Separated at birth?
They both have the same problem: a very poorly-proportioned and executed rear end.
That Shelby GTR concept does not do the old Daytona coupe any justice whatsoever. Poor attempt IMO.
The Firepower is better, but the mouth on the front doesn't work for me, and the tail end, due to the styling, looks too wide in proportion to the length of the car. The interior was also nothing new.
Is it just me, or are concept cars getting plainer and plainer in appearance? that GTR concept looks like it was penned in mere minutes.
That Shelby GTR concept does not do the old Daytona coupe any justice whatsoever. Poor attempt IMO.
The Firepower is better, but the mouth on the front doesn't work for me, and the tail end, due to the styling, looks too wide in proportion to the length of the car. The interior was also nothing new.
Is it just me, or are concept cars getting plainer and plainer in appearance? that GTR concept looks like it was penned in mere minutes.
Originally Posted by Slamnasty,Jan 7 2005, 01:35 PM
They both have the same problem: a very poorly-proportioned and executed rear end.
That Shelby GTR concept does not do the old Daytona coupe any justice whatsoever. Poor attempt IMO.
That Shelby GTR concept does not do the old Daytona coupe any justice whatsoever. Poor attempt IMO.


Ferrari GTO 62, Shelby Coupe 64
I agree the Firepower! (the "!" is actually part of the name, how gh3y) is a dead ringer for the GR-1 and both are way too looooong in the nose. The did do a good job incorporating the Chrysler styling cues into the design, but the proportions are a bloody murder.
I agree the Firepower! (the "!" is actually part of the name, how gh3y) is a dead ringer for the GR-1 and both are way too looooong in the nose. The did do a good job incorporating the Chrysler styling cues into the design, but the proportions are a bloody murder.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post





