My first impression when the Leaf image loaded was that you were being overdramatic. The Ferrari website created the impression of a similar but fundamentally more elegant car (not elegant, just more elegant).

Then the Ferrari image loaded. Wow.

It really is a game of spot the difference. A difficult game.

edit: I don't want to reduce hypercars purely to their "Wow!" factor, but a huge huge part of their value is definitely the feeling they evoke when you see one out of the corner of your eye and your head snaps around. This Leaf/Luce side-profile similarity is completely antithetical to that "Wow!" factor.

I do think the Luce looks a little bit better in that comparison, but I think that is also at least partially due to the photographer being way better. The black parts at the bottom of the Ferrari like like a shadow in that photo, whereas on the nissan it looks like black plastic. But I'm pretty sure that's a trick of the light more than anything.

I wouldn't say it is pretty, but to me it looks nicer on this picture than on the Ferrari website.

It is a very generic shape for sure!

Only the color is similar. Nothing else is otherwise you’ll start putting many cars in the same basket

Huh? I know nothing about cars, but to me there's an obvious difference. If I saw the top car in the street, I'd say "wow that's nice"; while the bottom one just looks like a regular car. The top one looks like it went to the gym, the bottom one looks like it was puffed up through a straw. Idk if that justifies a 20x price difference, but that's my immediate reaction.

Judging by pictures only Ferrari should cost double of Nissan and 1/5 of this[0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yangwang_U9#/media/File:Yangwa...

I believe he only designed the interior

I think you simply haven't seen the light. Here, perhaps his $4800 lantern can help: https://www.balmuda.com/lovefrom-balmuda/

Ferrari have had indicator buttons in all their cars since about 2010

Haven't Ferrari used buttons for turn signals for a while?

I have this observation with the influx of soulless SUVs on the road. Every car group you see are always screaming out for manual, rear drive sports cars at an affordable price, but the majority of consumers just want a cube of car that has wheels and can go places. And they buy a new cube every year or two to keep up with the Joneses.

Everyone then complains that the automakers aren't making what they want... But the blame isn't with the manufacturers, the blame rests with consumers and how mindlessly apathetic they are to... basically everything.

The Cybertruck isn't ugly. It's gorgeous. You may not like its particular aesthetic, however that doesn't make it ugly. It's executed extremely well for the aesthetic it's going for.

Difference is that cybertruck is in the purposefully ugly category. Even if it could have been done lot better. This one is not supposed to be ugly. If you want ugly you need to properly lean into it. Cybertruck at least attempted that.

When you're putting down this much for a car, you have options... I don't think this will be on the top of the list.

So the rest of the world not caring doesn't matter as the audience for this is probably a million people at best

> It doesn't matter if it's ugly, it doesn't matter that the cyber truck is ugly, it doesn't matter if either are good cars.

The cybercar turned out to be a massive failure though. So, it kind of mattered?

subset of hn commenters? The cybertruck is widely ridiculed, also in taiwan.

[dead]