[Closed] Cars that are just WRONG!

pontiac aztec

[img] [/img]

webber

[img] [/img]

plymouth superbird

[img] http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/2949/plymouthsuperbird1a.jp g" target="_blank">http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/2949/plymouthsuperbird1a.jp g"/> &t=1[/img]

Tazzy wins.

Announced this week the Nissan Murano convertible.

Yes that Niche that never needed to be there the "faux 4x4 SUV off roader convertible" I'll try to get a picture.

Range Rover Sport convertible anyone?

BTW I saw a Mercedes McClaren SLR in chrome yesterday in the next village. Horrible and massive in the flesh.

Can't be bothered posting an image but the [b]Isuzu Vehi-cross[/b] is what a 1980's 15 year old boy would imagine what Action Man should drive.

Still think the Lagonda wins by a country mile.

Not only is it utterly minging, it was also massive money when sold!
[img] [/img]

The estate version was even worse:
[img] [/img]

Love TVRs but never got the Griffith, always thought it was gopping!

[img] [/img]

A few months ago Classic and Sports Car mag did a big piece on the designer of the Austin Allegro/Princess etc. They showed the original drawings he did for them and he explained what happened. The designs looked great, modern and futuristic but practical, on paper, but when it came to making them the management wouldn't do it properly. Instead of making a new chassis for the new car they wanted to use existing ones chopped down or extended to save money. New suspension designs were rejected in favour of cheaper existing alternatives. This was the same with engines and loads of other bits.
The problem is that a good design requires the wheels to be in just the right place, the engine placed exactly right so the body you designed fits over it, otherwise the finished car looks vastly different. I think the allegro in particular had to have a higher bonnet and wheels in a different place, so instead of a sleek modern small car you ended up with a dumpy mess.
Unfortunately the unions made things worse by ruining the company financially so they had to save money but this just made it worse still. If some of the cars in the designers drawings had made it into production properly then we might have Rover around still.

pontiac aztec

I'm finding it really difficult to look at that car, my brain just refuses to parse it properly. It reminds me of the sort of thing you came up with when you were nine and had the genius idea of cobbling three different Lego sets together.

A very good friend of mine studied automotive design and has explained to me why certain things work and look right while others don't. Quite interesting really as it's often the small details that make the most difference. He once was chatting to me about the ratio of wheel size to the distance from the top of the wheelarch to the bonnet line on a Skoda Fabia. If you look at the new model the wheels are too small so the bonnet to wheelarch measurement looks massive, making it look a bit too chunky and blunt at the front. The previous model looked so much better as the bonnet was more low profile, especially the VRS which I think has slightly different front wings.

robdob - read that article also and the original drawings were indeed lovely.

Certain details on the P1800 initial drawings (inc. smaller fins) were much nicer too.

They have had to mess about with the lines of cars for the european pedestrian safety measures.. like you need a big squishy bumper and the bonnet needs to be well clear of the engine so you don't smack your head on the head when you get run over.

Interesting that there are some American cars on this thread.. I find most things on the road in the US either gopping or really really old fashioned. They really are incredibly conservative when it comes to cars.

I know we've all got different tastes, but calling a Bristol, ANY pre 90’s Citroen, a Twingo, an XJ-S and a Lamborghini Espada ugly is just perverse - I'd love to own any of them 🙂

I like unusual designs if done with confidence and style, so for me the 2CV, Renault 4, original Beetle (even the first Cube) etc are things of beauty.

It's the bland, thoughtless rip-offs that really annoy me: The countless Euro and Far Eastern 'me too' corporate boxes which display a complete lack of confidence and paucity of design.
Lexus are particularly guilty of this and all new Mercs are an embarrasing approximation of past glories - hell, even Jaguar has realised that you can't resell the same car for ever.

I'll make an exception for the Mk 1 MX-5, nicer proportions than the original Elan, to my eyes at least.

The new Mini and Beetle are lazy, unimaginative and crass. Anyone seen driving one should be dragged from their seat and urinated on at the side of the road.

Also, many cars start off beautiful, but are compromised by 'updates' as time goes by - Rover SD1, MX5 (again), Alfa Spyder, MGB/Miget etc, etc. The first design is always the purest and best.

The US seems to have an almost limited set of design criteria when it comes to the cars they produce... They are either muscle cars (big engine, rubbish suspension, no handling) or the sort of thing normally see being driven as taxis or cop-cars in the films. Universally bad every one of them.

I'm not saying that we are better at it, because it is all in the eye of the beholder and all that, but European cars do tend to be slightly better proportioned and much better at driving along roads with corners.

I will also admit to having an Austin Princess and a Morris Ital in the family at one point. Luckily my dad got rid of them both and got a BMW and a Rover Vitesse instead. Now all I have to be disgusted at are the slight bits of rust on the boot of my 4x4 and the general ugliness of Porsche Cayennes. I do dispute the entry for the 911 though. Early ones were a bit 80's shoulder pads, but the modern ones are both aesthetically and functionally pleasing.

