I love the curvaceous fuselage of the L-2000-7A and its elegant, large-area, highly-swept twisted-cambered double-delta.
Did you know the plane required no trim-tanks for efficient supersonic flight? The shape of the wings were such so that as the plane went faster the wings forward-delta produced disproportionate amounts of lift supersonically which compensated for the aft shift in the center of pressure. At Mach 3.0, the elevon-deflections were pretty much flush with the wing (I'm not sure if the rear and outboard part of the delta produced lift supersonically too, or if they acted like a giant trimming surface that flew at an extremely low negative alpha).
The inlets also were of fixed geometry as well. The geometry of the inlet (combined with it's sharp cowl-angles) produced a substantial pressure-recovery, which when combined with porous ramps (of various sizes) was able to, in the event of an aerodynamic-disturbance/unstart, self-stabilize using no bypass doors (and obviously, moving parts)
It's kind of sad that it lost out to Boeing, as Lockheed could have probably built this airplane and flew it before politics were able to get in the way. While Boeing's design had a greater capacity, and was more aerodynamically-efficient (there was also a heavy bias towards swing-wings so it would seem), Lockheed's design was far more practical and realistic. Allegedly, much like how in the CX-HLS program when Lockheed won the contract due to it's political connections in the defense-industry even though Boeing's design was considered by many to be better, Boeing was able to use it's connections to secure the contract (probably regardless of how good Lockheed's design was, however I'm not 100% sure about that).
KJ_Lesnick