A couple of comments on the Phantom thread recalled some thoughts I've had for a while on the subject of car makers' attempts to forge a visual identity. I've jotted a few examples of what I think works and what doesn't, and I'd be interested in other people's thoughts on the matter. Remember that these are just personal opinions and concern only style, not engineering substance.
* From the moment the retro grille appeared in 1991, Rover got steadily more obsessed with the 1950s look. The forward-looking 3500 and 800 gave way to progressively tweedier designs, culminating in the ridiculous 75, which would have come with a pipe and an RAF moustache if the likely buyers hadn't had them already.
* Jaguar saloons have a similar self-made image problem. The 1994 XJ looked dated but elegant, and at least did a good job of re-introducing the fluting around the headlights. But it had no room inside, so the current model is taller to correct that. But the marketing department didn't dare change the basic shape, so the car now wanders around with its tail in the air. The S-type is just awful - a blatant attempt to cash in on Inspector Morse's 60s Jaguar that starts with a grille shaped like a lavatory seat and gets worse from there. And the X-type repeats the timid failings of the XJ - although it can look quite svelte in metallic blue-grey, provided it's not a Sport, when it looks like a geography teacher in trainers and tweeds.
* The Jaguar XK on the other hand, shows what can be done. It's unmistakably a Jaguar and yet looks content to be its 21st-century self, rather than a clumsy 60s hommage. The new S-type is supposed to be a looker too, so let's hope it works - I like Jaguar, live near its factory and would love to see it doing well again.
* Aston Martin and Bentley can probably be bracketed together, in that they've managed to modernize their look without losing their roots. (Although both managed a few horrors in the 80s and 90s.)
* Alfa Romeo is another that's dug up an archaic styling device but got away with it, I think because the retro theme is confined to the front end. I'm not entirely sure I like it - the offset number plate looks clunky with a full-size UK plate rather than a dinky Italian one - but it's certainly distinctive.
* Saab is a pet subject of mine and would have got my vote in this section until 2005. A 9-5 then was recognizably related, inside and out, to a 1967 99, while still being and looking modern. The 2005 facelift has thrown away a lot of that good, subtle work in the vain hope of beating the Germans at their own game. Volvo (or is it Ford?) has held its nerve much better and had the courage to remain distinctively Swedish.
So, discuss!
|
mx5 does it well
copy a great
make it more reliable
update the safety spec
best if you pick a car which can be cheaper to make than a bog standard hatch but sell for more than a bog standard hatch
thats how to do it
|
Maserati. Modern cars with a true flair. Morgan are little bit more iffy. (Especially the bog eyed one). Vauxhall Morano - pretty striking but in a very traditional mould. Aston, even though the interior has gone all ikea.
|
|
|
Interesting thread.
Thinking along the lines of the family identity, then I'd say BMW and Seat do it well in that they are distinctive (you can always spot one in your rear view mirror) - but at the same time pleasant styling wise.
Personally I don't like the family look of Ford (just beginning to improve after the Anglia look of the late 90's) and I don't like the Vgrille of the Vauxhall range.
Must mention Rover's efforts for the MINI which much appreciated by BMW
|
|
I was struggling to think of a BMW that matched up to the original proposition, I guess the last shape 5 Series was the nearest. The current crop are still unmistakably BMWs though. Are you familiar with eh Hoffmeister kink ? An subtle design element on a Beemer, which arguably makes it so.
|
|
Peugeot (when largely influeneced by Pininfarina) had a very attractive, coherent style from 204, 304 through to 504, then 305, 505, 205, 405, even 406. But I'm sorry, they are just extracting the Michael with the heavy-handed look of the 207, 407. It's like they were styled with blunt crayons instead of fine nibs.
|
|
Yeah, the old 204 had a very delicate, almost feminine look about it. My dad had one, and despite being an absolute bag of spanners mechanically was otherwise a very nice car.
|
|
|
|
|
{SNIP - why quote everything to which you're replying to, when "in reply to WillDeBeest" is so much tidier? - DD}
Both Alfa & Jaguar are fantastic current designs that show their heritage.
And you're very wrong about the S-Type (where's the shooting smiley?) mine looks stunning when cleaned gets compliments by whoever sees it. I've noticed a lot of S-Types creeping in at work where tradition was BMW & Audi. Maybe they're becoming too common & mainstream.
|
"in reply to WillDeBeest"...
I find myself agreeing with everything he said. I'm not generally a fan of retro styling in anything, but in terms of cars, I do like 'hints' of past glories if they're done well - current Aston Martins and Maseratis spring to mind (IMO).
S6 1SW
|
>>in reply to wildebeest....
Yes, I agree with all of that too. The 75 was another wasted effort by Rover. A car that, for once, was reasonably well engineered yet they hamper it with styling that would only appeal to a very small market sector. Jaguar too have wasted some decent investment by trotting out old-fashioned designs. I actually don't mind the S-Type, at least they made an effort, but the x-type looked old hat before it even went on sale.
>>in reply to round the bend
Yep, the Vauxhall V grille is another mistake. Back in the early 90s Rover made a bit of an impact with the traditional chrome grille (but then got carried away). Everyone else seemed to want to make a similar impact and Vauxhall cunningly thought up the idea of a great big chrome V. Every equivalent Opel has looked smarter since, yet the Vauxhall contrived mess has somehow lived on.
|
in reply to no one
Car makers try to have a corporate image, a style. Unfourtunately due to sheer lack of imagination and flair this has been reduced to a stupid shared radiator grill drawn up on an etch a sketch,
Jaguar still manage a "look and feel", as do Volvo. SAAB used to but suddenly lost it. BMW still have it but its changed, and SEAT have sudenly gone out an found a rather funky and sexy look and feel.
Renault had it for a while, but they seem to be throwing it away. Stylish, funky, sexy, sporting is suddenly beeing washed down the drain.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
|
>>in reply to wildebeest.... Yes I agree with all of that too. The 75 was another wasted effort by Rover. A car that for once was reasonably well engineered yet they hamper it with styling that would only appeal to a very small market sector. Jaguar too have wasted some decent investment by trotting out old-fashioned designs. I actually don't mind the S-Type at least they made an effort but the x-type looked old hat before it even went on sale.
The 75 was the best looking Rover for years - so what if it was retro - retro was in when it was launched - look at the Mini and the Beetle - singling it out in a market filled with such cars is rather petty. Very few customers I ever met with 75's were under 45 and most well over, but they are just the kind of people who have money to buy spend on a large saloon/estate.
Looking at how many are on the roads, it doesnt seem to have put many people off.
The Beetle is the true criminal for retro styling - atleast the Rover was a fairly cohesive design, the Beetle however looks like it was left in the oven too long and melted. Its utterly vile and good at nothing other than a retro trip - atleast the Rover, back in 1998, was fairly well received whereas the Beetle was NEVER taken seriously by anyone other than the odd hairdresser.
I have three customers with XJ Jags ( previous shape ) and the reason they love the cars AND in two cases have driven large Jag saloons for 20 plus years is exactly because they love the elegance of the design and neither want the latest version on account of the styling being ruined.
|
The 75 was the best looking Rover for years - so what if it was retro - retro was in when it was launched - look at the Mini and the Beetle - singling it out in a market filled with such cars is rather petty.
I don't know the sales targets for each model, but I know the Mini exceeded BMW's wildest expectations. I don't think the 75 did. The 600 was a good looking Rover too IMO, a far tidier effort than the 75.
I have three customers with XJ Jags ( previous shape ) and the reason they love the cars AND in two cases have driven large Jag saloons for 20 plus years ....
Lovely cars, but Jag's problem was to attract new buyers. That was the X-type's brief, which it has singularly failed to fulfil.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Caterham et al
|
the S-type is just awful.
Oh dear. I thought it was one of the nicest looking cars around. I guess I have no taste at all. Basically, my problem is that I tend to like pretty much anything retro or old-fashioned.
However, I do like the fact that with Jaguar, Volvo, Saab, Audi, Mercedes, & BMW, if a time traveler from 30 years ago was to see one of today's models, they would have a pretty good chance of identifying the manufacturer. With Ford, Vauxhall, Renault, Peugeot, Fiat, it would be a different story.
|
|
Oh well I better say it before Murphy the Cat comes purring along - the 300C.
|
Oh well I better say it before Murphy the Cat comes purring along - the 300C.
Yes indeed, living off the earnings of "the oldest profession" is very tradional.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
>> Oh well I better say it before Murphy the Cat comes purring along - the 300C. >>>> Yes indeed living off the earnings of "the oldest profession" is very tradional. ------------------------------
>>
leave him alone...he's a car nut, which means he's one of us
|
Does anyone do it well?
Isn't it necessary to go back a bit?
A nice 60s Rolls if you can find one and if you dare.
Or a Bristol. Don't get boring about it chaps for God's sake. A nice late Bristol would fill the bill, a mon avis incontestable.
|
|
|
|
A Bristol is traditional - but not so sure about 'modern traditional' .
If thie is all about understated elegance, surely no-one does it quite like Audi - or did before they introduced that ugly front grille.
I agree with others about the Rover 75: the body shape is quite nicely 'modern trad' but the interior - yuk. That awful sepia colour of the instruments is reminiscent of the sort of 1940s front parlour that was never used unless there was a death in the family, or Aunt Bertha came to stay (or both).
|
|
The new Fiat 500 (small cars being what Fiat does best), I believe released next February, looks pretty good and captures the feel of the original. Unfortunately a start price of £11k isn't so good.
|
|
|
|
