NOMINATIONS: Best Looking 1970s F1 Car [Open 02/05-08/05]

[Liquid]

Rules

Nominate four cars with a photo to match each.
Don't clog up the page with lots and lots of videos; links to videos are fine.
You can change your post and your nominations right up until the closing date.

Provide any supplementary information you wish, but don't give us an 8 page essay.

The top four cars with the most nominations will go through for polling next week.

Eligibility

Cars which competed in World Championship events during the 1970-1979 Formula One seasons.​

Important: Cars which only competed in non-championship races are not eligible.

As far as I am aware, that is the only criterion which may preclude nomination. If something does come up over the course of the thread, a ruling will be made.

If you have any quibbles about your nomination, tag me in your post and I'll get back to you.

Reasoning

If possible, please give some justification or reasoning for your nominations.
You can choose based on livery, body shape or a combination of the two. It's up to you.

---

Nominations close in the evening of SUNDAY 8th May.​

 

[lxmmy]

Lotus 79 Cosworth

Brabham BT44B

Williams FW07

Tyrrell 007

70's the era which was particularly abstract in body variants but only a few can take my fancy. With the nominations of the Lotus and Williams being my favourite in terms of body shape and the Brabham & Tyrrell being based on famous liveries.

Edit: Change of picture.

 

[brocky31]

Firstly I want to nominate the Brabham BT33 with this beautiful color:

Then, I want to nominate the Penske PC4 which have great design

Next: The most beautiful Alfa Romeo F1: the Alfa Romeo 177

At the end, the Lotus 79

 

[Jimlaad43]

Lotus 72

Tyrrell 003

McLaren M23

Renault RS01

 

[Dotini]

1975 Ferrari 312T

1979 Arrows A2

1975/6 Shadow DN5



1971 March 711

For the 1970's F1 cars, we should recall the FIA mandated deformable side structures as of 1973. To some extent, this mandated the looks from that time onwards.



Edit: I'm withdrawing all four of these nominations.

 

[Legro]

The 70s is a strange one. Many absolutely crazy cars that I love just for their craziness, but very few of them happen to be also what I'd call good looking as the aerodynamic experimenting meant that large portion of cars have either more or less funny looking front or some other feature that could have been better aesthetics wise. There are few cars that are better than others though.

Tyrell 006

Although there are few little details, such as the mirrors, which don't really fit the rest car, it has one of the best engine cover/rear spoiler combinations I've seen.

Wolf WR1/WR2/WR3/WR4

Brabham BT44B

Lotus 79

 

[Liquid]

I think the tea tray March is one of the most disgusting looking cars to ever turn a wheel. And this is the same decade that gave us the teapot Ligier, too. The 1970s is a tricky one; as others have pointed out, the drive towards safety coupled with the exploration of aerodynamics gave us some odd looking cars. I'd go out on a limb and say that despite a few nice lookers here and there that the 1970s were the ugliest Formula 1 decade. Either the 70s or the 50s.

 

[Dotini]

I think the tea tray March is one of the most disgusting looking cars to ever turn a wheel. And this is the same decade that gave us the teapot Ligier, too. The 1970s is a tricky one; as others have pointed out, the drive towards safety coupled with the exploration of aerodynamics gave us some odd looking cars. I'd go out on a limb and say that despite a few nice lookers here and there that the 1970s were the ugliest Formula 1 decade. Either the 70s or the 50s.

The question of what is "good-looking" arises. What does that really mean? Is it entirely subjective, or are there some deep-running themes or truths than can supply a partially objective basis that a thing is good-looking?

There might be some reliable axioms to aid us in the judgement of what is good looking about a racing car. One of these might be that "form follows function". To me this implies at least two things:

1) The form of the racing car ought to support and reflect its functionality and little to nothing about the car should be cosmetic or non-functional.

2) The car should function effectively and efficiently. It a car should be unreliable, slow or in some way flawed, that means it is less functional and ipso facto less good-looking. Corollary is the saying that if the car is a winner, it automatically looks better. A racing car is not a static object, it is dynamic.

Now I realize that the thread OP attempts to disconnect performance from appearance, to judge the cars solely on their looks and not their speed or success. But I'm suggesting that can and should never be entirely possible. The car that performs well and looks good at speed in competition must be considered better looking than the otherwise similar car that can't get off the starting grid and complete a competitive lap.

