Apparently, a car callad a "pontiac aztek" is the ugliest car, as voted for in "The Daily Telegraph". I've never heard of or seen one, 'spose that's the power of the INet...
www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.jhtml?xml=/motor...2
|
Without looking at the link I was going to say Suzuki X90. Then I looked at the link. I was wrong. That's astonishing even by SUV/4x4 standards of hideousness.
Mind you if it was most pointless car we're looking at, surely that would be the X90.
|
How about the Peugeot Nemo Van.
Saw one in the car park at work - I bet it is the last one taken out.
|
Ugly:
BMW 1 series
Uglier:
BMW 1 series coupe
Ugliest:
BMW 1 series convertible
Seriously though, no, they're not as ugly as the Aztec. But in terms of cars which can be seen on the road fairly regularly, they're right up there.
Oh, the view from the rear of the new Focus CC is pretty bloomin atrocious too.
|
Of current cars that I see around and about my vote would be for the Nissan Micra Coupe!
|
Range Rover or Discovery - new shapes... the old ones looked ok, but the new ones are just bricks....
Oh, and the "Warrior" whatever that is.... is it just me or are there a higher %ge of ugly 4x4s/Pick-ups compared with other vehicle groups?
|
New Skoda Fabia, with its midships garden shed?
Such cars tend to date very badly but there is the French concept of "jolie laide" as applied to girls - ugly but attractive with it. The 2CV comes to mind -I loved my two to bits.
|
|
|
A lot if cars are spoiled by one or two clumsy design features but that Pontiac Aztec is one of the select few cars where nothing looks right. The Rodius and Multipla fall into that same category.
Another ugly car that is 'all wrong' to my eyes is the Morgan Aero 8.
|
That Rodius is just offensive. How can anyone, anywhere have ever thought "hmm, that looks perfect, build it like that please!". And how can a car be pig ugly and dull at the same time?
I actually rather like the original Multipla though. Far better than the model of blandness that replaced it.
I find it in some ways more annoying when one feature completely wrecks an otherwise nice design. Like the ridculously oversized radiator grille on the new C-class for example, or the cheap looking rear light clusters on the E92 3 series. I get hugely irritated when I see an Alfa Romeo with the Evolution spoiler option too.
|
That Rodius is just offensive. How can anyone anywhere have ever thought "hmm that looks perfect build it like that please!". And how can a car be pig ugly and dull at the same time?
What I can never work out with those Ssangyongs is that they were designed by MG's head design guru (Ken Greenley, was that his name?).
What happened? A Morris Ital for the new millenium?
Still, at least they're a lot tougher than the old Ital -- Mercedes engines and all that.
|
A Morris Ital
Bland, yes, ugly, no!
|
|
|
|
|
To cap off the unfeasibly horrible styling, the Pontiac Aztek is also almost unfeasibly horrible to drive, even by USA pseudo-SUV standards. I had them foisted on me a couple of times as rental cars in years gone by.
|
|
|
A lot if cars are spoiled by one or two clumsy design features
Good point - the one that always springs to my mind is the Nissan 350Z. Why on earth did they decide to fit silver door handles which are almost a foot long?
The car now looks ludicrous from the side in any colour other than silver. Which is just dull instead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Surely the X90 did have a point - it amused other drivers.
Peanut.
|
|
Ken Greenley - the man who designed the Aston Martin Virage and the Bentley Continental R- designed the Ssangyyyyonngggg Rodius? Can this be true? What misfortune overtook the man? Did he lose his fingers in a dreadful accident?
|
|
|
For mainstream cars, I found following cars as ugly
Ford Ka, Vauxhall Tigra, VW Beetle, Hyundai i10, Nissan Micra (new shape) and new Landrover LRX [can't remember anything now]
However, beauty is in the eyes of beholder.
|
The mid 1980s Rolls Royce and Bentleys made the word "ugly" a euphemism for "horrible looking box whose only resemblence to a car was the fact it had 4 wheels. otherwise it looked like a badly designed tank"
I always thought anyone who bought one new had a style bypass.
Then there was the Mark 1 Viva: a car whose wings were folded over like the ends of a soldered can giving exposed seams...
Then of course the Porsche Cayenne makes "Porker" sound apposite.
But really and truly what about the late 1980s early 1990s MB S class? Doubled glazed bed on wheels with about as much finesse.
Mind you, the orginal 1959? fin tailed Cadillac made them all look paragons of styling reticence and good taste.
|
Some people think they are all ugly. I don't of course, but I have a predilection even for cars I do think are ugly: a weakness for the entire species, warts and all, shared by quite a few others here I feel, analogous to the attitude of soppy bunny-huggers to everything from the warthog to the headlouse: if it's got fur or slime or scales or too many limbs, it's better than us.
There are those of course who don't understand that car styling is always a compromise with the ugly, or anyway the crass: a four-wheeled trolley. And there are those who don't understand that the efforts of stylists or engineers succeed and fail in different ways, or that a particular shape may appeal to some individuals more than others. These people just know which cars are beautiful and which cars are carp, so there. The concept of a look that is pleasing because demure and deliberately understated is foreign to them. This is a pity because it's a difficult trick for designers to pull off. Where are you AE?
:o}
|
|
Got to be the BMW X6, one passed me on the M6 near Shap last month, hideous IMO!
|
I'd like to point out as well that styling and "taste" is an inherently cultural thing.
While the British public might have some business judging cars such as the Allegro Vanden Plas, such cars as the aforementioned Ssangyong or that Pontiac are missing the point completely.
Those cars are merely "alien", and until a South Korean or American comes on here and agrees that these cars are indeed ugly we have no right to criticise or judge.
An American forum I frequent (non-car related) years ago got hold of pictures of the then-new Renaults like the Avantime, Vel Satis, Megane etc, and universally condemned them as ugly French oddities, and proceeded to thank Goodness that "we don't get anything like that cr*p over here".
Horses for courses.
Edited by Webmaster on 30/08/2008 at 00:54
|
|
As Lud put it FU styling is a statement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I get the distinct impression that no-one else in the backroom has yet seen a Daihatsu Materia in the flesh, then ?
|
>An American forum I frequent (non-car related) years ago got hold of pictures of the then-new Renaults like the Avantime, Vel Satis, Megane etc, and universally condemned them as ugly French oddities, and proceeded to thank Goodness that "we don't get anything like that cr*p over here".<
Not much wrong with their judgement then. ;-)
Edited by Webmaster on 30/08/2008 at 00:55
|
|
The new Fabia was designed on an etch-a-sketch, a truly awful looking car.
|
What about cars which started off looking OK but were spoilt by a mid-term facelift?
My choice - Citroen C5 (gained hideous rear lights)
|
Chrome, It is an interesting subject. A friend of mine also remarked about the rear lights. I personally love the looks of the new C5 Citroen. it has to be in black though. A lighter grey colour didn't suit it as well. I saw a red one at Nice airport and it looked quite good. Citroen obviously wanted to make the rear still look like the typical Citroen.
Despite being an excellent car, I am not too fond of the rear of the new Ford Mondeo. It all looks really bulky (I know it is an outstanding car though). It is all down to personal taste and thank goodness we are all different.
I love my 1999 Seat Toledo, still looks fantastic in dark blue and goes amazingly well after more than 160,000 miles. The new Seat Toledo looks terrible to my eyes though. It makes me sad saying it, but it really looks odd. I see they have nice new shapes up their sleeves.
|
Fiat Multipla Mark One. The re-styled (or even just styled) later ones are not quite as offensive to the eyes.
May I also suggest a long-forgotten abortion, the Renault 14? Not only hideous to look at, but also to drive and work on.
Any Subaru, but in derference to certain established posters the Forester is better than some; although IMO that's not much of a recommendation.
The final Scorpio.
|
Fiat Multipla Mark One. The re-styled (or even just styled) later ones are not quite as offensive to the eyes.
I can't believe it when people diss the Multipla's looks. It is the coolest looking MPV ever made, and one of the few that doesn't look like it was styled by a breeze block fetishest.
|
|
|
|
Current VW Golf estate from the rear. Especially when debadged, there is absolutely nothing to break up the monotony then.
Not sure if the designers were just fed up by the time they got to the back or if it was an exercise in recreating a 1980's Nissan Sunny estate look.
|
I may have missed it but how can any list of 100 ugly cars not have a Rhodius in it?
|
Someone has mentioned the Ford Scorpio, which comes close, but let me offer the BMW Z3 Coupe as the ugliest duckling of all.
tinyurl.com/5rbvoc
|
let me offer the BMW Z3 Coupe as the ugliest duckling of all.
