Differing Apporaches to automotive design.

[bmwfreak]

I'm sort of new to this site, but there is one thing i wanna ask everyone. I suppose somebody has probably posted this topic up elsewhere, but I wanna ask anyway.

What does everyone in general, think of the differing apporaches to design that car manufacturers are taking? Mercedes want all of their cars, save the A-Class, to look like compressed versions of the S-class, BMW are a bit hit and miss with what they're doing now (Love the Z4, Love the E62 6 Series, the new 5 looks a bit top heavy and the 7 is, well, distinctive), and POrsche are, well, trying to apply 911 looks to anything they've got. Ford-PAG and VW-Audi seem to have gotten their act together (except for the Phaeton), although Jaguar seem to have a problem, with an old-looking X-type, an ugly S-type, and a rather-too-retro-looking XJ.

Don't try and tell me that looks don't matter, and that all that matters is how they handle on a twisty B-Road or in drag races. Is design heritage really that important (think Jaguar, Porshce, and even Aston Martin) or should manufacturers feel justified in trying to abandon their pasts (BMW, Renault, and new Jaguar, with the R Concept and the RD-6S)?

Where does car design go from here?

[mhn3773]

no ur right brembo..but thats the current manufacturers and the current path they are going on..they will divert and probably sell 2 different models of the same car least thats the only way i can see any car sales in the future..there will be stripped down versions of most cars for us car nuts but will be produced in small numbers compared to the green peace mommy vans and suvs

somethings will give eventually and either all sports cars as we know them will become extinct or they will start to make the family cars along side the environment friendly sports cars..its the only way..

[bmwfreak]

BMW has a wonderful design heritage, a reputation rightly deserved. There was the shark-faced E28 5 Series and E24 6 series, as well as the timeless beauty of the 3.0 CSL. The only mass car manufacturer I see willing to take a risk now is Renault (Megane II, Scenic, Avantime - hehe-), with most others reverting to their pasts to come up with 'new' car designs.

Of the premium car brands, only BMW seems to be willing to take a different, if radical direction to car design. HOnestly, can you really tell the difference from an old A8 to a new one from 200 yards? You can, if you look hard enough.

It worries me though, that the bean counters rather than petrol-blooded enthusiasts are becoming more dominant in design centres and corporate boardrooms, with too much emphasis being placed on function, rather than trying to draw a compromise between function AND form. And I am generally worried that the public( ie, normal mortals who will buy mass market cars, me and you) will all end up driving the same boring looking Tata Indica clone.

Ghastly, and scary.

[jon_s]

Thankyou for bringing a rational and intelligent discussion here. On some other sites, you simply see people argue that: BMW have gone all wrong with no reason at all!

Overall, I like the new BMW's, the ONLY aspect I don't like is the rear boot. It looks out of place, and I don't see myself warming too it. I may tolerate it sometime, but I doubt I will ever like it! The advances in technology that BMW have made are second to none.

I agreed that BMW are being radical, but I feel that Audi, are taking the 'don't fix if not broken' line. The new A8 is sufficiently different IMO, but not different enough to scare off its regular clients. It is a fine line to draw, go too far, and no one will buy your product, do too little, and you will be accused of staying in the darkages!

Even though I own a Ford, I hate the current range! Everything looks the same. Having said that, they are aimed at a very different market. They sell a lot of fleet cars, which is a huge area! Anything radical in this area simply will not sell.

As with everything, the stuff that we hate today, criticize for being ugly e.t.c will, without doubt tomorrows classics.

[SFDMALEX]

This is hard. A new approach to things is always good, new designs are always good but the problem is that BWM for example fucked up big time with designs that wont look good even in 2010.

These manufacturers are trying to make something new, but it just isnt working. BMW need to take a lesson from Lamborghini. Look at the Countach. Back in the day it looked like a space ship(very futuristic) but it looked great. BWM with all the new cars are trying to make their cars look good also but their designs are just plain ugly.

As for function over form, everybody needs to take a lesson from Ferrari and the Enzo. All of its body is pure function, but look at the form. I'm sure BWM has a windtunel, so instead of making their cars fast and ugly, they can make their cars faster and pritier by spending few hours in the wind tunnel.

And no way should any manufacturer abandon their past, especialy one like BMW. Look at Ferrari. 50years and you can still see all the heratige in the new models. That gated gear gate. Sticking to V12 and V8 only..........

Porsche is also tring to put the 993 look in their new line of 911s....

In general all manufaturers are getting just very boring by making old cars better and in some cases uglier....except the 911

[bmwfreak]

Should Renault and BMW be given SOME credit for being willing to take a risk? Sure, BMW messed up a little with the 7, and to a lesser extent the 5, but i think the 6 and the Z4 are defintely steps in the right direction, as well as the forthcomng X3.

As for ferrari, I think it's a case of having the financial clout to be able to do that kind of thing, sticking to V8s and V12s. I love the 360, and the 575M. My verdict is still undecided over the 612, until i get to see a full on picture of it. Luca Di Montezelomo once said it's easier to sell 4000 Ferraris rather than 4000 VW Golfs.

With BMW, it's a delicate balancing act, trying to mainatain profitability AND individuality. We all know Ferrari will never have a cash flow problem. Sure, BMW have kept many of the cues from it's other models. The small Hofmesiter knick on the C-Pillar, the kidney grille, the flared wheelarches, the double headlamps. It's tricky to intergrate these things into new 'modern' design language, with either revolution or evolution being the two choices when faced with designing a model's replacement.

As for the 911...... Well, that's an evolution from the old VW Beetle, aint it? Hehehe. Sure it is, if you're willing to go back far enough in time. (= Rear engined, those headlamps, etc etc. Dont get me wrong, i dont think 911s are ugly, but i dont think they're 'pretty' either. Distinctive, yes, and easily identifiable, but not gorgeous. I prefer the 996 shape to the 993, simply because it looks a more cohesive and streamlined design. I remember the Zuffenhausen and Weissach faithful crying foul over the 996 when it came out, not only in terms of looks but the change from an air-cooled flat-six to a water cooled one. BUt they have to move on, somehow.

Porsche's mistake? The Cayenne. What a shame, a disgrace to Porsche's heritage.