All the auto manufactures need another Harley Earl.
Its like all the cars have the same general shape, and some butt ugly front ends to go with it.
The only time there is a good looking car it is priced out of the general publics ability to purchase it. In the 70's and 80's it was a box, just like the old ford model T. At least we had Lexus to break that trend. I wonder who will break the ugly trend we have now?

 

You mean the aerodynamic trend? Yeah, that's not going to go away.

 

you can thank govt regulations for that

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...fatter-feature

 

Na I'm talking about the major ugliness of cars now. At least there are a few that have some nice looks Challenger is one Mercedes makes the other. Yeah gov regs true, and tell me who is it that pushes all these things ?

 

Looks are really subjective. There will never be one point in time when the auto world balances it's axis and everyone is pleased.

What I've noticed over time is our opinion of car designs are much related to our age. As we get older, we tend to grab onto an earlier period of time when we were first smitten by cars and got a taste of our own wheels. From that point on, things change and we look back at our beginnings as the golden era. Heck, even GM does this- so much so they put Camaro taillights on a Chevy Malibu.

 

Aero efficiency is one thing, designers are also making complex surfaces just because they can. You can thank Chris Bangle for that... But if it wasn't for his challenging designs, cars would be boring soap bar shapes. I'm not that young but I welcome all new designs that push the boundaries. Heck, even the staid ES now has a huge spindle grille and separate swoosh lights.

 

Fashion changes.


Current styling will become outdated soon enough.

 

You do realize that you are arguing about something subjective right? Just because YOU think cars are ugly, doesn't make it FACT for everyone else. It is okay for OTHER people to have their own opinions too.

 

Subjective yes and IMO, cars have never looked better overall than today. Also, cars have never been so varied as today with so many different shapes and styling trends. Compare with past decades (especially starting with the birth of cars through the 80's), cars were much closer in design to each other than today.

 

True though the new trend now among automakers seems to be "one sausage, different lengths"

 

It seems most all new cars have roofs that mimic the VW bug, a blister roof, and speaking of aerodynamics those roofs become lifting bodies at high speed and or high winds. In 90 Lexus literature claims how great the aerodynamics are for the LS400, and it had a nice roof line, with no pinch weld plastic trash collector strips like all the new cars have now. It was nice when they all knew how to make a roof, but the bean counters likely didn't like the cost so now all side panels are stamped in one piece. That's the thing of new cars its not that some of the design is good, all that counts is how inexpensive it is to make it. And speaking of the way the roofs are attached, that whole deal is like a monkey see monkey do thing, I'm not sure what brand did that first, but they all seemed to follow, I think that is really strange that not one is doing it different.

 

http://oppositelock.kinja.com/the-re...ely-1707345719

This article sums up my thoughts nicely.

 

^^^

We also have to consider that although manufacturers design the end, they have to conform to multiple multi-national safety standards and regulations that will translate into an international/universal legal-compliant car.


Take parameters such as the height and width of rear taillights (including the third center brake light), size and brightness, bumper size and protection, more regulations regarding exhausts and output, visibility and safety of rear windows, and visibility of license plate placement, and you're working with a cookie-cutter mold for ALL cars to design around.

 

I basically agree with the OP. I've also had my fill of Humpack-Whale rooflines, peep-hole rear windows, Gargantuan grilles, slit-headlights, body-folds and Jelly-bean curves all over the vehicle, monotone paint jobs, video-push-button dash screens, wheels large enough for a 19th-Century Conestoga wagon, and ultra-low-profile rubber-band tires that pound your kidneys and self-destruct in potholes. Let's see something different for a change.

 

I think the OP may not be aware of all of the standards that these cars have to meet. Because they are stringent there is not a lot of wiggle room in design for the front or the rear. Have to meet pedestrian safety standards and the rear has its own set of rules .

I totally see what he is saying though. especially when you look at the pics above