meh, I don't like the look of convertables tbh..
Only one I think really works is the 911. But I still prefer the normal version.
Only one I think really works is the 911. But I still prefer the normal version.
I pretty much agree... but for some reason a part of me doesn't want to call something like a TR7 a convertable. I think it is but for some reason I think others would dissagree...eskimo_sammyjoe wrote:
@ VicktorVauhn, the roofs go up and down, therefore they're convertible in my books.
If you are counting all of those, its pretty stupid to say that Boxter S, S2k, 914, TR whatever, miata, ect... are for people who don't care about performance.
Viktor, you're totally right. None of those are convertibles, they're roadsters. Simply put: A roadster is a car that was intended to be topless from the very beginning and if there is a hardtop version (like the new MX5 Miata), then it was more of an afterthought.
The 612 is no real looker, tbh. It's rather plain. I had the opportunity to examine one at a car show a while back and it's nice, but it doesn't scream sex machine like other Ferraris. It looks nice, just plain. I have nothing to really complain about it other than that.
The F40 and the F50 are also both works of art. Open your eyes.
I never said the 360 was ugly. The 430 is absolute horrid. Look at the lines of a 430 and just begin to notice the inconsistencies. Better yet, get three side images: one of a 355, 360 and then the 430. Or front or back. Then compare all three of them in a row starting with the 355 and then the 360 and finally the 430. Then notice how radically different and un-Ferrari the 430 looks. Then you should notice the inconsistencies in the body lines across the entire car whereas the 360 and the 355 were all very consistent and with a purpose. Once you see this, you'll see it across the entire Ferrari line up that is currently on the market.CammRobb wrote:
All wrong.
360, 430, 612, how can you say they're ugly? The California is a cracker as well!
The F40, you're trying to say that's better looking than a 360 or a 430? You're mad.
@Mek, Why the Aston hate?
The 612 is no real looker, tbh. It's rather plain. I had the opportunity to examine one at a car show a while back and it's nice, but it doesn't scream sex machine like other Ferraris. It looks nice, just plain. I have nothing to really complain about it other than that.
The F40 and the F50 are also both works of art. Open your eyes.
The 911 isn't a GT car. I wish they had brought an SL500, tbh. That would have been a good GT.Jenspm wrote:
I was counting on Hammond to bring a 911
Great episode, loved the driving in the tunnels under the castle
Eskimo, you need to get behind the wheel (or at least the passenger seat) of a car without a top on it. Even a Jeep if you have the chance. Driving around with that much openness is an absolute dream. Even a targa top comes close. But when we're talking about super cars here, the differences in performance between the hardtop and the softtop are going to be so negligible that you as an average person really won't ever notice.eskimo_sammyjoe wrote:
But in the process of them not being wobbly, the cars are a lot heavier and lose some of their performance. Its just a personal preference, i dont like hard top cars that are designed to be fast and sporty having the roof cut off because it seems to mean that whoever is driving them prefers looks over performance, and if you are that way, why not get something that was designed not to have a roof from the design stage?
@ VicktorVauhn, the roofs go up and down, therefore they're convertible in my books.
I'm not questioning that drop tops have their place and are a great experience to drive (yes, I have driven one) but my problem is that the drop tops on the Lambo and the Aston were after thoughts. They weren't intended to be convertibles otherwise they would have come out topless to start off with. There most likely isn't a notable difference in performance, but if I owned one, just knowing that the hard top version has slightly better performance would irritate me no end. It's all personal preference really, I don't mind if you like the drop tops better, but I just prefer the hard tops.CapnNismo wrote:
Viktor, you're totally right. None of those are convertibles, they're roadsters. Simply put: A roadster is a car that was intended to be topless from the very beginning and if there is a hardtop version (like the new MX5 Miata), then it was more of an afterthought.I never said the 360 was ugly. The 430 is absolute horrid. Look at the lines of a 430 and just begin to notice the inconsistencies. Better yet, get three side images: one of a 355, 360 and then the 430. Or front or back. Then compare all three of them in a row starting with the 355 and then the 360 and finally the 430. Then notice how radically different and un-Ferrari the 430 looks. Then you should notice the inconsistencies in the body lines across the entire car whereas the 360 and the 355 were all very consistent and with a purpose. Once you see this, you'll see it across the entire Ferrari line up that is currently on the market.CammRobb wrote:
All wrong.
360, 430, 612, how can you say they're ugly? The California is a cracker as well!
The F40, you're trying to say that's better looking than a 360 or a 430? You're mad.
@Mek, Why the Aston hate?
The 612 is no real looker, tbh. It's rather plain. I had the opportunity to examine one at a car show a while back and it's nice, but it doesn't scream sex machine like other Ferraris. It looks nice, just plain. I have nothing to really complain about it other than that.
