Help me identify a FUGLY car.

I also just found this build thread of a really cool "Avanti GT" project...apparently based on a plan in the 80s that never materialized, by the owners of the Avanti rights at the time, to build a 2-seat version.

https://www.pro-touring.com/threads/123630-Avanti-GT-Tribute

ebonyandivory said:

Avanti’s are downright stunning when you compare them to Amphicars. 

So there’s that...

I give amphicars a pass because they also try to be boats.

T.J. said:

Avanti fits the clues. No grille. Two square headlights. American. Malaise era. Fastbackish. 

1960's were malaise era?

Loewy was a totally badass designer.  That said the XK 140 thing is pretty hideous.  Big fan of the  Coke bottle though

The 1960's, at least from an automotive perspective, were anything but a "malaise" in the USA.  Looking only at Chevrolet, all they could do was produce styling knock-outs that predicted how cars in other countries would look for the next 15 years after their initial designs went to market.

And then you see the various Olds Toronado's posted to this thread.  I had forgotten how weird those cars got to be.  The original is still wonderful looking (to my eyes at least) but the mid-70's versions were insane.

In reply to Toebra :

To be fair, he got a very quick glance at it and only had a few vague details due to that fact. I’m sure he doesn’t actually think the 60’s was the Malaise Era.

When I saw "Fugly" used, I was expecting Virgil Exner era Chryslers.

I like Avantis. Also, and I realize this is a minority opinion, I don't think the malaise era was all that bad for design. Sure, there are MORE bad designs than in preceding or succeeding eras, but by and large I think most of the ugly can be fixed with a bumper tuck, shadow lining, and more traditional color schemes. For my eye, the worst era  for auto design was mid '90s where everything just looked like an amorphous blob. Oh, and now, where everything looks like a rolling scalene trapezoid. 

ShawnG said:

Pontiac Aero Coupe?

Montiac?

ShawnG said:

When I saw "Fugly" used, I was expecting Virgil Exner era Chryslers.

Exner Mopars didn't get weird until the 60's.  I think the '55 Imperial or 300, for instance, are beautiful cars.   Meanwhile, the '61 Imperial...

In reply to pres589 (djronnebaum) :

Agreed, he kinda went off the rails at the end.

pres589 (djronnebaum) said:

ShawnG said:

When I saw "Fugly" used, I was expecting Virgil Exner era Chryslers.

Exner Mopars didn't get weird until the 60's.  I think the '55 Imperial or 300, for instance, are beautiful cars.   Meanwhile, the '61 Imperial...

And Exner wasn't 100% to blame. He was a scapegoat. During the design process for the 1962 cars Chrysler president William Newberg overheard GM folks at a club one night talking about a "new small car" and thought they meant they were downsizing their cars. Chrysler was in the process of investigating Chairman of the Board "Tex" Colbert out for owning a lot of stocks in companies that supplied parts (possibly a hatchet job by Newberg) so in the chaos nobody questioned the rumor he had overheard or suggested trying to confirm this rumor when he told the Styling Department to take all the new car designs that were finished and shrink them down or else the big ChryCo cars would look outdated compared to the supposed downsized Impala. Also, because it was a crash course on a budget, a lot of stuff got changed and cheapened and Exner had had a heart attack and was out of the studio for a while, so a lot of people were filling in for him and putting their own takes on stuff and nobody had been placed in charge of the Styling Department in the interim because Chrysler was trying to keep that on the downlow, resulting in a complete lack of oversight. The downsized Mopars came out and bombed, and then it turned out that GM wasn't talking about downsizing their cars, but introducing a new compact (the Chevy II). Chrysler needed a scapegoat, and Tex Colbert had alread been fired before they came out, so Exner got the blame and was let go.

ebonyandivory said:

In reply to Toebra :

To be fair, he got a very quick glance at it and only had a few vague details due to that fact. I’m sure he doesn’t actually think the 60’s was the Malaise Era.

That, and the Avanti is pretty much universally regarded as far ahead of its time with respect to styling.

In reply to b13990 :

Fun Fact. King Richard helped design the front end.

Toebra said:

ebonyandivory said:

In reply to Toebra :

To be fair, he got a very quick glance at it and only had a few vague details due to that fact. I’m sure he doesn’t actually think the 60’s was the Malaise Era.

That, and the Avanti is pretty much universally regarded as far ahead of its time with respect to styling.

Yet this product, from the same company looks 10 years OLDER than it is:

1960 Lark:

In reply to chada75 :

Yeah, I probably shouldn't trash that Pontiac Aerothingy. Clearly it was designed for a very specific purpose and then homologated.

ebonyandivory said:

In reply to Toebra :

To be fair, he got a very quick glance at it and only had a few vague details due to that fact. I’m sure he doesn’t actually think the 60’s was the Malaise Era.

 Yeah, I know malaise era cars. And you are correct, only a brief look at it while driving past it at a gas station. 

I was, however, shocked to learn it was made up  to 2006 though. 

_ said:

I was, however, shocked to learn it was made up  to 2006 though. 

That's a complicated story...

Wow.  I could never see the Avanti being called "Fugly."  I always thought they looked really cool.  Maybe not beautiful like a Jaguar E-type, but not ugly.

In reply to _ :

Avanti II does not equal Studebaker Avanti.

I don't think the Lark is a Loewy design.  The Hawk is, if I recall correctly, another sharp looking car, though appearance is a pretty subjective metric.  

In reply to Toebra :

It's not, the Lark was an economy model they brought in when the company was in the toilet.

So basically a Lark is a 1960 version of Chrysler K car

I am on my 52nd orbit of the sun. For about 47 orbits I have desired an early Avanti and a Hawk or Eagle model Studebaker. So far the only Studebaker part that I own is a Lark Wagon bench seat 

Toebra said:

I don't think the Lark is a Loewy design.  The Hawk is, if I recall correctly, another sharp looking car, though appearance is a pretty subjective metric.  

I was never a big fan of the Hawk. The styling is a little too busy up front. Although I never realized until now, how European it looks. I much preferred the earlier cleaner Commander look.

And the bullet-nose Studes were always awesome just for how outrageous they were

Poor Studebaker, they really did make some cool stuff.