The Interiors Thread.

[GTV0819]

I guess what I'm trying to get at that truly small car design involves interesting challenges of packaging, especially with regards to the interior. I cited the European models (Like the R4) because they have novel approaches to deal with the lack of space. I don't think Mustang/Falcon designers really faced those kinds of mini-car packaging constraints. Know what I mean? It would have been interesting to see what American designers would have come up with in the 60s if they were tasked with making a truly small car. The Pacer might be the closest thing, but even those are pretty large compared to the stuff Europe was making.

edit, from a Wiki citation:


While there is a regional relativity to car sizes, the relativity of size to the human body is fixed. I think that's the difference between small-car design and cars that are merely smaller than others. Does that make sense?

On the other hand, there weren't many large Japanese cars way back then. Their largest models before during the 60s-70s weren't even close to the smallest American car that time, I think.

 

[homeforsummer]

I guess what I'm trying to get at that truly small car design involves interesting challenges of packaging, especially with regards to the interior. I cited the European models (Like the R4) because they have novel approaches to deal with the lack of space. I don't think Mustang/Falcon designers really faced those kinds of mini-car packaging constraints. Know what I mean? It would have been interesting to see what American designers would have come up with in the 60s if they were tasked with making a truly small car. The Pacer might be the closest thing, but even those are pretty large compared to the stuff Europe was making.

I agree. I think in the context of this conversation we can use absolute terms for "small cars" rather than relative terms.

Perhaps it's easier defining things by segment: the theory here is that America has never made a compelling volume production subcompact (or smaller). And by America I mean designed in and for, rather than American brands (since a Fiesta has long been pretty good).

Of course, that's largely because there's been no need. And what I like about some of the best American cars is that they're a good expression of essentially limitless design and engineering freedom, which is compelling in its own way. If you're given the opportunity to min-max your criteria wherever it's needed, through say, lack of space constraints or low gas prices, that alone produces some interesting vehicles.

I do like the ingenuity that having tough design criteria creates though. It's one of the reason I like kei cars - the dimensions are set for you, so you can focus resources on creating the best car within those tight units, without the "mission creep" of being tempted by larger engines or bigger bodies. It's why design plays such a big part even among the boxier keis, and why kei cars have traditionally been incredibly well-equipped despite being cheap (even in the 80s kei cars were offering active differentials, aircon, five-valve engines...)

And strict cost constraints in the few decades after the war are why European "people's cars" of the time are so wonderfully diverse. 2CVs and Renault 4s, Saab 96s, Minis, Beetles, Trabants, DAFs, Fiat 500s and 600s, and bubble cars. Most were responding to very specific sets of market conditions and had some brilliant engineering solutions as a result of working around low design and production costs.

 

[Volksauto]

Has the American auto industry ever produced a compelling small car design?

 

[GranTurNismo]

Has the American auto industry ever produced a compelling small car design?

 

[Beeblebrox237]

I guess what I'm trying to get at that truly small car design involves interesting challenges of packaging, especially with regards to the interior. I cited the European models (Like the R4) because they have novel approaches to deal with the lack of space. I don't think Mustang/Falcon designers really faced those kinds of mini-car packaging constraints. Know what I mean? It would have been interesting to see what American designers would have come up with in the 60s if they were tasked with making a truly small car. The Pacer might be the closest thing, but even those are pretty large compared to the stuff Europe was making.

edit, from a Wiki citation:


While there is a regional relativity to car sizes, the relativity of size to the human body is fixed. I think that's the difference between small-car design and cars that are merely smaller than others. Does that make sense?

I totally agree with you on this point. I don't think I can think of one American car where the packaging of adult humans and their stuff was put at the top of the priority list in order to make a small, comfortable car, and the outcome was successful. I think American companies have always struggled with packaging because it's never been a necessary aspect to success in the American market. My mum, who grew up with Fords in the '60s and '70s, always said that the Hondas that my parents tend to prefer managed to get far more usable space out of a much smaller platform than any of their American counterparts. My grandmother's '95 Chrysler Concorde was supposedly well packaged for its time, being one of Chrysler's cab forward designs, but the interior space is bizarrely disproportionate to the human body and you end up not all that comfortable at all unless you're about 5' 3" and as wide as a city block. It's a much longer car than my parents' Civic, but it's more comfortable and easier to get 5 people in the Civic.

Since this is the interiors thread, I might as well mention the Civic's interior and what I like and don't like about it:

It's a nicely driver-focused setup with everything pointed towards you and everything positioned pretty well. I really like the dual tier gauges and the upper and lower screens, but I wish there was a volume knob. The aesthetic design is kind of meh to me, some of the trim is quite nice and the red fabric is great, but there isn't enough continuity in design and appearance between different sections of the interior. The door cards on the sedan have none of the silver trim or faux carbon trim of the dashboard, and the centre vent for the passenger looks like it was plonked there after the designers ran out of space. A generally good driving environment and both ergonomic and effective, but I'm not sure it's the prettiest when it comes to details.

