Can We Talk About Car Design for Just a Second?

"Anthony Miller" (ahmille4) 08/10/2016 at 17:00 • Filed to: Bustle Butt

2

17

As I was writing this, another !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , so please forgive the redundancy.

Can we all just stop for a second and take a deep breath?

*sigh*

Ok, now that we are all appropriately zenned out we can have a healthy discussion about the visual aesthetics of today’s vehicles. Many, many words have been expounded on the subject of car design and our apparent approach towards an angry, angular, future. I am here to provide a few more on the subject. You see, I have a theory, and as a regular automotive blog contributor, I am obviously qualified to share it and ignore any evidence to the contrary.

Today’s Transformer-ization of our cars today comes down to a confluence of three things:

Chris Bangle ( Author’s note: Yes I know 2003 called and wants its hot take back)

Minimum fuel efficiency requirements

Nostalgic “critical mass”

Now, I’m sure at this point most internet-ers would roll their eyes and go back to screaming obscenities at each other via YouTube comments, but not here! This is Jalopnik , where higher standards reign supreme!

You see, today’s Toyota Camry looks like someone took some concept drawings straight out of Lamborghini’s design studios, wadded them up into a ball and then decided to paint that onto the ungainly jellybean that Toyota refers to now as the XV50. Why that is successful is completely down to the design barriers that Chris Bangle rightly or wrongly broke with his 7 series and “flame-surfaced” Z4. Although it also has to do with the fact that the Camry is a reliable jellybean and your grandpa who would never buy a “dam furrin car!” has been with his lord and savior for a couple years now.

Chris Bangle broke the automotive design community completely free of it’s staid 1980-90s boxiness and brought together two very different languages, one of hard, straight creases and the other of long flowing curves. Unfortunately that birthed things like the Bangle Butt and the absolutely hideous side profile of the E92. I mean, really? LINES AREN’T SUPPOSED TO MISS EACH OTHER LIKE THIS.

Did they go blind suddenly while looking below the door handles?

Now, I’m not convinced that Mr. Bangle just did these things because he wanted to watch the world burn. No, as has been mentioned !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , I think he was actually willing to adapt a respected and solidly established design language that was going to die no matter what with the introduction of ever-increasingly strict fuel efficiency requirements. Think of the 7-series as a test case for this. That high rear-end is much more aerodynamically efficient than the much more attractive low decklid of the previous model. Look at the E65 and now look at the rear of a 2016 Ford Taurus. The Taurus is practically a hatchback and we can thank an increased focus on aerodynamics and fuel efficiency for that. Chris Bangle might be rightfully excoriated for the ham-fisted atrocity that is the E65. However, I don’t blame him for trying something so radical that it influenced an entire industry to start thinking differently and get creative.

The pinnacle of 90's sedan styling. Photo Credit: Jelopnic

However, like your favorite project when it goes up in front of committee, no new idea in the automotive industry can go for long without being completely bastardized or misappropriated. I believe this is no better illustrated than the “throwback” designs of the early 2000s. Freed from the bounds of having to abide by one singular coherent design language across all vehicles, American manufacturers in particular looked to find a way to cash in by taking “new” unapologetic design chances. They did this by being completely derivative of their own daring designs of the 60s and 70s. This worked perfectly because of what I refer to as nostalgic critical mass. The designs of cars in those decades that were “re-made” in the 2000s were all inherently aggressive. People bought these cars because they wanted to “make America great again” and now we find ourselves here. While not nostalgic, the Japanese decided that they could out-aggressive 60s America and have been playing catch-up ever since. The Honda Accord wears a harness, Lexus ( Lexii? ) imitate Predator, and the Camry looks like a bedazzled jellybean with angry eyes.

The 60s and early 70s were rightfully thought of as a golden age of performance, particularly for the American muscle car, however, designs during that time weren’t exactly the most creative. But rose-colored glasses don’t exactly care. Designers were given a free hand to pen “updates” of “classic” design language and once aggro styling was re-penned for the Information Age, well, it’s pretty easy to see where we’ve ended up. Or maybe not, because I think I just poked an eye out looking at the new Prius.

GRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!

This explains why Lamborghini, Lamborghini, the creator of !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , was criticized for making the Huracan look too conservative. Car companies will argue that aggressive sells, and who am I to argue, the new Camry just moved something like 15 trillion units last month. But where does it end? A car doesn’t need to have 17 different accent lines to look interesting! And consumers can only buy what our automotive overlords put out for sale.

