Beautiful and powerless or Ugly and Powerful

[wrestrepo]

Reading the Juke thread I got inspired....well, it's really a copy of a thread I saw elsewhere...
What car you think it's gorgeous but has a crappy powertrain or that has been hit with the ugly stick but has a great powertrain.
Ugly and powerful


Nissan Juke off course



Nissan Murano



Beautiful and powerless

DeLorean


Prowler (odd beauty)


Which cars do you think fit into these two categories?

[Cm452]

Well, I cant think of any cars off the top of my head, but I'd have power and handling over looks any day of my life. I'd drive a rustbucket POS with a sweet rally suspension and a wicked turbo/supercharged engine!
-Cm

[zachc]

its all about looks. thats all i care about really. aha. i refuse to drive anything that does not look good.

[wrestrepo]

Originally Posted by zachc

its all about looks. thats all i care about really. aha. i refuse to drive anything that does not look good.

names, names!!!!!

[sptsdn]

Here are two cars I think most people would consider ugly but powerful:

The CTS-V:


The Alfa Milano/75:


Personally I like the looks of both of them.

[Loki]

Looks are always going to be subjective.

imo, the Prowler is dumb looking and powerless. Murano, Juke, and (stock) WRX powerful? Compared to what????? I like the Milano/75 and CTS-V looks.

Chevy SSR (read Prowler comment)
LS-based Ford Thunderbird (again, Prowler comment)
New Camaro SS (ugly but fast)
99-04 Mustang GT/Mach 1/Bullett (hideous but can make some power)
Acura TL SH-AWD (hard on the eyes but kinda sorta quick)
Some of the Bangle BMWs were unfortunate looking but performed well
Mazda RX8 (blech looking but goes ok- though also really kinda slow)
300C/Charger (both do nothing for me but some models make decent power)
Infiniti FX truck things (tacky and gaudy looking but made some power)

US S14 240SX (pretty nice looking but dog slow when stock)

I can't think of any truly beautiful car that was slow for its time.

[SaabKen]

Originally Posted by sptsdn

Here are two cars I think most people would consider ugly but powerful:

The CTS-V:

The Alfa Milano/75:

Personally I like the looks of both of them.

Me like them too.

Some consider the 850s ugly. I say bull-caca:




But I also like these "ugly" (to some) classics:





And for some reason, there are idiots out there who can't seem to ever appreciate the beauty of these. God help them !

[saab19]

the new cts v looks much better in person (and from behind the wheel) than in pictures.

off the top of my head I've got nothing (given a second's thought, the new challenger in the ugly category, though I realize potentially all three of those types of cars could be put here)

[Ryan33]

I personally think the CTS-V is a really sharp looking car. I feel as though that is one of the rear cars out there that not only perform incredible but look incredible.

[TunnanXWD]

All things are good:

The Alfa .. it says, I have two bottles of wine in the boot and the moon will be full; so let's take a drive.

The Toyota F says .. Got a case of Bud all cold in the cooler. Lets get out of town and I'll check you for ticks.

[saab19]

Originally Posted by Loki

Looks are always going to be subjective.

imo, the Prowler is dumb looking and powerless. Murano, Juke, and (stock) WRX powerful? Compared to what????? I like the Milano/75 and CTS-V looks.

Chevy SSR (read Prowler comment)
LS-based Ford Thunderbird (again, Prowler comment)
New Camaro SS (ugly but fast)
99-04 Mustang GT/Mach 1/Bullett (hideous but can make some power)
Acura TL SH-AWD (hard on the eyes but kinda sorta quick)
Some of the Bangle BMWs were unfortunate looking but performed well
Mazda RX8 (blech looking but goes ok- though also really kinda slow)
300C/Charger (both do nothing for me but some models make decent power)
Infiniti FX truck things (tacky and gaudy looking but made some power)

US S14 240SX (pretty nice looking but dog slow when stock)

I can't think of any truly beautiful car that was slow for its time.

bangle had a hand in the E36, E46, AND the E92 (as well as the 5/7 series...).....so which bangle designs then? bc some of those vehicles are (obviously, IMO) are some of the best looking vehicles on the road, even today.

[Loki]

Originally Posted by saab19

bangle had a hand in the E36, E46, AND the E92 (as well as the 5/7 series...).....so which bangle designs then? bc some of those vehicles are (obviously, IMO) are some of the best looking vehicles on the road, even today.

I agree with you on the E36, E46 and E92. I said some of Bangles designs were unfortunate, not all. Exhibit of Bangle Ugliness A and B:




E60 is a blahfest, imo. The M version helps a bit.

I don't mind the puggish 1 series but it's far from beautiful. I actually do really like the M coupe (the Z4 being that which he was criticized for most after the E65). The 6 is nice but suffers from Bangle-butt.

[ghost_walker]

the deloren is easy to sort out.

you find either a renault v6 turbo or a volvo v6 turbo and swap the engines over.

deloren used a PRV engine which was a joint effort by peugeot, renault, volvo

hence the PRV engine and we all now how much power those swedish designed engines can make don't we?

[Rennsport1]

Originally Posted by Loki

I agree with you on the E36, E46 and E92. I said some of Bangles designs were unfortunate, not all. Exhibit A and B:




E60 is a blahfest, imo. The M version helps a bit.

I don't mind the puggish 1 series but it's far from beautiful. I actually do really like the M coupe (the Z4 being that which he was criticized for most after the E65). The 6 is nice but suffers from Bangle-butt.

I just can't get very excited about SUVs, and the Bangle 7 series only looks good with it's front half sticking out and the rest hidden. The previous 7 was so much nicer looking, but a money pit otherwise I understand.

[900t]

Originally Posted by ghost_walker

the deloren is easy to sort out.

you find either a renault v6 turbo or a volvo v6 turbo and swap the engines over.

deloren used a PRV engine which was a joint effort by peugeot, renault, volvo

hence the PRV engine and we all now how much power those swedish designed engines can make don't we?

Oh yeah, can you imagine a DeLorean with the engine out of an Alpine A610 with 250 horsepower

[900t]

Originally Posted by Rennsport1

I just can't get very excited about SUVs,

But is the X6 an SUV? It is as much a Suburban as a Corvette, it is like how Obama is black even though his mother was white

[Rennsport1]

Originally Posted by sptsdn

Here are two cars I think most people would consider ugly but powerful:

The CTS-V:


The Alfa Milano/75:


Personally I like the looks of both of them.

CTS-V, ain't exactly pretty, but I like it. The Alfa is interesting, never loved them, but it is interesting looking, and I like the short overhangs and odd angles, it still looks sporty and not ugly IMHO.

[Loki]

Originally Posted by Rennsport1

I just can't get very excited about SUVs, and the Bangle 7 series only looks good with it's front half sticking out and the rest hidden. The previous 7 was so much nicer looking, but a money pit otherwise I understand.

My Exhibits A and B were examples of Bangle ugliness. The 7 was jaw-droppingly atrocious.

[SaabKen]

Originally Posted by Rennsport1

CTS-V, ain't exactly pretty, but I like it. The Alfa is interesting, never loved them, but it is interesting looking, and I like the short overhangs and odd angles, it still looks sporty and not ugly IMHO.

The CTS-V sedan and coupe are bad-a.s.s., they're not for everyone but I commend Cadillac for having the cajones to invest in such no-holds barred performance models that are just as competitive as the M5, S6 and E63

[Rennsport1]

The X6 isn't that bad looking, but it's silly IMHO. If you you need a BMW with a lot of capacity or for cold climate/rough muddy or snowy roads, get an X5. For the money nothing beats the 3 series with fold down rear seats(optional in the sedan, std. in the coupe), just so wonderful to drive, efficient, and great looking, uhhh, if you like BMWs, ahem.