Yeah, I agree, the panning shots look bad in 24 fps.
FYI, 60 fps dropped down to 24 fps looks even worse than native 24 fps. This is because it's not an even divisible of 24, so what looked choppy will now look unevenly choppy, where every other frame will use information from 2 and 3 frame respectively. There are some interpolation algorithms that smooth things out, but it's generally a bad idea. This is why movies that shoot HFR either shoot 48 fps or 120 fps - this allows them to have an even divisible to 24 fps. I.e. each 24 fps frame is basically combines 2 48 fps frames; or even just skipping every other frame works. So, if you'd like to shoot a higher frame but also ensure a good 24 fps version of it, make sure it's an even multiple of 24 - 48, 72, 96, 120 etc.
The Hobbit was 48 fps, by the way, for the above mentioned reason. They didn't have 120 fps tech back then.
I assumed 60fps captures more information thus making the video look better. Not being divisible makes sense..
The right question then would be if shooting in 60 and dropping it down to 30 would give a better picture then shooting in 30fps.
It depends on the method used. If it's a simple skipping of frames, then it shouldn't make much difference, although shooting 60 fps does limit your options for shutter speed. There are more advanced blending and interpolation algorithms that can make use of the extra information at 30 fps though.