Yep, there's a flap to keep the noise down when cruising at low revs. It's a great idea and makes distance driving much more comfortable.How come it suddenly goes very quiet after revving? Does it have those valves to keep low rpm noise down? My boss had them removed on his Vanquish
The last F1 car that looked good?
- Thread starter dannyjo22
- Start date
The 599 mustn't be as insulated as the S becasue even when pressing on it was just is quiet as my old CTR inside. Standing outside of it is a different story mind you!?
Both awesome sounding machines.
As for an F1 car, the one that sticks in my mind is the Jordan 197. This was one of the teams I grew up watching so sticks in my mind more I suppose.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGl7vQl_cE4
Very condensed season review, but F1 seemed quite exciting back then.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2005
- Posts
- 1,595
One of the ugliest F1 cars, the BMW F108.
... and one of the most beautiful, the Ferrari 641/2.
That is disgusting.
I miss to massive, terrifying tires on older F1 machines. The newer ones are wimpy by comparison.
D.Hill's car on the left, looks the best car for me. Is that the 1993 car?
The 1994 Williams isn't too bad either.
For me, a car not only has to looks aesthetically pleasing but it must be fast.
If that is the 1993 car, it was one of he most dominant cars produced in the last 20 years or so.
I don't particularly like the look of Prost's Ferrari, especially given that it wasn't very reliable.
Watching the extended highlights of the 1990 Aussie GP over on the BBC website, I was struck by how minimalist and clean-lined the 1990 cars were. Low and wide, they had a proportion that just looked right.
The 1990 cars seemed to slice through the air; today's cars - technological marvels though they undoubtedly are - seem to barge their way through it. Which, I guess, is not far from the truth given the extra aero downforce of today. But still...
The 1990 cars seemed to slice through the air; today's cars - technological marvels though they undoubtedly are - seem to barge their way through it. Which, I guess, is not far from the truth given the extra aero downforce of today. But still...
Last edited:
What on earth do the visuals have to do with reliability?
The 640/641/642 series were stunning looking cars and sounded just as good. The Williams FW14/15/16 are good looking and arguably better engineered but given the choice I'd have the Fezza as my desktop Wallpaper every day of the week.
Why is that car so high up in the air? Its very rare to see an F1 car go that high and if it does, then usually a spectacular accident follows.
What year was that and which race?
'93, Adelaide, Mika Hakkinen driving IIRC.
Too right, that car does NOT belong in a "Good looking F1 cars" thread
Heh. McLaren will go down in history with that aesthetic abortion. Along with pretty much every car from the 'ooh I know let's stick a winglet on every single surface we can find!' era of 2007-2008. Oh, and those X-Wing jobbies from '97 (think it was Ken's boys who brought them in?).
Oh yes, and the Ferrari F310 from '96. A distinct low-point in design for the Scuderia....
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 May 2003
- Posts
- 9,361
- Location
- Limehouse
I actually think some of the 2006 season cars looked awesome.
The ferrari in particular looks really low slung and has a great stance.
Mclarens have always looked good recently but I think this is more to do with the colour scheme than anything.
The ferrari in particular looks really low slung and has a great stance.
Mclarens have always looked good recently but I think this is more to do with the colour scheme than anything.
sorry but i think 2006 - 2008 cars looked best and i think the ferrari that spie kept showing is one of the worst shown in this thread. really am quite surprised how people can like such bland winged cars.
as previously stated its either the raw non winged early cars like that mazerrati from earlier or the modern cars for me.
as previously stated its either the raw non winged early cars like that mazerrati from earlier or the modern cars for me.
You couldn't be more wrong.
The 89-94 3.5L cars have a purity to them that went out of the window afterwards. Clean simple designs that were very effective. There's some lovely details on the cars of that period such as the tightly waisted side pods on the Ferrari 641 (above) and the rear diffuser on the 1990 McLaren. The rules got tightened up after 1994 to reduce downforce (and therefore speeds) at which point the computers and wind tunnels came up with monstrosities such as barge boards, high noses with the sticky out plank underneath and various bits of stick on tat appear to claw back the lost downforce while still sticking to the letter of the regulations.
To generalise the 2005-2008 cars lack purity and look fat, fussy and messy. With a well designed livery some of them pull it off such as the 2007 McLaren, but that's rare for the period.
The stance is down to the regulations. Tyres dimensions and the zones for the front and rear wings are set in stone.
The 89-94 3.5L cars have a purity to them that went out of the window afterwards. Clean simple designs that were very effective. There's some lovely details on the cars of that period such as the tightly waisted side pods on the Ferrari 641 (above) and the rear diffuser on the 1990 McLaren. The rules got tightened up after 1994 to reduce downforce (and therefore speeds) at which point the computers and wind tunnels came up with monstrosities such as barge boards, high noses with the sticky out plank underneath and various bits of stick on tat appear to claw back the lost downforce while still sticking to the letter of the regulations.
To generalise the 2005-2008 cars lack purity and look fat, fussy and messy. With a well designed livery some of them pull it off such as the 2007 McLaren, but that's rare for the period.
The stance is down to the regulations. Tyres dimensions and the zones for the front and rear wings are set in stone.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 25
- Location
- London
That flying Hakkinen pic is awesome. I think the Sauber looks the best out of the cars this year, but I guess no sponsors will do that to a car.
That flying Hakkinen pic is awesome. I think the Sauber looks the best out of the cars this year, but I guess no sponsors will do that to a car.
That colour scheme and the futuristic look of the car, makes it look fantastic. The detailing on the front wing also makes it look rather complex and advanced.
Nice looking car.
Its looks ugly to me, like the front wing is used for ploughing snow or fields rather than for racing 
It might look better if you imagine that stupid sharkfin removed and instead shaped down to the rear wing.
The sidepods are just disgusting.
It might look better if you imagine that stupid sharkfin removed and instead shaped down to the rear wing.
The sidepods are just disgusting.