So what is to be done? Well, we may not be like it, but maybe, just maybe , the automotive world is in need of another Chris Bangle to bustle their way on to the scene.

Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo > Anthony Miller 08/10/2016 at 17:06

0

This car always got to me.

RallyWrench > Anthony Miller 08/10/2016 at 17:10

3

The Taurus, though cool, is an 80's design that leaned heavily on the Audi 5000 and has a bunch of Pontiacish plastic on it in the case of the SHO. I submit these two as the pinnacle of 90's sedan design :

Yes, I realize the 740 is a facelifted model, but I think it stands. The S6 below is clean, simple, unadorned, and badass.

There was never anything wrong with the German philosophy of selling the same sausage in different lengths.

Anthony Miller > RallyWrench 08/10/2016 at 17:16

0

However, these were also for the upper-crust. I’m referring mainly to the jo-schmo vehicle us normal humans drive for the most part.

Matt Nichelson > Anthony Miller 08/10/2016 at 17:20

4

Anthony Miller > Matt Nichelson 08/10/2016 at 17:20

1

Profile pic noted

RallyWrench > Anthony Miller 08/10/2016 at 17:22

1

Joe Schmo could buy an E36 or A4 that had the same purity of line though.

DynamicWeight > Dr. Zoidberg - RIP Oppo 08/10/2016 at 17:23

1

It’s the middle “no” line. Why did they break the panel there!? WHY!?

for Michigan > Anthony Miller 08/10/2016 at 17:25

0

But I like the way the E92 and E85 look...

Imo, the list of attractive BMWs isn’t particularly long, but those two are on it.

E92M3 > RallyWrench 08/10/2016 at 17:26

1

It’s certainly better than the american approach. “Let’s sell the same vehicle as Chevy, GMC AND a Cadillac.”

“Bob is brillant! Add another 10 million to his bonus this year"

Matt Nichelson > Anthony Miller 08/10/2016 at 17:28

0

It’s all good!

Montalvo > Anthony Miller 08/10/2016 at 17:29

0

Sweet more E92s for me. Maera was getting lonely. Also happens to be the same color too.

BringBackTheCommodore > RallyWrench 08/10/2016 at 17:33

1

I respectfully and humbly disagree with you. The 7-Series is beautiful, but this was the best-designed ‘90s model sedan in my book:

TheNeonDriver - Now with More BMW! > Anthony Miller 08/10/2016 at 17:39

0

Another thing that really drives car design (A pillars, Hood height, Window level, ect.) are the side safety and pedestrian impact regulations. These have become increasingly more stringent in the last 10 years.

You want low window sills, you get shitty side impact scores. Or lets of extra bracing, or extra airbags.

There is obviously more than just this happening, but these regulations also play a large part in shaping current cars and tuck.

I also have an E92 (2012, post facelift, with the M-Sport kit) and I think it’s one of the classiest cars on the road right now. The one line on the rear bumper actually follows the wheel arch.

RallyWrench > BringBackTheCommodore 08/10/2016 at 18:24

1

I really like the E39 now, but as a massive fan of its ancestors it took me awhile to warm to it, and I hated it at first. The M5 is the best version, of course, as it hardens the soft edges that are a little too jelly bean 90's for my tastes. The E38 seemed to avoid that trend, to my eye. I will say that the E39 is an all-time masterpiece compared to the E60.

BringBackTheCommodore > RallyWrench 08/10/2016 at 21:44

1

For me, it was love at first sight - but agreed on the standard 5-series, they do seem a bit soft around the edges. Coming from the E38 (and I suspect possibly, say, the E36) I can see why it took a while to warm up to them. For some reason, though, I just fell head-over-heels for the E39, especially the M variant. I still agree with you, though, and think the 7-series is beautiful.

RallyWrench > BringBackTheCommodore 08/11/2016 at 02:22

1

I own an E36, you’re not wrong ;)

Nauraushaun > Anthony Miller 08/13/2016 at 11:21

0

I never thought Bangle had that much influence. The “Bangle Butt” and “Flame Surfacing” weren’t particularly well received, and though some of it showed up on other cars later on, I think crediting him with making car design interesting is too far.