Worst Looking Race Car...

dculberson said:

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:

As a counterpart to the thread for pretty race cars, let's have one to celebrate the ugliest.

This LeMans Cadillac thing:  

Only if you mean AWESOMEST. C'mon. That thing is super rad. The history of it makes it just incredible.

IMO, it looks like a Citroen and a bar of soap had a one nighter....

In reply to SaltyDog :

You owe me a keyboard...

citroen and a bar of soap, grumble grumble, Pepsi, grumble grumble...

Sorry!

For that matter, dirt track "late models":

They look like somebody made a race car body out of an upside down johnboat. But they are a lot of fun to watch in action.

I'm with the Deltawing isn't ugly camp. It was an interesting concept which we could debate the merits or lack there of for days with no consensus. But leaving aside it's actual or perceived effectiveness I don't think it was ugly at all.  I"d go so far as to say it is/was rather elegant if very unconventional.  I think most people can't get past the fact it's not a traditional layout and dismiss it immediately and unfairly.

The ugliest racing car is the one that just hurt your driver. The second-ugliest one is one that is stopped at the side of the track before the checkered flag flies.

chaparral said:

The ugliest racing car is the one that just hurt your driver. The second-ugliest one is one that is stopped at the side of the track before the checkered flag flies.

TIL:  I have the second-ugliest race car of all time in my garage.  Provenance.

freetors said:

In reply to fidelity101 :

I'm gonna have to disagree with that one. It's beautiful in form and function. And you have to respect an engineer that's willing to throw out the rulebook and design from first principles.

thats entirely different reasons, this just looks ugly, as a race car.

And since AMC Matador coupes have a bit of a hatedom going on this site:

Adrian_Thompson said:

I'm with the Deltawing isn't ugly camp. It was an interesting concept which we could debate the merits or lack there of for days with no consensus. But leaving aside it's actual or perceived effectiveness I don't think it was ugly at all.  I"d go so far as to say it is/was rather elegant if very unconventional.  I think most people can't get past the fact it's not a traditional layout and dismiss it immediately and unfairly.

It still looks like a penis.  I guess those can be elegant though...

I put dragsters on the other thread. I'll do the same here:

Toss up here:

MadScientistMatt said:

For that matter, dirt track "late models":

They look like somebody made a race car body out of an upside down johnboat. But they are a lot of fun to watch in action.

The wedge late models of the 80's took it to another level.

Jim Hall's Super Sucker was very unique,   admittedly there were not a lot of rules for the class,   they still made it Illegal

put me down in the camp that almost everything in this thread are beautiful beasts of speed (except the "rainbow cookie cutter" and "late models"), imho

The COT was pretty rough to look at.

In reply to tuna55 :

My take:

The Fairmont is fuggly for sure.

The Mopar is funky, but in a good way.

The Pinto is Baddass!

Of course, these cars are from the era of my days at the US Nationals .....Back when the pro stock cars looked, at least a little like, the cars they were based on.

But then so did the funny cars.

Tyler H said:

That cars not ugly, that car just sucks!

ross2004 said:

The COT was pretty rough to look at.

Honestly, with the exception of the rear wing, what's the difference between that and what races today?

Crosley Hot Shot winning at Sebring.  Sort of winning, anyway.

MadScientistMatt said:

Presenting "The Bug," widely credited for being the first dragster. An old Ford with pretty much everything not needed to get it across the finish line removed.

Here's the 999, that didn't have any of that unnecessary stuff to remove:

Barney and Henry approve!

Adrian_Thompson said:

ross2004 said:

The COT was pretty rough to look at.

Honestly, with the exception of the rear wing, what's the difference between that and what races today?

I never really got the hate on the COT.  I thought that they were a significant improvement over the twisted up cars that preceded them.  The current cars are significantly different from the COT but the most noticeable difference is that the brand specific noses are more diverse. 

The Pinto and Matador actually look pretty decent here, not sure what the problem is.  I always figured the Matador Coupe could be made to look pretty decent with the right paint, stance, wheels, and de-cluttering.

In reply to pres589 :

I always said: "If a Pinto was good enough for Bob Glidden, then it was good enough for me", but really, they were ugly. I mean they were cool old Pro Stock cars, but they were still ugly. I am not going to post pretty Pro Stock cars here because I will ruin the thread, but when you consider how awesome, say, the Reher-Morrison second gen Camaro looks, the Matador and the Pinto look pretty terrible.

I guess I have a soft spot in my heart, or maybe my head, for the Pintos and Vegas.

In my formative hot rodding years, if you had a V8 pinto or Vega, you were pretty darn cool.

And if it was tubbed,  Look Out!

I never had one, so I guess I wasn't cool. I just had my ratty '69 Chevelle. Wish I still did.

fidelity101 said:

no deltawing yet from anyone? wow.

The original DeltaWing was plenty weird, but not as ugly as the 'coupe' version that followed it. Just look at the thing: