F1technical.net

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote: Still want that Mclaren?

Yes. The SLS is plain ugly. And it's overweight.

Nice engine though.

Fair do's

But you may lose that Mclaren in the car park so anonomous it looks.
Best paint it that horrible orange then.

I prefer to refer to it as "classy understatement" rather than "anonymous".

Certainly better than the "brash" look of some other cars...

I dont know,

Give me a Zonda over any Ferrari/Lamborghini/Aston.
Why? You wont miss it anywhere.

And when you put it next to these so called beautiful cars, It is the one people walk round and gawp at.

Presence

Just_a_fan wrote:

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote: Still want that Mclaren?

Yes. The SLS is plain ugly. And it's overweight.

Nice engine though.

Indeed JAF, those foul headlights and rear section, something for a bald and overweight autobahn-cruiser perhaps?

Oh I see where this is going.....

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:I dont know,

Give me a Zonda over any Ferrari/Lamborghini/Aston.
Why? You wont miss it anywhere.

And when you put it next to these so called beautiful cars, It is the one people walk round and gawp at.

Presence

That explains the fondness of body kits and 'tricked out' cars.

mx_tifosi wrote: That explains the fondness of body kits and 'tricked out' cars.

Presence does not explain "the fondness of body kits and 'tricked out' cars"
That is taste. Or lack of it.

But it explains why cars like the Zonda and SLS dont adhere to a tradtional design theme and dare to be different.

Thing is, I like the Zonda. Sure it is extrovert but in a good way. It was a fresh take on the mid-engined supercar. The SLS, on the other hand, is not a fresh take at all but an attempt to recreate the original 300 SLR Gullwing. The original was a great looking car. Sadly the new one isn't.

If you're going to have "presence", it should at least be interesting even if it's not conventionally attractive. That, for me, is the difference between the Zonda and the SLS.

Just_a_fan wrote: If you're going to have "presence", it should at least be interesting even if it's not conventionally attractive. That, for me, is the difference between the Zonda and the SLS.

Presence is unquantifiable. It's a je ne sais quoi.

Typical over style with a tutonic overtone.
The car is ugly.
...

Morteza AMG wrote:And here's a video of David Coulthard driving it:

Hmmmm, that wouldn't be a Red Bull employee driving a Mercedes, would it?

I have no doubt that the car would be brilliant to drive, but as for looks, elegance and class they simply are not in the same league as a Ferrari, Aston Martin or even a McLaren. Mercedes are kidding themselves. They have an image of a stack them high and sell them expensive car manufacturer, like BMW. To sell this car with such competitors they're going to have to change their image and branding somewhat.

segedunum wrote:

Morteza AMG wrote:And here's a video of David Coulthard driving it:

Hmmmm, that wouldn't be a Red Bull employee driving a Mercedes, would it?

I have no doubt that the car would be brilliant to drive, but as for looks, elegance and class they simply are not in the same league as a Ferrari, Aston Martin or even a McLaren. Mercedes are kidding themselves. They have an image of a stack them high and sell them expensive car manufacturer, like BMW. To sell this car with such competitors they're going to have to change their image and branding somewhat.

I agree with you. Brilliant to drive but the design is too wide and the bonnet is really long. It somehow reminds me of a Doge Viper It lacks some kind of charisma I think compared to McLaren, Ferrari and Aston.

A successful car design should polarize people I think. Everyone saying 'meh' is not a good sign.

Equal parts of love and hate are usually good.

segedunum wrote:

Morteza AMG wrote:And here's a video of David Coulthard driving it:

Hmmmm, that wouldn't be a Red Bull employee driving a Mercedes, would it?

Nope. That would be a Mercedes ambassador and Mercedes DTM driver driving a Mercedes.