 

[Roger the Horse]

Brabham BT44B

Arrows A2

Wolf WR1

Tyrrell P34

 

[Dotini]

In the 70's, commercialized liveries have set in and started to make a big difference on how we perceive "good-looking". The Brabham BT44 is enhanced by its livery, as are the Lotus 72 and Lotus 79.

So shape, livery, functionality, effectiveness and efficiency all play into "good-looking", whether overtly or subconsciously.

 

[lxmmy]

1971 March 711

It looks like they attached a surf board on to that.

 

[Dotini]

It looks like they attached a surf board on to that.

It does! In light of my own remarks about what ought to be good-looking, I'm canceling my nomination for the March 711. Designed by Costin, there is a lot about the shape that was antedeluvian, ineffective and inefficient.

 

[Panoz]

Brabham BT44B

Lotus 79

Shadow DN5

Tyrrell 006

 

[Wiegert]

With the BT44B finding a spot in most of the nominations so far (personally I think it's an easy winner for this decade), I'm tempted to nominate four other contenders to spice up the selection and perhaps give something that's already been nominated a bit of a boost, as well as throw in a new contender:

Brabham BT46 (Not the "B" fan variant)

Penske PC4

Wolf WR1-4

Lotus 72E

 

[Dotini]

IMO the seventies divide into 3 parts, or technical/appearance eras:
1) Prior to '73 when the deformable structure rules kick in
2) Prior to '78 when the ground effect sidepod era took hold
3) Ground effect cars from '78-'79

The heart of the seventies was dominated by two legendary designs, the M23 McLaren and the Ferrari 312T.

The M23 was probably the best designed and built car of the seventies up until the Williams FW07. I'd like to see this car in its best livery (Yardley?), and I'd call it the best car of the decade by a mile.

From a design and construction point of view, the Lotus 72 was a POS and so was the 312T. Its frame was small diameter square steel tubes with aluminum panels pop riveted on. Garbage design suitable for a go-kart trailer. It killed Villeneuve.

I withdraw my earlier nomination of the 312T.

 

[FutureF1]

I don't have 3 others right now but this has got to be one of the most beautiful cars of all time(and I'm not a big fan of classic F1 cars)

McLaren M14A:

 

[Dotini]

McLaren M23, here in Yardley livery, IMO technically the most soundly designed and constructed car of the seventies prior to the FW07. This car pioneered the centrally located fuel cell, an important safety improvement. Many drivers won races in the M23. If I was to pick a car from the seventies to race for pleasure, this would be the one.

• 
• 
  Williams FW07, 1979
  
  
  

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

BT46B I think the technology to outdo ground effects was a great idea, so much so that false claims of debris being tossed at competitors to get it banned came about.

JS11 Did what Lotus did that year but better, basically took the ground effects to better use. However, there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. And while downforce in the armfuls for race cars on GP tracks is a great thing, when it's too much too soon it becomes a negative. And that's why this car didn't win more of what it should, several suspension and tire failures plagued the car especially in the 1980 season. The car went on from 79 to 80 with updates

best 70s car Ensign N179 Just like the other picks (though not so much this was a joke more so) is the 70s showed the real pinnacle I think of aero and mechanical grips being meshed together. Cars became more wing like and smooth surface areas with this car doing it so much so it eliminated the side pods or what would be the openings of them and place the ducting/cooling on the front of the car.

All in all I picked what I did because they (beside the last) look great and different for the time period to those most people would take notice in. Like the Williams or Matra or Ferrari or McLarens of the day.

 

[Liquid]

Lotus 49C

I love the triple slat rear wing.

Arrows A2

 

[DK]

Hesketh 308

Tyrrell P34

Ferrari 312T2

Lotus 79

 

[Liquid]

2) The car should function effectively and efficiently. It a car should be unreliable, slow or in some way flawed, that means it is less functional and ipso facto less good-looking. Corollary is the saying that if the car is a winner, it automatically looks better. A racing car is not a static object, it is dynamic.

I disagree with the notion that a good-looking car is a successful car or vice versa. Not wanting to give away my future nominations for the decades to come but some of my favourite Formula 1 cars in history have been midfield runners, also-rans and cars which never won races.

It's definitely true that a successful car leaves a more lasting imprint. A Marlboro McLaren is going to get more likes than a Fondmetal Minardi; more people have heard of the Marlboro McLaren and more posters and die-cast models of Marlboro McLarens have been sold because it won races and made the headlines. But that doesn't make it better looking. It does make it more popular but not necessarily better looking in the eyes of, for want of a better word, 'real' fans who appreciate cars up and down the grid.

A lot of ugly cars have been failures but ugly cars have been winners or front-runners; Cooper T51 (1959), Lotus 72 (1970, 1972) Ferrari 312T5/T5 (1979, 1980), Benetton B190 (1990), Ferrari F310 (1996, 1997) and pretty much all cars since the step noses and penis noses.

On the contrary one of the most heralded cars of all time is the distinctly midfield Jordan 191. I anticipate that to be the one of, if not the, most nominated cars of the 1990s. And even looking at this thread shows that the unsuccessful, only-used-for-half-as-season Arrows A2 is garnering some love as well.

I suppose livery comes into it too. An iconic livery becomes iconic from being associated with a successful car and people will say a car is pretty simply for the livery alone.

Your point about a racing car being dynamic and not static is an interesting one though. Would the McLaren MP4/10 (a horrible, horrible machine) be considered so bad and ugly if it was a winner?

 

[Nessy]

1976 Brabham BT45

1977 Brabham BT45b

1977 Ferrari 312 T2

1976 Tyrrell P34/2

All of the above, for aesthetic reasons.

 

[Ryk]

Kojima Engineering KE007

1976 - Fuji - Hunt took the title in monsoon rain, Lauda withdrew early on, and what is that, Masahiro Hasemi sets the fastest lap in the race in his only attempt in a F1 race with this local hoopty car with second rate Dunlop tyres. Lotus, Ferrari, Brabham, McLaren... all slower.

Matra MS120D
3 Litre Matra V12 - If only you could hear the sound of it. Setting Pole and fastest lap at the beautiful Clermont-Ferrand in the hands of "Best driver never to win a (Championship) Grand Prix" - Chris Amon

------------------

Couple of different cars. But I love the Gordon Murray Brabham cars that have already been thrust into the spotlight.

 

[brocky31]

some say they have attributed the fastest lap to Hasemi only because he was a local pilot and the true best lap was the work of Lauda

 

[lxmmy]

Next: The most beautiful Alfa Romeo F1: the Alfa Romeo 177

I would have to give that award to the 159. But in my opinion the 177 is actually one of the ugliest Alfa Romeo's and if not is the ugliest.

 

[Ryk]

BRM P160 - Tony Southgate 1971
Held the record for the winner of the fastest ever Grand Prix for donkeys years (30+ years) and was one of the closest races ever at Monza in a blanket finish. Sleek swooping chassis Big fuel tanks and a Nice big V12 BRM engine - just the job!

 

[Dotini]

I disagree with the notion that a good-looking car is a successful car or vice versa.

Your point about a racing car being dynamic and not static is an interesting one though. Would the McLaren MP4/10 (a horrible, horrible machine) be considered so bad and ugly if it was a winner?

That's not the way I put it, but okay, disagreement is what makes a horse (or car) race.

That MP4/10 is bad, alright. But according to the theory, it would indeed look better if it had been a winner.

 

[Dolph Drago]

I remember watching a documentary (I think it was 'The Quick and the Dead') some years ago and becoming fascinated with older Formula 1 stuff. I initially laughed at the ridiculously tall air scoops from '74-'75 when I first saw them in that film. Now I have grown to love them. Anywho, I think I'm going to go with these picks:

Lotus 72

Brabham BT44B

Tyrrell 006

Tyrrell P34 (many may find it odd, but I love the craziness of it)

Just missed the cut:
Shadow DN5 (dat air scoop, especially with the 'Murican flag )
Lotus 79 (has a more '80's look to it)

 

[UnkaD]

Alfa Romeo 177

Renault RS10

Ferrari 312T4

Lotus 79

Overall, I just love the shape to these cars. The combination of low slung and wide flat bottoms with the increase of front tire size made for a very balanced and sleek look, making the machines at the end of the decade my favorite.

 

[-Fred-]

You have the wrong 312T4, it doesn't have the right number on it. Scheckter might have won a WC with it, but Gilles brought it to life. It's not quite as pretty as the Lotus 79, yet arguably, it has a presence that just makes it timeless I feel. And let's be honest, it looks way better sideways. It looks dangerous, like a proper F1 should. Look at how wide, how low it is... those finned sidepods, reminding us of 1950s Americana. One of my favorite racecars ever.