GTPNewsWire
Contributing Writer
- 22,264
- GTPHQ
This is the discussion thread for a recent post on GTPlanet:
This article was published by Andrew Evans (@Famine) on March 9th, 2018 in the Automotive News category.
I'm pretty sure than Sin is showing off as many possible combinations of the interchangeable body panels as it can at the same time.Why is it not symmetrical? No car should ever not be symmetrical.
Funny you mention that, actually. With the thread including such things as a D-TypeWhy is it not symmetrical? No car should ever not be symmetrical.
Why is it not symmetrical? No car should ever not be symmetrical.
While it's certainly striking, I'm not quite sure "relevant" is the comparative term I'd use for a car costing the wrong side of $3 million.None of the cars in the article are relevant anymore (even tho the Alpine is lovely and the Supra is ok too).
Because Valkyrie AMR Pro.
![]()
it's certainly striking
That’s still pretty ugly, IMO...
...Though I will concede that this thread slightly changed my mind. Had no idea about the Murcielago and of course the D-Type is a beaut. I just think asymmetrical and immediately think of the Cube, Veloster, and those horrendous Land Rovers with offset rear ends.Funny you mention that, actually. With the thread including such things as a D-Typealthough i don't think the Porsche 550 A was mentioned, along with a fair amount of other older roofless race cars
But is it ugly because it's asymmetrical? I understand that it may not suit everyone's taste, but I think it pulls off that one detail rather well as it relates to the design of the whole car. I picked the XNR for that very reason.That’s still pretty ugly, IMO...
While it's certainly striking, I'm not quite sure "relevant" is the comparative term I'd use for a car costing the wrong side of $3 million.
By that reasoning, they're likely candidates for an ADD diagnosis compared to these guys.focus on nothing else but pure speed