I've been having a more detailed look at those mountains, and I think its the actual spine of the ridge that is setting my perception of them all wrong. If you look at the flanks of them and try not to see the ridges at all, then they look perfectly right. Maybe the detailing of the ridge looks right as well, but loses something in the size reduction (I'm assuming you have to reduce the map to upload it here) so that it looks more like a pucker than a line of rocky bits?

Don't know.

Could really do with some input from someone who does top down mountains all the time.