Anyone else think cars nowadays are getting uglier?

[Laveerre]

IRL and in GTA
Turismo for example, I mean look at the first Turismo

Sporty and good looking, then came IV version

Pretty ugly IMHO, or atleast uglier than the first one
Then there's the new Turismo R

Looks like a damn UFO
And then there's the Cheetah

Nice old Testarossa look, and then the new Cheetah

f*cking what??? Another spaceship

But my point is that cars in the 1970-1999 were the best looking cars, and cars nowadays look weird and ugly

[RoadRunner71]

YES.

 

 

Wish I had a time machine

[Laveerre]

Me too
This car has been one of my favorites forever

[Algonquin Assassin]

I have no idea whether this should be in vehicle chat or general series chat, but I'm not a mod anymore so I don't have to make that decision lol.

 

As for the question I think there are still some great looking modern cars. Not everything from "back in the day " is a good looker except for some of the muscle/sports cars.

 

Just as a side note it's probably more to do with SA's blocky graphics, but GTA IV's Turismo is a far nicer looking beast IMO.

[Laveerre]

I have no idea whether this should be in vehicle chat or general series chat, but I'm not a mod anymore so I don't have to make that decision lol.

 

As for the question I think there are still some great looking modern cars. Not everything from "back in the day " is a good looker except for some of the muscle/sports cars.

 

Just as a side note it's probably more to do with SA's blocky graphics, but GTA IV's Turismo is a far nicer looking beast IMO.

Might be, but HD universe version of SA Turismo would probably be a lot better looking. Hard to say since no one has made that

[RoadRunner71]

Me too

This car has been one of my favorites forever

 

 

As for the question I think there are still some great looking modern cars. Not everything from "back in the day " is a good looker except for some of the muscle/sports cars.

I disagree. However, gotta say that European and Asian cars look have gotten generally better with the years. I still find the last ones ugly and boring.

[The Odyssey]

Honestly I think you're blinded by nostalgia.

 

If V's Turismo had the same design in San Andreas, I'd say you would probably appreciate it more. Same goes for the Cheetah.

 

IRL, Old cars seem to look more blocky and generic. New cars out there seem to look more sexy IMO.

Edited March 5, 2014 by The Odyssey

[GTA3Rockstar]

http://gtaforums.com/topic/448512-fugly-cars/page-31

[Laveerre]

Honestly I think you're blinded by nostalgia.

 

If V's Turismo had the same design in San Andreas, I'd say you would probably appreciate it more. Same goes for the Cheetah.

 

IRL, Old cars seem to look more blocky and generic. New cars out there seem to look more sexy IMO.

I don't like the new cars, but it's all matter of taste, which you can't debate on.

But IMO this 1959 Impala

is a LOT better looking than this 2009 Impala

 

Edited March 5, 2014 by Laveerre

[Fonshway]

Spaceships hahaha, they kinda do look like that

[sivispacem]

http://gtaforums.com/topic/448512-fugly-cars/page-31

This.

 

The answer is no. People just only ever look back at the nicer cars. They forget that most cars from the 60s/70s were utter sh*te and brain-bleedingly dull.

[Algonquin Assassin]

To be fair I bet back in the 70s, 80, 90s all the guys who grew with hotrods in the 40s or whatever probably thought the newer cars were spaceship like aswell.

 

IMO it's a generational thing. I love classics as much as anyone, but I don't discourage newer cars and as I said before not all cars from that period the OP suggested are really nice looking.

 

Think of a first generation Ford Taurus.

 

*shudders*

Edited March 5, 2014 by SonOfLiberty

[Laveerre]

 

http://gtaforums.com/topic/448512-fugly-cars/page-31

This.

 

The answer is no. People just only ever look back at the nicer cars. They forget that most cars from the 60s/70s were utter sh*te and brain-bleedingly dull.

 

Old cars = Few ugly, mostly good looking with great engines and sounds

New cars = Most ugly but a few good looking with ricey sounds but some still have that V8 roaring

 

Like I said, matter of taste. I'm not forcing anyone to like all old cars, but I like every car from 1960-1999

EDIT: but I should've posted this in Off-topic / Vehicles, can you move it?

Edited March 5, 2014 by Laveerre

[uNi]

Moved to Vehicles.

[Rainbow Party]

Well yeah I agree that new cars in general are uglier than older ones. New cars just have radical shapes and lines as if they were desperate to make them look modern, but they look bad and show they ran out of ideas. And what's the deal with the new Corvette looking like a Ferrari?
Also, models that usually change their whole style every 10 years or so still look pretty much the same, like the Mustang or new Peugeot cars.

[Outcast]

I don't think old cars in general are better looking then modern cars. It's just like music, we only remember the hits and all the other crap that was made back then just fell to the wayside, as they should have. Give it another 20-30 years and I guarantee only the best looking cars of our generation will be remembered while stuff like the Corolla will be forgotten.

[Laveerre]

I don't think old cars in general are better looking then modern cars. It's just like music, we only remember the hits and all the other crap that was made back then just fell to the wayside, as they should have. Give it another 20-30 years and I guarantee only the best looking cars of our generation will be remembered while stuff like the Corolla will be forgotten.

Could be, but future cars will probably be hideous, just look at this Cadillac Concept car

I'd rather drive a Corolla

[Outcast]

If we're going to start bringing in speculation as points for this debate then the entire discussion is futile.

[sivispacem]

Old cars = Few ugly, mostly good looking with great engines and sounds

Right, so those hundreds of entirely disposable generic four-cylinder saloon cars, most of British Leyland's output ever, most small continental European cars and basically everything made in Japan pre 1973 get ignored for the purposes of your summary then?

 

Awful engines, tepid and generic styling, atrocious reliability. There's nothing appealing about Morris Cars or the Datsun 410.

[Laveerre]

 

Old cars = Few ugly, mostly good looking with great engines and sounds

Right, so those hundreds of entirely disposable generic four-cylinder saloon cars, most of British Leyland's output ever, most small continental European cars and basically everything made in Japan pre 1973 get ignored for the purposes of your summary then?

 

Awful engines, tepid and generic styling, atrocious reliability. There's nothing appealing about Morris Cars or the Datsun 410.

 

I didn't say every old car is good looking and fast, but most of them are that I know of. Or should I put it this way:

There are more good looking cars between 1960-1999 THAN there are in 1999-2015

And nothing appealing about Datsun 410???

It may not be the best looking car out there, but sure as hell is better looking than a Nissan Juke or Fiat Multipla

[Rainbow Party]

but you are comparing a pretty old car to 2 new ugly cars, that's not fair

[Outcast]

 

 

Old cars = Few ugly, mostly good looking with great engines and sounds

Right, so those hundreds of entirely disposable generic four-cylinder saloon cars, most of British Leyland's output ever, most small continental European cars and basically everything made in Japan pre 1973 get ignored for the purposes of your summary then?

 

Awful engines, tepid and generic styling, atrocious reliability. There's nothing appealing about Morris Cars or the Datsun 410.

 

I didn't say every old car is good looking and fast, but most of them are that I know of. Or should I put it this way:

There are more good looking cars between 1960-1999 THAN there are in 1999-2015

And nothing appealing about Datsun 410???

It may not be the best looking car out there, but sure as hell is better looking than a Nissan Juke or Fiat Multipla

 

That's the problem with these sort of discussions, it's all highly subjective. I have nothing against the Datsun 410, but I think its a very generic looking car for that era. You also mentioned that it's a lot better looking than a Nissan Juke but I find the Juke to be quite a handsome car (yes I thought it was ugly as sin when I first saw it but it's grown on me). Also, are you kidding me about cars looking better between 1960 and 1999? the 90s were the worst in car design, but of course thats just my opinion. To be honest I don't see this thread going anywhere but down, especially since a lot of what's being said here could very well go in the fugly cars topic.

[Laveerre]

but you are comparing a pretty old car to 2 new ugly cars, that's not fair

What do you mean excactly?

Should I compare a 1998 Celica to 2014 Civic for example? I'd still go for the Celica, even though it's not that good looking car, but the new Civic is just so... "Modern" that I dislike it

 

 

 

 

Old cars = Few ugly, mostly good looking with great engines and sounds

Right, so those hundreds of entirely disposable generic four-cylinder saloon cars, most of British Leyland's output ever, most small continental European cars and basically everything made in Japan pre 1973 get ignored for the purposes of your summary then?

 

Awful engines, tepid and generic styling, atrocious reliability. There's nothing appealing about Morris Cars or the Datsun 410.

 

I didn't say every old car is good looking and fast, but most of them are that I know of. Or should I put it this way:

There are more good looking cars between 1960-1999 THAN there are in 1999-2015

And nothing appealing about Datsun 410???

 

It may not be the best looking car out there, but sure as hell is better looking than a Nissan Juke or Fiat Multipla

 

That's the problem with these sort of discussions, it's all highly subjective. I have nothing against the Datsun 410, but I think its a very generic looking car for that era. You also mentioned that it's a lot better looking than a Nissan Juke but I find the Juke to be quite a handsome car (yes I thought it was ugly as sin when I first saw it but it's grown on me). Also, are you kidding me about cars looking better between 1960 and 1999? the 90s were the worst in car design, but of course thats just my opinion. To be honest I don't see this thread going anywhere but down, especially since a lot of what's being said here could very well go in the fugly cars topic.

