New Car Lines Losing Their Looks?

[Pantha-King]

The Ford Focus, an amazing car when it came out back in 98'. However with the second generation of Ford Focus I find myself thinking "has Ford taken a step back in the looks department?"
What has happened with the design? I still find myself wanting a first generation Focus despite the fact that it's around six years old.
There's something lacking in the design of the second Generation Focus, and I can't quite put my finger on it but the second and soon to be third generation have nothing on the original.

It's not just the Focus either, the Peugeot 206, a popular car even by today's standards and I see quite a lot of them where I live. A car I also considered at one point and more so when I saw what they had done to the design with the 207.
The giant face-like grille and enlarged Peugeot logo does nothing to help it.

Honda Civic has gone down the same road, the original Civic still looks great even now, whilst the 00'-06' still retains some of the qualities that made the original so good. But then we move on to the current generation Civic, which is now showcased as more as a sports car than anything else. All I have to say is what happened to the front end of the car? What's with the pointed front?

There are a few other cars out there that just can't compare to their predecessor's, be it in looks or other areas.

Does anyone else feel that current generation car designs are lacking?

 

[X-Power]

I agree with the 206-207 transistion. There's one parked outside on my street right now and it looks overweight compared to the 206. I think modern supermini's are getting far too big now... they're the same size as family cars used to be.

Here's one...

Fiat Grande Punto

Fiat Punto Evo

I know this is a facelift and not a replacement but they managed to turn a good looking car into a hideous one.

 

[Pantha-King]

I know that superminis and hatchbacks are more popular than ever, but companies seem to be skimping on the designs somewhat.

I'm not bothered about what's under the bonnet as a lot of companies usually keep the cars performance to the same standards as the previous generations but improve on it slightly. But when it comes to the body design I feel less compelled to go for a better performing car despite the technologies and new additions to the interior.
If the car is an eyesore then everything else goes out of the window.

I agree with the Fiat, and I'm also forgetting the latest Ford Fiesta too 👎

 

[Jondot]

Agree with all except the Civic. The previous one looked like a frigging MPV, so frankly pleased it turned into an angular spaceship. I'd also like to bring up the Ford Ka (and no doubt homeforsummer will be in to mention the Mondeo), which went from a striking new edge design to a lumpy, Fiesta-aping handbag.

 

[lpb-nissan-gt-r]

but think about car companies which are doing the opposite e.g lamborghini
original Murcielago

Compared to the LP640

Gallardo

lp560

Although these are facelifts.
EDIT
IM getting red xs Im not sure what I did wrong
edited Thanks Jondot.

 

[Ardius]

I don't agree, some cars look better now I think, like the Fiesta, Swift and Yaris. I'm not keen on the constant changes to the Renault Clio though, but its all a taste thing really. The Fiesta/Focus look is the new fashion (angled headlights, etc) it seems as the Corsa, Yaris, etc all use similar stylings now.

Don't really see where you're going with Peugeots, they've always looked the same essentially. I never really liked that look, regardless of decade. Probably my favourite Pug design was the 80s 205 style.

 

[Jondot]

IM getting red xs Im not sure what I did wrong

You've stuck http:// twice in some of the addresses.

 

[Perfect Balance]

I think a good number of the cars posted look better in newer form.

 

[Keef]

The Focus is a good example of a design that just can't be beat. They did it pretty much perfectly the first time around, and revolutionized the world of small cars with it. It just came together perfectly, the whole car's theme matched, it broadcast the feelings and imagery that they wanted it to. By far the best version of that car and I don't think it'll ever be topped with any future Focus.

 

[McLaren]

but think about car companies which are doing the opposite e.g lamborghini
Although these are facelifts.
EDIT
IM getting red xs Im not sure what I did wrong
edited Thanks Jondot.

A good point, but we have to remember that supercar companies are always on verge of making their cars look edgier, meaner, & just stand out more. The 6.2 Murcielago is a pretty menacing car, but add a new shape in its bumper, a new diffuser & some wide intake vents, & it stands out even more.

Regular companies, though, aren't on the same page. Most of the time, like the Civic above, it's just a car that's going with time. The new one, like the Focus, is very modern looking, whilst you can tell that the older ones are def. designed in a different time period (even if it's half a decade or more).

The Focus may still look really good because we were so used to it.
Like the Jag. XJ. That car's previous design is extremely old, but because it's so conservative (like the E39 5 Series), that simply changes continued to make it look rather modern. Now that we have this new one that has completely redone itself, it has made the previous XJ design show how old it really is at heart. Continuing, the new Focus may also not look as nice because the maker is trying to market to a new crowd. The old car has a basic idea behind it (Keef mentioned it), but the new one whilst still containing that theme, is obviously trying to appeal to a newer market as its original at the same time by now looking sleek & "edge-y" even though the Focus really isn't that kind of car.

My only issue with car designers is the tactic of resorting to retro to design a car like the Camaro. It looks good, no doubt, but if that's what's slowly popping up as "new" car designs for the next gen. model, what happens when the designers start trying to make a retro design of cars from the 70's or even the 80's?

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I prefer the newer Focus. I don't see anything special in the old one.

My only issue with car designers is the tactic of resorting to retro to design a car like the Camaro. It looks good, no doubt, but if that's what's slowly popping up as "new" car designs for the next gen. model, what happens when the designers start trying to make a retro design of cars from the 70's or even the 80's?

I don't really mind the retro, since the new cars only take the basic shape of the old cars. Everything else looks completely different. I don't think they would get far with the 70s or 80s since those cars weren't/aren't as iconic.

 

[McLaren]

I don't really mind the retro, since the new cars only take the basic shape of the old cars. Everything else looks completely different. I don't think they would get far with the 70s or 80s since those cars weren't/aren't as iconic.

The basic shape is enough to make some cars become unappealing. The Thunderbird was not a very particularly good looking car unlike the original.

 

[homeforsummer]

Agree with all except the Civic. The previous one looked like a frigging MPV, so frankly pleased it turned into an angular spaceship. I'd also like to bring up the Ford Ka (and no doubt homeforsummer will be in to mention the Mondeo), which went from a striking new edge design to a lumpy, Fiesta-aping handbag.

Yer' damn right I am

Previous gen

Current gen

I know I'm in a minority here, but we've gone from a simple, Germanic, chiselled look that even works well as a base model (seriously, go find an LX or whatever, they still look modern and don't even look under-wheeled like many modern base models), to an absolutely massive, curvy mess of intersecting straight lines and curves with odd details, and a shape that only works if you give it massive wheels since all the base models look like they're rolling around on Minstrels.

I'd agree with Jon on the Ka too, which has gone from one of THE small car designs of the 20th century to a contorted micro-Fiesta (don't even get me started on that) that has to conform to the same proportions as the retro Fiat 500.

Not only that, but because it's based on the 500 rather than being Ford's own design, the original Ka can run rings around it in the handling department.

I agree with people who like the earlier Focus too. It made everything else look very old indeed when it came out, wheras the current model looks like someone stuck a Ford badge on a Kia. An old Kia, given that the Cee'd looks better than the Focus at the moment.

I also agree with Jon on the Civic, the current one is a much better design than the staid, MPV-alike previous gen. The most successful Civic is still this one though, although I do like the current USDM models.

Pantha-King is right about the 206 too. Pretty, chic hatchback, turned ever more monsterous by Peugeot's design department. Actually, Peugeot are the only manufacturer I think who've ruined their whole line-up very successfully. Apart from the RC-Z, which has no direct predecessor, no current Pug looks anywhere near as good as it's 90s counterpart:

106, 107

206, 207

306, 308

406, 407

...you get the idea.

I'd like to add I'm not adverse to all modern cars, quite the contrary - but I'm not sure that a lot of makers aren't getting the wrong idea about what great styling is.

Actually, Ford are very good at it... in the United States, where most of their lineup is actually quite good looking. But then over there you haven't really moved onto the whole "kinetic" tosh that Ford Europe is churning out. Cars like the Fusion and the Flex look great, I reckon.

 

[a112]

That new Stratos and some other new cars are bringing some joy to the car design world if you ask me. 2000.-2010. was a bit disappointing in general.

 

[Pupik]

The problem (if it can be considered as such), is that there's a corporate identity template that gets applied over an improvement/update from the original design. In a lot of cases, cars look very much like they were designed by multiple committees.

 

[homeforsummer]

The problem (if it can be considered as such), is that there's a corporate identity template that gets applied over an improvement/update from the original design. In a lot of cases, cars look very much like they were designed by multiple committees.

I agree. Which is why Peugeots looked so much better when they just gave Pininfarina a pen and paper (I think all the 90s Pugs above save for the 206 were Pininfarina, as were older ones like the 205, 405 and so on) and then stuck Peugeot badges on the front, rather than letting their team of half-blind design monkeys interact with focus groups and all other manner of terrifying things from a styling perspective.

 

[opladener]

I've actually been thinking about this a few days ago. Its really the opposite to me.

The Mk1 Focus looks now bland to me (I like mine very much though), the newer one is much better looking. The design seems fresher, more exiting

Same with the E-Class, the old one looked great to me when it came out. Now with the new model on the market, its outdated and boring.

This does not apply to all cars, of course. Some are just classic designs that will stay fresh forever. Like the E-Type, the GT40, the McLaren F1 or the Ferrari 250 and many others.

But even a Ferrari Testaross, a dream car of my childhood looks a bit outdated and boxy to me compared to newer supercars. I have to say that I prefer rounder shapes usually though.

 

[oskierox]

I think everything looks ten times better than before nowadays.

 

[homeforsummer]

I think everything looks ten times better than before nowadays.

You've lost me. Are you saying you prefer older designs, or newer ones?

And whichever one you prefer, why?

 

[analog]

I think there needs to be a distinction made between facelifts of existing cars or their succesors.
A new follow-up design is often at least more cohesive in concept compared to some facelifts ( whatever you think of the looks ) despite not being a "proper" replacement.

The original Focus and Ka are indeed good examples of cars taking the Ford brand into a new direction ( and a new type of customer ) only to replace them with mediocre looking follow-ups ( maybe going safe to maintain those new customers ).
These two cars were a clear departure and still look great in my opinion probably because I can clearly remember their impact when they were released, which I can't see the current models with their bland "me-too" design doing in 10 years time.
To me the new Civic ( best looking Civic of all time IMO ) does the same thing the Focus did 12 years ago and as for Peugeot.........let's not even go there.

Now as for facelifts, they often seem to be a last resort to modernise an existing model regardless of the concept of the existing car or cohesion in general design language used in that car ( may have to do with the brand having adopted a new design language during the lifespan of that model ) in the same way facelift on humans often makes the face look just different and even worse rather than younger or better looking.
That Fiat Grande Punto was a great looking little car but when the new retro 500 was introduced as the It-car of the moment they somehow wanted to include some of its "magic" onto the existing line-up which ended up in the new Evo monstrousity.

There are succesful facelifts ofcourse but they often are regarded succesful during a short time.
For example the original Citroën CX with its futuristic seventies design was redone with plastic bumpers and restyled with a more traditional dashboard design to see it through the eighties and at the time it worked and even appeared more modern or due to its initial design contemporary with its rivals.
Now the older version looks much better and purer and will probably be the one most sought after but at least that facelift served a purpose at the time.
Most facelifts however appear to be created just to have a different new model even when that means the car looks more bland, incohesive or plain ugly due to it.

As an example I give you the Alfa 147, pre-facelift a goodlooking car with a beautiful and distinctive looking front-end design with lines echoing coachbuild Alfa's from the late forties and early fifties.
Post-facelift it's just a bland more pointy looking front-end which could be interchangeable ( apart from the grille ) with most other hatchbacks.

Pre-facelift

Post-facelift

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

The basic shape is enough to make some cars become unappealing. The Thunderbird was not a very particularly good looking car unlike the original.

I liked the design of the new Thunderbird. The problem most likely was that nobody asked for it.

You've lost me. Are you saying you prefer older designs, or newer ones?

And whichever one you prefer, why?

He prefers the newer cars.



The Peugeots...none of them are really pretty, newer or older.

 

[a112]

The Peugeots...none of them are really pretty, newer or older.

I beg to differ

And I also like the looks of 205 Gti, 106 Rallye, 405Mi16 etc.

 

[lpb-nissan-gt-r]

^Got nothing on this

but proving op point 2006 Charger

if only it had been designed more like the original. Sorry for big pic.

 

[Tornado]

The current Charger is a massive improvement over the previous Charger...


Am I the only one who noticed that the OP showed an original 1st gen Focus, and then the post-2007 Mk. II Focus?

Also, I second basically the entire Peugeot range, but I will counter that most Alfas astoundingly manage to look even better than the ones from 10 years ago did. And the current Euro Civic looks way better than the EP Civic did.

 

[niky]

The Focus is a puzzle. But the issue is that the first car was so out there, it turned some people off. The "New Edge" look was the "Bangle" of its day. Striking but divisive.

When they redesigned it, they went conservative, to go after more mainstream buyers:

Yes, it's conservative on the face of it... but the lines are actually quite interesting.

You'll note that the Focus has a bigger schnoz in the second generation. Not Ford's fault. Blame pedestrian safety and crash safety requirements. And yet, look at what styling tricks Ford implemented to make it look smaller (and more successfully than Alfa implemented those same styling tricks with the Brera!)... the cowled lights are stretched and pulled back, to give the illusion of the front fender being smaller than it really is. And this is done more subtly than in the first-generation car or the 2.5 facelift.

There's also a subtle play of lines around the front fender near the base of the windshield. Allows them to make the fender look leaner while giving more vertical space for the motor. The windshield is also pushed forward over the dashboard, to help further hide how nose-heavy the design really is compared to the old car.

And, personally, the rear end looks better... less fussy... though there's still the feeling of the Focus looking like a small bread-van when looking at it butt-on.

I don't like the facelift.

They've stretched the lights some more to further lighten (visually) the front fenders and have drawn attention to the fact that they're doing so... this is the same issue Honda has... an overdramatic attempt at compensation that draws attention to the feature they're trying to hide! And it looks un-necessarily fussy... though it does have a certain Volvo-ish flair.

Only a few cars have managed to create visual cohesion out of the huge mass of metal that current crash regulations and market demands force upon them. The 2nd gen Focus, the first-gen Mazda3 (this one is a prime example of how to make a new-generation blob look more like a classic sedan...),

and the new Mitsubishi Lancer (however, they do this by simply making the car bigger!)

Bigger... and then they ruin it by perching tiny tail-lights on a massive trunk. And ruin it some more by giving the Evo an Audi goatee. And ruin it even more by putting the same schnoz on the Outlander and the Colt! Come on guys... what's good for the goose is definitely not good for the gander...

But don't blame the designers... they're doing the best they can with the shapes they're being forced to design around... which generally, aren't as sleek or as compact as the shapes earlier designers had to work with.

Things like a low cowl, a low hip point (bulging hips... ugh) and a sleek shape are things you won't see on small cars anymore. Big cars... well... it's easy to look long and low when you're over five meters long and weigh two tons...

Oh... Mazda6

While I loved the first-gen, with its classic proportions and insectile eyes... the design aged faster than bell-bottom pants. It still looks good because it's got the classic long and low look. The new car is bigger (had to be, to compete), but it still looks good. Better, in fact:

The sculpted front fenders and awesome headlights and tail-lights make this one of my favorite car designs of the moment.

And the flow....

Too bad I don't have my full-sized original of that image, anymore... the Mazda6 is one of those designs where details flow into and out of each other. It's not perfect, mind... from some angles, it's a bit slab-sided (again, don't blame the designers for the shape of the egg)... but it's a great design. I wish they'd follow this ethos instead of the "shiny-happy-people-theme" they have going on with the Mazda3 and all their other new products.

 

[homeforsummer]

The Peugeots...none of them are really pretty, newer or older.

It's obviously a personal taste thing, but ideally they need to be compared with what else was on the market at the time to really appreciate them. That, and the photos I used can't really compare with actually seeing them.

And that I missed off the best one (Daan will approve)...

Another Pininfarina project, the 406 Coupe.

 

[Tornado]

Did Peugeot have anything to do with that car? I've heard that Pininfarina not only designed it, but it was built in their factory to their specifications.

 

[McLaren]

And that I missed off the best one (Daan will approve)...

Another Pininfarina project, the 406 Coupe.

I'm sure I've told daan before, but I still think that's such a pretty car.

 

[Prince.M5]

That 406 Coupe is a nice and simple car in my opinion... Paninfarina once designed the Hyundai Matrix and it was really, really ugly

 

[homeforsummer]

Did Peugeot have anything to do with that car? I've heard that Pininfarina not only designed it, but it was built in their factory to their specifications.

I suspect you're right. Pininfarina did most 1990s Peugeots though which is why they're all nice looking cars that have managed to stand the test of time. Wheras all the in-house ones, save for perhaps the RC-Z (and even that has an awful front end) look terrible.

That 406 Coupe is a nice and simple car in my opinion... Paninfarina once designed the Hyundai Matrix and it was really, really ugly

I suspect the problem with the Matrix was that Hyundai approached Pininfarina and said "design us a car... but we want it to look exactly like this". We can just take comfort in the knowledge that had Pininfarina not had a hand in designing it, it might have looked even worse...