F-Type Still the Best Looking Car
#22
#23
MY 18 will look the same, no major changes. You can expect Jaguar to keep that design for probably 10 years and pray they eventually get rid of that bar on the front.
I am in agreement, not fond of this Aston concept car, because it does look a little too F type. But that is all it is, a concept, not for production.
Park an Aston Martin Vantage (10 year old design) next to an F type, and take a poll. You may not like the results.
#24
The two companies have certainly shared far too much common heritage for the similarities not to exist. While this has elements I don't like, the nod to the F-Type's haunches is interesting still to me. Its kind of like the two sisters, one who is a knockout and one that has a "butter face".
#27
Aston Martin just released pics of the Vanquish Zagato concept: looks like a cross between a Camaro and an F-Type. The F-Type retains a serious edge in the looks department. Let's hope they don't screw it up with the 18MY.
Aston Martin Vanquish Zagato Concept First Look Review
Aston Martin Vanquish Zagato Concept First Look Review
#28
Aston Martin just released pics of the Vanquish Zagato concept: looks like a cross between a Camaro and an F-Type. The F-Type retains a serious edge in the looks department. Let's hope they don't screw it up with the 18MY.
Aston Martin Vanquish Zagato Concept First Look Review
Aston Martin Vanquish Zagato Concept First Look Review
Funny that the Ford Fusion ripping off their grille now has me saying it looks like a Ford Fusion. LOL Also, that top is a bit brutalist.
In 2005 when I started saving, I was saving for a used Aston. Then Ian did this thing and simply robbed the Aston of any reason of buying it... so Aston has to do this. And we all know they mentioned they are selling to women far more often... why then, the V12?
Is this Fisker coupe look alike meant to challenge the SVR, etc? It's so interesting, how Jaguar is on the scene. Jeep's building a high end SUV to compete with JLR & seemingly more the F-Pace than the Evoque. Aston is trying to emulate their old designer's new Jag design.
It's all so fascinating to see where Jag just positioned itself, and caught people off guard. I might be off on all this..... but yes. The F-Type is easily still one of the most beautiful on the road. I'm actually off overt and garrish super cars to any extent, as my base F-Type has me looking back at the greatest touring sports cars as more of a purist vibe than wanting the Scanner's head explosion stylized torque bombs. =)
Last edited by Uncle Fishbits; 05-31-2016 at 01:44 PM.
#29
Here's Aston shots.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aston_Martin
but the best part is that my favorite car of all time, and one I plan to own one day, is the BMW 8 series from the early 90's. Arguably a "long and sharky" vehicle. LOL Not sure liking BMW is appropriate here. =)
#30
It's so funny... because the reason I love the F-Type so much more than the look of the last 15yrs of Aston is that they become far too, pardon the bad description, "long and sharky". Yes, we can all take some time to revel in how bad that description is. I guess I am just saying the proportions "feel" more like golden ratios to me with the F-Type...
From Edmunds.
F-Type
Width 74.2"
Length 176"
Height 51.6"
Wheel base 103.2"
Vantage
Width 73.4"
Length 172.6"
Height 49.6"
Wheel base 102.4"
I think the F-Type is a little to long (3.4")and a little to tall (2"). And the interior, well, we won't go there.
The following 2 users liked this post by SoCalJagS:
Smoke Em (05-31-2016),
Uncle Fishbits (06-02-2016)
#31
C7 (also from Edmunds)
Width 73.9
Length 176.9
Height 48.8
Wheel base 106.7
Weight 3299 lbs.
#32
It's funny how perceptions can be misleading. Many think the F-Type is smaller than the C7. I don't care much about interiors as long as the seats are comfortable, but with regard to weight, I am going there . . . :-)
C7 (also from Edmunds)
Width 73.9
Length 176.9
Height 48.8
Wheel base 106.7
Weight 3299 lbs.
C7 (also from Edmunds)
Width 73.9
Length 176.9
Height 48.8
Wheel base 106.7
Weight 3299 lbs.
#33
#36
#37
I understand, but the OP @ Unhingd started this thread because of the looks of the F-type, the fact that it's a tubby baby not withstanding.
#38
#40
I love this Socal... I'm a huge skeptic, big rationalist, materialist, etc.... I love finding moments where my brain believes what it wants, and bucks reality. I don't like tricking myself, and I am unanimous in that.
As for weight, almighty Google is delivering VERY fast results for a lot of searches, in a bold, easy to see box.
If you type "F-Type weight", voila... 3455 - 3847lbs.
C7 is 3444 - 3523
I passed a truck scale the other day and thought about weighing mine... you can literally just drive up and weigh, then go? That simple?
Anyone want to ramble philosophy on pros and cons of the Goldilocks of weight? What's too light, what's too heavy, and what's *just right*? =) I know it's dependent on the car. Basically a ratio of being heavy enough to have traction on the road... OOOH WAIT! Design does play into weight because of downforce. You can have a light enough car that doesn't fly off the road if the proper downforce is generated. But there's a point where it's too light.
I guess too light is this (time stamp might not work, so go to about 1m40s):