 

90s had the great looking cars IMO (Supra, Silvia, Skyline, Soarer kinda, F40 etc.) but those are Asian models, I don't know much about 'murican 90s cars (except Viper and Corvette and some other models)

But like I'm saying for the third time, it's all about matter of taste

 

If you don't like it, that's fine by me, I'm not forcing you. I've got my own opinions, you have yours

Edited March 5, 2014 by Laveerre

[Doc Rikowski]

In general I think there was more creativity and variety in designs from the past.

And I'm talking only about cars used to look, not how they performed.

[sivispacem]

Supra? Early nineties an wedge, later 90s a rather handsome curvy thing.

Silvia? S13 good, S14 ugly, S15 good.

Skyline? R32 great, R33 meh, R34 gopping, R35 kinda cool.

Soarer? Just plain ugly.

F40 great, sure, but F50 oddly proportioned and the 360/612/599 much nicer to my eye.

 

Like you say, it's all subjective but then again I didn't make the claim "older cars = few ugly, mostly good looking with great engines and sounds". Which is true if you exclude all the utter bilge and only consider the classics that are appreciated for their looks/performance, which like modern cars is only a small proportion of what's on the market.

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

I favor a lot the new cars that are coming out these days, but there is no doubting that there are some hideous new monstrosities coming out.

 

In my opinion though, the IV Turismo looks the best as does a 360 Modena in the real world.

 

Also, the 70's, 80's, and 90's did have a lot of hideous cars no doubt. The muscle, sporting, and luxury cars looked good for the most part, but almost everything else was atrocious. Today, even some basic cars look stylish.

Edited March 5, 2014 by StingrayX

[Laveerre]

Supra? Early nineties an wedge, later 90s a rather handsome curvy thing.

Silvia? S13 good, S14 ugly, S15 good.

Skyline? R32 great, R33 meh, R34 gopping, R35 kinda cool.

Soarer? Just plain ugly.

F40 great, sure, but F50 oddly proportioned and the 360/612/599 much nicer to my eye.

 

Like you say, it's all subjective but then again I didn't make the claim "older cars = few ugly, mostly good looking with great engines and sounds". Which is true if you exclude all the utter bilge and only consider the classics that are appreciated for their looks/performance, which like modern cars is only a small proportion of what's on the market.

Forget what I said about engines and sounds, the point of this thread was merely cars looks, not performance.

S14 looks excactly (or probably is) Nissan 200sx, which is great looking IMO

I do agree that Soarers are ugly cars, but I'd rather have a Soarer than Chrysler PT Cruiser

[sivispacem]

I'd rather have a Soarer than a Lexus SC, which is its direct successor, but there's not a lot I'd want less than a Lexus SC.

 

The current LS and IS are much more handsome than their 90s equivalents.

 

The S14 and 200SX are the same.

[Sup3rman]

This is an utterly stupid and unimaginably hard topic to figure about. As a whole you can't say that newer cars are worse looking than older ones. You can't say that the car basically started as beautiful thing of engineering and than went and became a fugly piece of metal. There are corgeous designs nowadays, but to me the point lies how these cars are made and why i love older cars myself. Its the design and how they are designed. Look at pictures of how cars were designed back then, sketches and drawings of concepts and then hand drawn schematics that were used to actually complete the production version of the car. Also, there were cars that were virtually hand made, even bodypanels were not pressed but beaten by hammer. You dont see that nowadays, even tho cars are hand made today but with more sophisticated technology. Nowadays car are designed via computers and put together by robots. I know this way the cars get more quality and there are no large caps or mistakes but it sort of feels not made by humans anymore. You can dismiss this comment if you like or argue, but ill stay at my opinion.

And as an example, a Ferrari 250 GTO and the equivalent car of today, the LaFerrari:

 

E: You can see the imperfections of the 250 GTO even from that pic, and that is actually what shows that it was done by a human being, rather than the boringly and mathematically correct lines of the LaFerrari. This is not saying the LaFerrari isnt a good looking car or ugly. Just that perspective i was talking about.

Edited March 5, 2014 by Sup3rman

[sivispacem]

I wouldn't say that the 250 GTO and LaFerrari are comparable. One is a street-only hypercar designed to be the last word in outright performance and the other is a homologated racer only sold to the general public because Group 3 racing rules required it to be.

 

I do completely bet your point about the "human" aspect in the design though. That's why I've always had a bit of a soft spot for the endless procession of small barn-built supercars that the UK seems to produce, as well as some of the low-volume builders elsewhere.

 

Noble

 

Weismann

 

TVR

 

Ginetta

 

Lotus