Crappy modern car design!

Gav1n

Is it just me, Or does it bother anyone else the way modern cars are being designed?!

Apart the fact that they're becomming so angular, they're nearly all looking the same these days! What the hell ever happened to curves?! And giving the car some character? Like the mini, and the old volkswagon beatle! Curvy cars, pleanty of character and they continued to be viewed that way for over 40 or 50 years!

Now, everything just seems so cold and contempary! I really don't think these boxy type, angular cars, like the new civic, all the skodas, the new focus and fiestas etc. I don't think they'll age very well.

And i hate the way the engines are being designed! If you open the bonnet of a new car these days it's as messy as 16 year old boy on his first date with a girl! not knowing where to put his hands!

Gone as days of us fellas (and the odd girl!) gettin the hands dirty, and havin a good awl fiddle with a spanner! Is this a good thing? Does anyone else hate not being able to service their cars themselves, and having to shell out a fortune for someone in a white coat who'll just change your oil and check your tyres! Have new cars become too complicated? New cars suck! :mad: :mad:

DukeDredd

I agree with all your points especially about the one regarding servicing cars. I drive pretty old cars that i can repair and service myself without much bother. I'm not looking forward to the day when one of these "modern" cars will become one i own and i can't fix it myself. The day they begun putting computers into cars to control engines was a sad one.

Maximilian

I've got an Audi TT - not an angle in sight and as neat as can be under the bonnet. Having said that I quite like the modern designs - such as the BMW Z4.

Gmodified

DukeDredd wrote:

I agree with all your points especially about the one regarding servicing cars. I drive pretty old cars that i can repair and service myself without much bother. I'm not looking forward to the day when one of these "modern" cars will become one i own and i can't fix it myself. The day they begun putting computers into cars to control engines was a sad one.

unless you are talking about old carb cars the engine management in injected cars didn't change that much. OK. There is more electronics when comes to e.g. traction control etc. but in regards to engine i can't see any issues.
They just look scary all covered by plastic panels attached to bunch of sensors. sometimes you need to have reset tools, or code readers which makes your work easier

bbbbb

Ah yes, the good old days, when cars drove like tractors, rusted to crap in the irish winter, had to be begged to start on cold wet winter mornings, when head rests and am radios were extras, and crumple zones and air bags were non existent. I could go on, but I think you get the point.

For most people, cars need to be cheap reliable safe and efficient means of transportation, not style statements. In that sense, there is no comparison.

DukeDredd

bbbbb wrote:

Ah yes, the good old days, when cars drove like tractors, rusted to crap in the irish winter, had to be begged to start on cold wet winter mornings, when head rests and am radios were extras, and crumple zones and air bags were non existent. I could go on, but I think you get the point.

For most people, cars need to be cheap reliable safe and efficient means of transportation, not style statements. In that sense, there is no comparison.

Hmmm - a '92 Corolla had fantastic handling, never rusted (look at any of this vintage STILL on the road), would start any morning in any temperature you asked it to (often started mine on really cold mornings when the neighbours were struggling with much newer cars!), only thing it was missing was airbags...plus is was build like meccano - anyone interested could replace any part in it in thier own back yard with a few basic tools.

fjon

92 isn't old though - that's only about 10 years ago. Gav1n was talking about beetles and minis, which are over 50 years old. By 92 cars were advanced enough to have airbags and not to rust I believe chokes were starting to be phased out as well around that time

mike65

Duke I think bbbbb has something nearer 1972/82 in mind! In which case he'd be spot on. I like cars I can understand and work on without needing a white lab coat.

Mike.

bbbbb

yup, I think '92 starts to fall into the modern era. I don't think one of these:
http://www.cbg.ie/CarPictures_large/CB274565.jpg

is the "curvy car with pleanty of character" the original poster was lamenting after.

I think we're starting to split into arguments here:
- aesthetics/design of the car
- reliability/maintenance of the car

I think (1) in general is on a downward slope as modern cars start to look the same (including the '92 corolla).

I think (2) probably peaked in the mid-ninties, with japanese engineering & production, but before chips and car management systems started to make an appearance.

Canis Lupus

I'd agree that alot of cars are getting a bit samey... But I reckon cars are looking better now than they ever had so I'm not complaining.

Rattlor

The new Micras are even gayer than the previous design, and the new Civic is totally bent too.
And on a slightly related note, I also hate all Fiats - Multipla (PUKE), Stilo, Punto, etc.

lomb

if ur willing to pay nice looking cars are on your beck and call. examples mercedes e class, audi tt, porsche boxster, bmw z4, mercedes slk all alfas although u trade off any reliability, vw new gti looks well and only 34000. agreed the new focus looks rubbish but i bet u anything the next focus will be lovely after they dont sell any of these ones.

the reason they are taking out curves is to lower production costs, and reduce drag to increase economy. also to meet the new pedestrian friendly tests if u hit one. also maybe they dont want to offend anyone thats why corollas have always looked crap as they are made by a conservative japenese company and italian cars have always innovated on style yes the fiats are dirt but at least they are different and you have a choice even if its not a reliable one.

electronics have their plus and minus points. plus-cheaper to roll out for the manufacturer, increased fuel economy, talking to other systems ie new automatic cars a split second before the gear change dip the throttle for a seamless shift, usually very reliable.

minus- when they go wrong expensive and timeconsuming to diagnose but mostly just expensive. the ecu that controls the engine costs 1500euro in any modern car eg corolla, golf, etc so not cheap.

DukeDredd

mike65 wrote:

Duke I think bbbbb has something nearer 1972/82 in mind! In which case he'd be spot on. I like cars I can understand and work on without needing a white lab coat.

Mike.

Ok - just didn't see anywhere in his about what era he was talking about.

ambro25

Rattlor wrote:

And on a slightly related note, I also hate all Fiats - Multipla (PUKE), Stilo, Punto, etc.

Ever since coming out, I've decided to dub the Multipla the 'Multi-bleuah'

And insofar as modern oil refineries under the bonnet are concerned, I totally hear the argument against it. I won't re-bore people with my misadventures with a 1.6 SX Fiat Brava, but suffice to say that if a car needs a computer to tell the mechanic what's wrong with it in the first place, I 'aint buying it - been finger-burnt before...

DukeDredd

ambro25 wrote:

Ever since coming out, I've decided to dub the Multipla the 'Multi-bleuah'

And insofar as modern oil refineries under the bonnet are concerned, I totally hear the argument against it. I won't re-bore people with my misadventures with a 1.6 SX Fiat Brava, but suffice to say that if a car needs a computer to tell the mechanic what's wrong with it in the first place, I 'aint buying it - been finger-burnt before...

I agree with you on this score. I had a BMW a couple of years ago and various things started to go wrong in it and the mechanics hadn't a fecking clue what was going on with it. All this diagnostic bull has taken over. A scheme to get rid of the small garage i reckon.

dahamsta

It's just fashion, it's not like it's never happened before. I doubt many here were around in the late fifties but you've probably still heard of the '57 Chevy, which started a trend back then much like we have now. The entire world followed suit, even in Ireland where we had what were effectively scale models, like the Anglia (which are just as cool, but smaller). Yes they were angular and curvy, but that was the fashion then and this is the fashion now. In fifty years the current trend will be emulated in another way.

I think the new 5 and 7 series BMW's are totally cool btw, which pretty much pins my flag to the pole.

adam

shagman

I would agree that generally modern cars are awfull hideous machines designed by marketing people with a "value adding" and built in obsolesence mindset (with very few exceptions) .Thats why the computers are there so only dealer garages can fix them .I don't recall a huge public demand for them. A lot of the arguements against classic cars are generalisations ie they all rust and are not dependable tell that to the owner of the volvo p1800 with over 2 million on the clock. A lot of what we consider modern technology is available on luxury classics eg 4wd with traction control on the jenson interceptor FF 13 years before the audi quattro.The only thing I can think of that is relatively new is airbags.Even those merc folding hardtops are an ancient design.
For me the only way to pick a car is if you were 10 again would you buy a matchbox hotwheels model of it to do the loop de loop track that ye just got off santa.

ambro25

My dream car is a TVR... any TVR, but a Griffith would be nice.

'says enough about my position on curves, engine complexity (not to say my love of RWD ).

Nearly bought a 5L two years ago for £14k, 37k on clock, lowered (a little :rolleyes:), Brembo all around, 17", full s/steel exhaust, metallic midnight blue, cream hide/tan top. Wife wouldn't let me part-ex the MX-5 :mad: .

alastair

shagman wrote:

A lot of the arguements against classic cars are generalisations ie they all rust and are not dependable tell that to the owner of the volvo p1800 with over 2 million on the clock.

ANY car will rust given time and exposure to the elements (except for those galvanised affairs, and there's the odd 20 year old car that was galvanised). Some old cars are dependable, and some aren't. I'd imagine the service overhead on a new Ferrari is considerable compared to a Morris 1000. If you want a reliable older car you just choose a sensible one.

There are many 'classic' cars that are perfectly usable as an everyday car, and which will outlast most of the new models available. It's just a matter of adapting to the odd quirks of older technology (generally fewer creature comforts, heavier steering, regular maintainance and attention, owners clubs and specialist breakers where parts become scarce, etc). I grew up in a household where classic 60's cars were used as everyday transport alongside 'modern' hatchbacks. There wasn't any significant difference in reliability or overhead running cost. I'd bet that the classics are still on the road though, and the hatchbacks have gone for scrappage. You pay your money and make your choice.

Personally I don't think there's much being produced these days that holds a candle to the sheer character of older classics. The TT is lovely alright, and sure there's porches and smart cars and well proportioned alfa's, but nothing to compare to the personality of a morris traveller, a frogeye sprite, or a citroen DS. It helps of course to have the cream of thirty years automotive design to choose from. New cars are safer, cleaner, generally easier to drive, and make your life a little easier, but definitely blander.

