131 replies to this topic

[Victor]

It is not that poor Alpha Bull is uglier than all other. No, all current F1 cars look horrible to my eyes.

Why are they so long? Just look at the distance between front and back wheels. What happened to the back of the car, is it hunchback?

Is the driver a criminal? Why is he behind bars?

I know I am getting old and good old days look better and better as I age, but are modern F1 cars beautiful? Hell, no!

Edited by Victor, 16 February 2020 - 15:12.

[PayasYouRace]

As always, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

I find the AlphaTauri gorgeous. The sleek lines and tight packaging of a modern F1 car allied to a superbly stylish almost perfectly monochrome livery that is applied in all the right places. Having seen modern F1 cars up close and personal at Autosport International in January, I got a new appreciation for their slimness and subtlety that photographs can't capture.

 

I'm not trying to be contrary here. I genuinely think modern F1 cars can be beautiful and you're showcasing probably the best example.

 

Now, are threads to have a moan about the state of modern F1 original and clever? Hell, no!

 

Edit: Does trying to force what can only ever be your opinion off as a fact endear you to anyone? Hell, no!

[TomNokoe]

No they are not. Not a chance.

[Widefoot2]

Not to my eyes. But then, I started paying attention to F1 back when the cars were just getting wings, so factor that in.

[pdac]

No

[PedroDiCasttro]

They're ugly.

 

They've got too many stuff sticking out of the sides, not to mention they're as long as an 18 wheeler truck. 

[P123]

TR colours remind me of the Olivetti/ Paramlat sponsored Brabham's.

 

I don't think any modern racing car could be termed beautiful.  Even the much admired Formula E chassis looks a bit like a fat Ariel Atom with some extra scaffolding.  And I don't get the love for the looks of the current Indycar chassis, pre-windshield.  It's not terrible, but not worth gushing about.

 

For F1, some of the pre-halo Mercs looked ok, but the 50's, 60's and 90's were the peak in terms of 'beauty'.  All other decades, not so much.

[OO7]

The detailing in modern F1 cars is extraordinary.  Advanced paints to make the liveries pop out at you.  Components that fit together seamlessly with panel gaps almost non-existent.  Having said all that, in my eyes the basic shape of all the cars is pretty atrocious.  Hunched backs as Victor put it, snowplough front wings, strange noses and unsightly, sharp, angled down transitions from monocoque to nose .......... etc etc.

Edited by OO7, 16 February 2020 - 01:26.

[JHSingo]

Erm...no.

 

Weirdly, I now look back on the 2017 cars and think they've aged quite nicely. Probably from being the last non-Halo cars. But even they weren't really beautiful.

 

I suppose this discussion is often based of which cars you grew up with. I now look back on the cars of the mid-to-late 90s and early 2000s, which was my "era", and think they are stunning - but I'm sure those who were around during the 60s or 70s would disagree with that.

 

But I think you're struggle to find anyone who'd describe the current era as beautiful.

[EndlessMotion]

I think there's a certain beauty to anything as highly engineered as an F1 car. But if you're directly comparing modern F1 cars to much older generations I think you'd be hard pushed to find someone that found the modern cars more or as beautiful as those from decades gone by. That's not to say that there weren't plenty of horrible looking things from the past though.

 

I think there are plenty of reasons the cars aren't very nice to look at these days and it's down to not only the regulations dictating certain designs, but advances in technology in general taking us further and further away from beautiful design from an aesthetic point of view. The cars are so shrink wrapped now there's actually not a heap of bodywork left and little chance of curvacious areas or lines to follow. The wheelbase is probably what really hurts these cars the most though. From head on there are still some cars over the past 5 years or so that actually look lovely. But then you move the perspective around to the side and.......oh dear. Add things like the halo which while are fantastic for saftey, just don't look like they should be there and you just end up with a mess overall. They're purposeful beasts but ungainly and awkward looking from most angles.

 

Liveries can certainly help but I think the problem is mostly just the shape and length of the cars currently. You can polish/paint a turd as much as you like but it's not going to change what it is.

[Nobody]

You can love different things, I find the aero freaks of the late '00s to be just as beautiful as the golden era late '80s and early '90s. Currently I am a fan of the rear wings but find the emanciated sidepods and plough FWs a bit bizzare

Edited by Nobody, 16 February 2020 - 02:39.

[AustinF1]

Liveries? Sometimes, but not very often these days. The cars themselves? Rarely.

I do find that Alpha Tauri livery to be rather striking and attractive, but strip that away and the car below is yet another ugly product of similarly ugly rules imho.

[RacingGreen]

No, and I hate the switch to matt paint liveries too.

[kumo7]

I am a McLaren fan so anything what McLaren does have good reason to ti, through which I generate admiration that leads to my aesthetic.

In case of Alfa Tauri, much less, which does not mean Alfa Tauri is ugly, I do think it is fancy, but that fanciness changes to beauty only when it start winning on track, so to say...

