That sucks. I wish I could help you more, but I'm out of ideas. Sorry.

Just try what i said, and see if that works for you. If it doesnt, you could share the file with us(i do not recommend it though) or just the part that is "wrong", this would let us get a closer look and see if we can find your issue ^^

[EDIT]
Just noticed something in your pics...
If you look at the left corner, theres a vertice with huge amount of edges connecting to it, you have to get rid of that and all others like it, those are very hard to handle and they rarely look good.

Yeah, it's tricky to try and fix something without knowing the whole situation. Pictures can only show so much. If you posted the blend there might be a better suggestion.

I guess it'll work only if both triangles are in the same plane. In my case, I don't think they are. I press 'A' to select all and then do 'Ctrl+F' and do 'triangles to quads' and very few triangles converge. Most of the triangles remain untouched.

The more I read online, the more I'm beginning to see that modelling a car is close to impossible if you ignore poles, flows and organic topology. I'm wondering if it would be better to just start from scratch with another model and this time pay attention to the subdivisions I'm using.

Some of the references I'm looking at for topology are:

http://www.subdivisionmodeling.com/foru ... .php?t=907
http://blendernewbies.blogspot.com/2008 ... ngles.html
http://www.blendercookie.com/2009/12/05 ... s-part-01/

Of course, there's a lot of food for thought. If I had known there was so much to learn to model a car, I probably would have stuck to modelling simple objects like kitchen appliances .

Edit: Uploaded the .blend file of the car in the current state. Thanks for taking a look.

I'm off to bed now, I'll look at it tomorrow. Hopefully we can salvage it.

The triangles to quads hardly ever works as well as one would expect it to. Almost every time I try to use it I end up having to do it manually because it just doesn't merge the right triangles or it just leaves a bunch behind.

I think that the BlenderCookie video is better than the tutorial I made. I am doing a re-write for Blender 2.5 right now, but I find it hard to tell/show people everything without making it so long that people would lose interest. I have learned quite a bit since I wrote the car tutorial that is up now and I really don't think I did very good with it at all, I can only hope I do better with this one.

Anyways, I did check out your blend file and it seems that the trouble spots are where you have stretched out long triangles, even some stretched quads. I think if you can get those triangles into quads and most of your quads more square-ish it will be better. Your model isn't all that bad, it'll just take some fiddling to get those icky spots cleaned up. The info from those sites should help in fixing it too.

Hey Irascible, maybe after you post it I'll do the revised tutorial and suggest improvements if I think it needs it.

Sure, I'd appreciate that.

I just took a look at your mesh, in my opinion you have way too many tris, and on many places you have more than 4 edges connected to one vertice, this creates a problem.

If you cant get the tris to quads(by either merging or deleting and redoing into quads) try to make it an FGon instead, its easier to handle than tris but still very annoying.

Theres alot of work on a car model, but since this isnt low poly or mid poly do not be afraid to add more vertices, just make sure you get the shape right if you do add more. Two or more edges close makes the edge sharper, if thats what you want i sugest you try to use SHIFT+E to "crease" the edges into desired sharpnes.

Well, it's been a while since I posted here, but thought I'd post an update on the progress.

I started following the porsche tutorial on blendercookie and that's been quite useful. He explains how important topology is when modeling something so that the edge loops can be added easily for controlling the flow.

I've completed upto part 6 of the series and this is what I have so far:



Of course not as good as his, but pretty decent given that I'm a noob at modeling.

I'm still trying to come to terms with topology, but I guess that'll come only with practice.