Understanding automotive design

[Sharp11]

I, like many, have an immediate and visceral response to automotive designs. It's easy to hate something, especially if it's unfamiliar. OTOH, it's easy to like something right out of the box, especially if it is familiar.

However, I've been doing quite a bit of reading regarding automotive design and have come to understand something rather important, that is, design is art and art is sometimes hard to "get" if you don't know what the designer's intentions or goals were. I warmed up to the Z4 design, partly, after reading up on its designer's objectives.

When we look at a piece of art or listen to music we're not versed in, we may hate it or dismiss it out of hand - i.e., if one doesn't understand the language of jazz can one really enjoy Charlie Parker? If 20th century music is foreign to you will you really enjoy Bartok or Barber? Will Jackson Pollock and Helen Frankenthaler light your fire in the art world? It's unlikely.

Automotive designers, unlike the artists I've mentioned, are faced with many challenges, from the cost of building designs to meeting regulations and expectations of their bosses and finally, the acceptance of the public. I can relate to this as a composer-for-hire, I'm constantly having to be creative within tight parameters.

I'm not saying we should love the current designs, but it's interesting to keep certain things in mind with perhaps trying to understand the designer's goal, I think, most important.

Just a thought.

Ed

[Roadstergal]

On the other hand, I warmed up to the Z4 without having a clue what the designer's goals are.

[rumatt]

http://forums.carmudgeons.com/showpost.php?p=93221&postcount=22

[lemming]

:+1

http://forums.carmudgeons.com/showpost.php?p=93221&postcount=22

i understand your point, E., but to understand a composer's music or a designer's concept is one thing. to say that the music is timeless and a classic, however, is not always true, even though you can appreciate the genius of the composer.

[Sharp11]

On the other hand, I warmed up to the Z4 without having a clue what the designer's goals are.

That's because you're the young, free-spirited type, open to all possibilities - except, of course, Apple computers. ;)

Ed

[Roadstergal]

Some people just don't like Mozart. Some people don't like Wagner. Some people, boggling though it may be, don't like Red Dwarf. I've given up trying to convert them.


except, of course, Apple computers.

Try to support G5 servers for a year and see how you like them...
Actually, I started off with Apples, and was an Apple fanatic for years. My first computer was an Apple II+.

[Sharp11]

http://forums.carmudgeons.com/showpost.php?p=93221&postcount=22

I don't know, maybe because of this?

OTOH, it's easy to like something right out of the box, especially if it is familiar.

Ed

[Sharp11]

:+1



i understand your point, E., but to understand a composer's music or a designer's concept is one thing. to say that the music is timeless and a classic, however, is not always true, even though you can appreciate the genius of the composer.

I understand, I'm just suggesting a way towards opening our minds up to new things, let's not worry about whether something will stand the test of time (you're right, we have no way of knowthing this anyway).

In light of my thread topic, I'd sure like to know what was on the mind of the designer of the Edsel - Salvator Dali, perhaps? :)

[lupinsea]

Going through architecture school and working in the architectural profession I'm offen on the designing end of the stick. During school when we'd have outside architects come in to critique our work they would try to react and evaluate our designs based upon what we stated our design goals were, not necessarily whether they personally liked the design. To a certain extend I try to extend the same consideration to other designers. But in the end these things we design, be they cars, buildings, computers, or what have you, must ultimately appeal to the intended audience. Every once in a while designers must do what I'd call a "gut reality check." It's easy to get wrapped up within your own design language so you need to be able to step back, scratch your head, divorce yourself from your efforts, ideas, and energies and REALLY ask yourself, "does this makes sense, does this look good, what the hell is this supposed to be." Afterall, most people won't have any clue as to what the design concept or inspiration was. They'll either like it or not for various reasons.

Continuing with the Z4 as an example, I appreciate the Z4 as a design effort and like the concept of the "flame surffacing" in the sheet metal of the sides. The effect is quite striking and seems very evocative of the conceptual idea. There may be some lines or folds I'd have done differently but over all it's a very interesting concept. However, stepping back and looking at the over all package I'm still undecided on whether I like it. I don't hate it and I think it looks good but I'm not sure I really like it. It certainly wouldn't be a deal breaker at all if I was in the market for a 2 seat roadster.

http://users.belgacom.net/bmw_z3/family_Z3/BMW_Z4-1.jpg

http://news.caradisiac.com/IMG/jpg/BMW-Z4-M-1.jpg

http://news.caradisiac.com/IMG/jpg/BMW-Z4-M-4.jpg

http://clabedan.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/bmwz412.jpg

http://www.autopress.be/images/SPORTIVE/BMW_Z4_20i.jpg





But when I gaze on just about any Aston Martin I don't have to think about the design. There's something instantly appealing to me about the elegant lines on, say, the Vantage.

