Not at all - I like the red V12 diesel one a lot more too. FWIW, I never knocked anyone else's choice - I got zinged for not liking the R8. It's no biggie, it's just not me.

I do wish Audi would make the R8 V10 look more aggressive like the V12 one (esp. if they don't make the V12).

 

Not entirely true. "Still Ugly" is a little different than "not liking".

Analagous to:

I don't like Chris vs Chris is still Ugly.

 

Here we go again - my point was that I never replied to someone else's comment when I made my observation. And your last sentence applies in both meanings...

 

A more aggressive R8 is def needed. No harm no foul.

 

I couldn't agree more about the hideousness of the R8. The car looks cheap for one, it's also slow (V8 version), it's very small, it's not wide, and it also lacks road presence. The interior is also shit on most US cars as they're ordered stripped. No extravagant leather work, CF, contrast stitching, or CF racing seats (might not be a US option - I forget). None of them have ceramic brakes either here either. The price most of them are/were going for was/is also ridiculous. Dealers thought they were selling 599's or Enzos...

Prior to the launch of the R8 it was hyped up as Audi's new super car. I was actually impressed a bit with it at first, until I saw it in real life. It looks like a bigger Audi TT - literally. There is nothing shocking, menacing, extragemnt, or exotic about it. It's just another bland Audi to add to the bunch. I'm not a big Audi fan, actually I hate Audi's - every single one of them, but I actually had a huge crush for the R8. It looked amazing back in 2006 when Audi launched it's interactive site. The interior, the CF piece behind the door, the wheels, the huge brakes, the sound, the shifter; I couldn't stop going to the site and specing one out - I liked it that much. IMO, the car is the biggest disappointment ever. I see many of them around Chicago. I have a very good eye for cars, I can tell a debaged E55 from a E550, etc... but I struggle to see very much difference between the TT and R8 from a distance until I see the side and rear profile of the car.

It most definitely will not be remembered in 10 years, hell it doesn't even come to mind now...

As for the Veyron. Put your crack pipes down people. The car is pure sex. It may not have the most razor sharp italian design in terms of body shape, but it definitely makes a huge statement and looks extremely exotic. Take a look at some of the classical designs of Bugatti. All of his cars were very bubblish and smooth. None of them have sharp lines. They were very extravagant and different. The Veyron is huge, wide, extragemnt, menacing, extremely low to the ground, and it looks very expensive. The interior is also out of this world in terms of elegance, simplicity, and functionality, while still showing it's performance heart with CF racing seats. The cars design was also mostly designed around it's engine and performance capabilities, not just sheer eye candy. It will most definitely be remembered in time to come as a true super car in both looks and performance. Just like the Enzo, CGT, SLR, F40, F50, McLaren F1.

993 and the others, don't bother trying to shape my opinion into yours by saying the R8 is god and the Veyron is hideous bla bla. I couldn't careless, these are just my opinions and observations. Many others which are referred to as having good taste in cars seem to feel the same as well...

 

hmmm taste is just an opinion - why do you think automakers have so many car choices for us, this is the best part of freedom to chose! (plus of course if we can afford the car)

993fan, howdy remember me?

Friends and strangers give me shiet for selling my GT3 to get a lowly nsx but I certainly don't care - I buy what I want

 

I understand your opinion but disagree. As far as design goes, no one has a crystal ball, no one can tell what will or won't hold up. I for one have always loved the design of the R8 and continue to. I actually think it will hold up just because it doesn't seem to follow many design trends (like the way Mercedes has pretty blatantly copied BMWs controversial Bangle-Butt trunklids and flame surfacing). I would argue that if you looked at the gallardo, that seems like it would be much more of a "contrived" shape and very trendy, so I would personally think it would look as ridiculously outdated as the Countach 25th anniversary or the Testarossa.

I was driving the 996 Turbo in town one time, and a small crowd had gathered in the street to look at a parked R8. They wouldn't even get out of the way to let me through! I would guess that if you showed even the most layman person the R8 and the TT, hardly any person would confuse the two. They have similar design cues but in real life no one is going to mistake them.

More importantly, The R8 will probably remembered as the first competitor to the 911 (C4s) that is pretty roundly regarded as having toppled the Porsche benchmark. How many have tried and failed? The V8 Vantage looks unbelievable but its dynamics were way off, and if you thought the R8 was slow, you'd be faster if you were Fred Flinstone and you were pedalling in your bare feet in the Vantage. The Maserati Coupe may have had a better sounding engine, but it also had other cool features like the gearstick regularly falling off, skyhook suspension that would stiffen the wrong side of the car during a turn, and a paddleshift gearbox that would switch the upshift paddle into a downshift paddle on its own. With the R8, Audi wisely decided to make their true halo car a mid-engined car with a very reliable, proven engine, design it to link the car to "lesser" cars in the company (the point of a halo car), and work on its dynamics to produce a car that beats the 911 in a very un-911 way. They didn't work on making it tail-happy or harder suspension - it actually rides softer, absorbing information that you don't need, placing the importance of neutrality over the importance of feeling unnecessary and distracting jitters in the steering wheel and giving you info you need. The fact that they were able to do this before anyone, ESPECIALLY BMW, is impressive, since Audi is rarely regarded and more sporty than its Bavarian rival. The fact that it seems to be a better driver's car is evidenced by many track tests that not only best the 911 but put it in the company of Koeniggseggs and Enzos (as seen in EVO, Car, Automobile, etc). The fact that the company did it in their own way makes the car unique to me, and very untrendy - two things that will probably keep the car in people's (911 owners) immediate memory.

As for the Veyron . . . I've never been a huge fan of the looks, but to each his own. I would argue that in terms of performance/cachet, the Veyron will be forgotten, just like the EB110 was. The problem with the Veyron is that it was and is a number chaser - everything about it was concerned with having the most impressive numbers - 16 cylinders, 4 turbos, 9 radiators, 252 mph, 2.5 to 60, etc. That is obviously impressive, but if you asked most members on this board or most car fans in general which would they choose between a Veyron and a McLaren F1, most would pick the McLaren, because it was engineered in such a unique, personal way, and really wasn't concerned with top numbers. The CGT is the same philosophy, and so was the 959, which is still highly regarded today. The F40 and F50 have stood the test of time, but I doubt the Enzo will, because that car, as well, seemed like a number chaser. The SLR will, undoubtedly, absolutely not only be forgotten, but McLaren will try to send out Men In Black memory eraser devices to anyone who was alive during its terrible and awful production run as an embarassment of a car made by a pre-eminent formula 1 company. Even now, they can't move decent mileaged SLRs because no one wants to pay that much for a heavily modified Mercedes littered with McLaren badges. Did the McLaren F1 ever produce an updated headlight version, a 722 version, a roadster version, or a speedster version, like the abhorrent SLR did? Ask Ron Dennis about the SLR and I bet he'd pretend it never happened like a child out of wedlock.

I'm not saying the Veyron is bad in any way, but I would put my money on it being as remembered as the EB110 - i.e., not very much at all. That seems to be the fate of number chaser cars. I truthfully respect the GTR for reaching its goal of beating the Turbos numbers, and for its modern looking design. Those looks might not hold up (for the same reason as the Gallardos) and more importantly, it'll lose its luster the millisecond the next porsche/corvette comes out with better numbers.

 

Yes, yes, yes. Great post rjmontoya!
I went by the Audi dealership a few days ago and thought about some of the guys comments in this thread towards the R8, of course it's a supercar! The engine visible through the rearwindow, the hunkered down, sleek look, the aggressive front, the exquisite interior and attention to detail. I love it.

 

Oh, lookee here, they let Rick Ko in. There goes the neighborhood. Did you happen to find the pictures of the Gallardos that you claimed to have yet? We were spot on about how long you could afford to keep the GT3.

 

If you think the Veyron looks good, then that would explain everything. Simply a matter of taste. As much as I would love to drive a Veyron due to it's incredible performance, I believe that it is one of the ugliest supercars ever made. Aesthetically, it is a total nightmare and doesn't hold a torch to an R8. But, no matter; I'll enjoy my R8 and you can dislike all you want.