Discussion
Dr Z said:
The Ferrari F10 was a good looking thing...
2009-2011 high rear wing/high nose cars looked good to my eye.
That just serves to demonstrate how these things are so subjective. To my eyes, that era of wide front and narrow rear wing, with the high beak nose, was one of the the aesthetic low points of the sport. They look so ungainly and unbalanced front to rear.2009-2011 high rear wing/high nose cars looked good to my eye.
Aesthetic high points for me have been the high airbox cars of 1975, the start of the new NA era 1990-92, and maybe the end of the V10 era, 2004-5 ish.
I'm not including the pre-wings era cars in this, as that almost feels like a completely different category that can't be directly compared. It's almost like trying to compare piston-engined aircraft with jets.
thegreenhell said:
That just serves to demonstrate how these things are so subjective. To my eyes, that era of wide front and narrow rear wing, with the high beak nose, was one of the the aesthetic low points of the sport. They look so ungainly and unbalanced front to rear.
Aesthetic high points for me have been the high airbox cars of 1975, the start of the new NA era 1990-92, and maybe the end of the V10 era, 2004-5 ish.
I'm not including the pre-wings era cars in this, as that almost feels like a completely different category that can't be directly compared. It's almost like trying to compare piston-engined aircraft with jets.
I agree, it truly is subjective. That F10, to me, having looked at the 641, looks laugh at loud awkward. Aesthetic high points for me have been the high airbox cars of 1975, the start of the new NA era 1990-92, and maybe the end of the V10 era, 2004-5 ish.
I'm not including the pre-wings era cars in this, as that almost feels like a completely different category that can't be directly compared. It's almost like trying to compare piston-engined aircraft with jets.
And another thing.....inspired by discussions about helmets in the large numbers thread
90s
and of course
Nice. Clean. Simple. Easy to identify.
Have a 'less is more' simple style to them - which makes them iconic designs
But now....
Why have they all become so fussy?!?
90s
and of course
Nice. Clean. Simple. Easy to identify.
Have a 'less is more' simple style to them - which makes them iconic designs
But now....
Why have they all become so fussy?!?
Edited by Vocal Minority on Friday 19th May 08:56
thegreenhell said:
That just serves to demonstrate how these things are so subjective. To my eyes, that era of wide front and narrow rear wing, with the high beak nose, was one of the the aesthetic low points of the sport. They look so ungainly and unbalanced front to rear.
Aesthetic high points for me have been the high airbox cars of 1975, the start of the new NA era 1990-92, and maybe the end of the V10 era, 2004-5 ish.
I'm not including the pre-wings era cars in this, as that almost feels like a completely different category that can't be directly compared. It's almost like trying to compare piston-engined aircraft with jets.
I get the like for 90-92 and the 2004-2005 cars, but surely the 1975 cars are the very definition of out of proportion! They look like toy cars to my eye. Aesthetic high points for me have been the high airbox cars of 1975, the start of the new NA era 1990-92, and maybe the end of the V10 era, 2004-5 ish.
I'm not including the pre-wings era cars in this, as that almost feels like a completely different category that can't be directly compared. It's almost like trying to compare piston-engined aircraft with jets.
Vocal Minority said:
I'm going to be honest
The Ligier JS5 looks like it should fall over in sharp turns....
when the high airboxes went and the cars became lower from the mid 70s on - they looked the business.
But the proportions on these were decidedly wierd
Is that the one they referred to as the 'tea pot'?The Ligier JS5 looks like it should fall over in sharp turns....
when the high airboxes went and the cars became lower from the mid 70s on - they looked the business.
But the proportions on these were decidedly wierd
Eric Mc said:
Funny, the cars that existed when I was 9 are also the way F1 cars should look.
Maybe it's an age thing.
I certainly think this were the best looking era for F1, and I was minus twelve when it was introduced. Maybe it's an age thing.
I don't think F1 cars should look like that now though, or indeed like the cars from the 80s or 90s. For me, F1 isn't about good looking cars, it's about technologically cutting edge ones.
CraigyMc said:
Eric Mc said:
I've always hated the high nose as introduced on the Benettons in 1991.
The first high-nose car was the Tyrrell 019, 1990.Why was that OK and the benneton not OK?
As i have said previously, what someone likes or dislikes is totally subjective. I like the raised nose with individual wings. I don't like the raised nose with a full span wing.
London424 said:
From the looks of things this year it seems that the cars CAN follow behind. Seb has been able to sit and pressure the Mercs at every race this season. Lewis was able to do it to Seb at the last race (yes there was a compound difference in the mix on that one too).
But a lot of the midfield seemed to be in pretty close contact with each other as well.
Lots of following..... 2 seconds behind though? But a lot of the midfield seemed to be in pretty close contact with each other as well.
I may be wrong, it may be perception, but it seems the cars need a huge tyre advantage and DRS to be able to get along side each other.
Vocal Minority said:
Its definitely an age thing.
I think and F1 car should look like a Ferrari 412/t2 - on an FW16, and that a Group A Impreza is the best thing there is - and super tourers are the dogs wotsits.
Anything from that Lancia Delta Integrale through Impreza vs Evo period of Group A defines rally cars for me. Just too young for Group B. Similarly Super Touring, particularly toward the middle of the 90s, is my mental image of a touring car.I think and F1 car should look like a Ferrari 412/t2 - on an FW16, and that a Group A Impreza is the best thing there is - and super tourers are the dogs wotsits.
The 90's were a wonderful high point in motorsport aesthetically.
Every series had great looking cars and liveries even more so. The proportions of the cars were spot on, F1, CART, supertourers, GT cars, rally cars plus superbikes and 500cc bikes all looking great decked out in alcohol and tobacco sponsorship and just before aero really got mad so they were simple looking things.
Plus it was all over TV and very accessible without requiring to pay for certain channels beyond basic cable/Sky.
Yes I'm a 90's child and damn proud of it.
Every series had great looking cars and liveries even more so. The proportions of the cars were spot on, F1, CART, supertourers, GT cars, rally cars plus superbikes and 500cc bikes all looking great decked out in alcohol and tobacco sponsorship and just before aero really got mad so they were simple looking things.
Plus it was all over TV and very accessible without requiring to pay for certain channels beyond basic cable/Sky.
Yes I'm a 90's child and damn proud of it.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff