[EmailAddress]

The initial message was deleted from this topic on 07 November 2023 at 11:49

[Chubbyross]

For me, looks are incredibly important in a car. I wouldn’t buy a perfect handling car with all the power to match if it had the looks only a mother could love. Would I buy the most beautiful car if it drove like a crippled dog? Possibly. I’d certainly buy a Miura and stick it in my kitchen just to look at all day long. By all accounts a Countach isn’t the greatest car to drive but I’d be more than happy to own one.

[skedaddle]

Looks followed by lightness and handling. Not too bothered about power.

[Haltamer]

Why not both?

If everyone dispensed with looks, this would probably be a Type R Forum

[samoht]

The great thing about an RX-7 is it's beautiful, quick, and has a lovely handling balance, so no need to compromise.
(Terrible fuel economy, practicality and maintenance costs, but those are minor details right?)

[leef44]

Haltamer said:

Why not both?

If everyone dispensed with looks, this would probably be a Type R Forum

This is the one thing that's on my mind.

I've always gone power/handling over looks but looks are important to me. I love the swooping looks of the TVR T350 but it wasn't the best in the handling department (ok I could have fettled with it)

But that Type R - it has had the best reviews for its involvement and handling. These are important things for me but if I had the money, I just could not buy one due to its looks. I would buy the latest one because it is tamed down looks-wise.

[Truckosaurus]

I once owned a Nissan Juke so won't be voting for 'looks'.

[Baldchap]

Truckosaurus said:

I once owned a Nissan Juke so won't be voting for 'looks'.

Or dynamics.

[Harry Flashman]

Chubbyross said:

For me, looks are incredibly important in a car. I wouldn’t buy a perfect handling car with all the power to match if it had the looks only a mother could love. Would I buy the most beautiful car if it drove like a crippled dog? Possibly. I’d certainly buy a Miura and stick it in my kitchen just to look at all day long. By all accounts a Countach isn’t the greatest car to drive but I’d be more than happy to own one.

This, but with the proviso that the interior is lovely. This is why I have a Maserati GranSport over the far more capable contemporary 911.

Also, in the crowded South East, speed and handling are becoming less relevant than sense of occasion.

[kambites]

Dynamics for me, I don't really care about looks or, at least past a certain point, power.

[GiantCardboardPlato]

For me its all about the seats, the stereo, and the touchscreen.

[NDA]

As a classic car owner and a Tesla owner, I am clearly conflicted!

Classic cars are generally about the look rather than power. A daily driver is probably power before look.

[Chubbyross]

GiantCardboardPlato said:

For me its all about the seats, the stereo, and the touchscreen.

…I presume you’re not being serious.

[Bennet]

Is the fast car absolutely awful to look at?
Is the pretty car absolutely awful to drive?

Or is the good looking car still pretty good to drive? As long as it still has reasonable steering feel, I'll go with the good looking one.

[Ardennes92]

Life is a compromise as is choice in vehicles; balance of both if only 1 but maybe at least one of each would be best

[carinaman]

Truckosaurus said:

I once owned a Nissan Juke so won't be voting for 'looks'.

I like the looks of the first Juke.

[Baldchap]

Bennet said:

Is the fast car absolutely awful to look at?
Is the pretty car absolutely awful to drive?

Or is the good looking car still pretty good to drive? As long as it still has reasonable steering feel, I'll go with the good looking one.

We hired this awful to look at, awful to drive monstrosity in SA a few years back. I think cars that drive well more often than not look pretty decent.

[SkodaIan]

Baldchap said:

We hired this awful to look at, awful to drive monstrosity in SA a few years back. I think cars that drive well more often than not look pretty decent.

I'd agree with this. If a car looks like a dogs dinner because the people designing the back didn't speak to the people designing the front (or simply nobody cared), it usually drives badly too for the same reasons.

There are exceptions where the car is designed to look ugly and aggressive (Civic Type R, some BMWs etc). However in those cases the design of the "look" does fit together, even if its not to many people's taste.

[Silvanus]

Most important to me is does the car meet the needs of what I want it to do and is it well engineered, looks are petty important too, but not a deal breaker. Speed is less of an issue these days, practicality is key. As long as its quick enough to overtake slow vehicles safely and cruise well on a long journey, I'm happy.

[Speed addicted]

Haltamer said:

Why not both?

If everyone dispensed with looks, this would probably be a Type R Forum

I was about to say I wasn’t bothered by looks, but it’s a bigger part of why I like cars than I thought!

I’d buy flawed car if it looks good and makes a good noise.

I wouldn’t buy a car that I really didn’t like the looks of no matter what it was capable of.

But ideally a bit of both would be nice!