Best Lookng Kamm Rear Ends?
Discussion
slomax said:
ive always loved the Marcos back end, especially on the 3 litre.
I think that there are a lot of lovely rear ends on this thread thanks for posting. I have also learned a thing or two such as the flip tail not being part of Prof Kamm's theory.I think the Marcos seems to be the shape most faithful to the teardrop as it tapers both horizontally and vertically at the rear as well as being gorgeous.
I am not sure of its c. of drag but then the same early 128 bhp V6 Essex engine would be pushed to make a Capri do 115 mph, it managed at least another 10 mph with the Marcos.
[quote But Kamm tails don't always work. The DB6 looks dreadful next to a DB4. OK not just because of the rear end but the wheelbase etc which wrecks the design.
[/quote]
Now that is very subjective and stirring! It is one of those comments reinforced by repetition. The poor DB6 suffers a lot from this, abandoned Supperleggera bodywork, much heavier, a truck to drive. I call it crapetition, a new word for the Oxford Dictionary!
The DB4 has a purity of line and is very 1950s and ordinary in many ways looking very much like many other cars of the time. Particularly the AC Greyhound from the rear and not unlike many Austin/Morris Farina designs both front and rear.
Again referring to my first post, I have never heard anybody say that the rear of the Lusso looks dreadful? It is very similar.
Read this month's Octane!
[/quote]
Now that is very subjective and stirring! It is one of those comments reinforced by repetition. The poor DB6 suffers a lot from this, abandoned Supperleggera bodywork, much heavier, a truck to drive. I call it crapetition, a new word for the Oxford Dictionary!
The DB4 has a purity of line and is very 1950s and ordinary in many ways looking very much like many other cars of the time. Particularly the AC Greyhound from the rear and not unlike many Austin/Morris Farina designs both front and rear.
Again referring to my first post, I have never heard anybody say that the rear of the Lusso looks dreadful? It is very similar.
Read this month's Octane!
Vanin said:
The DB4 has a purity of line and is very 1950s and ordinary in many ways looking very much like many other cars of the time. Particularly the AC Greyhound from the rear...
In fact rather like the DB MkIII - indeed I consider the DB4 to the DB MkIII rather like an english pair of brogues compared to an Italian pair of shoes. Incidentally the DB6 copies the DB MkIII rear window shape but the MkIII doesn't have a Kamm tail, fortunately!
The Mk 111 is gorgeous too.
I think that a problem with the DB6 from some angles is that if it had the same triangular window as the 4 and 5 it would emphasise the line from the top of the doors to the rear which disappears in some paint colours when viewed from the side.
This gives a slab sided image in a photo which does not appear in the flesh.
It's best angle is a three quarter viewed from the rear.
The 4 and 5 have an awkward looking joint where the roof meets the tail. There is a rather sharp curve which makes it look as though the roof has been added as an afterthought as opposed to the way the 6 roof flows into the rear.
We all have our good and bad sides when posing do we not?!!
I think that a problem with the DB6 from some angles is that if it had the same triangular window as the 4 and 5 it would emphasise the line from the top of the doors to the rear which disappears in some paint colours when viewed from the side.
This gives a slab sided image in a photo which does not appear in the flesh.
It's best angle is a three quarter viewed from the rear.
The 4 and 5 have an awkward looking joint where the roof meets the tail. There is a rather sharp curve which makes it look as though the roof has been added as an afterthought as opposed to the way the 6 roof flows into the rear.
We all have our good and bad sides when posing do we not?!!
Vanin said:
The poor DB6 suffers a lot from this, abandoned Supperleggera bodywork, much heavier, a truck to drive. I call it crapetition, a new word for the Oxford Dictionary!
!
So when did you last actually drive a DB6 for any length of time?????!
I drive this particular example on a regular basis and it's a joy to drive - nothing like a truck !!!!
LordBretSinclair said:
So when did you last actually drive a DB6 for any length of time?????
I drive this particular example on a regular basis and it's a joy to drive - nothing like a truck !!!!
I do not think you have quite understood what I mean by crapetition, which is the repetition of crap.I drive this particular example on a regular basis and it's a joy to drive - nothing like a truck !!!!
Journalists read other journalists pieces without doing their own research. Auction houses are worse.
The DB6 is a delight to drive, is not a truck and they only made a few changes to the sub structure to the roof which supports the aluminium panel and which actually weighs less than the Superleggera original as well as being stronger.
The car actually weighs less than a top range VW Golf.
The answer to your question is thirty four years.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff