I never thought a 1980 Seville as a beautiful car but set against this modern monstrosity…
Look at the simple, clear but effective horizontal lines on the older car.
It seems we’re in a wild age again, like the late “fins” fifties, with wild details. That SUV has strange dents on the side, stupid lines up front, a huge unnecessary grill, wheels are too big, etc etc.
We can only hope this current, strange period will end someday. After that, will we return to an age where cars have better designs again?
I thought that, too. Whatever kind of car that is behind the Caddy has a dent in the side. No, wait, it’s supposed to be there.
Hell, I don’t even like the new Mustang. I’m having a hard time thinking of a new car I like. This coming from someone who works at a dealership that sells high end cars.
I agree completely.
There is absolutely no new vehicle I can think of to want;
completely turned off by the fugly.
If I was a kid nowadays, I wouldn’t ever get into cars in the first place.
How has it gotten so bad?
Every new vehicle seems like it was catered to the same dozen people in a single focus group held some time ago, despite huge lineups of ostensibly different segments, none of which fit my personal wants or desires besides one or two stat points. I really don’t care about horsepower if the vehicle looks like a rolling Frank Gehry abomination
XR7Matt: You hit the nail on the head! These “focus groups” are who? From where? I’m in the automotive business and have been for a total of 20 years now. I’ve owned many new vehicles and even more used cars over the years. I have never been in any focus group. Now, I’ve been selected to participate in then over the past few years, but I never “qualify” for them because I work in the industry. WTH! Who better to have in those things? Instead they ask some lady who has zero interest in a car to participate? Just makes no sense.
Much though I scorn focus groups—they are a cover-yer-ass exercise—you’re way offside here. Percentage of car buyers who work in the industry: miniature. Percentage of car buyers who could be described along the lines of some lady who has zero interest: giant. Most people aren’t car enthusiasts.
You absolutely are not alone. This past weekend the International Auto Show was in town here in Atlanta and I told my wife that I had no desire to go this year because all it is nowadays is these dang blob crossovers! I’m only 43 but I feel like I’m the old man talking about how back in my day we had cars! We had trucks and SUV’s and minivans too, but now it seems like all you see are cuvs. Unfortunately for people like me, I don’t think we will ever see the “car” as we all knew it come back. I know it’s basically a lost cause to be upset about not being able to buy a rwd front engined sedan anymore unless you get a high performance specialty vehicle like a CT5V or a BMW and things like that. But people love their blobs, and as much as it pains me to say it, I know they have some true advantages over a car, but that doesn’t mean I have to like them! Now get off my lawn!
I was still in high school when the 1980 Seville was introduced. I recall how appalled I was that Cadillac would make such a horrible looking car! After all, at that same time my parents had a 1975 DeVille that was long and sleek looking for such a large car. Soon after the 1980 Seville came out, they traded the 1975 for a 1979 DeVille. I loved (and still love) those years of DeVille’s for looks, so you can probably see why I looked at the pictures of that Seville with such disdain. But…………a few years went by and that “slant-back” design grew on me. By the late ’80’s I was out of school and had a couple years of college under my belt and I decided to try my hand at auto sales. I was hired by a local dealership which happened to sell two of my favorite brands: Cadillac and Buick.
By the early ’90’s, I owned my first of several 80-85 slant back Seville’s. Of course, the color seems to either make or break this style for me, but to this day I feel this style Seville was one of the best ever. Today I look at the roads filled with ugly boxes of SUV/CUV’s and I can only wish for the old days where cars looked like they did back then.
Graded on a curve the Seville looks like a 63 Riviera in this company. Hooray progress am I right?
Also to the crossover I can’t identify the model, brand or country of origin of because it looks the same as 10 others in the market, somebody at the plant needs to tell the stamping department they pressed the rear door skins backwards. I mean that couldn’t possibly been a deliberate design choice, that would just be stupid and pretentious if that were actually done on purpose.
somebody at the plant needs to tell the stamping department they pressed the rear door skins backwards. I mean that couldn’t possibly been a deliberate design choice, that would just be stupid and pretentious if that were actually done on purpose.
Backwards? You mean the crease should suddenly turn down instead of up? That would look very…stupid. And highly un-deliberate.
Regardless of whether you like it or not, can you not see that the crease is meant to reflect the wider rear and front fenders in relation to a somewhat narrower center body section, a more modern version of what’s going on in this ’47 Cadillac?
I mean the random triangle of sheetmetal behind the B pillar in the rear door where there should be glass area. It’s like you took a coke bottle shaped door from a 70s car and mounted it backwards somehow
I noticed that too – I guess it’s supposed to look like a dorsal fin?
But I’ve got to wonder if that creates a frustrating blind spot for rear-seat passengers. The combination of high window lines and huge headrests are exasperating for short people who sit in rear seats, but this looks like it would block the one sight line that such people would ordinarily have left.
“A frustrating blind spot for rear passengers”? Really? That tiny triangle? Anyway, the only thing rear seat passengers look at anymore is their screens. 🙂
It’s a stylistic flourish. Something like Virgil Exner might do if he were still around.
XR7Matt
Posted March 21, 2022 at 11:10 AM
I feel Exner would have put a fin like that on the roof of the car if he were designing it. Even he wouldn’t put flourishes in the middle of the greenhouse, especially one so random and broken as that
KiwiAlistair
Posted March 21, 2022 at 11:59 PM
Funny you should mention that. A weird fin in the back side window is just what St Virgil did do for 1962. (I’ve always loved this styling for its freshness and interest compared to the other boxy 62s)
Speculating on what Exner would do in 2022 is just that. I didn’t say that’s something he did back then. There’s a difference.
Frankly, comparing cars stylistically from one distant era to another is a rather futile undertaking. Which is precisely why I didn’t leave any commentary with this picture. I’m just trolling for comments like yours and the others. 🙂
Paul: I just can’t agree and from your comments it seems like you are just trying to get a rise out of others?
Anyhow, if you can look at those two pictures you posted and think there is anything in common, then I feel sad for you. That Cadillac on top looks amazing. Whatever that thing on bottom is looks dreadful at best. Top one say class. Bottom one says I’m a cheap hatchback that is just trying way too hard to be anything.
Top one say class. Bottom one says I’m a cheap hatchback that is just trying way too hard to be anything.
That’s what it says to you, which is perfectly valid. Now go ask a few 25 or 30 year olds for their reactions to the two.
Fashion and car styling change. Many folks have a hard time with those changes, especially after several decades. Some less so.
As to me, I will tell you this: I very much disliked having to wear suits and ties back when I was a manager/executive. I thought they were a stupid hold-over from another century. There was almost no possibility for creative expression (except maybe wide lapels for a few years), never mind the discomfort and expense. I wanted to wear…what men almost universally are starting to wear now. But I couldn’t back then. So I guess my relationship to fashion/design is perhaps different that yours.
I also disliked most American (and some others) car design of the late 70s and the 80s, the Seville more than just about any other. And I rather like this DS 3. Not particularly or exceptionally so, but generally speaking, I’m ok with it. Some aspects I quite like.
