By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
if it stays within what is considered tasteful design—meaning if it's not too radical. If, however, it's a design that breaks all the established *rules* of contemporary aesthetics, that's another story.
And that has been an issue with every new radical art movement from the dawn of time. The Impressionists and Post Impressionists of the late 1800s, for the most part, their art was hated when it was originally exhibited. Today that art is priceless. They were way ahead of the curve so to speak.
Bob
-juice
If the (car) design interferes with the operation, ergonomics and/or function, that's when I get upset.
Bob
Bob
It might not be saying much, but still.
-juice
Landmark, yes, but mainly (or perhaps even only) because they were in the forefront of radically aerodynamic shapes, and thus were true pathfinders. I've been a Chrysler fan and supporter for decades, but even I don't know very many Chrysler fans who actually think the Airflows are or were very good looking.
As for the Taurus and Sable, I rarely like Ford designs, but I thought those two were more than acceptable from day one.
I'm solidly with Juice - a truly great design is recognized as such immediately - like the BMW 507. Nothing ever penned by Bangle has or will ever qualify.
Sorry, I disagree. There's no way you can predict accurately how history will view Bangle. Just judging by the amount of cyber ink that has been spent on him here certainly indicates that he's had some influence. I'm sure you'll call it a bad influence, but you don't know how he has influenced others in his field, or young car design students.
Okay, I'm done with him. I've said about all I can. From here on in it just gets to be repetitive blabber.
Bob
Tough act to follow.
-juice
Let all of us who oppose extreme visual pollution hope and pray that any influence Bangle might have on young car design students will be limited to providing a truly obnoxious example that they should avoid imitating at all cost.
On another note, does anyone have any opinions as to why Subaru doesn't hire some top design talent? They make some pretty decent cars, and I think they would instantly move up a couple of notches with a more exiting look across the board.
-juice
I'll see if I can find a link to a website and show you what I mean.
FWIW, the Zapatinas designs are controversial, too.
The new 2005 Legacy was almost universally acclaimed yet it's pretty conservative for an all-new design. I think they got the details right so I like it, but I would not call it distinctive.
It's definitely not timeless. We'll look back in a decade or two and be able to tell the Legacy came from the post Y2K era.
So among Subaristi, the conservative Legacy approach drew more praise than the daring Zapatinas design. We'll see how it flies, but Subaru is commited to that new face.
-juice
Bob
http://www.cardesignnews.com/autoshows/2004/geneva/preview/audi-a- 6/index.html
Bob
If the radiator inlets and headlamp treatments on these designs get cleaned up a bit between the show circuit and production, I think they'll be well received.
http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=6853
Bob <running and hiding>
Bob
Could Subaru possibly be aiming at Audi in it's trek up market? Audi, Subaru and All Wheel Drive cars are synonymous.
It may take a while, but Audi is clearly a Subie target to aim for.
Bob
"That slowness is most apparent in its off-the-line performance, as its lack of torque leaves it dragging until the engine speed climbs above 3,000 rpm. From that point on, the pace quickens considerably, but choose the wrong gear and you're left with little in reserve. We can't imagine how the smaller 2.5-liter engine fares with only 184 horsepower; unless the badge on the hood is the only thing that matters to you, we would suggest steering clear of the paltry power plant in the base model."
What might that suggest about the XT v. X3 where the power difference is dramatic? Obviously, that particular reviewer hlooks negatively upon buying a car purely for prestige
overtime
Njswamplands, are you into Imus or Stern? This is very important to me. I love your wisecracks but can't seem to figure out if you are a genius or mutant. Please help me out.
FYI: I'm a mutant.
;-)
Here's the link.
Carry on!
Steve, Host
Don't know about Swampy, but I tried - really tried - to get into the Imus thing several years ago. I listened to the radio show for at least six month. Finally gave up because he's a colossal, crashing bore and simply isn't worth the time.
As for Stern, I occasionally make myself watch his TV show just to see whether he has managed to climb out of the cesspool, but he obviously likes it in there too much. Hands down, the worst program that has ever appeared on TV.
I can't think of a situation where I'd reject an otherwise excellent auto merely because its stylists failed to stretch the limits enough, whatever that means. How much is enough, anyway?
I don't buy cars for shock value. There is much to be said for thoughtful, orderly, harmonious evolutionary change. The new A6 fits that sensible concept to a "T".
Bravo, Audi, for not getting carried away with yourselves, as Bangle has done.
It ain’t easy doing 4.5 hours of comedy every morning. iMan rules. da-da-DA!!! Yeah, gets boring but there are yucks there with some real characters. Also, it's the only place where you can find real improv. I need this to face the serious world of work every day. Stern is just a jerk.
I can't speak for others, but I was infatuated with Audis long before I became a Subaru owner last June.
Through a quirk, I bought two very early-production '79 RX-7s in 1978. Kept one (for 200,000 flawless miles), tried to trade the other straight across for a new Audi 100 sedan. Couldn't get the Audi dealer to go for it due to the sticker-price differences, so I sold the 2nd RX-7 to a private party for more than the Audi's value. That was when new RX-7s were selling at far above MSRP.
I totally agree. I guess my comment had more to due with the fact that knowing how Audi keeps some models, like the A6, out there for a bunch of years, they need to look that much more ahead or as I said "stretch the limit" By the way, I would probably own one if I could just fit in one.
As to *premium,* that can be interpreted any number of ways: Luxury? Performance? Best in market segment? Who knows?
Bob
BMW should do a George Steinbrenner deal to get Lutz. X3 among others would benefit. There! Kept it on topic.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2004-02-19-gm-sporty_x.htm
Click on the Photos link - that Nomad is a stunner, inside and out. It has styling elements of the original 53 Corvette and the 56-57 Nomad.
I like all three; Nomad, Curve and Solstice.
Lutz is a "car guy" (oh how I hate that overused term!), with superb taste, and has a great instinct for product. He's not a designer, but a motivator.
Bob