How important are looks, style to you?

[tevake]

Talking about cars here, guys. I was just watching Top Gear UK and saw a comparison of a Ferrari 458 with the new McLaren new super car. The McLaren won on most points. More power, faster, better balanced drive, Way more comfortable both road handling and
Ride quality, nicer interior, even price.

How ever Clarkson felt that there was a lack of passion in the feel of the McLaren and didn't like the looks of the exterior styling. So He preferred the Ferrari over the Mclaren.
Even tho the Mclaren was the better performer in most ways.

Which brings me to the question. How importantly do looks and style factor into your appreciation of a particular car? Most important? secondary to performance, build quality? Could you love a great but ugly car? A beautiful but poorly built dog?

Cheers Richard

[Joe Bob]

Well, since I drive a rat....performance.

[pwd72s]

Tastes change...one of the reasons I'll never go back to P-cars. I grew weary of
having a "look at me" car. The Mustang is commonplace looking, while still delivering well balanced road performance.

But, more than performance, looks & style enter in here...prestige and status do as well. Some go for that, some don't. Some used to go for that...I'll confess.

[Noah930]

Fortunately the 911 is one of the prettiest car shapes of all time.

Depends. I look at my DD as an appliance/tool. I don't care what it looks like--though I'm glad it's not ugly. And if I were to race a car on a professional level, again I wouldn't care what it would look like. But for a weekend-type street car, why buy an ugly car if you can get a pretty one that works roughly equally as well?

[RWebb]

to the extent looks matter to me, I always go for classic looks and trim lines -- and not just for cars

[Bill Douglas]

Originally Posted by RWebb

to the extent looks matter to me, I always go for classic looks and trim lines -- and not just for cars

Oh yes, indeed. Classic good looks never go out of style.

[MarKoBrow]

Looks and style win every time.

[RANDY P]

If it was strictly by #'s we'd all be ricers.

There is something to be said for established pedigree and tradition.

rjp

[azasadny]

Some cars - looks
Other cars - performance
Porsches - both

[speeder]

Supremely important to me if you're talking about an "object of desire" type car. Actually it matters to me even in a PU truck or a cheap driver, I have to like it. In a supercar? I would have to be head-over-tits in love with it, in every way. Especially looks. But performance would be extremely important too.

Having to choose between looks and performance is not an issue with all of the great cars out there. And Ferraris are works of art that completely transcend the types of mundane comparisons you would make with say, a Subaru WRX vs. a Mitsubishi EVO or some other disposable cars.

JMNSHO.

[dtw]

...one of the reasons I'll never go back to P-cars.

You sold your 911?

[Flieger]

I think the McLaren looks good enough that the performance wins for me. I like technology and I don't care if it is utilitarian on the inside like most German cars used to be. I don't like flamboyant on the outside so the Ferrari seems a little over the top. I don't want an ugly, car though. Uninteresting is alright.

It seems that Clarkson thought the Ferrari handled better (by handling I mean the "feel" and fun-to-drive factor).

[Dantilla]

Total driving dynamics are more important than sterile performance numbers- Is the car fun?

For street driving, an early, underpowered Miata is more fun than a 600 hp supercar, as the Miata can be driven at 9/10ths without causing problems, or attracting Law Enforcement.

Manual trannys are more fun than autos. I'd rather drive a pick-up with a stick than a Nissan GT-R. The GT-R has too many electric nannies to achieve what it does to be truly interesting to drive.

Remember when Chrysler came out with the Dodge Stealth?
The advertising tag line was : Dodge made Porsche call 911!
On paper, the Stealth was pretty impressive, beating the 911 in a couple catagories. But they are all but forgotten now, as they were nothing special to drive.

I'd rather drive the car than look at its spec sheet. I don't care about bragging rights.

[Danny_Ocean]

Style and power (and handling)...my neighbors new car. I hate him:

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by tevake

Could you love a great but ugly car? A beautiful but poorly built dog?

I think that's the most interesting part of the overall question. I don't like old Toyota Landcruisers for the looks, but people love them for the utility and the fact that they are old. I thing a lot of '80's and '90's Rolls Royce's are damn ugly. So chalk that up to "great, but ugly."

Beautiful but poorly built? Lots of those, my friends. Style will always have a buyer.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by dtw

You sold your 911?

First I've heard of it.

[Tervuren]

I drive my 944's because I like the way older cars feel, without all the technical doo-dads. Whenever I get in a modern car, they feel very dead. Lotus Elise being exception.

[Normy]

Looks are everything. That is why I drive a 928.

This guy down here in Florida named Warren Mosler builds his own supercars, powered by Chrysler turbo four cylinders and now chevy V8's. His cars are insanely fast- basically race cars with lights and a place for tags.

-And they make a school bus look hot! Guys, design is EVERYTHING. Anything can go fast-

N!

[ZAMIRZ]

^The Moslers have come a long way. The early ones were definitely ugly as all hell, but the latest MT900 looks great and holds its own against much more expensive cars.

[pwd72s]

Well, let's see...today I'm wearing my designed by carhart jeans, white tube sox, chuckie taylor tennies, and a T shirt with a pocket...

Yessir...to me, image is everything!