[Neno]

Nope. But they are far from ugly either. Halo also always adds negativity to me to this modern cars and no matter how beautiful car and elegant it looks, just because of that it will look worse.

Edited by Neno, 16 February 2020 - 03:35.

[Otaku]

No, but we've had worse. Still nothing comes close to late 80s-early 90s. Perfect dimensions and great looking cars.

[Flasheart]

I don’t know if they are beautiful per sè, but I can appreciate them for what they are, and that is engineering masterpieces. I’m in absolute awe of what the aerodynamics teams come up with. As someone who grew up with massive drawing boards, slide rules, French curves, and sheets of vellum, I especially love what the likes of Adrian Newey can produce. So, are they beautiful? Maybe, maybe not. Are they things of beauty? For me, absolutely!

[CL16]

In person they’re beautiful, like spaceships with wheels.

[balage06]

Yes.

[Mat13]

The 2017 cars were stunning. These, without exception, are horrible-I found myself watching the 2008 Brazilian GP yesterday, an era I've always hated- compared to this years cars they actually weren't that bad!

[Brazzers]

I suspect the vast majority of the opinion here will be 'NO'. F1 cars aren't beautiful but i don't think they are meant to be. The cars are meant to look like out of this world with winglets and lasers coming out of everywhere, funnily enough it was this that attracted me to F1 as a kid. I remember seeing the the cars from 2005 - 2008 I loved the aggressive wings and proportions of those machines. 

 

From 09 to 16 the cars to me were ugly with those tall wings and wide wings. Post 2017' the cars imo look like proper racing machines and definitely out of the world again. To me - yes these cars are beautiful but everyone is subjective and has their own version of beauty as mentioned above.

[cyclist]

What I find ugly is the aerodynamic contraptions between the front sunspension and the side pods. This is supposed to be some kind of compensation to lacl of aerodynamic freedom in other areas, butI think it looks awful. Overall I think the lines of todays cars is quite OK, but they are a bit too long. If they would get rid of the bargeboards (or only allow simple ones) and reduce the wheelbase I think they would be better still.

 

I think these cars look better than the high nosed cars from around 2009, and better than the "wing cars" from 2008 and previous. My particular favorites are still the cars from the early to mid 90s, as the cars where quite simple but also quite different.

[SenorSjon]

Is it time to post the 412T2 again? Or any car from season 1991 for that matter? Pre endless CFD and windtunnel optimizations.

[DeKnyff]

No.

[BuddyHolly]

Nope, they are quite ugly.

[DeKnyff]

In my opinion, the worse thing of all is the ridiculously long wheelbase. Worse than the halo, the matt paint or the protruding aerodynamic devices.

Edited by DeKnyff, 16 February 2020 - 11:59.

[blackmme]

Yes from me, they are extraordinary machines and extraordinarily fast.

Seeing them flash around Stowe they looked very beautiful to me.

 

regards Mike

[chhatra]

I’ve only been watching since 2002, but yes these cars are getting uglier. We will see what 2021 brings.

The most beautiful car for me was the 2007 McLaren MP4-22 in it’s Monza spec.

https://f1i-com.cdn....7177_1200px.jpg

[Clrnc]

I’ve only been watching since 2002, but yes these cars are getting uglier. We will see what 2021 brings.

The most beautiful car for me was the 2007 McLaren MP4-22 in it’s Monza spec.

https://f1i-com.cdn....7177_1200px.jpg

Agree with your general point but for me it was 2008 Mclaren. Absolutely amazing car to look at

[68targa]

Modern F1 cars are superbly packaged and the engineering and design incorporated are second to none, but are they beautiful?  No, not to my eye.  But that is progress, beauty does not matter, results count.

 

A Lotus 25 is beautiful.

[H0R]

There have been better and worse years than 2020. 1967 is my favorite year, the early 70s were mostly just bizarre. I like the late 90s and the 2007/2008 cars. But nothing ever was worse than 2009. 2020 is probably in the better half.

[Pontlieue]

No, they aren't. The problem is that the rule-makers have a certain idea of how an F1 car should look, but that idea is still based on the state of aerodynamics in the mid-80s. On the other hand, the teams obviously only care about performance. In the current F1 cars, it has become increasingly visible where the vision of the rule-makers clashes with the knowledge of modern aerodynamics, resulting in bizarre thumb-noses or boxy parts of the cars where the constraints of the regulations become painfully visible.

[midgrid]

I’ve only been watching since 2002, but yes these cars are getting uglier. We will see what 2021 brings.

The most beautiful car for me was the 2007 McLaren MP4-22 in it’s Monza spec.

https://f1i-com.cdn....7177_1200px.jpg

It's funny - after years of wide, "snow-plough" front wings, this almost looks like a toy by comparison.

[djparky]

Nope...ugly boxes with even uglier aero crap on them

[SuperSwede]

They are a lot, but beautiful is most certainly not one of their traits.

[jjcale]

The current cars are iconic IMHO .... I remember folks on forums years ago complaining about the cars in the late 2000s - no folks look back and say the 2007/8 macca is one of the best looking cars in history..... I've even seen folks saying the 2008 snowploughs are iconic!

 

I love how the cars look ...  people just love to complain. 

Edited by jjcale, 16 February 2020 - 13:05.

[jjcale]

                   This is now considered car porn ...                    ....but back in the day "everyone" hated the look of the thing.

[Afterburner]

They are on the right track, and certainly better than 2009-2016 in many ways, but I still have some issues, in descending order of unsightliness:

- Halo (obviously)
- Rear wing is too high
- Front wing is too wide
- Too long (especially given how compact the packaging is now)
- Thumb noses
- The awkward ‘doorstop’ slant of the nose

This is admittedly a pretty small list. 2021’s rules fix a lot of the issues (at least in my memory) so we’ll see what they do with those.

[jjcale]

10 years from now when people remember the 7 titles ... this is going to be similarly well regarded 

 

This is beautiful ....

Edited by jjcale, 16 February 2020 - 21:13.

[Loosenut]

I'm still wondering why only Mercedes and I think STR/AT don't do the ugly bit on the end of the nose.
If they didn't have the fins and the halos, I think they would look pretty.

Nothing is gonna look as pretty as late 80s & early 90s tho. I don't think anything is gonna look as ugly as that 'Walrus Williams' tho.

[DutchQuicksilver]

Just how long have the cars become then compared to let’s say 2000, 2009 and now? I’m sure there’s a side by side comparison somewhere on the web? I think it all started when refueling was banned after the 2009 season. The cars started getting longer and longer.

[Vesuvius]

Cars are still beautiful, but they are not as beautiful as they were early 2000 to 2008.

[Afterburner]

I'm still wondering why only Mercedes and I think STR/AT don't do the ugly bit on the end of the nose.
If they didn't have the fins and the halos, I think they would look pretty.

Nothing is gonna look as pretty as late 80s & early 90s tho. I don't think anything is gonna look as ugly as that 'Walrus Williams' tho.

Not even the Caterham ‘Airbus’?

[midgrid]

Just how long have the cars become then compared to let’s say 2000, 2009 and now? I’m sure there’s a side by side comparison somewhere on the web? I think it all started when refueling was banned after the 2009 season. The cars started getting longer and longer.

 

I found this:

 

[Kalmake]

I think it's more wheelbase than chassis length that gives that "limo" look.

[Collombin]

I haven't actually been to a GP since 1991, but I did make the mistake of visting the Autosport show this year, and yes the thing that really ruined the look of the cars is the enormous wheelbase. Apart from that they weren't too bad.

[muramasa]

Wheelbase is long because of safety reasons and how reg is written in rather clumsy way.

 

Monocoque is longer and front wheels are farther from driver because it's to protect driver from dislocated tyres and suspension arms, also nose is longer for the crushable structure. Also there is aero reason to give more space to barge boards, but basically you cannot and should not go back to the config that tyres and arms are so near to driver and short nose like in 90s.

 

Rear end is longer because of 4.5:5.5 front-rear weight distribution. Tyres are made to work with that distribution, and when you have PU, tank and radiators behind driver as well as the aforementioned longer monocoque, you just have to push back the rear axle to achieve the distribution. Cars in 80s/90s had actually very long rear end, but that's due to bigger tank bigger engine. Current cars rear end can be much shorter mechanically, for example rear axle can be placed at "α" part of the AlphaTauri logo in that OP picture (much of its gearbox casing is empty just housing long shaft), but it's placed far behind like that due to the weight distribution, plus benefit in aero as well as mechanical grip, comprehensively more advantageous in that way.

Edited by muramasa, 16 February 2020 - 14:55.

[Augurk]

Avoiding getting into a debate over what's beautiful - that's in the eye of the beholder anyway. 

 

I started watching in the mid 90's. And yes, while there's something nostalgic about the cars that I started watching, my sense of pleasing aesthetics seems to evolve with the times and technology. Besides a few exceptions, I have always liked the look of the cars each season - within the context of the time. I like the way design is evolving. And with most things I like the way they are designed now as opposed to at some period in time in the past. Normal cars, airplanes, objects, architecture. 

[TennisUK]

I do wonder if whatever F1 cars looked like when you were 12 determines what you think looks best. Does for me, anyway.
 

 

 
I don't mind the paint jobs of the cars these days (not the helmets though - helmet designs have been truly awful since around 2000) - and the return to 'team colours' with Mclaren, Ferrari, Renault, Mercedes all using their own, rather than sponsor colours. But the cars are far, far too long now and nowhere near as graceful as they were in the late 80s early 90s.

[TennisUK]

I mean... there is something quite amazing about the complexity of the CFD derived modern shapes, but I'm not sure I would call it beautiful: