Is Ferrari Roma inspired by F-type/Aston Martin?
#21
#22
In general I agree with you. But even Jaguar has missteps. XJS is another example. It only got any love after it became a classic and I still think it looks bad. Most beautiful modern Jaguars are the XK X150 and F-Type. Then to get into really beautiful territory you have to go back to E-type, XKSS, C type etc.
#23
I prefer the look of the front engined Ferrari's especially the 599GTO. I really like this one, but dont think it is prettier than our cars or the db11 - or the new vantage for that matter. If I had to chose between this and a dbs superleggara it would be the Aston any day of the week as it has more of a mongrel look about it. I dont think I would pay more for the Ferrari than I would an F Type based on looks alone.
The Roma looks out of place in the line-up, and to the extent it adopts the F-Type proportions and curves it seems meh, done before. The original traits are typical Ferrari, like they made a Mr Potato Head from parts that would look ok in a balanced approach, but become defective when you pick the raciest of everything and glue it all together.
#24
Well, the XK8 is not my favourite but it was more handsome than its contemporary rivals. I agree completely that the XK and F-Type are beautiful - classically beautiful. But have you forgotten the iconic Mk 2? And the Series I-III XJ models - which were and still are among the most beautiful sedans ever made? I stand by my remark about Jaguar designs compared to their rivals. Compare a 1973 XJ (svelte and still gorgeous) with a 1973 Mercedes sedan (frumpy is the kindest word I can find).
The following 2 users liked this post by sov211:
jcb-memphis (01-08-2022),
scm (11-27-2019)
#25
MikeV8,
I have both an X100 (XKR) and an X150 (XKR). Without any hesitation whatsoever (and not even a close race) my X100 which you find so ugly gets more compliments than my X150. I would say at least 20 to 1. As a driver's car, there is no comparison as the X150 is so solid and the X100 shakes like a bowl of jello and is incapable of handling corners at any kind of speed, but looks wise, you're just not in touch with what most people think.
I have both an X100 (XKR) and an X150 (XKR). Without any hesitation whatsoever (and not even a close race) my X100 which you find so ugly gets more compliments than my X150. I would say at least 20 to 1. As a driver's car, there is no comparison as the X150 is so solid and the X100 shakes like a bowl of jello and is incapable of handling corners at any kind of speed, but looks wise, you're just not in touch with what most people think.
The following users liked this post:
giandanielxk8 (05-17-2020)
The following 2 users liked this post by BruceTheQuail:
giandanielxk8 (05-17-2020),
tberg (11-27-2019)
#27
Well, the XK8 is not my favourite but it was more handsome than its contemporary rivals. I agree completely that the XK and F-Type are beautiful - classically beautiful. But have you forgotten the iconic ? And the Series I-III XJ models - which were and still are among the most beautiful sedans ever made? I stand by my remark about Jaguar designs compared to their rivals. Compare a 1973 XJ (svelte and still gorgeous) with a 1973 Mercedes sedan (frumpy is the kindest word I can find).
The XK8 is gorgeous. Don't get me wrong. I still prefer its looks over the DB7 i6 or pretty much any Mercedes, Audi, and BMW of the era. I was talking about what you said about things looking like it was stuck on. The rear of the XK8 totally doesn't match the rest of the gorgeous body.
Sure, if you compare the XJS to its Mercedes contemporaries it comes out looking a bit better. But that's low hanging fruit. Compare it to its contemporary Alfas, Maseratis and Ferraris and it looks horrible. Compare it to the Etype, which is the car it was supposed to replace, and it is a failure.
Last edited by MikeV8; 11-27-2019 at 03:26 AM.
#28
MikeV8,
I have both an X100 (XKR) and an X150 (XKR). Without any hesitation whatsoever (and not even a close race) my X100 which you find so ugly gets more compliments than my X150. I would say at least 20 to 1. As a driver's car, there is no comparison as the X150 is so solid and the X100 shakes like a bowl of jello and is incapable of handling corners at any kind of speed, but looks wise, you're just not in touch with what most people think.
I have both an X100 (XKR) and an X150 (XKR). Without any hesitation whatsoever (and not even a close race) my X100 which you find so ugly gets more compliments than my X150. I would say at least 20 to 1. As a driver's car, there is no comparison as the X150 is so solid and the X100 shakes like a bowl of jello and is incapable of handling corners at any kind of speed, but looks wise, you're just not in touch with what most people think.
This was not what I meant. Only the rear is horrible. Hideous, ugly and mismatching ugly.
#29
I think people misunderstood what I said. I never said the X100 was ugly. Only that the rear is ugly and doesn't match the rest. It should have looked like the XK180 rear or even the 2000 Ftype concept rear, which was basically a redo of the XK180 anyway. That protruding rear on the X100 is horrible.
The following users liked this post:
BruceTheQuail (11-27-2019)
#30
Hate the F12's deep dish door/body stampings, love the Roma's sensuous lines and smooth door/body panels. Hate the grill or lack thereof of the Roma. It needs to have a real grill not holes punched in the front fascia. Still think that Maserati's Alfieri design was better than both of them. Too bad it never (yet) made it to production.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)