What is the car equivalent to this?

File: freightlinerinspirationtruck-534.jpg (80KB, 770x433px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 770x433px

>>15856573

>>15856573
What do you mean by "equivalent" though?
Stealth? Price? Design?

>>15856593
This but black

>>15856576
This. Lamborghini has been trying to make their cars look like stealth planes for over a decade now.

>>15856814
yeah

>>15856860
Their theme is "bull" and they be making cars that looks like snakes and planes.

>>15856573
Ford Fiesta with 1.0L EcoBoost

>>15856573

did they model that after Batman's Boomerang?

>>15856814
>that windows
>that 10 square meter piece of body panel at the rear, there would fit another wheel above the rear wheel and the window
is that a shoop? I mean, it's literally one of the most ugliest cars I've ever seen, it's close to the original Multipla

>>15856573
Expensive, slow, can't attack in daylight if the enemy still has an air force or it will get shot down?

Fighters are high performance. Bombers haul explosives and try not to die.

>>15856951
>boomerang
>not batarang
Get the fuck out

>>15856576
Thats more wobblin goblin not spirit

>>15856593
More like this cause bomber

>>15856576
this

>>15857022
lmao

>>15856958
It sucks not to be an american and not know what stealth plane means

Much like a b2 It doesnt look like much except a sleek machine but fuck with it and you will feel the wrath of god.

>>15857022
Uncanny valley as fuck

>>15857024
yeah but its horrendously ugly so youll still look like a faggot

I don't know of any car that costs billions.

>>15857024
Of course I know what stealth planes are stupid American, I even work for Northrop Grumman
The B2 is pretty, but the cts is ugly as sin and objectively does not look sleek

>>15857038
Yeah and the b2 looks like a manta ray went potato your point being?

>>15857070
the B2 is a plane with a purpose in its design no one looks like a faggot in it

the Cadillac is just plain ugly

>>15857067
how do you work for them when you are too stupid to realize the difference between subjective and objective?

File: img_6833.jpg (67KB, 1024x683px)

67KB, 1024x683px

>>15857024
....fuck with a slow defenseless bomber thats made for insersion and tactical nuclear deployment cause it looks bad ass it must be bad ass? Naw.

Now this on the other hand...

File: 0608phr_22_z-1977_pontiac_trans_am-front_quarter.jpg (160KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 640x480px

Or a Saab probably.

>>15857081
Objectively is exactly the word I meant to write.
Everyone who thinks the CTS looks sleek is wrong. Period.

>>15857083
Everyone knows bombers are useless and basically defenseless in a dogfight. Are you still going to take aim at one from the ground with your stinger, jamal?

>>15857095
>everyone

maybe if you have the dissenting opinion then you are objectively wrong on this subjective matter

>>15857083
>insersion

Nice try, ahmed

>>15857102
That uhhh. I was just comparing to something i thought was better in regards to bombers. Not which one is easier to shoot down but aight.

>>15857119
Spelling error. I admit the-feet

>>15857172
why did you reply to me and not the op, then?