Come on in guys got an opinion and idea...maybee an explanation.....

OKay guys was thinking about this today on my way to work, I was in the lane waiting for the light to turn and the opposite traffic was turning in my direction...I kinda zoned out and blured my eyes, as the cars went by I noticed something then I went back in focus and saw the car go by, civic, malibu,corrolla, subaru, another malibu, and the list goes on for about 10 12 mid size 4 door cars of diffrent manufacureres..they all when I blured my vision really did not stand out from one another they all had the same look, roll down the street and stance...

then it dawned on me....

lets go back to the 50's and you saw style, things that were amazing cars comming out with new features, fins, grills of all shapes and sizes, flares and what not, this continued into the 60's with the same thing dramatic styling, jaw dropping looks, in your face cars, the 70's were the end of that era, the gas crunch brought a new style to our shores..imported euro styling, Japanese small car styling, those cars sold, we emulated them. The term Euro inspired, Euro Handeling was now the key word for anything built in America, japan showed us small inexpensive cars that were great deals built good but lacked that one thing...style.... so from the early 80's on we go into the 90's the cars we grew up with are now the cars we are buying, they have gone from the simple cars of cheap dependable import to cover the whole range of mid level and dependable, to luxuryious but still no style..
this is what people grew up on Toyota making a name for its self in everything it does right, Honda too...they do everything that we didnt know how to do and took the style away from our cars, we had to emulate the competition, we did not know how to do anything else..our once great sedans, rolling artwork were now having to prove its almost as good or try to in the areas that the mass market and media have been feeding us for so long...Euro this and Japans quality.. this had gone on for some time now..

move up to late 90's something broke and took a gamble, Caddy broke with tradition and threw everyone for a curve, alot of mags said great things about the car CTS..it was an american car..had american styling since no one would try what Caddillac did...could hang with the euro cars, built well enough to be on par with Japans luxury..but it had something more..style..it looked diffrent rolling down the street...along comes DCX, they take this and they run with it, all there cars Crossfire, 300C, Charger all following what GM's study in style did, make something that isnt what is already out there, blow the cookie cutter mold up and start fresh...Ford did it by stepping back in time with its Mustang...it works for them...style is the key here...

The reason for me saying this is alot of people hate the way the new Charger is done looks ugly, wierd, whatever you want to say, I think it is AMERICAN STYLE that is finally comming around...if that car was in the same 12 cars that went by it would not blend it, just like a CTS these cars stand out, they are not made in the same way American car companies have had to make cars to appeal to the bland cars or Toyota and Honda, these cars have style and are built on as good as or better platforms than what we were trying to emulate only a few years ago.

Love it or hate it I think cars like the Charger are what is needed here in America, style has to play a roll and I think alot of us have been force fed so much on what a good looking car should look like now if it dosnt blurr in with the rest of the cars then it dosnt look right..that to me isnt american styling..we have the capability now to make cars that are as good as the competition I think we just need to get our artistic side back and actually make rolling works of art again. DCX Ford and GM have already set that in motion, I think we just have to understand and embrace it.

These new cars are what American Cars should be....... :bow:

American cars SHOULD be polarizing! There should be people who love a car's design and people that hate it (though more of the former than the latter :) ). Foreign cars have been traditionally bland or uniform.

The 300, Magnum, and Charger, and to a lesser extent the Crossfire & Pacifica are all strong American designs, and IMHO Chrysler is leading the way. Ford's new Mustang and even the Thunderbird also fall into that catagory.

It takes very little effort to give a car a strong design once a design theme is set. Best example of this is over at Cadillac. The CTS had some serious impact when it came out, and still stands out in traffic. Then you look at the STS, and it comes across as bland. It blends in with traffic more, even though it's the same design.

If everyone agrees something is a "nice" design, then that should be something like the kiss of death. But make a design that people call awsome, or yank their head around to see, or can identify it coming at them a quarter mile away, while there are still a few people who call them ugly, and you've got yourself a winner. :)

at leasy you know what Im saying, does the rest of the board know what I mean?? ;)


The Charger is in your face American styling :D gotta love it :D

GTO and charger are two different examples.

One is very understated/bland looking, and wouldn't be considered ugly by 98% of the people out there. And the other while far from bland, carries more of a love it or hate it design. One is distinctly American, while the other has more of a import look.

So i get what you're saying. Regardless of how ugly we may think the Charger looks, it is distinctly American and a break from your typical cookie-cutter sedan. Same with the CTS, and the 300C (although it is likened to the european Bentely). Same goes for the mustang. Many felt the sn95's were going towards the import look, especially the rounded 94-98 body style...but there's no mistaking the 05's as anything other than American.

So yeah. America should create their own style (not nessesarily go retro), but you gotta make it attractive. I find the 05 mustangs attractive (some don't), and almost all find the CTS attractive, but the opinions on charger are everywhere. So go american, but make the overall style more pleasing to everyones eyes.

at leasy you know what Im saying, does the rest of the board know what I mean?? I know what you mean, and as an effort at American styling, Charger gets some points. BUT, as guionM said, "There should be people who love a car's design and people that hate it (though more of the former than the latter ) and we've proven there's more of the latter, and we almost overlook designs' flaws like that when coupled with LOADS of HorsePower.
Make it available in a Coupe, tone the front down a bit, and it'll expand its base in "the former"("people who love a car's design" ).
The Crossfire is a good example, NOT mainsteam sexy, but NOT ugly either,(maybe, "interesting"..) and you d@mn sure aren't gonna confuse it with anything else on the road... :cool:

the thing with Charger is its really diffrent, and not cookie cutter...but what if these designs came commonplace...radical styling that made cars diffrent..and not expensive like the Prowler, T Bird or any other car..

and how can you say charger is later...its the name they hate..but its not the 60's charger its the 2005 Charger..and should sell real well...

sometimes ugly (cts) becomes sexy when its in the public and actually seen...and becomes an american style...

I think the charger will look good whn its in the public eye..

you know dave, i've actually been thinking about this for a couple months now
i really started thinking about it once i started seeing old cars (not even muscle cars) that just had really aggressive lines and stances
basically, i was gonna post a poll stating "have auto designers lost their touch?" because i, like you, just feel like everything is so bland and blended in anymore
you beat me to it though ;)

but yea, i think we DO need more hard edged designs
i think the cts is a perfect example
bold hard lines, stuck out grille, bulging headlights, etc. all make for a visually stunning package, that is obviously selling well

That's what I love about my Z28, it doesn't blend in. It looks like nothing else on the road(and we don't need gay Concorde comments, because other than the headlights, I don't see it).

From a designer's perspective, it's not that we've (or they, since I've never worked for an auto company) have lost touch, but there are many new and different factors that go into car design today that didn't exist 30-40 years ago. Plus design studios don't have the power they held under the likes of Harley Earl and Bill Mitchell, but it seems that under Lutz and Hayes ((?)I just went brain dead...the guy who leads Ford design) design is becoming more prominent.

1.) The biggest one is of course, is aerodynamics for fuel efficency. Designing for the windtunnel will ultimately lead to cars of the same general shape.

2.) Ergonomics: I get the chance to drive many older cars at the Chicago auctions, and while I'm admiring the styling elements, and can't help but wonder how people lived with some of the contols everyday (I learned to drive in a '78 Chevy 1/2 ton p/u, and some of those controls were really not so convenient to get to). When you design to put things within easy reach, there's only so many places it can go.

3.) Sately: Airbags, door beams, roll over and crash standards. These things take up space.

While I personally think the Charger, Magnum, and Charger are hideous and personally not the definition of Amercian design (unless crude and clunky is your definition), I give them big credit for being bold and creative (although I wonder how many people here would be enamoured with then if they were not V8 powered).

I don't give Ford this credit (business wise sure, design wise no even close)

To me Caddy epitomizes the new American design, sleek, sharp, and identifiable. Perhaps it's an age thing, or I just have a really progressive, innovative mindset.

Is there room for improvement? I think so, but also remember that most of the cars mentioned at the beginning of the post or those companies bread and butter cars, and 'polarizing' styling isn't the strongest argument for substanstial sales. Thus you get alotta vanilla.

the thing is ther bread and butter cars were supposed to be stylish, daring and fun to have...not vanilla...thats where I say we lost the appeal by using the bland japanese and euro styling of economy cars comes in..bland should not be what an american car should be and should not blend in with the economy cars of europe...but we have been brainwashed into thinking we want vanilla cars..and cars like the charger and so on are american design love it or hate it its bold in your face and polarizing...like the cars from the 50's and 60's..when more of these cars come out the cars being designed in Japan and sold over here that are cookie cutter will not cut it...people will want style and flash...and those type of cars will be what americans want something diffrent stand out and flashy..even for what was once vanilla cars...how bout a little swirl mixed in or sprinkles on the top..Like I said Caddy threw everyone for a loop and it paid off it striking, some people hate it some love it but it is AMERICAN style..and nothing can compete with it...and as you said

"Plus design studios don't have the power they held under the likes of Harley Earl and Bill Mitchell, but it seems that under Lutz and Hayes ((?)I just went brain dead...the guy who leads Ford design) design is becoming more prominent."

that is the problem..dont make the cars look like or handle like anything but what it should look like..an American car..

Look, certain cars should be polarizing. Others should not. Cars that are targeted towards emotional buying or performance should demonstrate the bleeding edge of styling. Appliances should not.

Malibus are appliances. Corvettes are not. Impalas are appliances. Cadillacs are not.

Nobody really cares what their toaster looks like. A toaster should be generally pleasing appearance-wise, but much more basic things sell toasters... like, does it toast bread or not?

Same with Malibus/Camrys/Accords.

Where the Japanese truly fail, and continue to, is that they do not understand how to build anything OTHER THAN an appliance sucessfully. When lust becomes part of the equation in a purchase, they fail miserably.

Chrysler has the benefit of ALWAYS being a niche builder. They can afford to take significant risks in design because they really don't have anything to lose. The Chrysler cars have precisely ZERO chance of threatening Impala's sales. Not going to happen. Chrysler might sell a few at the start of the run, but in the end polarizing designs are also the first to become passe, and by the end of the run Chrysler becomes a footnote next to:

GM sells a whole buttload of Impalas... oh yeah and Chrysler makes some cars too.

Remember the whole furor about the cab-forward design stuff 10 years ago?

Here's a little know fact:
Even at their peak, the Buick LeSabre ALONE outsold the ENTIRE LH car line-up.

Let me throw this at you. I'm not disagreeing at all, if anything I do agree, but there's a big picture to look at.

The bread and butter cars for companies are the models they want to get the majority of a maket and thus sales; they have to appeal to a WIDE (very wide, extremely wide) demographic. The more people you try to please really turns into the less people you're trying not to turn away. This is probably where upper management gets really conservative, and cars get boring. Plus these are usually the 'substance over style' cars. But, there are signs of improvement:

Malibu: high healdlights and full width chrome spear makes it a distinctive front end,
G6: long wheel base plus very short overhangs combined with a steeply raked front and rear glass make a very striking profile for a sedan,
Maxima: bumperless rear end is unique to the class,
Magnum, 300C, Charger: definately not aero sleek, (although IMO they are a throw back to a decade long and gone)
Colorado: even though the turn lamps over the headlights kinda remind me more of the early '80s Dodge Diplomat than Avalanche, it's still extremely disinctive and tough looking.

Those are just the ones off top of my head.

Now to counter you arguement that recently cars look boring because they copy or are overly influenced by their Japanese and Euro ecomnomy competitors is (I think) simplistic and untrue. There are many models in those home markets we don't get or get to see. One of my favorite cars while in Euorpe was the Puegot 307, a very sleek, stylish and rakish three door sport compact.

Is there an opportunity for 'sprinkles'? Absolutely! How about putting a styling crease on the side of the Malibue that mimicked the top chrome arch on the '57 Belair? Is it really difficult to asseble interiors where the dash panel lines flowed uninterupted into the door panels and center console (ala Probe and Aurora). I'd like to see some contols go back to the instrument bezel like the first gen FWD Grand Prix and '90s 300Z.

"Nobody really cares what their toaster looks like. A toaster should be generally pleasing appearance-wise, but much more basic things sell toasters... like, does it toast bread or not?"

thats the thing why make a car a toaster and not something hot..

yes there has been some change in the last few yrs..they said the new GTO was so 90's in style..
its comming around and I think that those cars should not look like the overseas competition..

Deep down I know american car buyers want a polarizing car that say here I am..it works if its done right..and experiments like theCaddy, DCX cars is where its going to take off..

thats the thing why make a car a toaster and not something hot..


Because the people who buy toasters don't want something hot. They want something that toasts bread.

the I guess Toyota is going to be the #1 automaker in the world..cus we cant even figure out how to plug something in to make it hot..

A car's styling doesn't mean too terribly much to me, as long as it has the function to back it up. WRX Sti's look rediculous with that giant wing on the back, but I would drive one every day of the week if it was given to me. I suppose many enthusiasts (and probably most non-enthusiasts) rank a car's styling farther up in importance, but if a car is powerful, handles well and is fun to drive, I'm not going to get in a twist over the shape of the headlights.

That said, there are limitations. Don't let the Aztek happen again.