Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..gavnwend said..
The Mazda Roadpacer built by GMH.& yes powered by a rotary engine .rare as hens teeth now.
Are you sure they qualified as ugly? It doesn't look that way to me. Its just a HQ.
Oh yes it's ugly, well they were when they first came out, especially following the HG, but we had to buy them, had no choice if you were a holden fan. Then the looks grew on us. But it took a while.
Select to expand quoteAdriano said..
This is fun.
I present Exhibit Y.
Datsun 120 "why" did I buy it
Not really ugly though. An x girlfriend had one, visited the old "line" drives many times in it "Paradise By the dashboard lights"
Select to expand quoteAdriano said..
Methinks love blinded you to its ugliness! 
The girl or the car
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said...gavnwend said..
The Mazda Roadpacer built by GMH.& yes powered by a rotary engine .rare as hens teeth now.
They were sold to Mazda & the Japanese denzo mechanics plonked a 1.3 litre
rotary in it they battled to get up hills .
Are you sure they qualified as ugly? It doesn't look that way to me. Its just a HQ.
The bit I read was that the rotary was at least equivalent to the 202 of the time. Even though some people call it a 1.3, the 13B was/is really more like 2.6 litres equivalent, and can rev a whole lot further than a 202.
I would be surprised if it were slow.
It a HJ, not HQ, would have been interesting to have driven one.
Select to expand quoteRex said..
FormulaNova said...
gavnwend said..
The Mazda Roadpacer built by GMH.& yes powered by a rotary engine .rare as hens teeth now.
They were sold to Mazda & the Japanese denzo mechanics plonked a 1.3 litre
rotary in it they battled to get up hills .
Are you sure they qualified as ugly? It doesn't look that way to me. Its just a HQ.
The bit I read was that the rotary was at least equivalent to the 202 of the time. Even though some people call it a 1.3, the 13B was/is really more like 2.6 litres equivalent, and can rev a whole lot further than a 202.
I would be surprised if it were slow.
It a HJ, not HQ, would have been interesting to have driven one.
Well technically, isn't it a Mazda Roadpacer?
I don't know. HQ? HJ? What did they change? I never drove one. I just remember an uncle had a statesman 'de ville' version of either a HQ or HJ. Did they have different variant names as well, similar to the commodore versus statesmans?
Select to expand quoteDid they have different variant names as well, similar to the commodore versus statesmans?
Belmont [base model]
Kingswood [more or less "regular family car" spec.]
Premier [a bit more upmarket]
Statesman [the bosses car]
Basically any 4 door sedan is an ugly car.
The "sedan" shape doesn't make any sense to me.
What is it for really ? From the old days when ppl had to keep the gerry cans in the boots during the oil crisises
Just do either hatch or s/wagon FFS
Select to expand quotesotired said..Rex said..
FormulaNova said...
gavnwend said..
The Mazda Roadpacer built by GMH.& yes powered by a rotary engine .rare as hens teeth now.
They were sold to Mazda & the Japanese denzo mechanics plonked a 1.3 litre
rotary in it they battled to get up hills .
Are you sure they qualified as ugly? It doesn't look that way to me. Its just a HQ.
The bit I read was that the rotary was at least equivalent to the 202 of the time. Even though some people call it a 1.3, the 13B was/is really more like 2.6 litres equivalent, and can rev a whole lot further than a 202.
I would be surprised if it were slow.
It a HJ, not HQ, would have been interesting to have driven one.
Well technically, isn't it a Mazda Roadpacer?
I don't know. HQ? HJ? What did they change? I never drove one. I just remember an uncle had a statesman 'de ville' version of either a HQ or HJ. Did they have different variant names as well, similar to the commodore versus statesmans?
The HQ while the same body outline had a different front end, rear end, and dash. The HJ/HX/HZ where almost identical other than grill changes and a bit of cosmetics. The Statesman had a different body that used many of the panels and parts of the parallel model sedan. Monaro and SS were the other varients to ad to sn's list above.
Select to expand quotedmitri said..
Just do either hatch or s/wagon FFS
Oh no! That is so utilitarian as are sedans.
I prefer Saloon cars like Fairmonts.
Select to expand quotecisco said..dmitri said..
Just do either hatch or s/wagon FFS
Oh no! That is so utilitarian as are sedans.
I prefer Saloon cars like Fairmonts.
Select to expand quotedmitri said..cisco said..dmitri said..
Just do either hatch or s/wagon FFS
Oh no! That is so utilitarian as are sedans.
I prefer Saloon cars like Fairmonts.
The wagons are actually on the longer Fairlane floor pan.
For a hatch I really go for the MG B GT.
My dad had one of these, 1950's English Citroen. It was 15 years old when he had it and it really stood out. Good or bad,I'm still not sure.
Here's another car my dad owned. Now you might think he collected classic cars but back then in 1955 the car which was a 1935 Morris 8 was just a 20year old car and cheap.
Select to expand quoterockmagnet said..
My dad had one of these, 1950's English Citroen. It was 15 years old when he had it and it really stood out. Good or bad,I'm still not sure.
Revolutionary car, the Traction Avant. Beautiful too. Whoever posted all the iconic cars of the previous century such as the beetle and the ds in the ugly cars discussion shouldn't ever consider a career in industrial design.
Select to expand quoted1 said..
rockmagnet said..
My dad had one of these, 1950's English Citroen. It was 15 years old when he had it and it really stood out. Good or bad,I'm still not sure.
Revolutionary car, the Traction Avant. Beautiful too. Whoever posted all the iconic cars of the previous century such as the beetle and the ds in the ugly cars discussion shouldn't ever consider a career in industrial design.
Sorry, just thought I would give a dying post new life with a twist with cars from a different generation "Cars my dad owned" . Lets face it , most of them were hideous .
I owned a VW Beetle and drove them as a work vehicle in the 70's and let me tell you they were bloody terrible. They were gutless and slid out in the wet due to the rear engine. They leaked and the rain got in , the floorboards rusted and they were just terrible to drive at speed. So I think calling one of the worst cars I ever drove an Iconic car is pushing it. (which I often did.) 
Select to expand quoterockmagnet said..
I owned a VW Beetle and drove them as a work vehicle in the 70's and let me tell you they were bloody terrible. They were gutless and slid out in the wet due to the rear engine. They leaked and the rain got in , the floorboards rusted and they were just terrible to drive at speed. So I think calling one of the worst cars I ever drove an Iconic car is pushing it. (which I often did.)
You forgot the wipers (vacuum) stop when you put your foot down and yes the foot was down lots, and the 6v lights were hopeless, all great on a rainy night
Select to expand quoteAdriano said..
This is fun.
I present Exhibit Y.
first car ........crap
Select to expand quotefiriebob said..rockmagnet said..
I owned a VW Beetle and drove them as a work vehicle in the 70's and let me tell you they were bloody terrible. They were gutless and slid out in the wet due to the rear engine. They leaked and the rain got in , the floorboards rusted and they were just terrible to drive at speed. So I think calling one of the worst cars I ever drove an Iconic car is pushing it. (which I often did.)
You forgot the wipers (vacuum) stop when you put your foot down and yes the foot was down lots, and the 6v lights were hopeless, all great on a rainy night
That and the battery under the rear seats... that catches fire when the seat springs short circuit the battery. My sisters car died this way.
My dad 1st car Auto Union that became AUDI that is the DKW 100s
............ 1000cc 2 stroke the smell in the car was challenging!
When I was 17, my dad took me for a drive out to meet an old farmer who had one of these in his shed just sitting there with no rust & low kms for just $1k:
I thought it was ugly & uncool (and couldn't really fit in it at 6'3"), so went with a much smarter/cooler option...
Some things you can't take back, although 'The Val' was a good old thirsty beast.
This is the ugly car thread isn't it? Look-away ugly this one. Two of them waiting opposite at the lights on the way to Bunnings. Dealer deliveries, still had protective glad wrap on them.
Chubby cheeked dealer closing a deal on a mobile phone. Those diagonal lights?? Look-away bright, then you have to look back, like a moth, way too bright. You drive a sports car to be looked at, why be talking on a mobile phone? And why are they diagonal? What's the purpose of them???
They are DRL's Daytime Running Lamps. Becoming mandatory equiptment, many car fleets will not purchase cars withou DRL's, OH&S stuff. So your car can be seen at distance by oncoming vehicles, LED's so they are long lasting and don't drain much power impacting fuel economy.
Select to expand quotemr love said..
They are DRL's Daytime Running Lamps. Becoming mandatory equiptment, many car fleets will not purchase cars withou DRL's, OH&S stuff. So your car can be seen at distance by oncoming vehicles, LED's so they are long lasting and don't drain much power impacting fuel economy.
The problem with even more flashing lights and signs and reflectors and things, is that people just end up ignoring them. We have that issue here, with lights, road markings and signs ****ing everywhere... all being duly ignored.
And the new Mazda Roadster looks dog****.
Not the ugliest ever but imo its up there. I know people love it because of its history but it doesn't stop it being ugly....
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..mr love said..
They are DRL's Daytime Running Lamps. Becoming mandatory equiptment, many car fleets will not purchase cars withou DRL's, OH&S stuff. So your car can be seen at distance by oncoming vehicles, LED's so they are long lasting and don't drain much power impacting fuel economy.
The problem with even more flashing lights and signs and reflectors and things, is that people just end up ignoring them. We have that issue here, with lights, road markings and signs ****ing everywhere... all being duly ignored.
And the new Mazda Roadster looks dog****.
Yep. When they have the 'safety light/message display' on the F6 freeway telling you that you can check out a website, you have to admit that they have missed the point. They are meant to be alerting you to dangerous conditions, not to give you useless information which is diverting your attention away from driving. The first time I saw this I thought there must be some poor guy that had the job of making the signs 'meaningful' even when there was nothing to say.
Day time running lights suck. They all look like the drivers are w@nkers, trying to stand out. The fact they always seemed to appear on prestige cars made me think this. I am probably wrong, but that's what I think.
It makes sense to run DRL in low light conditions, but bright daylight doesn't really require them. Of course, DRLs make no difference at all in bumper to bumper traffic when everyone is sitting 1m from each other... you can't see them, and the drivers are going to run up the back of each other regardless of how bright the lights are.
