# Hearst Tower (597 ft/182 m), NYC vs. Swiss Re (590 ft/180m), London



## LibertyTwo (Feb 22, 2004)

they're both forgettable --- i fear someday we will look back on them as we do boston city hall and say -- ah....that's very 2000-ish


----------



## Azn_chi_boi (Mar 11, 2005)

Swiss Re


----------



## El_Greco (Apr 1, 2005)

Swiss Re :cheers:


----------



## Chief (Jun 23, 2005)

Swiss Re is utterly unique in its design, and a real landmark on the the London skyline. You need to see it for real to fully appreciate it. It's innovative in almost everything it does.

The Hearst tower, on the other, is also innovative, but I feel it's been poorly executed. It finishes just too abruptly with that flat top.

So... it's pretty obvious which one I'm voting for...


----------



## Tazmaniadevil (Dec 23, 2003)

The base of the Hearst Tower is the old base of the old building. It is similar to the style of the Hearst building in LA. I believe the Hearst people wanted to save it so Foster built over it.


----------



## homesweethome (Feb 3, 2005)

swiss re just for the impact on the sky line. the hearst just gets lost wth all those uildings around it!


----------



## -Corey- (Jul 8, 2005)

Swiss re is awesome


----------



## ranny fash (Apr 24, 2005)

dont like the base of hearst, but it looks outstanding with the sun on it in the 5th pic. i think it suffers from being surrounded by other tall buildings a bit.


----------



## wjfox (Nov 1, 2002)

SwissRe without a doubt... this tower has done wonders for London's image.


----------



## Indica (Mar 19, 2005)

This is a super close one!!!

Im leaning a little more towards the Swiss Re.. that gets my vote. Hearst is awesome and is perfect with the dense NY skyline (and a must-visit one thats added to my list when I go to NY next year), but Im soooo partial to the Swiss Re and the round shape of it.. In fact its one of my all-time favorite buildings around! I think the only thing that could make the Swiss Re better is if it was about 100 meters taller.. maybe 60 or 70 floors total although Im sure many people would disagree with me on that one!


----------



## goschio (Dec 2, 2002)

I prefer the Hearst tower. Looks more elegant IMO.


----------



## cristianocani (Oct 21, 2004)

No doubt... Swiss Re!


----------



## po-boy (Jan 11, 2010)

Very old thread, but I'm bringing it back.

IMO, both are fantastic buildings. Swiss Re is more iconic and it really stands out in the London skyline. But for me, I prefer the Hearst. I think it looks fantastic and I love the way they incorporated the original building as the base.


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

Definitely Hearst cause Swiss is an hideous fat ***** uke:


----------



## the spliff fairy (Oct 21, 2002)

www.jasonhawkes.com


----------



## ikops (Jun 12, 2008)

Kanto said:


> Definitely Hearst cause Swiss is an hideous fat ***** uke:


This ***** is one of my favourite buildings in London.


----------



## skyscraper03 (Feb 12, 2005)

They are equally fantastically beautiful to me!


----------



## Hudson11 (Jun 23, 2011)

the swiss re has the advtantage of standing out but the hearst tower has an awesome base









vipnyc Hearst tower


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

Not a huge fan of either of them to be honest.. :lol: Although I'm leaning towards Hearst...


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

I love Hearst. Never really been a fan of Swiss Re.


----------

