What Makes A Car Beautiful?

I was sitting at a stoplight today, looking at all the cars around me and thinking: what a bunch of plain and unattractive cars.

That got me to wondering, what is it -- exactly -- that makes a car attractive?  This will be a very personal and subjective list of course, but I think I can make a pretty comprehensive list for myself.

I. Front End
A car's front end should resemble, slightly, a human face.  And not just any face -- a smiley happy face.
No frowny faces:

No angry faces:

Not cartoony:

Not faceless:

Just a nice pleasing face:

I like when the headlights stick up or out from the hood.  Recessed or flush lights look counter-functional & "too designy" to me:

They shouldn't stick up so much that they look "bug-eyed":

They should stick up just enough to be part of the body, to acknowledge they are an integral function of the body:


II. Side Panels & Roofline
The sides of a car should not be straight or angular or robotic:

I like when a car has a waistline:

I like when the wheels -- like the headlights -- are incorporated into the body contours rather than ignored:

I also like "gills" in the side, for some reason:

I like the Mercedes roofline with the negative arch:

I also like skylights and glass:


III. Rear-End
I like swept fastbacks:


This was never a good look:

Rear window visibility should not be compromised:


Tail lights should be big and functional:


This would be a pretty car if you smushed it to about 2/3 this length:

Like this (if you raised the roof & fixed the rear windows):

Cars should not look like cheese graters:

Cars should not look like Star Wars props:

The Fisker Karma isn't bad, if they raised the headlights up:

The Tesla X is just plain butt-ugly:

The new Tesla Model 3 reminds me of Spiderman, for some reason (not a good thing):

So, this would be your ideal car?  

She's not bad. What is that, a Hudson Hornet?

1951 Nash Ambassador.
Sloping back. Big rear window. Ugly headlights. It has pretty much everything.

In their time, I don't think you could beat the early Jaguar E-Types for looks. And they were the fastest production car made at the time.

I think the GT-40 (not the Ford GT) has been the best looking car on the road since its inception.

There was a Cord from the 1940s I think that was up there.


The XKE was a stunner, but the hood was unnaturally long.

The bonnet was long because the engine was long. It was a straight six.

The old Cords, Auburns, and Duesenbergs were gorgeous.

NoCoPilot wrote:

Like this (if you raised the roof & fixed the rear windows):

This looks close (and you can buy one):

Yes, that's a damn good looking car. Jaguar F-Type, according to the photo metadata.  The roof is the best part:


Too bad looks isn't the only criterium.

I hate sunroofs. I would go for the aluminum roof.
The thing is heavy enough without a couple hundred pounds of glass.
It weighs about 1500 pounds more than my E-Type did.

_Howard wrote:

I think the GT-40 (not the Ford GT) has been the best looking car on the road since its inception.

Yes, it's not bad. It looks hard to get in & out of though -- the one I saw in the ferry line last summer was only about 36" high. An old fat codger like me might bust a gusset.

You can see why I confused the 1951 Nash Ambassador for a Hudson Hornet.

Bucktooth private!

NoCoPilot wrote:

It looks hard to get in & out of though -- the one I saw in the ferry line last summer was only about 36" high.  An old fat codger like me might bust a gusset.

They are forty inches high. That's what the "40" in GT-40 means.
They are a bitch to get in an out of. Especially getting out. Even in the roadster it is tough.

That would be a problem.

And not an insignificant one.

But it's worth every strained ligament.

If you have small hands.

Just can't help yourself, can you?