As the old saying goes: concerning taste there is no argument.
But that’s somewhat different than just hating all new design/fashion, or almost all. I see a lot of that here…”let’s go back to the ’80s and have square little coupes with four round headlights and big windows”. “And men looked so much better back when they wore nice suits, and women wore nice dresses”
Change is a bitch, at least for some.
XR7Matt
Posted March 21, 2022 at 1:45 PM
I’m 33. Old Cadillac is hands down more attractive in every way
You don’t count…you’re an outlier and we know your preferences all too well. 🙂
Dan Berning
Posted March 21, 2022 at 3:21 PM
Paul: You say “That’s what it says to you, which is perfectly valid. Now go ask a few 25 or 30 year olds for their reactions to the two.”
Funny that you say that. I have as my fun/old car a super low miles and clean 1988 Cadillac Cimarron (yes, the famous car everyone loves to hate). Every time I take that car out, I get all kinds of people giving me thumbs up and telling me how nice it is. But the one in particular that has stuck with me is two different young guys (both under 25) who happen to work at the McDonald’s that I drive through for my large iced tea. Both these guys were super complimentary and told me how nice my “ride” is.
Personally, I feel like the auto industry and the “focus groups” have pushed the industry into the boring and sad state it’s in today in terms of class/styling/design. I truly believe that even the under 30 groups are yearning for something other than yet another boring blob of an SUV/CUV.
Dan, I agree that quite a few young guys like or are attracted to old cars. But then that’s always been the case to one degree or another.
But if you’re suggesting that a resurrected Cimarron would actually sell well, that’s quite a different story.
Sure, old cars and trucks always get attention, as I know all too well when I drive my ’66 f100. How many of them would even know how to drive it, never mind putting up with its abysmal comfort, noise, and utter lack of any amenities?
I loved my neighbor’s Model A when I was a kid. Cool! I wouldn’t want one for a daily driver though.
Of course showing that icky CUV thingy on this site is going to encourage boos and hisses from many of us.
I, for one, am happy to oblige.
Boo/Hiss!
Okay, I’m good.
I agree that cars got too long, low and wide for interior space efficiency in the 60s and 70s, and today’s vehicles with their shorter, higher, and narrower exterior dimensions result in much better useability. However, I despise giant grilles, headlights that stretch far back into in the fenders, side windows that are too short, random character lines and gashes, and black wheels.
In my view, it’s time for more modest grilles (or none at all for EVs), quad round headlights, taller windows, side styling lines that make sense, and silver wheels.
If they made EVs sleeker, they’d get more range on the highway. Hey, guys? Try de-uglifying your cars while you try every trick to pull every electron out of the battery!
Yeah, what you said. I am sick to damn death of vehicles that all look like either alien insects with anger-management issues, or lumps that have emerged from the end of a giant animal’s digestive tract.
Quad round headlamps: that’s an interesting idea. Maybe as a modular system involving standardised, easily replaceable round lamp units that would fit any vehicle with the quad-round system. Just sort of spitballing here.
Not only that … standardized, easily replaceable round lamp units made with tough, UV-proof glass! Perhaps with clear lens and faceted, computer-designed reflector.
I love pictures showing old and new cars next to each other, and this is no exception.
At first glance, this seemed like a great contrast of angular vs. rounded design trends, but looking at the CUV closer, there’s several angular themes blended in (highlighted in red below)… not all that dissimilar to the Seville’s seemingly random bustleback trunk.
Something I actually haven´t heard anybody talk about is the fact that not only are today´s cars are of a questionable design but also their [possibly] negative influence when it comes to sparking road rage, given their utterly aggresive looks, it almost seems as though modern cars are “angry” at you. I feel somewhat more intimidated by the sight of a modern car tailgating me in my rearview mirror than I´d be if it were a car like that Seville posted here.
Danny: I completely agree with you. Certain colors and many designs do bring out feelings and anxiety in others even if they don’t realize it. I’ve talked about this before on another blog (auto-related) site. Personally, when I’m behind vehicles of certain colors, I can feel myself getting more defensive and a little less patient with other drivers. Other colors seem to be more soothing and relaxing. But this very much applies to styling and body style as well.
Anyhow, many older cars from the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s and 80’s seem to put me in a more relaxed state when I’m driving around them.
Vehicles are now styled on purpose to look “aggressive” and they do.
Being surrounded by so much aggression all the time doesn’t exactly help one relax.
Oh my.
In both cases the vehicles lost their practical and functional forms and evolved into designs whose purpose is to be noticed. The CUV form has indeed become ubiquitous on our roads. Time to apply some Di-Noc and padded vinyl roofs!
Thanks for the reference. And here I thought everyone was arguing about a reflection. Turns out that “dorsal fin” is real (and silly looking in my opinion, as silly as a ’60 Fury’s fins, speaking of Exner).
Johannes Dutch
Posted March 21, 2022 at 1:19 PM
That specific styling element dates back to the Citroën DS3 subcompact hatchback, introduced in 2009 (renamed DS 3 in 2016).
dman
Posted March 21, 2022 at 7:02 PM
Now that I know the CUV is a DS, I actually think that “dorsal fin” feature aft of the B pillar evokes the shape of the original DS (Citroën) C pillar and its trim.
Tatra87
Posted March 22, 2022 at 3:57 PM
I hate to be “that guy” but this is neither a fin, nor is it dorsal.
I see front wheel drive only, vs available all wheel drive. With the HP cars have nowadays AWD or at least RWD is a necesity. Who cares what it looks like.
I think that most buyers like something that looks new and in style. If you buy something new, you want it to look new, and different. At one time that was pontoon fenders, then tail fins, then on to something else. It is just us old car lovers that spend our time and energy thinking about cars. Most people really don’t care, except that they don’t want to be associated with something that casts a poor light on them. Old, overly large sedans are just an embarrassment to most. Regular sedans are just passe. Manufacturers are not going to cater to us enthusiasts except occasionally with some retro style models. Sedans gave way to SUVs, then SUVs gave way to CUVs.
Some of the current CUVs have very nice simple elegant detailing in the front end and tail lamp area. Audis, Land Rover, and some others come to mind. When you reach the mid 60’s in age you’ve lived through a lot of yearly models changes. That’s a lot of decades of car watching. As a Boomer, some designs were imprinted on me very strongly. The end of the Fifties cars, the Sixties, (swinging or not!) then as we entered adulthood during the 70’s and 80’s we actually bought a few new cars that were companions during the most memorable and interesting times of our lives. It’s no wonder that we’ve got some strong emotions to the cars of our past. The ones that we owned, and the ones that we wanted to own. I have my own tastes in cars, just like everyone else, but I accept that we all have our own favorites. That’s what makes this hobby so much fun.
I must admit I’ve fallen pretty hard for the Citroen Ami. Here is the dune buggy variant sans doors. Superb as a resort cruiser but not practical as a daily. Surely it needs more than eight horsepower, 28 mph max and only 50 miles per charge to be a feasible daily driver. I could see a trailer roughly the same size with a larger battery pack built in. This is the kind of fun car design I look forward to seeing more of.
There are times I am almost embarrassed to admit that I am a professional car designer!
Some recent designs look almost as if the prime requirement was to be different at all costs, rather than produce something balanced, elegant and timeless. Great designs from any era will retain their elegance, even when they get old – look at Mitchell’s 60’s designs,
the original Golf, an Alfa 105 coupe. The lines on a good design all have a certain “internal logic” as to where they start, finish and relate to each other, same with surfaces. They don’t look as if they are trying too hard.
My feeling is that we are going to see an era of more reduced, considered design almost as a reaction to the “shouty” design shown here. Look at some of the recent concepts – an example is the Precept from Volvo with clear lines and sharply defined surfaces.
I think one problem is the proliferation of models within marques – look at BMW, which not too long ago had 3 or 4 main models and now has about 15 variants of the 3 series.
I hope my past designs can be considered tasteful and logical. The future EV products I am directing are certainly of the “less is more” philosophy, where every line and feature has to have a purpose….
Which current designs do CCers think will be looked back on fondly in many years’ time?
There are some nice modern vehicles out there…
I was out with my wife and a few of her friends and we walked past an Ioniq5, the first I’ve seen in the metal, in a parking lot and I was stunned by its presence (in the sense of impressive appearance, not the mere fact it was there). They just walked right past it. I’m sure if it had been a bustleback Seville, let alone a Ferrari or ‘59 Cadillac they may have at least noticed it. To me it jumped out even more than those other cars, because it was a crossover like half the other cars nearby, but yet so very unlike them.
Both cars certainly stand out from the crowd, now and for their time. Can’t say I like either design but the DS5 uses a lot of what’s fairly common in CUV design but is too busy. The Cadillac was certainly doing it’s “own thing.”
I agree the Hyundai Ioniq 5 is striking! One of the best looking designs I’ve seen in a while.
Hi Paul,
I am happy to share my portfolio with you – most of my recent stuff is still under embargo, but I currently work for Indigotech – we are developing lightweight EV Rideshare/Gig economy vehicles – take a look at our website: Indigotech.com… Early days in the process of bringing these vehicles to market and being a part of a small
team, getting involved in other disciplines, such as product planning, etc., but that is the fun of startups!
My Porsche designs include the 997 interior theme, Carrera GT production interior, Cayenne E1 exterior facelift, most of the Cayenne E2 and all 981 Boxster and Cayman exteriors (apart from the roof on the Spyder) including the GT4. Before that I worked on many designs for GMIO Opel – Zafira A interior, Maxx show car and W83 Opel Vivaro/Nissan Primastar/Renault Trafic, where my theme was chosen by Patrick Le Quement and resulted in 2 wonderful years in Paris working with the great Renault design team.
Here’s one of my “babies” – (you get very attached to something you worked on so intensely!).
The theme for the 981s was selected for production at the end of 2007 and was internally controversial as it introduced the long headlamps and “plateau” fenders (906/908!) into the Porsche design language of the time, getting away from the “baby 911” rounder lamps and fenders of the previous generations. The lovely 918 design was done later, in 2009 by my super talented colleague, Hakan Saracoglu being intended to showcase these themes in a “halo” car. Products such as the Taycan, which is after my time and I think looks stunning on the road, have developed these themes further. The “spoiler tail lamps” were lost in the 718 facelift, which I think was a shame.
Being able to get some designs on the road for Porsche was an absolute privilege, as I became a fan of the marque as a child – my favorite matchbox and Corgi models were of the 906, which I still love to this day.
BTW, You’ll see the 981 is sometimes claimed by someone else (“Erfolg hat vielen Vaeter”!), as often happens in my business – the design patents bear me out though!
I’m glad for your comment, Huey, as it does relieve a tiny bit of the feeling of age-induced not-getting-stuff!
I’ve thought for a while now that some of the new stuff may not appeal to me (of course not, I’m 50-something and a car-nostalgia guy), but a bunch of it just has just seemed design-incompetent. That is, just not very good work on its own terms. I feel like yelling at the designers, “You’d finished! Why couldn’t you leave it alone?!” But then, I don’t have a clue how much the marketers and others said “No! Add two of these, THEY have one!”, etc.
For future classic jobs, I’m stuck on the Aston Rapide, of all things. Sure, it’s not the future, but hell, in the metal, it’s still a haunchy art object. So there’s one for you…
I agree with you about the Rapide, Justy! That era of Astons includes some peaches – I was looking at a Vantage V12 the other day – not a line wrong on that one! I’d love a DB9 one day need those rear seats for our little guy. The current DB10 kinda lost it for me – apologetic “face” and cheap looking interior, but the DBS is very nice in person. The DBX in the right color is great – really nice sculpting – particularly the rear end and very nice interior detailing.
The Maserati Levante is pleasing too, with its long hood and characterful detailing and interior – very wheel and color sensitive, though.
I’m a bit disappointed by the latest Jeep Grand Cherokee and Wagoneer – the 2012-2021 Grand Cherokee was a great piece of design that still looks great with its nicely sculpted bodysides.
I agree about the Ioniq – really does have that showcar vibe, as does the Porsche Taycan, especially in white. A car that surprised me in the metal is the Polestar 2 – very solid and modern looking. I can’t wait for the Precept to hit the streets – that really will be covetable. Ferrari seem to be hitting their stride with the SF90 and a car that looks very good to me on the streets is the KIA EV6. There are some nice LCVs out there like the VW T6, now T7 and latest Peugeot Expert which are very nicely resolved. As a fan of the old VW buses I’m impatient to see my first ID Buzz on the streets….unlike the BMW iX? A real wtf? that constitutes the “dark side” of automotive design.
Just my 2c worth – YMMV!
No one should complain about the bobbed tail on the Seville ever again.
I’m all for higher roofs, but do they have to raise the floor on all of them, too? Batteries will only make that worse.
Go drive a Tesla model S or 3 and you’ll find the floor seems as low as any other sedan if not lower. While still state of the art as far as EVs go with large battery packs neither design is even remotely new.
Many cars (EV or not) riding higher is due to consumers demanding to sit higher.
I think the current design doldrums have a lot to do with car companies being preoccupied with hybrid/electric engineering. Once they master that, they’ll get as bored as consumer are getting and start developing interesting styles again. I hope.
Also, that Seville benefits from a two-tone paint job and a profile shot but that flat butt design is still pretty ugly IMO, especially considering how elegant the 1st gen. model was. That said, it’s a lot more graceful than the microcephalic/giant wheels monstrosity behind it.
Great pic! That Cadillac was “Blech!” when it was released and it’s still “Blech!” now. Thankfully there are few left.
The SUV and others like it seem to actually harken back to the 1950s when you had numerous cars sporting strange metal shapes with random bulges, divots, and protuberances sprouting here and there, headlight nacelles were heading all over the place rather than merely shaped to just hold the bright bits of glass and bulb, you couldn’t see the pointed bits on the ends of the vehicles from inside, and the wheels, while not too large, were conversely ridiculously undersized.
All my opinion of course, others may differ. But 17million American car buyers surely can’t be wrong, they’re the ones actually purchasing new cars. And many have actually done so before and will actually do so again.
If you’re in product planning for an automobile manufacturer and your livelihood and continued employment hinges on the success of your products then yes, popularity, ie sales, certainly counts for a lot. Of course quality counts for just as much as Cadillac specifically has found out to its own detriment over the last forty-odd years. Whoever was responsible for the X-cars was the King of GM for about a year, and then…poof! It can be possible to have both. Most people here would seem to despise the styling of the current RAV4 yet I believe it is the top selling vehicle worldwide and I as well as most others would not consider it of remotely poor quality.
A purely subjective measure of “style” counts for extremely little, serving merely to get tongues wagging as this fine and ironically wordless post has managed to do. I can fetishize and live in the past in some aspects of life as much as the next guy but design needs to progress, not just in cars but also art, architecture, music, the human condition etc. How boring to exclusively live in and hold up above all others one era with only the products and subjects thereof.
17million American car buyers surely can’t be wrong, they’re the ones actually purchasing new cars. And many have actually done so before and will actually do so again.
Do you really believe that those buyers would evaporate if styling wasn’t tailored to the latest modern trends? It certainly seems to contradict the drum I normally hear beat that normal buyers don’t care how cars look and want to get to a-b comfortably reliably.
On that note it’s extremely specious correlate the current styling of the RAV4 with its success considering it has been climbing in sales for year upon year since it’s introduction including through Toyotas blandest styling era. Toyota was in no danger of losing buyers if they didn’t one day decide to start making their cars look like storm trooper helmets from Star Wars.
A purely subjective measure of “style” counts for extremely little, serving merely to get tongues wagging as this fine and ironically wordless post has managed to do. I can fetishize and live in the past in some aspects of life as much as the next guy but design needs to progress, not just in cars but also art, architecture, music, the human condition etc. How boring to exclusively live in and hold up above all others one era with only the products and subjects thereof.
I find it’s a very boring shallow existence to simply follow what’s new and trendy. Old stuff is interesting and there are lessons to be learned from the past that can aid or simply entertain you in the present in the “it’s new to me” sense.
Jim Klein
Posted March 22, 2022 at 7:45 AM
“I find it’s a very boring shallow existence to simply follow what’s new and trendy…”.
That’s likely exactly what buyer in the 50’s heard from fans of the ‘20s. And buyers in the 60/ from fans of the 30s. And so on. Yet past times seem to keep being held up as “the ideal”. Enjoy life as it unfolds, not as it unfolded for generations past. Which doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy and appreciate what’s already there, but it wasn’t all roses back then either to the exclusivity of anything new. Of course if that’s the color of your glasses, well, whatever.
XR7Matt
Posted March 22, 2022 at 10:19 AM
Who’s holding the times up as the ideal? I think 60s car designs are better than present day, that doesn’t mean I wish I lived through the actual 60s. I tend to like 70s- 80s music more than the cookie cutter auto tuned crap on the charts today, but luckily I have easier access than ever to expose myself to never ending well of music of the past with the technology of today. I can separate art from the artist and likewise I can separate art from the era.
One has its’ weirdness on the back, the other on the sides. Other than that they’re typical shapes of their respective times.
It’s well known that Stellantis needs to cut brands and dealer channels on the European side, and DS is one of the ripest for the cull. Next to Lancia, perhaps *the* ripest, with the added bonus that for the sake of both corporate and actual politics it’s probably best to cut a French brand first.
Speaking of corporate politics, it’s been said (rumored? Urban-legend-ed?) that the Seville’s bustleback was a retirement gift to Bill Mitchell who’d long been enamored of such Empress Line-inspired designs but had never gotten one approved for production. I’ve made my peace with it as a piece of design having run hot and cold on it since childhood (I had the Hot Wheels), but it’s hard to get over the fact that it threw away all the success the gen 1 had with import-intenders and also actively repelled a good chunk of the traditional Caddy crowd who might otherwise have spent the extra over a DeVille.
I do like Citroens my daily is that brand and Im not a fan of that model Seville but you couldnt give me that DS3 and Id happily drive away in that Seville.
I know this post is a bit of a wind-up, and wind ’em up it duly has, but dammit, that bloody horrid Seville-by-Hooper does NOT look awful in front of The Blob behind (which appears to be ready to devour it). That cannot be progress!
Of course, this is all just the defensive complaint of me, of the aging, the nostalgic, the chromed-car-people types, who are all of us necessarily looking at life diminishing rather than unfolding.
The newbie in the photo is simply the thing folks now drive, and like.
It’s understandable for the fading crowd to misjudge the rising one, but it’s plain dumb to assume that aesthetics play less a role than they did for buyers of ’50’s and ’60’s and ’70’s stuff for them. Plainly put, it’s not just the functionality but the looks that make people buy them.
It’s been much-said here before, but go pick a forties sedan from a second-storey line-up viewpoint over a carpark. Good luck.
(Psst! I actually don’t mind the modern DS’s, a bit contrived, maybe, but not too bad over all. Perhaps not in kiwibryce’s Roadgrime Grey*tm like here, but otherwise, yeah. Now shhshh!)
the 981 was one of my favorite “babies” – (you get very attached to something you worked on so intensely!).
The theme was selected for production at the end of 2007 and was internally controversial as it introduced the long headlamps and “plateau” fenders (906/908!) into the Porsche design language of the time, getting away from the “baby 911” rounder lamps and fenders of the previous generations. The lovely 918 design was done later, in 2009 by my super talented colleague, Hakan Saracoglu being intended to showcase these themes in a “halo” car. Products such as the Taycan, which is after my time and I think looks stunning on the road, have developed these themes further. The “spoiler tail lamps” were lost in the 718 facelift, which I think was a shame.
Being able to get some designs on the road for Porsche was an absolute privilege, as I became a fan of the marque as a child – my favorite matchbox and Corgi models were of the 906, which I still love to this day.
BTW, You’ll see the 981 is sometimes claimed by someone else (“Erfolg hat vielen Vaeter”!), as often happens in my business – the design patents bear me out though!
’50s/’60s – Longer, lower, wider. ’70s – shorter, higher, brougham-ier, Today – REALLY higher, shorter, fuglier.
I never thought a 1980 Seville as a beautiful car but set against this modern monstrosity…
Look at the simple, clear but effective horizontal lines on the older car.
It seems we’re in a wild age again, like the late “fins” fifties, with wild details. That SUV has strange dents on the side, stupid lines up front, a huge unnecessary grill, wheels are too big, etc etc.
We can only hope this current, strange period will end someday. After that, will we return to an age where cars have better designs again?
Yes, some cars do grow better looking over time.
I thought that, too. Whatever kind of car that is behind the Caddy has a dent in the side. No, wait, it’s supposed to be there.
Hell, I don’t even like the new Mustang. I’m having a hard time thinking of a new car I like. This coming from someone who works at a dealership that sells high end cars.
As I do not appreciate, desire or “get” today’s current crop of SUV/CUV vehicles; there is not anything in a new car showroom to entice me inside.
Surely I am not the only one?
I agree.
I agree completely.
There is absolutely no new vehicle I can think of to want;
completely turned off by the fugly.
If I was a kid nowadays, I wouldn’t ever get into cars in the first place.
How has it gotten so bad?
Every new vehicle seems like it was catered to the same dozen people in a single focus group held some time ago, despite huge lineups of ostensibly different segments, none of which fit my personal wants or desires besides one or two stat points. I really don’t care about horsepower if the vehicle looks like a rolling Frank Gehry abomination
XR7Matt: You hit the nail on the head! These “focus groups” are who? From where? I’m in the automotive business and have been for a total of 20 years now. I’ve owned many new vehicles and even more used cars over the years. I have never been in any focus group. Now, I’ve been selected to participate in then over the past few years, but I never “qualify” for them because I work in the industry. WTH! Who better to have in those things? Instead they ask some lady who has zero interest in a car to participate? Just makes no sense.
Much though I scorn focus groups—they are a cover-yer-ass exercise—you’re way offside here. Percentage of car buyers who work in the industry: miniature. Percentage of car buyers who could be described along the lines of some lady who has zero interest: giant. Most people aren’t car enthusiasts.
Unfortunately, you’re spot-on.
You absolutely are not alone. This past weekend the International Auto Show was in town here in Atlanta and I told my wife that I had no desire to go this year because all it is nowadays is these dang blob crossovers! I’m only 43 but I feel like I’m the old man talking about how back in my day we had cars! We had trucks and SUV’s and minivans too, but now it seems like all you see are cuvs. Unfortunately for people like me, I don’t think we will ever see the “car” as we all knew it come back. I know it’s basically a lost cause to be upset about not being able to buy a rwd front engined sedan anymore unless you get a high performance specialty vehicle like a CT5V or a BMW and things like that. But people love their blobs, and as much as it pains me to say it, I know they have some true advantages over a car, but that doesn’t mean I have to like them! Now get off my lawn!
I was still in high school when the 1980 Seville was introduced. I recall how appalled I was that Cadillac would make such a horrible looking car! After all, at that same time my parents had a 1975 DeVille that was long and sleek looking for such a large car. Soon after the 1980 Seville came out, they traded the 1975 for a 1979 DeVille. I loved (and still love) those years of DeVille’s for looks, so you can probably see why I looked at the pictures of that Seville with such disdain. But…………a few years went by and that “slant-back” design grew on me. By the late ’80’s I was out of school and had a couple years of college under my belt and I decided to try my hand at auto sales. I was hired by a local dealership which happened to sell two of my favorite brands: Cadillac and Buick.
By the early ’90’s, I owned my first of several 80-85 slant back Seville’s. Of course, the color seems to either make or break this style for me, but to this day I feel this style Seville was one of the best ever. Today I look at the roads filled with ugly boxes of SUV/CUV’s and I can only wish for the old days where cars looked like they did back then.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
How funny. And how true! If I recall, wasn’t that 1980-1985 Seville designed off an older RR?
Graded on a curve the Seville looks like a 63 Riviera in this company. Hooray progress am I right?
Also to the crossover I can’t identify the model, brand or country of origin of because it looks the same as 10 others in the market, somebody at the plant needs to tell the stamping department they pressed the rear door skins backwards. I mean that couldn’t possibly been a deliberate design choice, that would just be stupid and pretentious if that were actually done on purpose.
somebody at the plant needs to tell the stamping department they pressed the rear door skins backwards. I mean that couldn’t possibly been a deliberate design choice, that would just be stupid and pretentious if that were actually done on purpose.
Backwards? You mean the crease should suddenly turn down instead of up? That would look very…stupid. And highly un-deliberate.
Regardless of whether you like it or not, can you not see that the crease is meant to reflect the wider rear and front fenders in relation to a somewhat narrower center body section, a more modern version of what’s going on in this ’47 Cadillac?
I mean the random triangle of sheetmetal behind the B pillar in the rear door where there should be glass area. It’s like you took a coke bottle shaped door from a 70s car and mounted it backwards somehow
I noticed that too – I guess it’s supposed to look like a dorsal fin?
But I’ve got to wonder if that creates a frustrating blind spot for rear-seat passengers. The combination of high window lines and huge headrests are exasperating for short people who sit in rear seats, but this looks like it would block the one sight line that such people would ordinarily have left.
“A frustrating blind spot for rear passengers”? Really? That tiny triangle? Anyway, the only thing rear seat passengers look at anymore is their screens. 🙂
It’s a stylistic flourish. Something like Virgil Exner might do if he were still around.
I feel Exner would have put a fin like that on the roof of the car if he were designing it. Even he wouldn’t put flourishes in the middle of the greenhouse, especially one so random and broken as that
Funny you should mention that. A weird fin in the back side window is just what St Virgil did do for 1962. (I’ve always loved this styling for its freshness and interest compared to the other boxy 62s)
Speculating on what Exner would do in 2022 is just that. I didn’t say that’s something he did back then. There’s a difference.
Frankly, comparing cars stylistically from one distant era to another is a rather futile undertaking. Which is precisely why I didn’t leave any commentary with this picture. I’m just trolling for comments like yours and the others. 🙂
Paul: I just can’t agree and from your comments it seems like you are just trying to get a rise out of others?
Anyhow, if you can look at those two pictures you posted and think there is anything in common, then I feel sad for you. That Cadillac on top looks amazing. Whatever that thing on bottom is looks dreadful at best. Top one say class. Bottom one says I’m a cheap hatchback that is just trying way too hard to be anything.
Top one say class. Bottom one says I’m a cheap hatchback that is just trying way too hard to be anything.
That’s what it says to you, which is perfectly valid. Now go ask a few 25 or 30 year olds for their reactions to the two.
Fashion and car styling change. Many folks have a hard time with those changes, especially after several decades. Some less so.
As to me, I will tell you this: I very much disliked having to wear suits and ties back when I was a manager/executive. I thought they were a stupid hold-over from another century. There was almost no possibility for creative expression (except maybe wide lapels for a few years), never mind the discomfort and expense. I wanted to wear…what men almost universally are starting to wear now. But I couldn’t back then. So I guess my relationship to fashion/design is perhaps different that yours.
I also disliked most American (and some others) car design of the late 70s and the 80s, the Seville more than just about any other. And I rather like this DS 3. Not particularly or exceptionally so, but generally speaking, I’m ok with it. Some aspects I quite like.
As the old saying goes: concerning taste there is no argument.
But that’s somewhat different than just hating all new design/fashion, or almost all. I see a lot of that here…”let’s go back to the ’80s and have square little coupes with four round headlights and big windows”. “And men looked so much better back when they wore nice suits, and women wore nice dresses”
Change is a bitch, at least for some.
I’m 33. Old Cadillac is hands down more attractive in every way
You don’t count…you’re an outlier and we know your preferences all too well. 🙂
Paul: You say “That’s what it says to you, which is perfectly valid. Now go ask a few 25 or 30 year olds for their reactions to the two.”
Funny that you say that. I have as my fun/old car a super low miles and clean 1988 Cadillac Cimarron (yes, the famous car everyone loves to hate). Every time I take that car out, I get all kinds of people giving me thumbs up and telling me how nice it is. But the one in particular that has stuck with me is two different young guys (both under 25) who happen to work at the McDonald’s that I drive through for my large iced tea. Both these guys were super complimentary and told me how nice my “ride” is.
Personally, I feel like the auto industry and the “focus groups” have pushed the industry into the boring and sad state it’s in today in terms of class/styling/design. I truly believe that even the under 30 groups are yearning for something other than yet another boring blob of an SUV/CUV.
Dan, I agree that quite a few young guys like or are attracted to old cars. But then that’s always been the case to one degree or another.
But if you’re suggesting that a resurrected Cimarron would actually sell well, that’s quite a different story.
Sure, old cars and trucks always get attention, as I know all too well when I drive my ’66 f100. How many of them would even know how to drive it, never mind putting up with its abysmal comfort, noise, and utter lack of any amenities?
I loved my neighbor’s Model A when I was a kid. Cool! I wouldn’t want one for a daily driver though.
Of course showing that icky CUV thingy on this site is going to encourage boos and hisses from many of us.
I, for one, am happy to oblige.
Boo/Hiss!
Okay, I’m good.
Seconded!
If you imagine the car’s profile as defined by the painted portion only, the floating roof, it makes the silver part look like a Lotus Elise.
I agree that cars got too long, low and wide for interior space efficiency in the 60s and 70s, and today’s vehicles with their shorter, higher, and narrower exterior dimensions result in much better useability. However, I despise giant grilles, headlights that stretch far back into in the fenders, side windows that are too short, random character lines and gashes, and black wheels.
In my view, it’s time for more modest grilles (or none at all for EVs), quad round headlights, taller windows, side styling lines that make sense, and silver wheels.
If they made EVs sleeker, they’d get more range on the highway. Hey, guys? Try de-uglifying your cars while you try every trick to pull every electron out of the battery!
Yeah, what you said. I am sick to damn death of vehicles that all look like either alien insects with anger-management issues, or lumps that have emerged from the end of a giant animal’s digestive tract.
Quad round headlamps: that’s an interesting idea. Maybe as a modular system involving standardised, easily replaceable round lamp units that would fit any vehicle with the quad-round system. Just sort of spitballing here.
Round quads would be great.
At least the “faces” of cars would have friendlier-looking “eyes”again.
Not only that … standardized, easily replaceable round lamp units made with tough, UV-proof glass! Perhaps with clear lens and faceted, computer-designed reflector.
Wait…lenses made out of glass?! But then they won’t degrade by the time the car’s middle-aged, so how is that gonna work?
This isn’t the most extreme comparison. The Seville was GM’s first transitional step from 3-box back to 2-box.
I love pictures showing old and new cars next to each other, and this is no exception.
At first glance, this seemed like a great contrast of angular vs. rounded design trends, but looking at the CUV closer, there’s several angular themes blended in (highlighted in red below)… not all that dissimilar to the Seville’s seemingly random bustleback trunk.
Look at the bright side – if you ever get sideswiped, nobody will notice you were in an accident.
Anyway, this CUV totally rips off the “been-in-a-collision” look from the Honda Odyssey.
Something I actually haven´t heard anybody talk about is the fact that not only are today´s cars are of a questionable design but also their [possibly] negative influence when it comes to sparking road rage, given their utterly aggresive looks, it almost seems as though modern cars are “angry” at you. I feel somewhat more intimidated by the sight of a modern car tailgating me in my rearview mirror than I´d be if it were a car like that Seville posted here.
Danny: I completely agree with you. Certain colors and many designs do bring out feelings and anxiety in others even if they don’t realize it. I’ve talked about this before on another blog (auto-related) site. Personally, when I’m behind vehicles of certain colors, I can feel myself getting more defensive and a little less patient with other drivers. Other colors seem to be more soothing and relaxing. But this very much applies to styling and body style as well.
Anyhow, many older cars from the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s and 80’s seem to put me in a more relaxed state when I’m driving around them.
Vehicles are now styled on purpose to look “aggressive” and they do.
Being surrounded by so much aggression all the time doesn’t exactly help one relax.
I always thought the 1971 full-size Fords were aggressive looking when being tailgated by one in my mother’s 1967 Chevy Bel Air!
Ugh, those recessed Ford front ends with the prominent beak.
219dekray: That Ford pic does give me the creeps. haha.
Looks like the stand in for The Car
The Car never looked scary to me.
It’s face is a little goofy-looking kind of like a Muppet.
Oh my.
In both cases the vehicles lost their practical and functional forms and evolved into designs whose purpose is to be noticed. The CUV form has indeed become ubiquitous on our roads. Time to apply some Di-Noc and padded vinyl roofs!
I think this is very true. And by the way, what is this crossover? And can anyone tell what country this is … somewhere in Europe I assume.
DS 3 Crossback.
Thanks for the reference. And here I thought everyone was arguing about a reflection. Turns out that “dorsal fin” is real (and silly looking in my opinion, as silly as a ’60 Fury’s fins, speaking of Exner).
That specific styling element dates back to the Citroën DS3 subcompact hatchback, introduced in 2009 (renamed DS 3 in 2016).
Now that I know the CUV is a DS, I actually think that “dorsal fin” feature aft of the B pillar evokes the shape of the original DS (Citroën) C pillar and its trim.
I hate to be “that guy” but this is neither a fin, nor is it dorsal.
Thanks. I was curious as to what it was, but not curious enough to actually ask.
Di-Noc is played, Jerry! Played! (picture Kramer waving his hands about)
What would actually be kinda cool would be holographic screens or shimmering iridescence
I see front wheel drive only, vs available all wheel drive. With the HP cars have nowadays AWD or at least RWD is a necesity. Who cares what it looks like.
I think that most buyers like something that looks new and in style. If you buy something new, you want it to look new, and different. At one time that was pontoon fenders, then tail fins, then on to something else. It is just us old car lovers that spend our time and energy thinking about cars. Most people really don’t care, except that they don’t want to be associated with something that casts a poor light on them. Old, overly large sedans are just an embarrassment to most. Regular sedans are just passe. Manufacturers are not going to cater to us enthusiasts except occasionally with some retro style models. Sedans gave way to SUVs, then SUVs gave way to CUVs.
Some of the current CUVs have very nice simple elegant detailing in the front end and tail lamp area. Audis, Land Rover, and some others come to mind. When you reach the mid 60’s in age you’ve lived through a lot of yearly models changes. That’s a lot of decades of car watching. As a Boomer, some designs were imprinted on me very strongly. The end of the Fifties cars, the Sixties, (swinging or not!) then as we entered adulthood during the 70’s and 80’s we actually bought a few new cars that were companions during the most memorable and interesting times of our lives. It’s no wonder that we’ve got some strong emotions to the cars of our past. The ones that we owned, and the ones that we wanted to own. I have my own tastes in cars, just like everyone else, but I accept that we all have our own favorites. That’s what makes this hobby so much fun.
