Concept cars that you wish had been built

Grizz wrote:

Keith Tanner wrote: Both of those are only beautiful because they're trying to look like beautiful cars from the past. Don't recreate the old Muira, create the new one.

So a cheese wedge with a bull on it. The old Miura is better looking than anything Lambo has put out since.... well, since the Miura.

Well, yes. But just because they've been getting it wrong doesn't mean the only option is a photocopier. Ferrari knows this - they go through good and bad phases, but the pretty ones don't all look alike. A 288 GTO doesn't look at all like a California SWB.

No question:

Four-rotor Wankel Corvette!

stanger_missle wrote: 1995 GT90 Concept

Yes.

Also: even though we would NEVER get it.

The Holden Efijy

Grizz wrote: So a cheese wedge with a bull on it. The old Miura is better looking than anything Lambo has put out since.... well, since the Miura.

The Miura is more beautiful than anything since, but that's because Lamborghini at some point decided that they are not in the beauty business. Just look at their logo; bulls represent strength, power, and wildness. That's Lamborghini.

It seems like automotive design is a lot like movies and music. Nobody seems to have any new ideas, so they're re-running the old ones. I don't like that, but I prefer it to drek. On the other hand, I was at the College of Creative Studies a few weeks ago and there were some incredible scale models of concept cars that the students had done, some in response to requests from auto makers. So it seems that some people have the talent to design good looking cars, which makes one wonder why so many fugly cars get produced.

In reply to Mitchell:

Then why did they produce the Miura concept?

This one. Amongst others.

Although I still badly want to buy a late 90's wrangler and build one of these.

Keith Tanner wrote:

Grizz wrote:

Keith Tanner wrote: Both of those are only beautiful because they're trying to look like beautiful cars from the past. Don't recreate the old Muira, create the new one.

So a cheese wedge with a bull on it. The old Miura is better looking than anything Lambo has put out since.... well, since the Miura.

Well, yes. But just because they've been getting it wrong doesn't mean the only option is a photocopier. Ferrari knows this - they go through good and bad phases, but the pretty ones don't all look alike. A 288 GTO doesn't look at all like a California SWB.

Seriously? I have a hard time telling one Ferrari from another. But for some reason I can tell ALL of the old Ferrari's from each other. I don't think they're much different than any other manufacturer in that regard.

In reply to bravenrace:

Which is why, if I ever had the money to just not care and buy an italian GT car, it'd be the Alfa 8c hands down......

nocones wrote: This one. Amongst others. Although I still badly want to buy a late 90's wrangler and build one of these.

having driven commerical.. I LIKE cabovers.. I am not a jeep fan, but I would buy that. Cabovers are great.. you can get a full sized bed on a truck only 2/3s the size due to the lack of a hood.

Granted, some people buy a truck because they like that LONG hood..

bravenrace wrote:

Keith Tanner wrote:

Grizz wrote:

Keith Tanner wrote: Both of those are only beautiful because they're trying to look like beautiful cars from the past. Don't recreate the old Muira, create the new one.

So a cheese wedge with a bull on it. The old Miura is better looking than anything Lambo has put out since.... well, since the Miura.

Well, yes. But just because they've been getting it wrong doesn't mean the only option is a photocopier. Ferrari knows this - they go through good and bad phases, but the pretty ones don't all look alike. A 288 GTO doesn't look at all like a California SWB.

Seriously? I have a hard time telling one Ferrari from another. But for some reason I can tell ALL of the old Ferrari's from each other. I don't think they're much different than any other manufacturer in that regard.

Hey, both of my examples are old cars. You know what a 288 GTO and a California SWB are, right? How to make two great looking cars that don't look like each other.

But they do go through bad stages. F50, Enzo, etc. They're getting better right now, although I have a hard time keeping up with them all myself.

mad_machine wrote:

nocones wrote: This one. Amongst others. Although I still badly want to buy a late 90's wrangler and build one of these.

having driven commerical.. I LIKE cabovers.. I am not a jeep fan, but I would buy that. Cabovers are great.. you can get a full sized bed on a truck only 2/3s the size due to the lack of a hood. Granted, some people buy a truck because they like that LONG hood..

That looks like a Doka with a fibreglass Jeep nose stuck on the front and a bobtailed cab.

On the theme of "wish they had"....

Anyone drive any of these cars?

(it's a loaded question)

I drive a 14 yr old Cavalier, how many of them will be a step down?

alfadriver wrote: Anyone drive any of these cars? (it's a loaded question)

Ok Eric, here you go.

No we haven't, they are concept cars, who amongst us would be privileged and awesome enough to have driven one?

tuna55 wrote:

alfadriver wrote: Anyone drive any of these cars? (it's a loaded question)

Ok Eric, here you go. No we haven't, they are concept cars, who amongst us would be privileged and awesome enough to have driven one?

Pat could have- in his time as a traction control engineer, it could have been put on a beast that was from around here. Some of them get to be driven by journalists, so theoretically, the staff could have driven one- or Lesley. I'm sure we can think of reasons why various posters would have driven one.

But, yes, I have driven one.

And of course it's bragging. Even got to drive it on my birthday. Oh, so wish I got pictures of that, but my wife has my picture of me in the static car.

Keith Tanner wrote: On the theme of "wish they had"....

I wish they had too

In reply to alfadriver:

I drove a mule, but it was an MDX, so that's not exciting. They were pretty close to releasing it, too, so it was even less exciting.

I did get to ride in one with no doors right off the factory floor (they were not finished yet). That was weird.

What did you drive?

In reply to tuna55:

Indigo. On the handling course back when it was still part of the Dearborn test track facility.

Plenty of prototype car time, but that's the nature of the job.

In reply to Keith Tanner:

Grizz wrote:

" The old Miura is better looking than anything Lambo has put out since.... well, since the Miura."

Keith Wrote:

"Well, yes. But just because they've been getting it wrong doesn't mean the only option is a photocopier. Ferrari knows this - they go through good and bad phases, but the pretty ones don't all look alike. A 288 GTO doesn't look at all like a California SWB."

My question is, why do you make a post about new cars and then use two old cars as examples? Lots of companies made old cars that didn't look alike, that's not at all exclusive to Ferrari. We were talking about new cars.

And lots of companies make new products that use a common design language to make them instantly part of the product family, it's not exclusive to cars.

I can tell the new Ferraris and Lamborghinis apart from each other, even with the same design language. My favorites are the Astons and I love each and every one of them. To me, they are like beautiful sisters that share a family resemblance, but have different personalities.

Lots of creativity there. All good looking cars that look a lot alike.

In reply to bravenrace:

Once you get it right, you change it at your peril. Any "improvement" is likely to look ugly.

And I can tell each one of those apart at a glance. In fact, there's a couple I'd take and a couple I wouldn't, based strictly on looks. lol!

bravenrace wrote: In reply to Keith Tanner: Grizz wrote: " The old Miura is better looking than anything Lambo has put out since.... well, since the Miura." Keith Wrote: "Well, yes. But just because they've been getting it wrong doesn't mean the only option is a photocopier. Ferrari knows this - they go through good and bad phases, but the pretty ones don't all look alike. A 288 GTO doesn't look at all like a California SWB." My question is, why do you make a post about new cars and then use two old cars as examples? Lots of companies made old cars that didn't look alike, that's not at all exclusive to Ferrari. We were talking about new cars.

Doesn't matter if they were new or old, they illustrated my point. Ferrari (as an example) has shown that it's possible to make a good looking car without simply trying to redraw the same car again. Exhibits A and B are two Ferraris separated by 20 years that are both knee-shakingly attractive, yet that don't look alike at all. I picked those two because they came to mind immediately. Substitute a 458 if you'd like. Or a 550 Maranello for a 90's example - I'll take mine in silver with a tan interior please. All very distinct. All were new at some point.

So, the Muira looked great. But that doesn't mean the only possible option is to simply do it again on bigger wheels with a blur filter on the fine details. Ferrari has proven this over a half century. As have others.

Keith Tanner wrote: I'll take mine in silver with a tan interior please.

You must be a moron. Everyone knows, Silver exterior goes with a red interior; Green and Blue exteriors go with tan interiors. Sheesh!