The US seems to have an almost limited set of design criteria when it comes to the cars they produce..

I think that the car companies' budgets are so squeezed by having to fund people who no longer work for them that R&D budgets are slashed. That's why you get loads of toys in their cars, it's a substitute for decent new car designs. And it's why the interiors are so rubbish. If you never offer anything new, the market starts to expect the same stuff all the time which you can then supply easily. They just add toys to differentiate their cars from the previous models or competitors.

Plus the fact that driveability and handling are non-issues for the most part, so that's one avenue of brand differentiation that's not open to them.

EDIT: oh and I like the new MX5 better than the old one. And don't get too hung up over the beetle - it's just a prettier body kit that's all - not an innovative car like the original.

A replica beetle with modern tech would be something though.

That Pontiac Aztec is inexcusable as a modern car!. It's all too easy for me/you to pick holes in older cars. You have to remember that all car designs were a bit clunky back then. There is also no doubt, the buying public need a lot of time to adjust to innovative designs, so the evolution of design tends to be very slow.

I totally concur with robdob about the interference from the Motor manufacturer's management boards - they always manage to ruin good design!

Ford are a big offender in this repect. I have an abiding memory of the prototype Ford Sierra at the Earls Court Motor show, of a leading edge desireable vehicle. The end product was a vague sad resemblance of the prototype and was plain fugly. They ruined it totally! The vehicle evolved throughout it's lifetime and ended up looking a bit more like the prototype, but still never got there. Ford went through a long period of making truly bland/ugly cars. This all changed with the arrival of current Mondeo and the whole line up is now looking great (with one or two exceptions like the Fusion).

BMW however, seem to be going the opposite way. The 1 series does indeed look like it's been left infront of an electric fire. The new 5 series has got the same wierd bulbous folds down it's side, similar to that of the 3 series. They have become kinda "flabby" in appearance. What were the designers thinking, or have the conservative management team done the same as others - totally changed a great design?

I've no doubt that the unions crippled British Leyland in the 1970's. And what a mistake it was to nationalise the flagging British motor industry! It was an incompetent Labour administration that eased the failing British automotive industry off the cliff into oblivion. Grrrr politicians/non-engineering/non-design types, they wreck everything!

[img] [/img]

honteux

I've no doubt that the unions crippled British Leyland in the 1970's. And what a mistake it was to nationalise the flagging British motor industry! It was an incompetent Labour administration that eased the failing British automotive industry off the cliff into oblivion. Grrrr politicians/non-engineering/non-design types, they wreck everything!

Nothing to do with the fact that they were making cr4p cars and went on strike every time anyone dared to try and improve things?

It's a competitive world and Britain just wasn't cutting it. They can clearly design and build a damn good "specialist" car (LR, Lotus, etc) and they can build them too (mainly for Jap companies) but they couldn't do both in a mass production World market.

a pontaic aztec in full driving stylee, rather than "poetry in motion" it is "gibberish in neutral"

[img] [/img]

You have to remember that all car designs were a bit clunky back then.

Eh? You're telling me that pre safety legislation Ferrari's, Jag XK's pagoda roof Merc's, Triumph TR's, Bently tourers etc were 'clunky'?

As to Ford, their modern design revolution began with the original Sierra, a massively radical design - hugely influential and ahead of it's time, but not accepted by the public until it had been sanitised and messed about with.
The new Mondeo's 'face' is designed to appeal to far eastern markets, where such things are massively popular. It's a far blander car than the previous one.

And before you start slagging off the unions (damaging though the 70's strikes were), a massive lack of investment in new models, R & D, infrastructure and a complete lack of foresight by management had condemned the British car industry to death a decade before the first industrial dispute took place.

The Marina was a rebodied Minor, the Princess, bold, futuristic 70's wedge design apart was rehashed Austin land-crab and the TR7 was a disaster due to US legislation and lack of development.

And say what you like about Chris Bangle's BMW's, at least people are talking about them. Wouldn't buy one myself, but the old Z3 'breadvan' was superbly unhinged.

BL had the opportunity to make fantastic cars (Citroen GS/CX anybody?) but through lacklustre management, terrible employment relations, political interference and a tendency to think back to before the war we threw it all away.
Germany, France and japan were no doubt helped by having a lot of their industrial infrastructure destroyed or heavily damaged during the war and the need to rebuild it during the 50s, whereas in the UK we just muddled on thinking about past glories.
Specialist cars in the UK? Are there any British owned ones left? OH yes, Morgan - [rolls eyes]

My Dad had an FSO polonez for about 3 days.
We dont see him anymore /shame/

[img] [/img]

🙁