Is it possible to overdesign a car to such comical degrees in ends up being kind of cool in a based retard way?
>>28609022Lots of hot wheels cars do this.
>>28609022Definitely. A lot of great cars were exactly that.
Here's another.
>>28609031>>28609040These are both staid in comparison to >>28609022 The individual design elements all build towards one cohesive whole and nothing looks out of place. By comparison, that OP's car looks like a schizophrenic nightmare assortment of whack angles and unecessary flourishes. Just because you can do something doesn't mean its a good idea.
>>28609072You're viewing them through a modern lens. The Delahaye and Countach were outlandish when you're used to seeing Model-As and G-bodies.
>>28609107Yeah I get that, but I still think the limitations of the day and the need to be somewhat discerning (limited by having to actually draw the thing, having to use clay mockups, beating metal by hand over the fenders etc) lent itself to some more considered designs. Limitations forced designers to take care in what they were doing and really think about how everything comes together. Now you can mock up anything on a computer and technology allows you to shit it out in real life. Same goes for modern architecture which suffers from some of the same problems. Is that apollo thing really gonna be looked back fondly as those the Countach and Delahaye are now. I doubt it.
Yes, the Chrysler Prowler.
>>28609022
>>28609167Those bumpers ruin it though.
Uncouth swine will be all over this in 15 years. It's the perfect methodogically ironic fuck you blend of all that's wrong in our era.
>>28609396Is that a Calibra?
>>28609483yes
Delage D12
