- Joined
- Jan 18, 2012
- Messages
- 300
- Points
- 156
How many times would you see these in the same headline?
http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=29995
http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=29995
Off Topic Multipla vs Zonda
- Thread starter Paddynabs
- Start date
Currently reading:
Off Topic Multipla vs Zonda
The author has a point, but he also mentions the difference between the original concept and the production ready article. An awful lot of concept cars are just that, a concept, intended purely to signal an intended design direction. If you actually put some of Bertone's or Pinninfarina's concepts onto the roads, then you wouldn't be able to get out of them in car parks, or get in them unless the driver suffered from Dwarfism or was a Paraplegic.
With some concepts the windscreen had such a steep rake that the driver would roast when the sun shines and not for nothing did some of these cars have pantograph wipers three foot long.
Where I do, almost, agree is the way fundamentally "right" cars have been facelifted but turned out worse than the original. The Countach mentioned in the article is a good example and its re-style was perhaps as much to do with trends in terms of body addenda. Once we got into the '80s almost anything with sporting pretentions had spoilers and side skirts, and despite the Countach not being pretentious in the sporting sense the designers went along with the trend.
The Lotus 7 rear end treatment seems to me to be an attempt to give an old design a more contemporary feel, but as we look back, we see the current Caterham 7 as being closer to the original than this one from around 30-35 years ago. Perhaps there comes a time when an old style just becomes a "Classic".
The revised Alfa 164 on the other hand became more svelte as a result of its facelift, the Ritmo became more attractive through becoming more "mainstream" as it became the Strada and the original Tipo was better for its nip and tuck. The Uno changed, but it was touch and go as to whether it was better or worse but lost some of its originality both inside and out. The Multipla was another that was more acceptable to the car buying masses but lost some of its originality; although I'm not sure they sold any more as a result.
The Sierra was panned by the critics when it first came out, in fact the Mk5 Cortina Crusader was one of the few cars at the time to show almost zero depreciation as existing Cortina owners, resisting the temptation to buy a Cavalier, tried to stay with the Blue Oval. The facelift was all it took and the Sierra took off.
From the point of view of those on this forum, the biggest cock up in the re-styling stakes must go to the GP. They took what was, in my opinion, the best looking small car in the world. The styling was neat, svelte and handsome. The interior was simple and with the coloured dashboard and more interesting seat fabrics. More sophisticated than the French and far more visually stimulating all round than the Germans. It went overnight from a car I really wanted to own to one I really didn't care about, and a car that lost FIAT a big chunk of the market.
Apart from that it was alright.
With some concepts the windscreen had such a steep rake that the driver would roast when the sun shines and not for nothing did some of these cars have pantograph wipers three foot long.
Where I do, almost, agree is the way fundamentally "right" cars have been facelifted but turned out worse than the original. The Countach mentioned in the article is a good example and its re-style was perhaps as much to do with trends in terms of body addenda. Once we got into the '80s almost anything with sporting pretentions had spoilers and side skirts, and despite the Countach not being pretentious in the sporting sense the designers went along with the trend.
The Lotus 7 rear end treatment seems to me to be an attempt to give an old design a more contemporary feel, but as we look back, we see the current Caterham 7 as being closer to the original than this one from around 30-35 years ago. Perhaps there comes a time when an old style just becomes a "Classic".
The revised Alfa 164 on the other hand became more svelte as a result of its facelift, the Ritmo became more attractive through becoming more "mainstream" as it became the Strada and the original Tipo was better for its nip and tuck. The Uno changed, but it was touch and go as to whether it was better or worse but lost some of its originality both inside and out. The Multipla was another that was more acceptable to the car buying masses but lost some of its originality; although I'm not sure they sold any more as a result.
The Sierra was panned by the critics when it first came out, in fact the Mk5 Cortina Crusader was one of the few cars at the time to show almost zero depreciation as existing Cortina owners, resisting the temptation to buy a Cavalier, tried to stay with the Blue Oval. The facelift was all it took and the Sierra took off.
From the point of view of those on this forum, the biggest cock up in the re-styling stakes must go to the GP. They took what was, in my opinion, the best looking small car in the world. The styling was neat, svelte and handsome. The interior was simple and with the coloured dashboard and more interesting seat fabrics. More sophisticated than the French and far more visually stimulating all round than the Germans. It went overnight from a car I really wanted to own to one I really didn't care about, and a car that lost FIAT a big chunk of the market.
Apart from that it was alright.
minisandfiats
New member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2012
- Messages
- 103
- Points
- 31
Sorry, GP? Grand Punto?
I wholeheartedly agree with this article, finding myself somewhat of a car design Luddite.
First gen Audi TT looks so much more fresh than the second.
Multipla (obviously) much better before facelift.
Oh, and let's not mention class (real) Mini vs some of the godawful monstrosities BMW sticks the badge on nowadays. Park a real Mini next to a new one for a lesson in design.
The only exception I can think of is the New New Beetle- I actually really like the sleeker update ones.
Rant over...
I wholeheartedly agree with this article, finding myself somewhat of a car design Luddite.
First gen Audi TT looks so much more fresh than the second.
Multipla (obviously) much better before facelift.
Oh, and let's not mention class (real) Mini vs some of the godawful monstrosities BMW sticks the badge on nowadays. Park a real Mini next to a new one for a lesson in design.
The only exception I can think of is the New New Beetle- I actually really like the sleeker update ones.
Rant over...
Compared to the last version yes, but compared to the original? Nononono!
minisandfiats
New member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2012
- Messages
- 103
- Points
- 31
Oh yes, original one is far better.
But then again that opens a whole "design evolution" debate- compare original 1940s Beetle to the last 1970s-ish ones!
But then again that opens a whole "design evolution" debate- compare original 1940s Beetle to the last 1970s-ish ones!
There is only one mini.
There is only one Beetle.
Always has been, always will be
What I want to know is, how the hell do some cars get onto the roads with such awful visibility (for the driver).
It seems the more 'sporty' the car is, the less the driver can see of his/her surroundings
There is only one Beetle.
Always has been, always will be
What I want to know is, how the hell do some cars get onto the roads with such awful visibility (for the driver).
It seems the more 'sporty' the car is, the less the driver can see of his/her surroundings
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2013
- Messages
- 3
- Points
- 1
Always felt the first Barchetta was just right but when they added the 3rd brakelight and messed with the front headlights it just spolied things.
There is only one mini.
There is only one Beetle.
Always has been, always will be
What I want to know is, how the hell do some cars get onto the roads with such awful visibility (for the driver).
It seems the more 'sporty' the car is, the less the driver can see of his/her surroundings
Didn't go far enough
There is only one mini.
There is only one Beetle.
There is only one Panda
Didn't go far enough
There is only one mini.
There is only one Beetle.
There is only one Panda
There's only one 500?:devil:
True, but the current one is as close as I can afford
Although there were quite a few versions of the 'original'
Last edited:
True, but the current one is as close as I can afford
Although there were quite a few versions of the 'original'
Quite notice the strong resemblance between the 1970 Fiat 500L and the 2013 500L
evkruining
New member
- Joined
- May 10, 2009
- Messages
- 12
- Points
- 3
Quite notice the strong resemblance between the 1970 Fiat 500L and the 2013 500L
Haha, indeed! They resemble so much that I can't tell them apart. ?
Seriously though, doesn't the 500L look like an ugly Kia or a Swift?
If anything I'd say a Mini countryman cross bred with a Panda.
Two facelifts that looked better than the original...the corsa D and the hawk eye impreza! Although in all fairness the starting points for both were disastrous.
Mmm, although we're mainly talking about styling here, I think design plays a part as well. It does to an extent depend on your definition of both words.There is only one mini.
There is only one Beetle.
Always has been, always will be
What I want to know is, how the hell do some cars get onto the roads with such awful visibility (for the driver).
It seems the more 'sporty' the car is, the less the driver can see of his/her surroundings
I'd like to generalise here by saying that to Style is to shape a car, whereas to design is to plan and engineer its overall layout. If you combine the design with the engineering you get a car. Therefore, when Ferdinand Porsche came up with the layout of rear air cooled engine with rear wheel drive the die was pretty much cast. It only remained for a little bit of 1930s aerodynamics to be squeezed into the planned wheelbase and Viola, you have the People's Car.
Likewise, for the Mini, apart from the need to replace a previous model, once a size was established it only remained for Issigonis' engineering plans; FWD, transverse engine with gearbox below it, to be squeezed into its 10' length and hey presto, a Mini.
From personal experience though the Mini, as bought by my Mum in 1979, a 1000 in yellow with fetching grey stripe nylon seats, appeared to be a '70s update of a '60s classic with its big steering wheel and narrow cross-ply tyres it sounded like the pistons would come out through through the rocker cover at motorway speed and would understeer until the cows came home on bends. It was only when you put a small wheel on the steering column and larger, wider ones with radials on the hubs that it handled as per legend.
Mind you, my Mum's car did have a badly fitted boot seal that, on delivery, had allowed the boot to fill up with water which showed off the mouldy bacon sandwich floating there in its best light.
As for the Beetle, they were noisy, with rock hard seats and virtually non-existent heater. As they were supposedly designed to be capable of running at or near their maximum speed on the Autobahn, Porsche and Hitler must have been masochists.
Of the cars mentioned, the only one that, to me, really was a triumph of style, design and engineering was the original Panda, especially once the FIRE engines came along. Think of the hammock type rear seat that could be removed completely to make a van and the ashtray that you could move across the dash, or remove completely. As seen in the Uno.
Flat glass and flat panels meant the car could be repaired almost anywhere in FIAT's orbit of countries they sold to; such as Greece, Turkey, Spain, North Africa and of course Italy. To me, that's brilliant design, styling and engineering all in one. For me the Panda is the best, but not necessarily the most iconic, of the three.
Last edited:
Quite notice the strong resemblance between the 1970 Fiat 500L and the 2013 500L
If you squint...
and hit yourself hard over the head with a sledge hammer...