I must admit I’ve fallen pretty hard for the Citroen Ami. Here is the dune buggy variant sans doors. Superb as a resort cruiser but not practical as a daily. Surely it needs more than eight horsepower, 28 mph max and only 50 miles per charge to be a feasible daily driver. I could see a trailer roughly the same size with a larger battery pack built in. This is the kind of fun car design I look forward to seeing more of.
There are times I am almost embarrassed to admit that I am a professional car designer!
Some recent designs look almost as if the prime requirement was to be different at all costs, rather than produce something balanced, elegant and timeless. Great designs from any era will retain their elegance, even when they get old – look at Mitchell’s 60’s designs,
the original Golf, an Alfa 105 coupe. The lines on a good design all have a certain “internal logic” as to where they start, finish and relate to each other, same with surfaces. They don’t look as if they are trying too hard.
My feeling is that we are going to see an era of more reduced, considered design almost as a reaction to the “shouty” design shown here. Look at some of the recent concepts – an example is the Precept from Volvo with clear lines and sharply defined surfaces.
I think one problem is the proliferation of models within marques – look at BMW, which not too long ago had 3 or 4 main models and now has about 15 variants of the 3 series.
I hope my past designs can be considered tasteful and logical. The future EV products I am directing are certainly of the “less is more” philosophy, where every line and feature has to have a purpose….
Which current designs do CCers think will be looked back on fondly in many years’ time?
There are some nice modern vehicles out there…
Good comments. Agreed that the stylistic direction is shifting. It’s becoming increasingly apparent.
As to current designs that I like, I posted that here:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/new-cars/new-cars-hyundai-ioniq-5-the-most-attractive-and-compelling-ev-yet-and-a-quick-drive-in-a-mustang-mach-e/
Are you able to tell us who you work for?
I was out with my wife and a few of her friends and we walked past an Ioniq5, the first I’ve seen in the metal, in a parking lot and I was stunned by its presence (in the sense of impressive appearance, not the mere fact it was there). They just walked right past it. I’m sure if it had been a bustleback Seville, let alone a Ferrari or ‘59 Cadillac they may have at least noticed it. To me it jumped out even more than those other cars, because it was a crossover like half the other cars nearby, but yet so very unlike them.
Both cars certainly stand out from the crowd, now and for their time. Can’t say I like either design but the DS5 uses a lot of what’s fairly common in CUV design but is too busy. The Cadillac was certainly doing it’s “own thing.”
I agree the Hyundai Ioniq 5 is striking! One of the best looking designs I’ve seen in a while.
Hi Paul,
I am happy to share my portfolio with you – most of my recent stuff is still under embargo, but I currently work for Indigotech – we are developing lightweight EV Rideshare/Gig economy vehicles – take a look at our website: Indigotech.com… Early days in the process of bringing these vehicles to market and being a part of a small
team, getting involved in other disciplines, such as product planning, etc., but that is the fun of startups!
My Porsche designs include the 997 interior theme, Carrera GT production interior, Cayenne E1 exterior facelift, most of the Cayenne E2 and all 981 Boxster and Cayman exteriors (apart from the roof on the Spyder) including the GT4. Before that I worked on many designs for GMIO Opel – Zafira A interior, Maxx show car and W83 Opel Vivaro/Nissan Primastar/Renault Trafic, where my theme was chosen by Patrick Le Quement and resulted in 2 wonderful years in Paris working with the great Renault design team.
Thanks. I’ll take a peek.
Here’s one of my “babies” – (you get very attached to something you worked on so intensely!).
The theme for the 981s was selected for production at the end of 2007 and was internally controversial as it introduced the long headlamps and “plateau” fenders (906/908!) into the Porsche design language of the time, getting away from the “baby 911” rounder lamps and fenders of the previous generations. The lovely 918 design was done later, in 2009 by my super talented colleague, Hakan Saracoglu being intended to showcase these themes in a “halo” car. Products such as the Taycan, which is after my time and I think looks stunning on the road, have developed these themes further. The “spoiler tail lamps” were lost in the 718 facelift, which I think was a shame.
Being able to get some designs on the road for Porsche was an absolute privilege, as I became a fan of the marque as a child – my favorite matchbox and Corgi models were of the 906, which I still love to this day.
BTW, You’ll see the 981 is sometimes claimed by someone else (“Erfolg hat vielen Vaeter”!), as often happens in my business – the design patents bear me out though!
I’m glad for your comment, Huey, as it does relieve a tiny bit of the feeling of age-induced not-getting-stuff!
I’ve thought for a while now that some of the new stuff may not appeal to me (of course not, I’m 50-something and a car-nostalgia guy), but a bunch of it just has just seemed design-incompetent. That is, just not very good work on its own terms. I feel like yelling at the designers, “You’d finished! Why couldn’t you leave it alone?!” But then, I don’t have a clue how much the marketers and others said “No! Add two of these, THEY have one!”, etc.
For future classic jobs, I’m stuck on the Aston Rapide, of all things. Sure, it’s not the future, but hell, in the metal, it’s still a haunchy art object. So there’s one for you…
I agree with you about the Rapide, Justy! That era of Astons includes some peaches – I was looking at a Vantage V12 the other day – not a line wrong on that one! I’d love a DB9 one day need those rear seats for our little guy. The current DB10 kinda lost it for me – apologetic “face” and cheap looking interior, but the DBS is very nice in person. The DBX in the right color is great – really nice sculpting – particularly the rear end and very nice interior detailing.
The Maserati Levante is pleasing too, with its long hood and characterful detailing and interior – very wheel and color sensitive, though.
I’m a bit disappointed by the latest Jeep Grand Cherokee and Wagoneer – the 2012-2021 Grand Cherokee was a great piece of design that still looks great with its nicely sculpted bodysides.
I agree about the Ioniq – really does have that showcar vibe, as does the Porsche Taycan, especially in white. A car that surprised me in the metal is the Polestar 2 – very solid and modern looking. I can’t wait for the Precept to hit the streets – that really will be covetable. Ferrari seem to be hitting their stride with the SF90 and a car that looks very good to me on the streets is the KIA EV6. There are some nice LCVs out there like the VW T6, now T7 and latest Peugeot Expert which are very nicely resolved. As a fan of the old VW buses I’m impatient to see my first ID Buzz on the streets….unlike the BMW iX? A real wtf? that constitutes the “dark side” of automotive design.
Just my 2c worth – YMMV!
No one should complain about the bobbed tail on the Seville ever again.
I’m all for higher roofs, but do they have to raise the floor on all of them, too? Batteries will only make that worse.
Go drive a Tesla model S or 3 and you’ll find the floor seems as low as any other sedan if not lower. While still state of the art as far as EVs go with large battery packs neither design is even remotely new.
Many cars (EV or not) riding higher is due to consumers demanding to sit higher.
I think the current design doldrums have a lot to do with car companies being preoccupied with hybrid/electric engineering. Once they master that, they’ll get as bored as consumer are getting and start developing interesting styles again. I hope.
Also, that Seville benefits from a two-tone paint job and a profile shot but that flat butt design is still pretty ugly IMO, especially considering how elegant the 1st gen. model was. That said, it’s a lot more graceful than the microcephalic/giant wheels monstrosity behind it.
The French does seem to have an affinity for Traction Avant Cadillacs, starting with the 1967 Eldorado.
Great pic! That Cadillac was “Blech!” when it was released and it’s still “Blech!” now. Thankfully there are few left.
The SUV and others like it seem to actually harken back to the 1950s when you had numerous cars sporting strange metal shapes with random bulges, divots, and protuberances sprouting here and there, headlight nacelles were heading all over the place rather than merely shaped to just hold the bright bits of glass and bulb, you couldn’t see the pointed bits on the ends of the vehicles from inside, and the wheels, while not too large, were conversely ridiculously undersized.
All my opinion of course, others may differ. But 17million American car buyers surely can’t be wrong, they’re the ones actually purchasing new cars. And many have actually done so before and will actually do so again.
Jackass is a better movie than Citizen Kane because Jackass had more sequels.
The 1980 GM X-bodies were better than the 1980 Mercedes S-class because they sold more cars.
More popular does not always equal better.
If you’re in product planning for an automobile manufacturer and your livelihood and continued employment hinges on the success of your products then yes, popularity, ie sales, certainly counts for a lot. Of course quality counts for just as much as Cadillac specifically has found out to its own detriment over the last forty-odd years. Whoever was responsible for the X-cars was the King of GM for about a year, and then…poof! It can be possible to have both. Most people here would seem to despise the styling of the current RAV4 yet I believe it is the top selling vehicle worldwide and I as well as most others would not consider it of remotely poor quality.
A purely subjective measure of “style” counts for extremely little, serving merely to get tongues wagging as this fine and ironically wordless post has managed to do. I can fetishize and live in the past in some aspects of life as much as the next guy but design needs to progress, not just in cars but also art, architecture, music, the human condition etc. How boring to exclusively live in and hold up above all others one era with only the products and subjects thereof.
17million American car buyers surely can’t be wrong, they’re the ones actually purchasing new cars. And many have actually done so before and will actually do so again.
Do you really believe that those buyers would evaporate if styling wasn’t tailored to the latest modern trends? It certainly seems to contradict the drum I normally hear beat that normal buyers don’t care how cars look and want to get to a-b comfortably reliably.
On that note it’s extremely specious correlate the current styling of the RAV4 with its success considering it has been climbing in sales for year upon year since it’s introduction including through Toyotas blandest styling era. Toyota was in no danger of losing buyers if they didn’t one day decide to start making their cars look like storm trooper helmets from Star Wars.
A purely subjective measure of “style” counts for extremely little, serving merely to get tongues wagging as this fine and ironically wordless post has managed to do. I can fetishize and live in the past in some aspects of life as much as the next guy but design needs to progress, not just in cars but also art, architecture, music, the human condition etc. How boring to exclusively live in and hold up above all others one era with only the products and subjects thereof.
I find it’s a very boring shallow existence to simply follow what’s new and trendy. Old stuff is interesting and there are lessons to be learned from the past that can aid or simply entertain you in the present in the “it’s new to me” sense.
“I find it’s a very boring shallow existence to simply follow what’s new and trendy…”.
That’s likely exactly what buyer in the 50’s heard from fans of the ‘20s. And buyers in the 60/ from fans of the 30s. And so on. Yet past times seem to keep being held up as “the ideal”. Enjoy life as it unfolds, not as it unfolded for generations past. Which doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy and appreciate what’s already there, but it wasn’t all roses back then either to the exclusivity of anything new. Of course if that’s the color of your glasses, well, whatever.
Who’s holding the times up as the ideal? I think 60s car designs are better than present day, that doesn’t mean I wish I lived through the actual 60s. I tend to like 70s- 80s music more than the cookie cutter auto tuned crap on the charts today, but luckily I have easier access than ever to expose myself to never ending well of music of the past with the technology of today. I can separate art from the artist and likewise I can separate art from the era.
One has its’ weirdness on the back, the other on the sides. Other than that they’re typical shapes of their respective times.
It’s well known that Stellantis needs to cut brands and dealer channels on the European side, and DS is one of the ripest for the cull. Next to Lancia, perhaps *the* ripest, with the added bonus that for the sake of both corporate and actual politics it’s probably best to cut a French brand first.
Speaking of corporate politics, it’s been said (rumored? Urban-legend-ed?) that the Seville’s bustleback was a retirement gift to Bill Mitchell who’d long been enamored of such Empress Line-inspired designs but had never gotten one approved for production. I’ve made my peace with it as a piece of design having run hot and cold on it since childhood (I had the Hot Wheels), but it’s hard to get over the fact that it threw away all the success the gen 1 had with import-intenders and also actively repelled a good chunk of the traditional Caddy crowd who might otherwise have spent the extra over a DeVille.
I do like Citroens my daily is that brand and Im not a fan of that model Seville but you couldnt give me that DS3 and Id happily drive away in that Seville.
I know this post is a bit of a wind-up, and wind ’em up it duly has, but dammit, that bloody horrid Seville-by-Hooper does NOT look awful in front of The Blob behind (which appears to be ready to devour it). That cannot be progress!
Of course, this is all just the defensive complaint of me, of the aging, the nostalgic, the chromed-car-people types, who are all of us necessarily looking at life diminishing rather than unfolding.
The newbie in the photo is simply the thing folks now drive, and like.
It’s understandable for the fading crowd to misjudge the rising one, but it’s plain dumb to assume that aesthetics play less a role than they did for buyers of ’50’s and ’60’s and ’70’s stuff for them. Plainly put, it’s not just the functionality but the looks that make people buy them.
It’s been much-said here before, but go pick a forties sedan from a second-storey line-up viewpoint over a carpark. Good luck.
(Psst! I actually don’t mind the modern DS’s, a bit contrived, maybe, but not too bad over all. Perhaps not in kiwibryce’s Roadgrime Grey*tm like here, but otherwise, yeah. Now shhshh!)
The rear end of the outgoing Honda Civic completely lost the plot. Sales fell off a cliff and the UK plant closed. Not unrelated
Neither one of those cars looks good. Yuck.
the 981 was one of my favorite “babies” – (you get very attached to something you worked on so intensely!).
The theme was selected for production at the end of 2007 and was internally controversial as it introduced the long headlamps and “plateau” fenders (906/908!) into the Porsche design language of the time, getting away from the “baby 911” rounder lamps and fenders of the previous generations. The lovely 918 design was done later, in 2009 by my super talented colleague, Hakan Saracoglu being intended to showcase these themes in a “halo” car. Products such as the Taycan, which is after my time and I think looks stunning on the road, have developed these themes further. The “spoiler tail lamps” were lost in the 718 facelift, which I think was a shame.
Being able to get some designs on the road for Porsche was an absolute privilege, as I became a fan of the marque as a child – my favorite matchbox and Corgi models were of the 906, which I still love to this day.
BTW, You’ll see the 981 is sometimes claimed by someone else (“Erfolg hat vielen Vaeter”!), as often happens in my business – the design patents bear me out though!