The F40 and the F50 are also both works of art. Open your eyes.The 911 isn't a GT car. I wish they had brought an SL500, tbh. That would have been a good GT.Jenspm wrote:
I was counting on Hammond to bring a 911
Great episode, loved the driving in the tunnels under the castleEskimo, you need to get behind the wheel (or at least the passenger seat) of a car without a top on it. Even a Jeep if you have the chance. Driving around with that much openness is an absolute dream. Even a targa top comes close. But when we're talking about super cars here, the differences in performance between the hardtop and the softtop are going to be so negligible that you as an average person really won't ever notice.eskimo_sammyjoe wrote:
But in the process of them not being wobbly, the cars are a lot heavier and lose some of their performance. Its just a personal preference, i dont like hard top cars that are designed to be fast and sporty having the roof cut off because it seems to mean that whoever is driving them prefers looks over performance, and if you are that way, why not get something that was designed not to have a roof from the design stage?
@ VicktorVauhn, the roofs go up and down, therefore they're convertible in my books.
Serious Flex
The F40 is hideous. It's not a good looking Ferrari! I just don't get how you can call it that...CapnNismo wrote:
I never said the 360 was ugly. The 430 is absolute horrid. Look at the lines of a 430 and just begin to notice the inconsistencies. Better yet, get three side images: one of a 355, 360 and then the 430. Or front or back. Then compare all three of them in a row starting with the 355 and then the 360 and finally the 430. Then notice how radically different and un-Ferrari the 430 looks. Then you should notice the inconsistencies in the body lines across the entire car whereas the 360 and the 355 were all very consistent and with a purpose. Once you see this, you'll see it across the entire Ferrari line up that is currently on the market.CammRobb wrote:
All wrong.
360, 430, 612, how can you say they're ugly? The California is a cracker as well!
The F40, you're trying to say that's better looking than a 360 or a 430? You're mad.
@Mek, Why the Aston hate?
The 612 is no real looker, tbh. It's rather plain. I had the opportunity to examine one at a car show a while back and it's nice, but it doesn't scream sex machine like other Ferraris. It looks nice, just plain. I have nothing to really complain about it other than that.
The F40 and the F50 are also both works of art. Open your eyes.
I <3 the One-77, but tbh, I prefer the DBS.DesertFox- wrote:
I mostly agree, but you've seen the DB7 Zagato, right? Technically it's not a full Aston, but it's one hell of a minger, imo. It looks to me what a crappy ripoff of Vanquish would be (I know it was built earlier than the Vanquish, but still).
I have to admit, Ive never heard of the Zagato and im disappointed that I googled it now...I cant believe that there actually is an Aston minger Its just the back. Ergh.
Still, everyone makes mistakes. I can let em off
Dacia Sandero > all others tbh
When I saw TG:Live at the NEC, they said they werent looking forward to the review of their car...now I see why
Stig's walking after dropping off the keys near the end was epic.
Did anyone do the quiz afterwards? I got 9/10
Stig's walking after dropping off the keys near the end was epic.
Did anyone do the quiz afterwards? I got 9/10
I was expecting the car to be a joke, but not that much of a joke
I'm trying to load up the iplayer to see if it's up on the net yet, but the site is basically dead. 'The servers are too busy to handle my request'.
I reckon its all the people wanting to watch Top Gear
I reckon its all the people wanting to watch Top Gear
lol at Clarksons crash test dummy markings and the slow mo vids.
Nooooooooooooo...............!BBC iPlayer is down for maintenance. We'll be back shortly.
hahaha I go that too I don't think it'll be on yet.Finray wrote:
Nooooooooooooo...............!BBC iPlayer is down for maintenance. We'll be back shortly.
What if The Stig was.... Danica Patrick, Jutta Kleinschmidt, or Giovanna Amati?
[/sarcasm]
[/sarcasm]
It's up on iplayer now
They're good at getting hot girls to stand behind the celebs.
I think she seduced me near half way through the interviewCammRobb wrote:
http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo19 … opgear.png
They're good at getting hot girls to stand behind the celebs.
lies and slander. you must be gayCapnNismo wrote:
The 430 is absolute horrid.
Baba Booey
She's rather hot.TrueMusou wrote:
I think she seduced me near half way through the interviewCammRobb wrote:
http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo19 … opgear.png
They're good at getting hot girls to stand behind the celebs.
She didn't catch my eye initially. I thought she was alright...then the more she smiled at the camera, I was taken in...and she had me. DAMN YOU TOP GEAR...making me think dirty thoughts.CammRobb wrote:
She's rather hot.TrueMusou wrote:
I think she seduced me near half way through the interviewCammRobb wrote:
http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo19 … opgear.png
They're good at getting hot girls to stand behind the celebs.
I dont find her that hot. Link to iPlayer?
OP updated.
You're from Georgia, what the hell do you know?1stSFOD-Delta wrote:
lies and slander. you must be gay
Tuokool!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WOW she looks like a girl I knew from HS!! in a way..TrueMusou wrote:
She didn't catch my eye initially. I thought she was alright...then the more she smiled at the camera, I was taken in...and she had me. DAMN YOU TOP GEAR...making me think dirty thoughts.CammRobb wrote:
She's rather hot.TrueMusou wrote:
I think she seduced me near half way through the interview
On tonight's Top Gear: We drive a sniper rifle!