>>
Subjective again Roger; I quite like it meself but I suspect more because it's different than because it's pretty.
|
As a BMW 1-series owner I was most disappointed by 11th place. A poor effort indeed.
Surely the runt of Bangle's litter should be much higher, Bronze medal at least?
|
|
|
|
"BMW Z3 Coupe as the ugliest duckling of all."
Subjective, yes of course. I didn't help my case by finding what is perhaps the most flattering photo I've ever seen of the beast.
|
|
|
|
|
Put 'will vi' into Google and you'll get something that beats the lot. It says 'targeted at women in their 20s and 30s' - well, it missed. It's apparently a Toyota which is mercifully confined to the home market, but occasionally some joker imports one. I passed one on the M25 a few weeks ago.
There's an echo of the Burney streamlined car of 1930 which never got off the ground, probably also through chronic ugliness.
|
|
Saw a Daihatsu Materia yesterday, it might be slightly more aerodynamic than a breeze block.
|
|
What about the Vauxhall trying to pretent it's a Lotus - the 220X or something like it. It's awful.
|
|
Dunno about pretending, quite a few people (both motoring critics and Jo Public alike) prefer the Vx220 over the Elise.
|
I think the BMW Z3 M Coupe looks brilliant. Those flared arches, big fat garden roller tyres, long, vented bonnet, and four big exhaust pipes. Not pretty by any stretch of the imagination, but brilliant!
And let's face it, the only view most people will ever get of the thing is the back. These things go like ballistic missiles.
|
|
I drove a Z3 M Coupe once. You can either describe it as exhilarating or terrifyling and in that respect it reminded me of a TVR but with far better build quality and the ability to actually start when you turned the key. Over 300 bhp, light weight, mid 80s semi-trailing arm rear suspension and no traction control. Noisy and unrefined and on the autobahn it felt like flying. Fortunately it was good weather, it must be a heart stopping drive in the wet.
|
>>BMW Z3 Coupe as the ugliest duckling of all
Possibly not the ugliest, but certainly in the running.
The Multipla is an interesting case. I'm with DP & RR on this one. One's first reaction is "Good grief - what is that??" and then to burst out laughing. As the years go by, I'm inclined to think that it is not ugly. Rather, it is very original, and rather amusing, in a nice sort of way.
|
Ah well, I'm in good company: "Z3 'M' coupe may be fast but is aesthetically hideous."
www.honestjohn.co.uk/carbycar/index.htm?md=38&
HJ also says there "321 bhp 3.2 litre 'M' version almost too powerful."
|
No disrespect to HJ, but I genuinely don't understand how a car can be 'too powerful' It only goes as fast as you press the throttle pedal. People say the same thing about bikes, but even a 1000 bhp-per-tonne litre sportsbike is happy to pootle around at 30 mph at 2000 RPM. The M Coupe can be ambled around town without any undue hardship.
Any car with 321 bhp and rear wheel drive is going to make some serious demands of its drivers skill when stoked up, but is that the car's fault? The market is awash with cars that anyone can drive quickly - hats off to BMW for making this. I think it's fabulous - the TVR analogy above was spot on.
Cheers
DP
|
|
|
|
What about the Vauxhall trying to pretent it's a Lotus
And it was built by er....Lotus.
Edited by Pugugly on 01/09/2008 at 21:22
|
|
|
|
|
Put 'will vi' into Google and you'll get something that beats the lot. It's apparently a Toyota . I passed one on the M25 a few weeks ago.
Yes, I've seen this too. Very much like a Ford Anglia or an early Citroen Ami with its reverse-rake rear screen. Oh, I see the Ami was in the Top 100 too!
|
|
|
Put 'will vi' into Google and you'll get something that ...
looks like a MeganeII hatch from the rear drawn by one of the caracature artists on some Med. water front.
|
Interestingly, the oily bits are pure 1.3 Yaris (and that's good, very good). Toyota aren't stupid so there must be plenty of Japanese (aimed at women in their 20s and 30s) who prefer that extraordinary shape to the normal Yaris.
OK, the 2cv was ugly - but it was at least functional. This thing doesn't seem to do anything that a Yaris can't.
I'm sure there'll be someone along soon who thinks the WILL VI is the most beautiful thing since sliced bread - but then I'm not too keen on sliced bread....
There may even be someone who knows why it's called WILL VI.
Edited by Avant on 01/09/2008 at 21:46
|
|
|
|
|
