Exotic Car Design Boredom

"pauljones" (pauljones) 02/12/2014 at 11:09 • Filed to: None

3

18

I'll admit, I do like the new California slightly better than Pininfarina's other monstrosities of late. But even so, there is just nothing here that tugs at your heart when you look at it. There's nothing here that makes you dream about thinking how good that cute blonde a few doors down would like driving this. There's just nothing that does anything to pull at emotions here.

To be fair, however, it's not as though Ferrari is alone in this. From Bentley and Aston Martin to BMW and Porsche, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of feeling left anymore. It's not that the cars are entirely offensive in their aesthetic per se (though I certainly question the aesthetic tastes of more than one of their designers); it's that at the end of the day, it simply seems as if exotic cars these days are trying to sell and image, when they should be trying to sell an idea or a feeling.

It seems as if we've entered a somewhat cynical phase of selling for extra profit margins rather than selling for beauty, passion, enthusiasm, or feeling. And it shows in the designs of exotics these days. Sure, there is something to be liked about each of them, but on a whole, none of them seem to offer that complete knock-out package that they once did.

Victorious Secret > pauljones 02/12/2014 at 11:14

3

Everyone is going towards their own version of 'beige'.

Sure, beige for an Aston or Ferrari is still "hmmm, glorious" but no one is really taking risks anymore. Its all playing it safe and copy/pasting existing designs at different scales for different cars.

I blame Porsche the most. The 911 face just has to be on every car they make. God forbid people don't recognize a Porsche if it doesn't have a 911 face.

DConsorti > pauljones 02/12/2014 at 11:19

0

I agree at some degree with you.

IMO, todays supercars and exotics ara kind of boring and are nowhere near old ones!

Just like I posted in here http://jalopnik.com/the-bugatti-ga…

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

For exotic luxury cars, I think it was until 70's.

Battery Tender Unnecessary > pauljones 02/12/2014 at 11:31

4

C-C-C-Combo Beaker

At least, I think it is. Designers are settling into "pretty but boring" designs.

I hope it inspires other companies to be a little more experimental with their designs, because, despite being beautiful, I don't think I can take another VH based Aston that looks like the past six.

BrtStlnd > pauljones 02/12/2014 at 11:47

3

C'mon now. That Maz coupe is stunning in person. Aston is still cranking out a shitload of beautiful cars that all look similar.

The Ferrari 458.

The Lamborghini Egoista.

All of the Paganis.

The Alfa 8C.

The McLaren P1.

There's plenty of cars out there that still give me a boner.

ssidd47 > BrtStlnd 02/12/2014 at 11:52

1

Holy God. That blue is radiant.

pauljones > BrtStlnd 02/12/2014 at 11:53

0

The Gran Turismo is an attractive car, and I do like the 8C; but that particular Aston Martin you pictured is a no. The rest you named... well, more for you on that one. I don't find the 458, Egoista, P1, Zonda, or Huayra to be at all attractive.

None of them, though, even the ones I like, would get the same reaction out of me as, say, an original Sting Ray.

ssidd47 > Victorious Secret 02/12/2014 at 11:54

0

I honestly believe that the reason for this is that the luxury market is an oligopoly with these few players. Especially towards the sub-500k segment of the market. They can all just copy each other and not be stressed about losing market share.

BrtStlnd > pauljones 02/12/2014 at 11:57

1

Nostalgia is a helluva drug.

pauljones > BrtStlnd 02/12/2014 at 11:59

1

The argument can certainly be made, but I'm not convinced that that's the case. I'm fat, far too young to remember the original Sting Ray. The original Sting Ray was out of production decades before I was born. And yet, I still recognize it as a very attractive car, and more attractive than most put out now.

BrtStlnd > pauljones 02/12/2014 at 12:23

0

I think we need to make a distinction between "boring" and "really pretty". The ones I listed certainly can't be described as boring. The Egoista and Paganis are insanity in sheet metal form. They may not be "pretty like Ferrari 250 GTO" pretty, but they certainly don't look like anything else out there.

Steve is equipped with Electronic Fool Injection > pauljones 02/12/2014 at 12:29

3

Most exciting Pininfarina design of the past decade:

Manuél Ferrari > pauljones 02/12/2014 at 13:16

0

This is my favorite looking car right now. Sure it's derivative of all prior Lambo designs. But one thing it's not is boring.

It's not the fastest car out there. But it looks like an air force weapon. It not only has carbon fiber interior parts. It has carbon fiber side mirrors and a carbon fiber diffuser. It is the most over the top car you can buy for under a quarter million (US Dollars).

I know it doesn't have a stick and it's AWD. I'd rather it be RWD with the gated shifter. But I still think this car would be an absolute hoot to drive.

McLarry > pauljones 02/12/2014 at 14:23

0

Aston's designs only feel a bit derivative on this point because they've made a string of cars that most lay-people can't tell apart...In the end, though, that doesn't make that design bad or boring, they just have a bunch of cars that look similar. Honestly I'm not a fan of the most recent developments and all that weirdness going on in the headlights, but I still find the design very evocative. The Maserati GranTurismo and Jaguar F-Type round my top 3 as far as best looks goes.

pauljones > McLarry 02/12/2014 at 14:27

1

Oh, I can tell them apart. And the biggest problem with that is that it's strikingly obvious how badly Marek Reichmann (May he be given a stint in industrial design hell) screwed up the Rapide S and the Vanquish.

Axial > BrtStlnd 02/12/2014 at 17:36

0

I think a better distinction to be made is "boring in what way?" Or, "really pretty in what way?"

The terms "boring" and "pretty" technically mean nothing without qualifiers and so must rely on connotation to relay their meaning. For example, I would describe the Egoista as emotionally dead, visually exciting, and aesthetically droll. It has a lot of busy angles and folds and creases going on and it really grabs at your attention, but none of it builds into an emotional head. The aesthetic Lamborghini was going for is so over the top that it's counter-productive because it leaves nothing to the imagination. In short, its less than the sum of its parts because those parts have no synergy.

BrtStlnd > Axial 02/12/2014 at 18:21

0

According to your eye.

Axial > BrtStlnd 02/12/2014 at 18:35

0

Which is why I lead the whole break-down with "I would describe."

If you want to fall back on that tired and, frankly, lazy "that's, like, your opinion man" argument, this whole discussion becomes a farce as is your assertion that the vehicles you listed "certainly can't be described as boring." We might as well be Ken Ham and Bill Nye debating creationsim vs. science where I'm Bill Nye and you're Ken Ham, because you haven't even attempted to add some detail to your expression and are instead abusing language and making logical fallacies to try to make a self-admitted, non-existent point.

MtrRider Just Wants Doritos > pauljones 02/15/2014 at 17:08

1

I'm sure if you got off the internet and stopped looking at pictures of them you would think they were exciting again. The internet has definitely jaded me to these cars.

I also think designs are being driven by crash regulations and the imagined need to have a corporate face on all cars. The most unique and outrageous designs are from new companies, or companies with only one super car. Cars like the Viper or FGT. Alfa 4c/8c. The Cadillac concepts. Aston Martin One-77.