 

[homeforsummer]

Just covered this above. Neither of those are small by absolute standards, and whatever the top thing is probably wasn't produced in significant numbers given I've literally never seen it before.

 

[GTV0819]

Since this is the interiors thread, I might as well mention the Civic's interior and what I like and don't like about it:

It's a nicely driver-focused setup with everything pointed towards you and everything positioned pretty well. I really like the dual tier gauges and the upper and lower screens, but I wish there was a volume knob. The aesthetic design is kind of meh to me, some of the trim is quite nice and the red fabric is great, but there isn't enough continuity in design and appearance between different sections of the interior. The door cards on the sedan have none of the silver trim or faux carbon trim of the dashboard, and the centre vent for the passenger looks like it was plonked there after the designers ran out of space. A generally good driving environment and both ergonomic and effective, but I'm not sure it's the prettiest when it comes to details.

May I know which model of Civic this is? Is it the latest one? Because it doesn't seem familiar.

 

[GranTurNismo]

Just covered this above. Neither of those are small by absolute standards, and whatever the top thing is probably wasn't produced in significant numbers given I've literally never seen it before.

I posted the Neon as a joke it was the first thing I thought of when I read “compelling small American car”. Sure it may be cute looking from certain angles, but in no means is it a design revolution; it’s not even that small as you mentioned, interior is subpar, and questionable reliability.

The only truly “small” cars sold under American marques aren’t even American to start with. Chevrolet Aveo, Ford Fiesta, Ford Festiva, etc all have their roots overseas. Sadly, it seems as if American companies have never produced a compelling small car to begin with, not for production at least.

 

[TexRex]

and whatever the top thing is probably wasn't produced in significant numbers given I've literally never seen it before

Henry J, it wasn't, and it's really not all that small unless you're comparing it to other American cars of the '50s. They're pretty well smack between "standard" conterparts and the aforementioned Nash Metropolitan.

 

[GranTurNismo]

The 1967 AMC Amitron concept seems compelling enough of an American small car to me, but sadly there are no picture of the interior.

 

[Tornado]

The Mustang did have hard design limits in terms of weight and dimensions, but I suspect that was more to not screw with the straight Falcon underpinnings and therefore allow them to use the same crappy base Falcon components. They obviously weren't concerned with practical matters beyond that.






That being said, I'm more hesitant to follow the charge that stuff that's Neon size and thereabouts aren't really small cars so American manufacturers have never really competed in that area (outside of the Omni). Sidestepping arguments about how compelling the cars may have been at the time for a second, the fact that Americans won't buy hatches as a rule and therefore an extra foot aft of the cabin is basically a design prerequisite is a pretty big dampener on making anything that fits in the 4 meter class; but if you lopped that foot off the back of a Neon (which is about how much an EG Civic sedan or Mk III Jetta had on the hatch equivalents of the time, and the current Fiesta sedan has on the current hatch) that's about how big the first generation Neon would have been.

I don't think a car needs to be in Yaris-sized to actually be considered small for the purposes of deciding whether packaging concerns were thought about during its development.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

May I know which model of Civic this is? Is it the latest one? Because it doesn't seem familiar.

It's the ninth gen model, and my parents' is a 2014. The '13 had black cloth which isn't nearly as nice to look at.

 

[homeforsummer]

I don't think a car needs to be in Yaris-sized to actually be considered small for the purposes of deciding whether packaging concerns were thought about during its development.

Oh, not at all. But that doesn't make the Neon a "small" car - at launch it was larger than most compacts in Europe (Escorts, Astras) and not far off cars whose descendants are today considered midsize (Ford Mondeos, Vectras and the like). The modern Fiesta is more like a compact from the Neon's time rather than the subcompact it's considered today.

I'm sure packaging is considered in all kinds of cars - it's an essential part of making cars suitable for use by humans, of course - but America has never had the constraints Europe or Asia has when it comes to making smaller cars.

I personally love the culture difference between Europe/Asia and the US after the second world war. European/Asian cars of the era had to make use of limited resources, were built for relatively poor roads, and were often aimed at relatively poor customers with a big focus on utility and basic transportation. In comparison US stuff underwent a cultural and consumer boom, speed and power were huge selling points, hot-rod culture took off, NASCAR became a thing, and car design was all about colour, size and features.

While that's obviously an extreme example and doesn't apply quite as strongly by say, the 1990s, those sensibilities and buying profiles have generally continued in their respective countries. It could have changed in the fuel crisis in the 1970s, but the US automakers chose to just make their regular cars terrible instead of designing new, smaller ones

 

[Volksauto]

The Henry J had pretty good gas mileage for the day. It ain't no microcar but it sure is smaller and much simpler than many of the American cars of the '50s.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

While that's obviously an extreme example and doesn't apply quite as strongly by say, the 1990s, those sensibilities and buying profiles have generally continued in their respective countries. It could have changed in the fuel crisis in the 1970s, but the US automakers chose to just make their regular cars terrible instead of designing new, smaller ones

Well the other thing was that Detroit automakers faced no real competition (as you say, the cars produced throughout Asia and Europe were not really compatible with America up until the 70s really) for many decades. This allowed them to have sky-high payrolls which was necessary in the beginning to retain the assembly line workforce. Detroit assembly workers made basically double the average blue collar wage compared to the rest of the country. This created a kind of blue-collar bubble in Detroit. The problem is that in the 70s, when Japanese competitors started to enter the market with smaller and cheaper cars, the big three had no ability to reduce labor costs. So they just cut everything else. And so we got 3-4 decades of complete automotive malaise from Detroit.

I totally agree with you on this point. I don't think I can think of one American car where the packaging of adult humans and their stuff was put at the top of the priority list in order to make a small, comfortable car, and the outcome was successful. I think American companies have always struggled with packaging because it's never been a necessary aspect to success in the American market. My mum, who grew up with Fords in the '60s and '70s, always said that the Hondas that my parents tend to prefer managed to get far more usable space out of a much smaller platform than any of their American counterparts. My grandmother's '95 Chrysler Concorde was supposedly well packaged for its time, being one of Chrysler's cab forward designs, but the interior space is bizarrely disproportionate to the human body and you end up not all that comfortable at all unless you're about 5' 3" and as wide as a city block. It's a much longer car than my parents' Civic, but it's more comfortable and easier to get 5 people in the Civic.

Since this is the interiors thread, I might as well mention the Civic's interior and what I like and don't like about it:

It's a nicely driver-focused setup with everything pointed towards you and everything positioned pretty well. I really like the dual tier gauges and the upper and lower screens, but I wish there was a volume knob. The aesthetic design is kind of meh to me, some of the trim is quite nice and the red fabric is great, but there isn't enough continuity in design and appearance between different sections of the interior. The door cards on the sedan have none of the silver trim or faux carbon trim of the dashboard, and the centre vent for the passenger looks like it was plonked there after the designers ran out of space. A generally good driving environment and both ergonomic and effective, but I'm not sure it's the prettiest when it comes to details.

The problem I have with these Civics (and all other cars that share the same issue) is that the dashboard feels huuuuge. You feel so far away from the windshield you feel detached from driving the car. I like the platform and I even like the dual-tier dashboard. I just cant get over how ungainly they feel to drive.

 

[GTV0819]

The interior of the Defender has really remained subtle throughout the years.

 

[kikie]

I actually like the interior of the new Mazda 3. It is clean, sober and well build.

 

[05XR8]

I might have posted this pic before, but the new 3 brings back that simple dash I love. Simulate to most German cars back in the 70s.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I might have posted this pic before, but the new 3 brings back that simple dash I love. Simulate to most German cars back in the 70s.
View attachment 829092

I was thinking today about this return to more simple dashboards....and then I started thinking....what does dashboard even mean? So I looked it up:

a barrier of wood or leather fixed at the front of a horse-drawn carriage or sleigh to protect the driver from mud or other debris "dashed up" (thrown up) by the horses' hooves.

Dashboards have obviously evolved quite a bit and even the definition (by way of the car) has evolved to mean more of a device (tangible other otherwise) that conveys some base information. Interesting because really, a dashboard was just a poo & mud blocker.

 

[Volksauto]

I was thinking today about this return to more simple dashboards....and then I started thinking....what does dashboard even mean? So I looked it up:



Dashboards have obviously evolved quite a bit and even the definition (by way of the car) has evolved to mean more of a device (tangible other otherwise) that conveys some base information. Interesting because really, a dashboard was just a poo & mud blocker.

The '86 Daimler has got a very straight forward "instrument panel". The front of the car is the dashboard.

 

[05XR8]

So, hmm... the windscreen replaced the dashboard. However, the "dashboard" should be the instrument panel(which I guess it still is). Now, with TFT displays, does instrument panel become the display screen?

 

[Danoff]

 

[ProjectWHaT]

 

[GTV0819]

 

[sjramsay]

Interior buffs,

Is anyone able to tell what make of this car is from this interior shot?

 

[Volksauto]

Jaguar E-Type because of the three wiperblades and the shape of the head restraint.

 

[kikie]

I had the change to look into the new Supra today and it looks like a very nice place to be in.

 

[GTV0819]

Was surprised to learn that this one actually costs around $50,000, only to find out it has an interior like this with no option for a covered top, airbags and an air-conditioning system at all. But then again, this is supposed to go head-to-head with the Caterham, so...

 

[Volksauto]

Was surprised to learn that this one actually costs around $50,000, only to find out it has an interior like this with no option for a covered top, airbags and an air-conditioning system at all. But then again, this is supposed to go head-to-head with the Caterham, so...

Simplicity is key for a lightweight sports car.

 

[TVR27]

TVR Tamora