I'm so sorry.......







I don't mind the front of the car, but the back makes me wanna



Just wondering if anyone else thinks the same? I saw 3 on the road today and can't get over the shape of the rear.



+ I had a good look at one on the weekend (new car show) and can't help but think whoever sits in the back is going to get cooked with all that glass on a hot day!

 

^I thought I was alone.



To me this fits nicely into the same category as the

and the





You would think that the automotive industry has learned a lesson or two by now... I think something is wrong with the industry. It's too bureaucratic. Cars like the original Viper, which Dodge later modeled their line-up after was designed by a small elite camp of car enthusiasts called Team Viper. They secured a place in world history. The Veloster was designed by something like 89 engineers, 45 designers, 153 analysts, 323 randomly-selected focus group, and 16 executives.

 

I really liked the pictures and was upset that I jumped on the HD and THEN saw it. That was before I saw them in person and saw the specs as far as 1/4 mile. I am glad I went with the HD. I am not sure if I think its ugly, but its very much a "do not want" type thing.

 

I like the car, Ive been behind a couple and the rear doesn't bother me. I think the car looks best in black myself.

 

The rear is a slightly less dumpy version of the cruze hatch:







But I like it. In real life though: head room is poor, switch quality is poor, the rear seat in general is a joke, visibility is poor, the driver's seat was at the limit of adjustment for me and I'm only 6'3, the panel gaps are laughable, rubber trim doesn't line up... it might just have been because I saw an early RHD model, but I was really disappointed considering how much I'd talked up the car.



However, I can't knock the styling, engine bay room, thousands of sunroofs, trunk space (albeit with high liftover), and front seat support/comfort. I haven't driven the car so I can't fully judge it, but I'm waiting with baited breath for the turbo. That is one of the very few new cars that I'm genuinely excited for.

 

That version is ugly. This one is not...

 

^I question how you think that is pretty. All I see is a bloated blowfish. It's not clean. There are weird senseless things going on that don't belong to anything except electric shavers, inkjet printers, or portable phones. It's embarrassing to be seen in.



By comparison of a shooting-brake, this to me is pretty (YES this is OEM just like this), and fast:



Renault Clio V6. It came a decade before the Veloster. Unlike the Veloster, it was successful. Fast Forward 12 years, and Houston, we have a blowfish.



I agree, I see it in the same way. There is a lot in common.

 

i don't care for the looks either-...



to all veloster owners who will look at this-... my opionion on some other cars:

veilside tiburon used to look good

late model gto used to look horrible

gallardo used to look craptastic (this one's still creeping up on me)



so my tastes have changed. now that these cars have some years under their belt, i think the exact opposite of them.



but i don't see the veloster growing on me in ten years-...



it hurts me so, that the veloster was the replacement to the tib.



and i'm going to say the same for the 2013 gen coupe-... i saw a veloster coming towards me and was reminded of how hideous it was, but as it passed i noticed that it was actually a 2013 gen coupe (luckily the rear on the 2013 gc end is a nice update from the previous model).

 

I've seen several in person and they look much better to me than the pictures. Maybe they've just grown on me.



I agree with CobraEater, I also think the turbo version looks better.

 

I really want a turbo one in black. <3



When I first saw one I hated them, and now I really like them and think that I would be adorable in one.