I'm a biased volvo 1800 owner of course. Given a lottery win I'd probably buy an aston martin DB5 before I'd even consider one of their new (and better) cars.

impr0v

dahamsta wrote:

I think the new 5 and 7 series BMW's are totally cool btw, which pretty much pins my flag to the pole.

I'm also a fan. There's a short and interesting interview with Chris Bangle
here (again from Top Gear which I always seem to be pimping) making similar points about the phases of car design and trying to break the mould.

De Hipster

ambro25 wrote:

Ever since coming out, I've decided to dub the Multipla the 'Multi-bleuah'

Mine would be the unaffectionately christened 'Ford F*ck-up'...more commonly referred to as focus...

Modern vehicle styling sucks, cars no-longer have the character personality and/or entity they once had. It's got to the stage where I find myself appreciating anything that's even vaguely original. If only I could afford to stick to the high-performance supercar categories...my F40 & F355 are still along way off.

shagman

Ambro 25 ....Strange my mates dream car is a TVR Griffith too and he has settled for an MX5 in the meantime. I read an article in the tribune I think it was some minor celibrity trout going on about how her dream car is a porsche speedster but she drives an 04 Alfa or something. Are Porsche speedsters that expensive I wouldn't have thought so. Seems a lot of people have classic "dream" cars and then spend twice as much on an 04 box that'll depreciate in value hugely.
I think I'll start a thread on modern cars excluding supercars that exhibit an ounce of style or even brave design .

2 Espressi

Re: Convergent car design.
I just think that if an idea works, then it will be adopted by others. And there are plenty of great designs out there ay the moment. There are plenty of crap cars still beings made . So some things havent changed. What has changed is technology has sufficiently advanced for us to build the cars many have dreamed of for years. This has lead to the end of such notable featuresd as chrome brightwork, and bolt on bits like lights and resin bumpers of yore.

ambro25

shagman wrote:

Ambro 25 ....Strange my mates dream car is a TVR Griffith too and he has settled for an MX5 in the meantime.

1.6 or 1.8? All the same, it's a good school if he's not been driving RWD before... I still sometimes scare myself silly with the Maz', I daren't think of what the same situations would have been like with the TVR :eek:

shagman wrote:

I read an article in the tribune I think it was some minor celibrity trout going on about how her dream car is a porsche speedster but she drives an 04 Alfa or something. Are Porsche speedsters that expensive I wouldn't have thought so. Seems a lot of people have classic "dream" cars and then spend twice as much on an 04 box that'll depreciate in value hugely.

Seems to me everybody with an ounce of interest in motoring has a dream car/car they'd like to won & drive - it's aspirational, of course. But also totally dependent on motivations. I have always loved cars, from being able to barely sit & play with Corgis (well, Majorettes in France ) to now. Some people I know, however, just consider them for what they are: an object to facilitate transportation from A to B, with a huge price tag irrespective of the type/brand and a major portion of a household budget.

All the same... I do side with you on the topic of people who want dream cars, could afford dream cars, but decide to make a false economy with buying new/nearly-new (probably thinking it'll cost less to run/maintain/etc...) instead - their loss!

dahamsta

shagman wrote:

Strange my mates dream car is a TVR Griffith too

Everyone's dream car should be a Griffith, it's a cool car. (Although it ranks below a Diablo for me.)

Are Porsche speedsters that expensive I wouldn't have thought so.

Course they are, they're an absolute classic. Here's a lovely black one going for €55,000. Even that has "original" in quotes.

adam

dcGT

dahamsta wrote:

Here's a lovely black one going for €55,000. Even that has "original" in quotes.

I love those Speedsters. Beautiful cars. Personally, one of my favourite classics is the Mercedes 300SL. A truly unique design and a beautiful car. Like many classic designs, the gull-wing doors were placed there out of necessity (chassis design) - and now they define this particular car. The 300SL went like stink too in its day and had a true racing pedigree in its blood line. I'm not a big fan of Mercedes per se, but this is one exception.

De Hipster

I'm dribbling...was featured on Top Gear about a fortnight ago, absolutely devine!

ambro25

dahamsta wrote:

Everyone's dream car should be a Griffith, it's a cool car. (Although it ranks below a Diablo for me.)

'Ta! However, there should be a further 'classification' between 'attainable' dream cars and 'forever wished' dream cars: don't mean 2 be mean or p*** on your shoes, but your Diablo (even second hand) will set you back at least 3 times the price of a Griffith - and I've not gone on about running costs yet, either

Alfasudcrazy

Well I for one am pretty happy with current car design as I have a new Alfa GT waiting for me in the garage in January
Jap cars have always been boring and always will be. New BMW's are impressive looking to me.
Worst cars in my opinion as regards design are the civic and Yaris :mad: