corvette | | CorvSport.com

And that stainless steel trim on the bottom there maybe made for a clean finish, it was not a very pretty look.

The '58 and '59 were much much sweeter. Devoid of that stainless steel trim and the '58/'59 seemed lighter and more sprightly.  

Win a Rare 1959 Corvette® Fuel Injection Convertible

 

The vette is better looking IMHO. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 818
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Beautiful brute? 

IMO, the Virgil Exner-overseen design of the '56 DeSoto face is comparable to ANY 'best' design out there of ANY era (especially the modern one) - it is so utterly tailored & refined but still has

Shelby Cobra 427 Super Snake, Last of Its Kind, up for Auction (caranddriver.com)

Posted Images

When I was a kid in the 70s, next door neighbors had a gold '72 Olds 98 4dr ht like this, and a black '73 Cadillac Sixty Special.

 

a1.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Robert Hall said:

When I was a kid in the 70s, next door neighbors had a gold '72 Olds 98 4dr ht like this, and a black '73 Cadillac Sixty Special.

 

a1.jpg

My grandfather drove a car identical to this in blue, my fathers best friend had one in white. Sbulime cars....

1946 Ford F100 Flathead V8 5-Speed 2.jpg

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

I like Ferraris.  Usually.   More than Lamborghinis. More than Porsches.  These types of cars are not the types of cars Id buy had I had the money (including Corvettes), but they do brighten up the roads when you see one. Any of one of them so-called exotic things. They also do beautify a teenager's bedroom (with posters) of them or pics  in a beautiful cars thread.  :) 

I prefer modern Ferraris over any other modern exotic super or hyper car.  Even though I think that modern Ferraris are also overdone. 

Looks like it could be Aston Martin rather than a Ferrari. But hey...its a start. The start (maybe and hopefully) of beautiful, sexy and elegant lines rather than the awkward ugly-aggressive design language they had going on since the late 1990s. 

Ferrari Roma 2021 5K 6 Wallpaper | HD Car Wallpapers | ID #16212

 

This is the final version of the 'new' Aston Martin Vanquish 25 |  Motors-Addict

1 out of 2 awesome cars not bad. That Aston is Bomb.Com! :metal:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

The vette is better looking IMHO. 

Yeah...that would be a personal opinion. 

I like both equally.  But no matter which one you think is better looking, you cannot deny that the other is NOT not good looking.   

1958 CHEVROLET CORVETTE CUSTOM CONVERTIBLE 'EYE CANDY' -A Closer Look at the 1961 Ferrari 250 GT California SWB Spider

 

1958 CHEVROLET CORVETTE CUSTOM CONVERTIBLE 'EYE CANDY' -1961 Ferrari 250 GT SWB California Spider Up For Grabs at Villa Erba

 

Modified 1964 Chevrolet Corvette Coupe 350 4-Speed for sale on BaT Auctions  - sold for $60,000 on July 16, 2020 (Lot #34,004) | Bring a Trailer1962 Ferrari 250 GTO Might Become the most Expensive Ferrari ever sold -  The Supercar Blog

 

 

The world's most expensive car: 3 Ferrari 250 GTOs for sale at more than  $55 million each1963 Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport Gallery | | SuperCars.net

 

Second Ferrari 250 GTO to come off the line is up for saleFerrari 250 GTO #3387 | Talacrest Classic Ferrari

 

Edited by oldshurst442
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

no matter which one you think is better looking, you cannot deny that the other is NOT not good looking. 

One is great looking, the other is mostly 'meh'.

 

Is 'meh' considered "good looking"?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

Yeah...that would be a personal opinion. 

I like both equally.  But no matter which one you think is better looking, you cannot deny that the other is NOT not good looking.   

1958 CHEVROLET CORVETTE CUSTOM CONVERTIBLE 'EYE CANDY' -1958 CHEVROLET CORVETTE CUSTOM CONVERTIBLE 'EYE CANDY' -Modified 1964 Chevrolet Corvette Coupe 350 4-Speed for sale on BaT Auctions  - sold for $60,000 on July 16, 2020 (Lot #34,004) | Bring a TrailerThe world's most expensive car: 3 Ferrari 250 GTOs for sale at more than  $55 million eachSecond Ferrari 250 GTO to come off the line is up for saleFerrari 250 GTO #3387 | Talacrest Classic Ferrari

 

There ya go, the only auto's that are decent enough for me. :P 

The lone blue Ferrari has some nice attributes, but like @balthazar Most Ferraris to me are MEH!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Actual truck photographed by my friend Greg. 

 

May be an image of car and road

That is one way to use the trailer hitch for a storage unit! :P 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, balthazar said:

One is great looking, the other is mostly 'meh'.

 

Is 'meh' considered "good looking"?

I stand corrected.

I guess one can...

It is more accurate to say: Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder.  

If you look for beauty, you will find it. And by contrast, if you look for ugliness and faults, you will find that too...

It all depends on what you want to find. 

1964 Ferrari 250 LM Fetches $14 Million At Auction | Top Speed

1964 Ferrari 250 LM | Uncrate

1964 Ferrari 250 LM Fetches $14 Million At Auction Pictures, Photos,  Wallpapers. | Top Speed

 

Ferrari 275 GTB/6C Scaglietti Shortnose 1965–66 pictures (2048x1536)

Ferrari, Shelby, and Bugatti Lead RM Sotheby's $38 Million Auction – Robb  Report

1965 Ferrari 275 GTB tops RM Sotheby's sale at Amelia Island | Hemmings

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Hard to reply specifically as there are now like 23 different ferraris pictured in this thread.

23 different forms of Meh!!! 😆

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, David said:

23 different forms of Meh!!! 😆

Personally to me Mehh is most American cars from the late 60s, early 70s and 80s you guys are posting.  Huge, misproportionate, land yachts full of chrome and bad taste.  I don't see them as beautiful at all.  Plus they drove like crap too.  The only cool cars from that period are muscle and pony cars.

But that's just my personal opinion :)

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many things.  Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and everyone has an opinion.   '50s cars don't do it for me...before my time.   60s-70s cars I can relate to, but my sweet spot is the 80s-90s.    I like all sorts of cars, from the US and abroad.   I try and avoid xenophobia with cars...not partial to any particular brand or country of origin.   How a car drives is irrelevant to the styling;  many 60s-70s cars are horrid to drive by today's standards, many vintage exotics look gorgeous but are ergonomic/packaging nightmares. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and everyone has an opinion.  

Exactly. Everyone likes what they like.   

For example, I personally like cars from 50s even though they are way before my time, just like their swoopy aerodynamic (or what they thought aerodynamic at that time) shape.

It just balthasar and David making comments about how badly designed old Ferraris or Lamborghinis are while adoring some over chromed bricks seems a bit funny to me.  But as they say, whatever floats your boat.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

RE the Ferrari vs. Corvette discussion, in plucking out 2 adjacent pics I can sum up what I see design-wise right here.

Corvette is completely cohesive; it's lines and surface transitions have excellent 'follow thru' - where the rear quarter top line just has a beautiful, gently-varying radius thru the taillight, sharper thru the bumperette, yet still continues down to the bottom edge of the car. The lights are flush and fluid, the exhaust is both neatly concealed yet is located in the brightwork of the bumper port. It's 'hidden' until you spot it as an 'Easter egg'. The bumper, in wrapping around the rear quarter, seems like it may echo the radius of said fender line to the bottom edge, just rotated 90 degrees.

Just tons of thought in the design. 

One can argue against the '58-only chrome moldings sweeping forward up the deck (and many do). As much as I like chrome I could do without them (but I also could live with them).

There's no ill-fitting / low-hanging exhaust, no out-of-place rectangular reflectors, no tacked-on bumper with heavy bumper guards, no sudden sharp edges in the middle of the flow of the deck. I also get a strong VW Karman-Ghia vide from the Ferrari's tail lights- there's nothing wrong with them, they just look like they come off of something decidedly pedestrian.

Corvette here is head & shoulders above the Ferrari from a standpoint of design.

- - - - -
That's not to say the Ferrari is not without merit. The general proportions are very nice, and I do love the front fender grille that echoes the shape of the fender's curve. The silver accent there is also peachy against the dark blue. The rear 'bustle' is a tad overly tall, but it still works. And I generally prefer some sort of wheel well lip accent -as seen here- vs. the 'sheer' look at the 'wells... but the Corvette has enough eye candy to do without them here. I do think the Ferrari's rear bumper might look a tiny bit better mounted about 2-in higher on the body... but the front bumperettes are very low and I would not advise increasing that (minor) disparity. 

 

Screen Shot 2021-04-12 at 9.52.30 PM copy.png

Edited by balthazar
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/14/2021 at 8:44 AM, ykX said:

Personally to me Mehh is most American cars from the late 60s, early 70s and 80s you guys are posting.  Huge, misproportionate, land yachts full of chrome and bad taste.  I don't see them as beautiful at all.  Plus they drove like crap too.  The only cool cars from that period are muscle and pony cars.

But that's just my personal opinion :)

Again, kind of burned out on the car thing. I love the 50's and 60's American cars, and a lot of the imports, but to me nobody is building much of interest in cars right now. I like the Civic Type R, but can only get so excited by it. 

Motorcycles on the other hand...

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a person who’s ‘average model year owned’ number is 1968, I can attest that ‘60s cars do not drive either ‘horridly’ or ‘like crap’. The longer wheelbase, wider track in general is smoother, if you get a car with all coils (most of mine) and put radials & good shocks on it, it’s both controlled and firm as a driver. Now, if it has original- spec bias plies / worn out suspension, then yes; they can be not pleasant- just like a modern vehicle with overly low-profile tires an worn struts.

’60s Pontiacs are excellent drivers with the minor upgrades mentioned above.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he @ykX is equating a  'wallowy" suspension with crappy ride.  To that he aint wrong about the cars having wallowy suspensions during the time he is referencing which is from the late 1960s to the early and mid-1980s.  

I aint gonna judge nobody for liking and not liking this type of ride. I dont care really what somebody's preference is for car suspensions, but there are some things that I will take exception to.  But his or anybody else's preference aint one of them.  

The thing I WILL take exception to though is about calling it a crap ride as opposed to a tighter European "road hugging, stiffer suspension is that I will DEFEND the wallowy ride for these reasons:

BECAUSE our NORTH AMERICAN roads and CAR CULTURE DICTATED that OUR cars RODE like we are in our living room on our sofas in COMFORT.   Our highways, to THIS day, are STRAIGHT for THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of miles and when we USED to go on family trips from coast to coast practically, East to West or North to South and EVERYTHING in between, in European terms, many borders of many countries, 5-6 -7 countries, would be crossed. Europe is also very very mountainous, and hence their cars being smaller and because most of their roads were horse and donkey travelled, cars HAD to be tighter for turning.   American roads flattened the mountains or go right through them, but NOT travelling around the perimeter of the mountain when on one side is the mountain, the other side is a plummet to your death and you have to share the very very narrow road with cars going the opposite side.  Brakes and handling and turning radius had BETTER be tight...

City driving is the same.  HUGE phoquing boulevards. Street light to street light...racing.  

Is THAT a better ride over the other?

Well, take a North American road trip in a small, tight suspension-ed Japanese or European car of that era and you would realize that those cars were NOT great for OUR roads AND car culture.  Id say shytty if we were truly honest about this whole thing.

By contrast, traditional big American cars SUCK for Europe...for many many reasons. As many as those 1970s European and Japanese cars were for us.  High gasoline prices was probably the SOLE reason why these cars even got a foothold on our shores. Again, if we were truly honest about this whole thing... 

What I have said is not a secret. I aint teaching anybody anthing knew here.  Its just sometimes, we let our biases get in the way... 

1969 Lincoln Continental Mark III VIN: 9Y89A835685 - CLASSIC.COM

1976 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham | Orlando Classic Cars

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

And I understand preferences, for sure, but there is a HUGE range of differences in "1960s-1970s American car rides"; too huge to generalize.
A Ford Falcon in original, worn spec and a Wide Track Pontiac with modern shocks/radials would be wildly different. And ykX may STILL not like the latter's ride personally... I just wanted to weigh in on the generalization. There's loads of bouncy, heavily-leaning Euro cars with 8 turns lock-to-lock in the same era.

Hell; I've encountered significant differences in the same era/brand, ride-wise. My buddy has a '67 Catalina I drove last year; it was beat and it wallowed. I had my own '64 Catalina set up so nice; gas Monroes, 70-series radials, dialed in alignment- it rode great and back then- I really used to hammer on my cars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...