Opinion / Discussion what is the best looking vehicle on oz roads ? - Page 3

25th August 2008, 11:28 AM

sgam@hotmail.com wrote in news:a1200fd1-0763-42b9-8c2d-982fdd0b2fc3
@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com:

> On Aug 24, 7

0 pm, Daryl Walford <dwalf...@internode.on.net> wrote:
>> Pit wrote:
>> > My vote is still the pagoda roof SL Benzes 250. 280 then even
>> > the S class sl and slcs have retained a "style "
>>
>> > That is still neat
>>
>> > After that the old style Monaros have aged well .
>>
>> > In Current models the new Pugs look great
>>
>> Thats easy, an Austin Healy MK3 3000:-)
>>
>> Daryl
>
> I dunno, I always thought the 100/4 was a purer line than than the
> 3000.
>
> I have to say that for me, Ferrari 250 gtb swb or 250 California are
> still the most beautiful cars ever.
>
> Cheers,
> Steve
>

The 3000 has a better looking front than the 100

25th August 2008, 11:28 AM

sgam@hotmail.com wrote:
>On Aug 24, 8:49 pm, John_H <john4...@inbox.com> wrote:
>> Pit wrote:
>>
>> >My vote is still the pagoda roof SL Benzes 250. 280 then even
>> >the S class sl and slcs have retained a "style "
>>
>> Presumably you've never driven one (the pagoda roof)?
>>
>> Grossly underpowered, even by the standards of their era. And those
>> gear ratios... borrowed straight from a 1950's British truck (and
>> steered like one as well). Four speed column shift to go with the
>> gear ratios IIRC.
>>
>> It's many years ago, but I still count it (a 280) as by far the most
>> disappointing car I've ever driven (based on performance
>> expectations). The ultimate polished turd!.
>
>Be fair, John, the OP was talking about styling, and the Pagoda Mercs
>are definitely pretty cars. I've only driven one example, but it
>seemed to be a really nice cruiser. I wouldn't want to chuck one down
>a twisty back road - but I don't think they were intended to be a
>sportscar as such. Oh, the engine note was quite nice, too.

I've always been the roadster type myself and IIRC there were soft top
versions that looked much better than the coupe IMHO, even if they
didn't drive any better. If I had to drive it give me the same year
model TR6 anyday. If I had to buy it, make it an E Type.

As for style... Italians are the masters. Pity about the substance.
;-)

--
John H

25th August 2008, 12:48 PM

John_H <john4721@inbox.com> wrote in
news:gju3b4hjvlttvjc4qsqo9kodijm8m5j62r@4ax.com:

> sgam@hotmail.com wrote:
>>On Aug 24, 8:49 pm, John_H <john4...@inbox.com> wrote:
>>> Pit wrote:
>>>
>>> >My vote is still the pagoda roof SL Benzes 250. 280 then even
>>> >the S class sl and slcs have retained a "style "
>>>
>>> Presumably you've never driven one (the pagoda roof)?
>>>
>>> Grossly underpowered, even by the standards of their era. And those
>>> gear ratios... borrowed straight from a 1950's British truck (and
>>> steered like one as well). Four speed column shift to go with the
>>> gear ratios IIRC.
>>>
>>> It's many years ago, but I still count it (a 280) as by far the most
>>> disappointing car I've ever driven (based on performance
>>> expectations). The ultimate polished turd!.
>>
>>Be fair, John, the OP was talking about styling, and the Pagoda Mercs
>>are definitely pretty cars. I've only driven one example, but it
>>seemed to be a really nice cruiser. I wouldn't want to chuck one down
>>a twisty back road - but I don't think they were intended to be a
>>sportscar as such. Oh, the engine note was quite nice, too.
>
> I've always been the roadster type myself and IIRC there were soft top
> versions that looked much better than the coupe IMHO, even if they
> didn't drive any better. If I had to drive it give me the same year
> model TR6 anyday. If I had to buy it, make it an E Type.

>
> As for style... Italians are the masters. Pity about the substance.
> ;-)
>

They sure were, Bugatti made a real beauty, the Bugatti Type 41 Royale.
Beautiful cars, all six of them. (Even if the were made in France.
Similar style to the also beautiful, Duesenburg model J.

25th August 2008, 12:48 PM

Pit wrote:
> My vote is still the pagoda roof SL Benzes 250. 280 then even
> the S class sl and slcs have retained a "style "
>
> That is still neat
>
>
> After that the old style Monaros have aged well .
>
>
> In Current models the new Pugs look great

`48 Mercury v8 coupe,... and a stock `34 3 window coupe would be a
nice stablemate.....

25th August 2008, 12:48 PM

Ron wrote:
>John_H <john4721@inbox.com> wrote in
>news:gju3b4hjvlttvjc4qsqo9kodijm8m5j62r@4ax.com :
>>
>> As for style... Italians are the masters. Pity about the substance.
>> ;-)
>
>They sure were, Bugatti made a real beauty, the Bugatti Type 41 Royale.
>Beautiful cars, all six of them. (Even if the were made in France.
>Similar style to the also beautiful, Duesenburg model J.

I've always cosidered Bugatti to be entirely French (even if old
Ettore wasn't born there). Being the only nation that ever lost a war
to the Italians probably puts them in second place though!

I'd choose one of his 1920's GP versions... a glorious combination of
form and function. About the only vintage car I'd have a yen to own
these days (if I had the money and time... plus a suitable race track
nearby).

--
John H

25th August 2008, 12:48 PM

Ron wrote:
> XR8_Sprintless <XR8_Sprint@hotmail.com> wrote in news:g8sivo$rk9$1
> @aioe.org:
>
>> Ron wrote:
>>
>> My vote goes with a 1994 ED XR8 Sprint. The low stance and great front
>> end made them look very cool in my opinion.. Biased of course.
>>
>
> The best looking XR6/XR8 is the BA :-)
>
> We had an EBII once, the AUIII shits all over it in every department. It's
> just a shame it is ugly, however you get used to it..

BA is sorta better looking, however I find all foulcans
ugly as. There is nothing about them that interests
me. The design of the internal air vents is plain repulsive,
as is water bottle under hood.

I'm not a Foulcan or Commode type dude, but
hate Haaaha Hondas :-) so should get a point for that.

25th August 2008, 12:48 PM

On Aug 25, 10:23 am, Ron <dodo@hotmail> wrote:
> s...@hotmail.com wrote in news:a1200fd1-0763-42b9-8c2d-982fdd0b2fc3
> @a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 24, 7

0 pm, Daryl Walford <dwalf...@internode.on.net> wrote:
> >> Pit wrote:
> >> > My vote is still the pagoda roof SL Benzes 250. 280 then even
> >> > the S class sl and slcs have retained a "style "
>
> >> > That is still neat
>
> >> > After that the old style Monaros have aged well .
>
> >> > In Current models the new Pugs look great
>
> >> Thats easy, an Austin Healy MK3 3000:-)
>
> >> Daryl
>
> > I dunno, I always thought the 100/4 was a purer line than than the
> > 3000.
>
> > I have to say that for me, Ferrari 250 gtb swb or 250 California are
> > still the most beautiful cars ever.
>
> > Cheers,
> > Steve
>
> The 3000 has a better looking front than the 100

You think? I always thought that the 3000's front was too busy,
compared to the clean line of the 100. The 3000 is more muscular
looking, so I guess that has it's appeal, but for me the 100 is the
better looking car.

Cheers,
Steve

25th August 2008, 12:48 PM

"Atheist Chaplain" <abused@cia.gov> wrote in message
news:g8stpa$2om$1@aioe.org...

> The new GT40 doesnt look half bad as well, though Gordon Murray penned a
> design that I just like, no big ugly wings, no razor sharp lines and still
> the fastest normaly aspirated car on the planet.

Yeah, it's a great looking car, and it certainly stands out amongst the
"modern" supercars (You want ugly? Look no further than a Veyron!). The
Centre steering is a bit odd though.

--
Regards,
Noddy.

25th August 2008, 12:48 PM

On Aug 25, 10:25 am, John_H <john4...@inbox.com> wrote:
> s...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >On Aug 24, 8:49 pm, John_H <john4...@inbox.com> wrote:
> >> Pit wrote:
>
> >> >My vote is still the pagoda roof SL Benzes 250. 280 then even
> >> >the S class sl and slcs have retained a "style "
>
> >> Presumably you've never driven one (the pagoda roof)?
>
> >> Grossly underpowered, even by the standards of their era. And those
> >> gear ratios... borrowed straight from a 1950's British truck (and
> >> steered like one as well). Four speed column shift to go with the
> >> gear ratios IIRC.
>
> >> It's many years ago, but I still count it (a 280) as by far the most
> >> disappointing car I've ever driven (based on performance
> >> expectations). The ultimate polished turd!.
>
> >Be fair, John, the OP was talking about styling, and the Pagoda Mercs
> >are definitely pretty cars. I've only driven one example, but it
> >seemed to be a really nice cruiser. I wouldn't want to chuck one down
> >a twisty back road - but I don't think they were intended to be a
> >sportscar as such. Oh, the engine note was quite nice, too.
>
> I've always been the roadster type myself and IIRC there were soft top
> versions that looked much better than the coupe IMHO, even if they
> didn't drive any better.

Same car. The pagoda roof is a removable hard top. They look better
without it, I agree.

> If I had to drive it give me the same year
> model TR6 anyday.

Not if you've driven a Datsun 2000 Sports. :-)

> If I had to buy it, make it an E Type.

>
> As for style... Italians are the masters. Pity about the substance.
> ;-)
>
> --
> John H

Nothing wrong with old Ferraris while they're running. :-)

Cheers
Steve

25th August 2008, 12:48 PM

<sgam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a1200fd1-0763-42b9-8c2d-982fdd0b2fc3@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com...

> I have to say that for me, Ferrari 250 gtb swb or 250 California are
> still the most beautiful cars ever.

I actually have to agree here.

They were *great* looking cars, and probably the best looking Ferrari's ever
built. Too bad they had all the build quality of a home made kit car and the
reliability of a 1970's Skoda.

--
Regards,
Noddy.