Post cars that were ahead of it's time in terms of styling.

File: citroen-c6-09[1].jpg (498KB, 2400x1597px) Image search: [Google]

498KB, 2400x1597px

>>17050621

>>17049391
Let me guess, you just bought a shitty fucking Laguna?

File: 546b4c57edad2_-_pontiacaztekpr-0oj4pn-lg.jpg (127KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1280x720px

Install LED lights and ridiculous 21" wheels and you have a 2017 car made in 2001

>>17050689
Also add a huge angry fishmouth grille and make the lines on the side a bit more random.

File: 2013_Subaru_XV_Crosstrek_26.jpg (124KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 640x480px

>>17050689

I'm still sad that nobody bought the Aztek, yet when Subaru made the exact same fucking car years and years later everyone's buying it.

>>17050673
No I own one since 2003

File: AUDI-A2-27_27.jpg (188KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1600x1200px

>>17049391
1999 Audi A2
The rector of my school drove one and they were so uncool but I keep seeing them on the road today and getting tempted.

>>17049391
Anything Chris Bangle designed.

>>17050769
DESU I think a lot of people buy that car for the rims. Car's boring as fuck, but those wheels are sex.

>>17050628
Everything's good til you get to the B-pillar then holy shit it all goes to hell.

>>17050769

oh it's YOU again.

how many fucking times do we have to tell you that the only bit kind of similar to the az is the fucking color?

there's literally nothing else that matches.

File: 1920px-2008-2010_BMW_120i_%28E88%29_convertible_%282011-11-08%29_01.jpg (316KB, 1920x874px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 1920x874px

>>17052118
Gonna have to agree. Just about every fucking new car these days has flame surfacing.

>>17050769
Looks nothing alike. Do colors make you think all things look the same?

File: X0HQxgp.jpg (85KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1920x1200px

ur a fagget if you disagree

>>17050769
the aztek looks like a deformed tumor riddled FAT version of a car that looks mildly similar. you don't know what you are talking about

>>17052926
>started design in 1985!
>released in 1989
>all wheel steering
>twin turbo 6cyl
>amazing interior
>full of creature comforts that wouldn't come standard for almost 15 years
>electronic suspension
>first fully computer (CAD) designed car
For sure. Hate it all you want, it was ahead of it's time.

>>17050769
>The same car.
The only thing in common is the color, anon.

File: a9f3be07e0d35f7b158e0e390ec48ced.jpg (94KB, 1200x630px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1200x630px

>>17049391
Lol faggot that is an example of the french dark period. Ugly and shit

pic related is a car you forget is from 2003.

File: 1390409166175.jpg (77KB, 625x469px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 625x469px

>>17052926
Nope, that's clearly a late 80's early 90's design, there's nothing ahead of its time there.

>>17050689
really though. average cars look so bad today.

>>17051380
I have heard it's very light and tend to roll over

File: 1200px-GT40_at_Goodwood.jpg (178KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1200x900px

The GT40. Not the GT, since it's just a "remaster" of this beauty.

>>17053564
I never said anything about reliability. I think the laguna looks less dated thay the 350z. Not even shitposting.

>>17053568
I think you're a bit confused

File: Mitsubishi%203000GT%20(4)[1].jpg (56KB, 730x547px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 730x547px

>>17052926

yo

File: ford-focus-mk1-496x341-37b4c25df.jpg (46KB, 496x341px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 496x341px

>>17049391
fucking Focus. This thing looked absolutely crazy when it came out, and even today it still doesn't look like it has almost twenty years