car design thread

Some of those are great fun, some not so much.
But I applaud their creativity.

 

>

Image Unavailable, Please Login

Bird watchers.

 

The doors would need to be at least 12 inches thick! LOL!

 

And what may I ask is wrong with 12" thick doors? Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I saw the Super Bowl commercial for a 2023 Cadillac Lyric. Go to Goolde and look for
Will Ferrell Super Bowl Ad - General Motors [2021]


My calendar only covers 2021 so I was a bit surprised to see them plugging a car that won't be orderable until fall '22. As a sometimes auto critic (radio show) I have this reaction and would like to hear from designers how off base I am. And don't hold back the brickbats(whatever those are...)

Here's my take:

FRONT Very strong sculptural feel, with big scoops. I know electric cars don't need grilles cavities per se but at least the prototype has a simulated grille and cross hatch mesh, though in some pictures it's almost blacked out. Having that area blacked out gives you some re-assurance it's a car, whereas Tesla more boldly has a blank front look,i.e. "we don't need no stinkin' grille." The dimmer lit up grille surround I am not sure I like --should the lights be stronger or weaker--but in these days when you only have a second to give an impression so at least this car will say "I'm a Cadillac and proud of it"

SIDE Very strong form not detracted from by many different conflicting sculptural shapes. Thin blade door handles good answer to Tesla (seems like I had those on my '54 300SL)Rear wheel wells are almost absurdly cut too high for a family car. Wheels too tall (maybe only in prototype) reminding me those thin section height tires don't like potholes. I am hoping with a strong shape they get copyists like the latest Explorer now looks side view like a range Rover.

REAR
Again very strong. Vertical thin blade-shape running lights again a recurring Cadillac theme. The blade like lights are slanted inward at the bottom, don't know why couldn't have been vertical(unless that reminds you too much of older Caddies) . I like the double protection with the extra lights above the trunk lid but don't know if those are running light, brake lights or signal lamps.

INTERIOR Gauge nacelle reminds me of good old '70 1/ Pontiac Trans Am in binnacle shape. Dash not overly dominant like Teslas that say "I'm all electric-- get used to it" Can't figure out PR shot that shows no seams for folding rear seat--can you order it without a rear seat? Then what happens to the rear console?

Question: Why are they showing it so far ahead of time--doesn't this give the competition time to clone its design cues?
Commercial comment: I too was shocked hen i saw Norway buys more electric cars per capita than the US . What about the nay-sayers that say electric cars can't take bad weather?
Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Lyric seems to have some interesting details. But and there is always a but the drawing showing the front didn't evolve into a pleasing production version. All those big gaping hole vents in the front look like a consumer version 'wood chipper' and should have yellow safety tape around them. The drawing had a much better solution. Fix the front and lose those extra lights at the back corners up on the sail panel and A+ for this design.

 

Why is it the concept drawings always look better (except for he original Mangusta...)

 

If it looked too good people would try to maintain it for many years to come thus reduce new car sales. I photoshoped the sketch into the production version.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Great skill there, thank you!

 

Are cars art?
https://commonreader.wustl.edu/c/on-cars-as-art/?fbclid=IwAR12FPrc-O1KFBFFrnnLPoq3rfTnIJMmpgpFrWPfXm_cHf5PUDArWYclByQ

 

Interesting how a Corvette and a Mustang worked their way into the construct to.
One other detail not noted - none of the three cars are really 'family' cars.

 

The age old debate of if product designed by committee can also be art. I guess i can see it being art in lower case. But not ART. Now, concept sketches are ART to me.

 

A couple of thoughts on your question (as I'm not entirely sure my answers are correct!) -

Norway, electric cars, & bad weather: First, Norway (nor EU countries in general) isn't particularly large so range is not as problematic, and I suspect that given the uptake, charging is more readily available. Secondly, Norway offers very large subsidies to buyers of Ecars.

 

thanks for this -

and to answer "of 2 worlds" who says they're fot family cars? "it rather depends on your family" (spoken in posh British accent)

 

I think it depends.

Art communicates an emotion or an idea, whereas objects that are primarily neat solutions to a practical problem are merely elegant feats of engineering (see many German executive cars). The practical design of the minivan or camper van is never going to be considered art, although it might be a culturally representative of a particular era and feature in other works of art (e.g. VW Camper van and hippies). Impractical cars in sporting categories are not necessarily art. Take a look at the very high performance example of the Gumpert Apollo - a great feat of engineering and very, very quick, but it's not beautiful and isn't art.

A car that is art is not necessarily fast (but it can be), is not necessarily practical (but it can be), not necessarily well-made (but you hope it will be), and not necessarily a great drive (but certainly can be). A car that is art is beautiful, breathtaking to behold, stirs your emotions (even when it's stationary), and lingers in your mind for days, weeks, months, and years after you've first seen it. The comment from the article about the perceivers affective response to the perceptual experience seems to be a more intellectual way to articulate that same concept.

​

By modern standards, the 348 is slow, impractical, and maintenance-intensive. There are cheaper, faster, more aerodynamic, more economical, more reliable, more practical, more durable, safer, and more technologically advanced cars to be had in the modern car market. And yet, those modern alternatives don't strike me as art. The 348 is art... to me.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself, Andrew.
My personal opinion notwithstanding, I believe the author is full of it.
I do believe a car can be considered art, but his lecture was way too over my head to be meaningful. Verbose?
And art is indeed in the eye of the beholder, as well as beauty.
As long as you appreciate the 348, that's all that matters to you. Enjoy it.

 

Art ...
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Spykord ...?

Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

....and Van.....

 

Perfect! I wondered if Tenney was being subtle or...

1967 Catalina convertible

 

On the Pontiac theme some more 1967 >

Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
This time wearing Linden Green.

 

Three Years earlier >

Image Unavailable, Please Login
Perhaps the ultimate 'day 2' from 1964 anyway.

 

1965 - back when a new model year meant a new body design would debut >

Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Spent a significant amount of time deezining Pontiacs. Great memories.
And no, had no involvement with the Aztek!

Just in case you were curious.......

 

I recall that point was emphatically made on several occasions. Fear not, the Aztek won't besmirch your exemplary record.

All the best,
Andrew.