Most of those designs still look better than the vast majority of modern vehicles.

Ok this is cool.

/i want one
//plus he has the mad scientist hairdo

Came in for the Bob's Guide, leaving happy.

I was promised a flying car. Where is it?

/No Mollers need apply.

UNC_Samurai: Most of those designs still look better than the vast majority of modern vehicles.

This.

I thought I was the only one realizing how ugly current automotive designs are. They try so hard to be different, not only they end up looking all the same, they also end up looking horrible.

Even in the future, we still gotta put up with elderly drivers that can't figure out the difference between the brake and the accelerator.

/The real problem lies in the seat-to-pedal interface

Where's my supersonic car of the future.

Well they do have those Benz's and such that can auto park and brake on the highway.

/would be funny to fark with the sensor system remotely.

emiliogtz: UNC_Samurai: Most of those designs still look better than the vast majority of modern vehicles.

This.

I thought I was the only one realizing how ugly current automotive designs are. They try so hard to be different, not only they end up looking all the same, they also end up looking horrible.

Compaired to those old concepts out modern cars look fine.

Modern design is about passenger comfort and aerodynamics, which s fine.

Car designers in 1958 also thought that the bigger the fins, the better, except on the Edsel.

ricewater_stool: It's the electronics that are the problem, not the pedals.

No, it isn't. The problem is the driver.

I was listening to the latest 911 call (the Prius driver) this morning, and the 911 dispatcher asked him if he tried putting it into neutral. Damn near sobbing, the guy said that he couldn't try it, he was too busy trying to keep the car under control.

in 1958, they also said we'd be driving good, reliable, American cars. that worked out real well!

Why Camry's, but not designer's, car's, or gyroscope's? I've always wondered why people who use apostrophes to pluralize nouns are so damn selective about it.

The Crepes of Wrath: I was listening to the latest 911 call (the Prius driver) this morning, and the 911 dispatcher asked him if he tried putting it into neutral. Damn near sobbing, the guy said that he couldn't try it, he was too busy trying to keep the car under control.

Sounds fun. Where did you hear that?

We could have robotic self-driving cars right now if there was the political will to make it happen. Pathfinding and obstacle avoidance aren't easy, but they aren't that hard, especially if there was infrastructure support on the roads.

They may look silly but at least people were optimistic and had imaginations back then.

I'm still waiting on those hoverboards from Back to the Future.

trancemission: Why Camry's, but not designer's, car's, or gyroscope's? I've always wondered why people who use apostrophes to pluralize nouns are so damn selective about it.

The Y, I think. Camrys looks wrong... if it were a real English word it would be Camries. So the apostrophail happens there.

Bill Shakespeare:
...jetpack. where's my jetpack?

$75,000 and it is yours.


Almost one wheel, has gyros

Unfetchable ... BAH!

MaxxLarge: Not yet, it hasn't.

[www.angryflower.com image 640x349]

There. NOW it has.

Thank you!

/that pic hangs in my cubicle at work.

'tis gat no fookin wheez!

Antimatter: emiliogtz: UNC_Samurai: Most of those designs still look better than the vast majority of modern vehicles.

This.

I thought I was the only one realizing how ugly current automotive designs are. They try so hard to be different, not only they end up looking all the same, they also end up looking horrible.

Compaired to those old concepts out modern cars look fine.

Modern design is about passenger comfort and aerodynamics, which s fine.

Well, yeah, you got a point there. I should have just said I don't like current designs.

Still, I believe "modern design" has more to do with reducing costs than anything else. Of course, passenger comfort, aerodynamics and safety have been greatly improved over the last two decades or so, but do they have to look so bad? Do they have to look, drive and feel all the same?

/And many automakers have been using the same suppliers (also trying to reduce costs) for most of the components so I guess it just figures.

ahhh another futurist article... if there's one thing consistent about future predictions is that almost none of it became true...they are always a lot more optimistic than reality.... people always thnik we're a LOT more advance than we really are... with the flying cars, having human settlement in Mars, major deseases cured etc....

That design is absurd and will never work.
Why?
There's a woman driving.

//zing. sorry.

What about the Cuban Trcuk boat

dittybopper: I was promised a flying car. Where is it?

/No Mollers need apply.

Picture 11 of 43. They invented it, and it flew, but then they never put it into production. I want my flying car!

MaxxLarge: Pocket Ninja: I came in here to mock the submitter for not understanding how to use apostrophes, but I see that's been handled.

Not yet, it hasn't.



There. NOW it has.

/hey don't get mad at me i don't make the rules


I'm disappointed that the submitter was not mocked in verse.

A two wheeled car with a gyroscope sounds like the most retarded idea ever, I'd rather have the Camry, it would still look better and kill you less often

I really wanted a picture of Ed Bighead from Rocko's Modern Life in his car, but this was the best I could do.

Is it just me, or does the front seat look like Rosie the maid from the Jetson's?

Thomas Dolby is the shizznit.

I'll take the titanium bodied twin turbine powered Firebird. It looked a lot better than the production model with the screaming chicken on the hoo. I wonder if it really had titanium or turbines or was just a large prop.

dittybopper: I was promised a flying car. Where is it?


The AVE Mizar (new window)

Just don't use sheet metal screws...

On September 11, 1973, during a test flight at Oxnard, California, the right wing strut detached from the Pinto. Some reports say the wings folded and others say the Pinto separated from the airframe. An air traffic controller, watching through binoculars, said the right wing folded. Smolinski and the pilot, Harold Blake, were killed in the resulting fiery crash. Even though the Pinto was a light car, the total aircraft was already slightly over gross weight without passengers or fuel. One observer reported that the wing struts were attached to the car with sheet-metal screws and that, "...everything was really bad".

Those retro futuristic cars are really something.

They somehow manage to look even more dated than classic cars.

MonoTracer?