Page 3 of 6
Re: Practically Classics versus Retro Rides
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:40 pm
by TerryG
Those fins SCREAM spahn but I couldn't tell you which one.
The only two I can find images of are these:
Possibly the ugliest cars ever made!
Re: Practically Classics versus Retro Rides
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:51 pm
by JPB
Spohn yes, anyone care to guess the year and the maker of the base vehicle?

Re: Practically Classics versus Retro Rides
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 11:01 pm
by zipgun
1957
Re: Practically Classics versus Retro Rides
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 11:33 pm
by JPB
Nope, it's quite a bit older.
Re: Practically Classics versus Retro Rides
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 11:36 pm
by TerryG
The one on chasing classic cars was 1949. I thought Spohn was the "coach builder"
Re: Practically Classics versus Retro Rides
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 11:40 pm
by JPB
How come I didn't see your photos before, Terry?
Anyway, yes, it's actually very similar to the car seen in the top one of the images you posted and 1949 is the year, so which quality brand lies beneath that Shamrock-like add on tat?
Someone who'd never seen a Ssang-Yyong Rhodeus wrote:Possibly the ugliest cars ever made!
Re: Practically Classics versus Retro Rides
Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 9:11 am
by TerryG
I believe it to be a BMW under the (HIDIOUS) skin
Re: Practically Classics versus Retro Rides
Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 9:24 am
by tractorman
So, they are much like any other BMW (IMHO): hideous!!
Re: Practically Classics versus Retro Rides
Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 10:33 am
by JPB
Clearly that was too easy. Either that or Terry's spotting talent is far bigger than most. I suspect the latter.
Yes, BMW of course and possibly one of the fugliest things in the world - apart from a Ssang Yyong Rhododendron.
Re: Practically Classics versus Retro Rides
Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 11:14 am
by TerryG
Those wings are very distinctive. Let's face it, when you see something that hideous it does tend to stick in your mind.