http://www.astonmartin.com/content/allsites/images/action17_a11c7de9-1ff7-4850-bda8-4961140eabff.jpg

http://www.moviecars.it/images/auto/astonmartin_vantage8_big2.jpg

http://www.moviecars.it/images/auto/astonmartin_vantage8_big1.jpg

http://www.anthony-perry.com/uploaded_images/3745064986-746478.jpg

[John V]

I'm not saying we should love the current designs, but it's interesting to keep certain things in mind with perhaps trying to understand the designer's goal, I think, most important.

I don't think understanding the designer's goals is going to change many opinions about a car. Some designs you immediately love. Some you immediately hate. Some you're indifferent to (or maybe even dislike) but then warm up to.

Ed, do you think that if you talked to the designer of the Aztek about his design goals that you'd appreciate that pregnant rollerskate a little more? How about the late 80's Mercury Capri? The '96+ Ford Taurus? The Edsel?

Just like there are certain pieces of art that I don't appreciate and certain works that I don't enjoy listening to, there are certain things about the Z4 that I don't appreciate. The cutline along the front of the hood, the droopy kidney nostrils, the saggy headlights, the flaccid-penis-like side profile... they just don't make any sense to me and the remaining positive qualities of the car are drowned out by its weaknesses. But you think it looks good and that's all that matters - it's your car. :dunno:

[Sharp11]

Just like there are certain pieces of art that I don't appreciate and certain works that I don't enjoy listening to, there are certain things about the Z4 that I don't appreciate. The cutline along the front of the hood, the droopy kidney nostrils, the saggy headlights, the flaccid-penis-like side profile... they just don't make any sense to me and the remaining positive qualities of the car are drowned out by its weaknesses. But you think it looks good and that's all that matters - it's your car. :dunno:

The point of the thread is not to make you like the Z4, or any car for that matter, but to just allow for a little more education on the subject.

I understand a whole lot about music, it's my profession. I can pick apart a composition note for note, yet, I can still not like it. I can even recognize, for instance, the quality behind a certain pop song, and even readily admit it's really well-written, yet I can still dislike it immensely.

As one who loves to learn, I'm always up for carrying a certain level of information into other aspects of my life - I just don't want to readily dismiss things without attempting to understand them. Perhaps this is more of a mid-life thing for me as I try to keep my creativity and creative mind open.

Ed

Ed

[Sharp11]

I appreciate the Z4 as a design effort and like the concept of the "flame surffacing" in the sheet metal of the sides. There may be some lines or folds I'd have done differently but over all it's a very interesting concept. I don't hate it and I think it looks good but I'm not sure I really like it. It certainly wouldn't be a deal breaker at all if I was in the market for a 2 seat roadster.



Lup,

Thanks for taking the time - it's an interesting perspective and sums up my feelings pretty well, both in terms of your profession (which I respect) and your design interpretation.

Some of the things the designers (there were two, interior-exterior) tried to do with the Z4 came off well, IMO; I like the sprinting-forward look of the side profile, the low cut-line at the front of the door is there to emulate the cut of early roadsters (this is perhaps not so successful, arguably), the floating dash harkens back to the 20's and 30's (the Chis-Craft effect) and many more details.....most of which work fine for me. I simply don't see a problem with the front kidneys or headlamps, especially as compared to other current BMW designs-to me it looks great.

Interestingly, the Aston Martins don't do it for me, to me, the most beautiful car ever designed was the early 60's Jag XKE, followed by the Jag 120 from the 40's. I guess I'm a sucker for the long hood, short rear roadster proportions of the earlier cars.

Ed

[John V]

Some of the things the designers (there were two, interior-exterior) tried to do with the Z4 came off well, IMO; I like the sprinting-forward look of the side profile, the low cut-line at the front of the door is there to emulate the cut of early roadsters (this is perhaps not so successful, arguably), the floating dash harkens back to the 20's and 30's (the Chis-Craft effect) and many more details.....most of which work fine for me. I simply don't see a problem with the front kidneys or headlamps, especially as compared to other current BMW designs-to me it looks great.

I would like to understand what the designer's goals were for the front bumper / headlights / grille.

I appreciate what they were trying to do on the side with the "flame surfacing" Z-shaped creases and the door cutline - I just think they failed.

[Sharp11]

I would like to understand what the designer's goals were for the front bumper / headlights / grille.

I appreciate what they were trying to do on the side with the "flame surfacing" Z-shaped creases and the door cutline - I just think they failed.

I think the idea in front was to accentuate the width and low stance of the car. I like it.

Compare this to the verticality (and mass of cutlines) of the E90's front-end and I just don't see the objection.

But if it strikes you as wrong, so be it.

I feel the same way about the side profile of the Boxster, I can't get used to its amidships design, a design that puts the driver in the middle. This gives the car a funny sort of "can't tell the front from back" look. It's especially bad with the top up.

Ed

[John V]

Compare this to the verticality (and mass of cutlines) of the E90's front-end and I just don't see the objection.

I never said the E90 front end looked good. :dunno: The car as a whole is growing on me, but the front end is still fugly. So I'm not sure what your point is.

I feel the same way about the side profile of the Boxster, I can't get used to its amidships design, a design that puts the driver in the middle. This gives the car a funny sort of "can't tell the front from back" look. It's especially bad with the top up.

Yep, it looks like a flying saucer from the side. With the top down I think it looks great, but with the top up it's not a pretty sight. I think they could have done better if they'd added F355 or Solstice-esque buttresses to lengthen the appearance of the passenger compartment, but that would have made lowering and raising the top more difficult.

From the front, I hate the weird headlights and wish they had gone with a more elegant twist on a classic line like the new 987 cars have or straight up classic ovals like a 993.

[Roadstergal]

I never liked the rear end of any Porsche.

[John V]

:dunno:

http://vorlon.cwru.edu/~jpv/porsche/R_threequarter.jpg
http://vorlon.cwru.edu/~jpv/porsche/R_closeup.jpg

[Sharp11]

:dunno:

http://vorlon.cwru.edu/~jpv/porsche/R_threequarter.jpg
http://vorlon.cwru.edu/~jpv/porsche/R_closeup.jpg

Yours?

Nice color and it's still a great drive (but that back could be a front ;) )

Ed

[Sharp11]

The rear of the Z4 is the weakest view, imo.

Of course, as you know, it's the second view (top down) that makes it all worthwhile. Heck, I've had the roof open several times already this winter!!

[Roadstergal]

:dunno:

Especially that one. The rear looks like the front, and both look like someone sat on a frog.

I understand what they were trying to do with the design, but I don't like it. ;)

[John V]

The rear of the Z4 is the weakest view, imo.

Of course, as you know, it's the second view (top down) that makes it all worthwhile. Heck, I've had the roof open several times already this winter!!

I .. er .. ah ... you know you're not supposed to open or close a canvas roof when the temperature is below 40-45 degrees, right? :ack:

Obviously we can all argue automotive styling preferences until we're blue in the face and accomplish nothing. FWIW, I don't know what the Boxster stylists design goals were, and I don't particularly care. It doesn't add to or detract from my appreciation or dislike for various aspects. It's meaningless. I suppose all that matters is how the person writing the check at the end of the month feels about it :dunno:

Anyway, I didn't buy the Boxster for the styling, but at the same time I didn't find it offensive enough that I would hate owning it.

[Sharp11]

I .. er .. ah ... you know you're not supposed to open or close a canvas roof when the temperature is below 40-45 degrees, right? :ack:



It's been in the 50's and 60's up here.

My neighbor has a silver Boxster, she has the top down all the time, well down into the low 40's.

Ed

[John V]

My neighbor has a silver Boxster, she has the top down all the time, well down into the low 40's.

Ed

Edit: Knowing boxsters, the top is probably broken. :P

Ack. It's okay to lower it in a heated garage, go driving, come back, and raise it up once the top is warm. But lowering / raising in that cold weather is a real gamble for any canvas roof.

Hey, the Z4's rear end isn't THAT bad. Or rather, it isn't THIS bad:

http://e36evolution.com/IBm6.jpg
http://www.bmwgtn.ru/model/newmodel/03.jpg

[Plaz]

I never liked the rear end of any Porsche.

I tried to find an image of Portia deRossi's ass to reply with, but couldn't find a good one. :eeps:

[lupinsea]

Keep looking, Plaz! :eeps:

[John V]

Keep looking, Plaz! :eeps:

Yes, please!

[lemming]

understanding the new BMW design language really 'did' NOT and 'does' not help with my appreciation of the e65, the e60, the e85 or of the e63 (?). sorry, Ed. i know the point that you are driving at, but to me, car styling is not a cerebral exercise. it's all about the visceral and the subconscious. to try to elevate the discussion, as time has shown for BMW moderating their "design language", to something intellectual is ruinous.

for example, there are plenty of strange looking dogs that win the Westminster Dog Show that have zero appeal to me. but they are the best examples of their breed and there is a lot of thought into how the breed get represented and how a dog that never have dirt touch its paws "looks" like it would be able to fulfill its AKC definition of "hunting" or "birding".

but you know those frilly dogs? name the top 5 most popular dog breeds in the US. dogs, like cars, don't really need a lot of intellectual engagement to appreciate them. they're compelling or they're not on an emotional level.

[IndyMike]

name the top 5 most popular dog breeds in the US.
In no particular order I'd guess the following:

Standard Poodle
Golden Retriever
Schnauzer
Lhasa Apso
Black Labrador

:dunno:

I understand the design and purpose of any dog better than I understand the design philosophy of the Z4.

Now cats. That's another matter! They are in the Z4 category.

[Jason C]

The point of the thread is not to make you like the Z4, or any car for that matter, but to just allow for a little more education on the subject.

This sounds totally like BMW-esque condescension in recent years during press conferences and the like. You know it's not going well when every auto show meant spending an inordinant amount of time having to *educate* the ignorant masses on their design superiority and why everyone who criticized them must be wrong.

[lemming]

...another aspect of understanding automotive design which is interwoven with marketing in our era is to understand socioeconomics, too.

[Plaz]

...another aspect of understanding automotive design which is interwoven with marketing in our era is to understand socioeconomics, too.


IOW, it's all about the bling. :bigpimp:

[lupinsea]

So, um, Plaz. . .hows the Portia deRossi ass search going? :toetap:

[Plaz]

So, um, Plaz. . .hows the Portia deRossi ass search going? :toetap:

:lol:

Badly. But maybe this will satiate you guys.

http://vipx.telepolis.com/asombroso/famosas/images/portiadirossi.jpg
http://portia-de-rossi-nude.younghollywoodteens.com/nude/portia-de-rossi-nude_011.jpg

[Sharp11]

:lol:

Badly. But maybe this will satiate you guys.

http://vipx.telepolis.com/asombroso/famosas/images/portiadirossi.jpg
http://portia-de-rossi-nude.younghollywoodteens.com/nude/portia-de-rossi-nude_011.jpg

Gotta love message boards - in this thread alone we get: the top five dog breeds, Architecture, Charlie Parker and Helen Frankenthaler, Aston Martin, the Jag XKE and 120's, when to not fold a convertible top and finally portia-de-rossi's ass, well not quite, but almost.

Ed

[lupinsea]

and finally portia-de-rossi's ass . . .





:cool:





http://www.angelfire.com/pa3/portia/images/RScover.jpg



http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2005/02/06/SAG13_gallery__270x550.jpg

[IndyMike]

Gotta love message boards - in this thread alone we get: the top five dog breeds, Architecture, Charlie Parker and Helen Frankenthaler, Aston Martin, the Jag XKE and 120's, when to not fold a convertible top and finally portia-de-rossi's ass, well not quite, but almost.

Ed
Yeah, it appears we all have ADD and are not taking our meds as prescribed. :D

[lemming]

my two points were another subjective comparison between "form and function" and "beauty and appeal" using canines as an example (1) and the issue that BMW's styling appeals to a certain swath of people that does not overlap with MB's main demographic when i invoked socioeconomics (2).

[JST]

:cool:







http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2005/02/06/SAG13_gallery__270x550.jpg


Portias blow. Wouldn't you rather have something Swedish?

http://entertainment.tv.yahoo.com/shop?d=ap&id=1807763769&cf=pg&photoid=604894

(maybe not work safe, depending on where you work)

[lupinsea]

Why . . . yes I would.

Swedish would be juuuuuuuust fine. Especially at 2600 lb, 800+ hp, and 678 ft-lb.



http://www.myautoworld.com/autos/koenigsegg/koenigsegg-CCR/Koenigsegg-1.jpg


http://www.myautoworld.com/autos/koenigsegg/koenigsegg-CCR/Koenigsegg-7.jpg


http://www.myautoworld.com/autos/koenigsegg/koenigsegg-CCR/Koenigsegg-16.jpg


http://www.myautoworld.com/autos/koenigsegg/koenigsegg-CCR/Koenigsegg-9.jpg


http://www.myautoworld.com/autos/koenigsegg/koenigsegg-CCR/Koenigsegg-18.jpg

[lemming]

the Koe'segg is kewl.

and hey! look! true dual exhaust system. :-P

[lupinsea]

Koenigsegg Top Gear Video (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7016898738854371657&q=koenigsegg)

:cool: