Modern car designs ugly?

[TexRex]

such vehement dislike for something that's now so familiar is very odd indeed

(How long has 'Keeping Up With The Kardashians' been on the air now?)

 

[R5]

(How long has 'Keeping Up With The Kardashians' been on the air now?)

(How many people actually watch it?)

 

[Keef]

There is a difference between a "good" design and a "pretty" design. A design can be great yet ugly and vice versa.

 

[TexRex]

It can even be argued that a good design--particularly one intended to use construction materials and the subsequent required fuel as efficiently as possible--might inherently not be attractive if it means the end result is bland and follows suit with everything else on the road built to the same standards.

@legacyMACHINE something that has been established isn't automatically accepted thanks to its presence. I think the Juke is ugly, and its popularity combined with the amount of time I spend on the road during the week means it most certainly is something I must live with. I'd imagine it's quite difficult understanding others disliking something one likes, but I can say with complete honesty that I'd rather suffer in silence (as if I ever do) than have everything look exactly the same for reasons mentioned above.

 

[homeforsummer]

There is a difference between a "good" design and a "pretty" design. A design can be great yet ugly and vice versa.

Indeed. Though that's mainly because most people see "design" and "styling" as exactly the same thing, when they're not.

That, and humans aren't geared to find unfamiliar things appealing.

Most people go through life liking more or less the same things they liked between birth and their teenage years. I'm happy to admit I do that with kids' TV shows and music. Most kids' TV is crap now but some of the stuff I used to watch was great. And I've been completely nonplussed by most modern music over the last few years, even in genres that I traditionally like.

I don't do the same with cars - I like old stuff and new stuff alike - but many do. We have people on this forum who have a mental cut-off for pickups around the mid-nineties, or people who dislike all hatchbacks even though there are some absolutely fantastic looking examples of the breed. People prefer to cling onto an ideal than explore new things.

I suspect if your ideal car design is a variation of a 1980s square box or a curvy 1960s form, then the Juke is probably a step too far. If you throw aside preconceptions about what a car is "supposed" to look like (a three-box sedan, headlights in a particular place or whatever), then the Juke is a lot easier to appreciate.

In several ways I'd actually say the Juke is a better "styling" job than it is a "design". If we're to assume a Juke is supposed to seat four people and carry luggage as an alternative to a B-segment hatch, then it's not actually that great a design - rear access is a bit rubbish and the boot is quite small. Good design has been sacrificed at the altar of interesting styling...

 

[TexRex]

And the Juke is most definitely interesting. I think my ZDX is interesting as well, but without many of the [what I consider to be] unpleasant characteristics of the Nissan.

 

[Keef]

It can even be argued that a good design--particularly one intended to use construction materials and the subsequent required fuel as efficiently as possible--might inherently not be attractive if it means the end result is bland and follows suit with everything else on the road built to the same standards.

Indeed. Though that's mainly because most people see "design" and "styling" as exactly the same thing, when they're not.

In several ways I'd actually say the Juke is a better "styling" job than it is a "design". If we're to assume a Juke is supposed to seat four people and carry luggage as an alternative to a B-segment hatch, then it's not actually that great a design - rear access is a bit rubbish and the boot is quite small. Good design has been sacrificed at the altar of interesting styling...

I was referring to aesthetic design rather than engineering. Sometimes these two go hand-in-hand - Dieter Rams is a god - but cars are pretty complicated so its understandable that sacrifices have to be made. But you can still just a design based on aesthetics alone, like the ZDX which is not functionalistic at all but is still a pretty fantastic design. The Juke, not so much. The Juke is not only ugly but doesn't really utilize any design principles that I would consider "good". Unlike the ZDX or Nissan's own new Murano, the Juke is an incoherent mish-mash of shapes and curves and lines and there's no theme to it at all. The design is annoying which is funny because it's an annoying car marketed to annoying people, at least here in the states.

 

[homeforsummer]

It's odd, but I think the lack of theme to the Juke is a theme in itself. I'm trying to think of an equivalent in the non-automotive sphere for comparison, but nothing is coming immediately to mind.

What I really like about the Juke is that, here in the UK at least, it's very successful indeed. Now the market has proven time and time again that wilfully ugly cars don't sell, and that people are naturally fairly conservative and buy cars that reflect that. And yet the Juke is a big f-you to that theory because tens of thousands of people are buying it.

To me that says a sub-section of the car-buying population is fed up with boring cars, and I can't help but applaud any buyer deliberately opting for a car that doesn't look boring. That it happens to be an affordable car obviously helps, but there are plenty of affordable and boring cars out there that people are eschewing in favour of Jukes.

 

[TexRex]

The ZDX replaced a Pilot in our driveway and, while perhaps not as functional from a cargo space perspective, it's still more utilitarian than the Juke by virtue of its increased volume. That said, the "coupe" roof has proven itself a nuisance on a couple of occasions. Still, it brought with it much more driving enjoyment than the Honda ever did and the Nissan [seemingly] ever could--hearty V6 and better handling than something of its stature has any business having (I tested the X6 and managed to set aside my bias against modern BMWs, but was still drawn to the ZDX).

The Acura has a flow to it, though, from its slightly pinched nose to its oversized haunches below the beltline and nearly opposite greenhouse. Nothing is really out of place, whereas the upper headlights on the Juke seem almost like bone spurs jutting out from either side of the hood and the tail end just looks unfinished...perhaps an homage to Mercedes' C-class hatch of some years back. Sure, it's quirky and funky but the two characteristics seem to only say "I'm quirky and funky" without anything to balance the aesthetic.

I won't take any swings at anyone that owns or even simply appreciates the Juke, hell, I'd even say it fills an otherwise untouched segment (is Buick's Enclave comparably spec'd?), but I still ugly with a capital F. *gasp* Rant over!

 

[buickgnx88]

Personally, my favorite era of car design is the 80's and early 90's. I love the boxy styling, the flared arches, spoilers aplenty, and the 15-17" wheels that still mostly had some depth to them. I think the Mitsubishi Starion is probably the best example of the look I'm describing.

 

[TVR27]

Cars I like

Cars I don't like

 

[FoRiZon]

@Latvija27 Ironically, you put the most beautiful car on the dont like section so it made comparable to the likes.

The front of the recent BMW CSL Concept would be more suitable.

Of course, except the new Ford GT. That is indeed overdone. And V6?

 

[homeforsummer]

That's an interesting list above because Ford GT(s) aside, which I'd swap, I find all of the "don't like" cars more appealing than the "like". The SLR has always had really poor proportions for me and fussy detailing. The Huayra isn't a patch on the Zonda - it looks like a Zonda that's had an allergic reaction to something - and the Sagaris is like a caricature of TVRs of its time.

The AMG GT on the other hand looks absolutely stunning in the metal (I'm not keen on the headlights, but the rest is clean, unadorned and beautifully proportioned), the NSX is a little generic but also compact and lithe, and the i8 is the best looking BMW in decades. The detailing is fantastic, the headlight and kidney treatment the best we've seen from BMW in years and it manages to look futuristic without looking fussy. The "pooing out a Porsche" rear end isn't perfect but it's very colour sensitive - that effect only really applies when the base colour is silver.

And while the new GT doesn't look quite as good as its predecessor, it has some amazing details and it's at least more original than the previous GT. The old GT isn't really a "modern car design" in the true sense of the term.

 

[TVR27]

I don't like the way Mercedes are designing cars the AMG GT isn't as good as the SLS or the SLR.

 

[homeforsummer]

I don't like the way Mercedes are designing cars the AMG GT isn't as good as the SLS or the SLR.

Can you expand? "Isn't as good" is quite general. For me, the SLS was an interesting car (though the GT has made it look very big, very blocky and oddly proportioned) but I really struggle to see the appeal of the SLR. It's a mish-mash of different ideas, from contemporary Mercedes to that bizarre attempt at giving it an F1-style nosecone, and a truncated rear end. Then they slung a load of vents at it for added fussiness. The only detail that has genuinely stood the test of time are the wheels, but turbine-blade wheels will always look good.

 

[Cowboy]

best supercar of its decade (in my opinion).

 

[Moglet]

This one takes the cake for being ugly IMO. Together with everything Seat and KIA throw out of their design department.

Reported

 

[TVR27]

Can you expand? "Isn't as good" is quite general. For me, the SLS was an interesting car (though the GT has made it look very big, very blocky and oddly proportioned) but I really struggle to see the appeal of the SLR. It's a mish-mash of different ideas, from contemporary Mercedes to that bizarre attempt at giving it an F1-style nosecone, and a truncated rear end. Then they slung a load of vents at it for added fussiness. The only detail that has genuinely stood the test of time are the wheels, but turbine-blade wheels will always look good.

I find the AMG GT plain and boring in terms of style the lights and mirrors look odd.

 

[Scaff]

That's an interesting list above because Ford GT(s) aside, which I'd swap, I find all of the "don't like" cars more appealing than the "like". The SLR has always had really poor proportions for me and fussy detailing. The Huayra isn't a patch on the Zonda - it looks like a Zonda that's had an allergic reaction to something - and the Sagaris is like a caricature of TVRs of its time.

The AMG GT on the other hand looks absolutely stunning in the metal (I'm not keen on the headlights, but the rest is clean, unadorned and beautifully proportioned), the NSX is a little generic but also compact and lithe, and the i8 is the best looking BMW in decades. The detailing is fantastic, the headlight and kidney treatment the best we've seen from BMW in years and it manages to look futuristic without looking fussy. The "pooing out a Porsche" rear end isn't perfect but it's very colour sensitive - that effect only really applies when the base colour is silver.

And while the new GT doesn't look quite as good as its predecessor, it has some amazing details and it's at least more original than the previous GT. The old GT isn't really a "modern car design" in the true sense of the term.

Agreed, up close and on the move the i8 looks stunning.

 

[TVR27]

I'm not saying the AMG GT is ugly it's just plain and I know they can do better.

 

[Cowboy]

Some designs I don't like:

 

[FoRiZon]

1. Veyron: Not designed for looks, but nevertheless still looks better than the other top speed cars.

2. Veneno: Looks edgy, but it IS designed to be edgy, especially its a Lambo. Not like most manufacturers nowadays that converts to it (Audi R8)

3. F12: For it I kinda agree. Its isnt elegant and proporsionally looks like a Ferrari station wagon. Compare to the previous 612.

 

[niky]

I don't like the way Mercedes are designing cars the AMG GT isn't as good as the SLS or the SLR.

My objections to the SLS can be found here:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thre...4-mercedes-amg-gt.327152/page-2#post-10641430

Here's an illustration for reference:

Basically, the SLS was a retro-pastiche meant to evoke the 300SL, but it was horrible. The lines didn't flow. The way the headlights and the foglights stack is nearly Gumpert-level clumsy. The character lines along the flank don't interact in any meaningful way, and the rear pillar is simply retro for the sake of retro, and out of sync with the rest of the design (It's wedged in, much in the same way as Nissan insists on shoehorning 70's style C-pillars into the GT-R and 370Z.)

The AMG GT is a much less fussily styled and much more cohesive design, with nicely flowing lines and an attempt at a classically flowing roofline. I can understand how some people would be turned off by the exaggerated front styling, but personally, it injects a lot of personality into the design as compared to the more restrained front ends of the AMG GT's competition.

-

The SLR?

Excessive Bauhaus, turned up to eleven. Clumsy proportions, exaggerated side strakes, and an awkward stance.

Granted, the front end was wonderfully detailed, but the attempt to relate the styling to F1 felt forced. A less authentic nosecone would have gone with the rest of the front end styling much better. Instead, it looks grafted on like a prosthetic nose.

The AMG GT is straight to the point, in comparison. Less frivolous styling, more concentration on getting the proportions and curves right, from the very start.

Yeah. I like it. Well-executed design, with very pleasing proportions. The SLS and SLR? Those, not so much.

 

[homeforsummer]

^ What he said.

I have to say though, the GT doesn't photograph as well as it looks in the metal. Those curves and ripples in the hood look absolutely stunning up close. It's lower than it looks in photos too. Hard to see out of, admittedly - you sit low and there's not a lot of glass, but it doesn't half work styling-wise.

Given a hundred grand to play with, and expressly denied from buying a bunch of classic cars instead, I'd have to think long and very hard as to whether the dosh would go on a GT, a 911 or an i8. The 911 doesn't age and is lovely to use in normal driving, the i8 has huge technological appeal and looks like nothing else, and the GT attracts positive attention and comments like nothing I've ever driven.

 

[eight6er]

Yes modern car designs are ugly in my opinion, but there are a few exceptions. I think the Jaguar F type coupe is the nicest looking car they ever made by a long way and most of the modern jags are among the best looking cars available today. German cars seem to be getting uglier all the time, or else more boring and bland looking, so nothing really new there. US had a few nice looking designs with their modern retro muscle cars, but they're ruining them with every yearly revision.

I always hated that SLR Merc, it's got to be one of the ugliest, most out of proportion monstrosities in years. Pretty much every part of it's looks is like the car is trolling me. It looks like a cut and shut.

 

[Tornado]

Not helping was that Mercedes was also in the process of putting that same damn F1 nose on all of their sporty cars. The SLK in particular was torn into even more than the SLK for it.

 

[homeforsummer]

Yes modern car designs are ugly in my opinion, but there are a few exceptions. I think the Jaguar F type coupe is the nicest looking car they ever made by a long way and most of the modern jags are among the best looking cars available today.

I quite like the F-type but I must have missed the memo on finding it absolutely stunning. The back end is great, but the front is too gaping and square-jawed to be truly attractive and the entire car is quite squat rather than elegant.

Like the AMG GT, it's definitely better in the metal, but I'd stop a long way short of saying it's the best-looking Jag ever. I'm not even sure it's in the top ten. I'm going off Ian Callum too. The XJ is neat (and still a bloody lovely thing to drive) but the impact of the XF has gone, the XE is bland, the new 4x4 thing not as interesting as it could be and I'm thoroughly bored of the long line of copycat Astons since the original Vanquish.

While I appreciate that he's dug Jaguar out of its retro hole he's also too quick to write off those designs these days. The S-type wasn't universally popular but I think he made a mess of its facelift when he joined the company and that reimagined MkII he built a year or two back was a dog's dinner.

And while I like the current XJ, I'm not sure it'll age as well as the previous models. The reason they endured so long is because it was a stunning shape for a saloon car. I saw one in the evening in London a few months back. XJR. Dark colour. Looked impossibly cool slinking along the Strand.

 

[el fayce]

As a person who sees toyotas on regular basis, I think I should abort the country,

The 4runner and the Tundra aren't helping much

 

[synchromesh]

I personally love the new Mini Cooper.

 

[niky]

As a person who sees toyotas on regular basis, I think I should abort the country,

The 4runner and the Tundra aren't helping much

A lot of people like the new Corolla. While I can see why, I don't really care that much for it, either.

For the Vios/Yaris/whateveritscalledinyourplace, the design actually works a bit better than the blobby tall Fiesta/Sonic/Almera(Versa) that it's sold against, though the front end certainly is love-it-or-hate-it.