Styling Does Matter

If a particular car is superb at some facet of performance it will usually attract a following, but the size of that following will be affected by how good (or bad) the car looks.

Here's an example that based on the facts of it's creation should/could have been much more than it was.

In the late 1960s, two employees of Lotus Cars decided to create their own car and they had the precedent of the Lotus Elite to show them the way - a light weight fiberglass chassis/body with a small engine that performed above it's class.  The Elite was a beautifully styled car that still draws admiration today.

They crafted a car using a Sport Imp engine (much of which owed inspiration from the Coventry Climax SOHC engines used in the Elite).  They used Imp underpinnings for suspension and the resulting car had some success in small bore rally classes.

I think that the reason they aren't more familiar to us (other than the fact that they were a home market British model) was, IMHO, the styling, which seems bizarre, although I am sure it has its fans.

Car from which inspiration came:

What they (the company was called Clan and the model was called the Crusader):

Semi Cool.  Remove the headlights and it looks sorta like a dirt late model. 

See also: Lotus Seven Series IV. When Caterham bought the rights to the car in...1973?...they reverted to the styling of the Series III because, well...

I want a Clan Crusader because beating people on track with a weird little car has great appeal to me.

Agree - for me the best Lotus 7 started with the series 2 used in The Prisoner.  A friend used to vintage race with me in an early 7 powered by a BMC 948 cc engine.  He'd hit around 60 mph and it was like someone had grabbed his car and pulled it backward as I pulled away in my MG.  Told him that if he made cut-outs in the back of his front fenders (and screened them with hardware cloth so his helmet didn't turn into a gravel target ) he'd increase his acceleration at higher speeds drastically.

They were brilliant giant killers in solo events.

Tom1200 said:

I want a Clan Crusader because beating people on track with a weird little car as great appeal to me.

I wanted one for precisely that reason, too. That, and they're a surprisingly competent little beast.

It looks like a bad beetle-based kit car.  I'd still drive it.

DeadSkunk (Warren) said:

Tom1200 said:

I want a Clan Crusader because beating people on track with a weird little car as great appeal to me.

I wanted one for precisely that reason, too. That, and they're a surprisingly competent little beast.

I read about them in British magazines, probably 25 years ago and have always wanted one.

That motherberkeleyer is HIDEOUS. ive come out of blackout drunks next to way better looking things.....

Pretty sure that im in the minority though. Sometimes ugly looks good (like 90s billet wheels, vw thing), and sometimes ugly is just ugly (this, that later lotus 7ish thing, my brothers ex wife). 

In reply to Dusterbd13-michael (Forum Supporter) :

The front 3/4 view with the bugeyes is the worst angle. Other angles are better and so is the version with drop down headlights

As far as Imp powered cars go, I'd take a Ginetta G15 over a Clan Crusader.  I know the topic was on a FRP (or GRP) monocoque chassis cars, but the Clan is just a bit to odd looking for me.  

In reply to Tom1200 :

"Cars and Car Conversions" was my favourite for a long while. I still get 3 or 4 British magazines monthly.

In reply to DeadSkunk (Warren) :

Much better with the lights down. But it looks like a X19 and a 300zx had a baby. I like odd though, so I'd def. drive one!

I'll fling that puppy into corners like it was a 8 lb bowling ball!!

In reply to RoddyMac17 :

I'm partial to the G4 myself.

Over the years the car got different owners and the styling evolved 

these were called the clover and used Alfa Romeo flat 4 engines

a mini based one called the McCoy was made aswell 

In reply to MotorsportsGordon :

The top 2 look like someone with a Fiero had really wanted a C4

Looks better with the drop down headlights but more like a TR7, which is not necessarily a good thing.

Headlights are difficult for a designer. If you want to get away from the bulbous look you either have to have them fold into the body or somehow conceal them. I've owned both.

I liked the concealed look:

and here is another option - clear covers  (both cars are MGAs)

Only problem with the clear covers is that I recall how the Ferrari Daytonas were made to look when Federalized for the US, going from this:

to this:

But I guess it could have been worse:

In reply to wspohn :

Good point - that last one should have been a convertible 

...get it??

In reply to DeadSkunk (Warren) :

I used to drive 1000km round trip every month in my X1/9 to pick up my copy of CCC.

In reply to Sidewayze :

Care to share that story? 

In reply to wspohn :

I thought the euro Daytona had the under glass headlights and the US had the hideaways.

Rons said:

In reply to wspohn :

I thought the euro Daytona had the under glass headlights and the US had the hideaways.

Good question! perhaps it was that way as I think the XKE, which had glass covers on early cars, was made to lose those later on and it may have been North American regs that did that.

OTOH, the Lamborghini Islero always had flip ups - they made them for only two years and the first year had non-US compliant hard edges switches and such  while the second year had rocker switches like the British cars went to, but both had flip up lights.  So maybe the flip ups were approved and the glass covered weren't. Thanks for pointing that out.