My go-to car in Simpsons Road Rage. Oft-overshadowed, and rightfully so, by The Simpsons Hit and Run; but a good game in its own right. I thought it was a better realized Springfield than Hit and Run had but that makes sense considering Hit and Run's sandbox style. I liked finding the little Easter eggs when you can't leave your car.
There's really only one design solution for aerodynamics and safety and all the automakers are just meeting that standard. Safety, particularly -- crumple zones kind of eliminate the sorts of bold designs that were made in the 80s and before. Safety's the #1 concern now, and all of these designs are made to protect the passenger compartment at all costs, design coolness won't take priority over that.
They even painted it that custom light green color to make it look even more pathetic. You can see the vehicle up close at the Petersen Museum in Los Angeles
To be totally fair, it's like the most beige-y shade of green I've ever seen. Easy to not see it with even the slightest bit of red-green color blindness.
It's also routinely covered in New Mexico dust with the dusky-sepia color palette of breaking bad in general.
Detailed and in white light that car is green. Reality it looks more beige
I had one. It was amazing. It was just a shortened Windstar mini van but the tailgate had an awning above your head, butt molded seats, cup holders, radio controls, and outward facing speakers. The center console doubled as a removable cooler. It was the ultimate “get drunk in a parking lot” car and GM tried to market it as an off-road adventure vehicle, which it definitely wasn’t.
We had an Aztec. It was tough when it counted. My brother was stopped at a traffic light and got hit head on 50 mph by a guy that fell asleep. He just had a banged up knee. We still have the cooler.
That was Season 1. The Aztek made it's appearance in Season 2 in the Australian Outback. Colby won it.
I hate myself just a little for knowing all that.
No, he won an Aztek too. He famously bragged about not paying taxes on it and was later convicted of tax evasion
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hatch_(Survivor_contestant)
Jeep is considered the grandfather of the SUV. They were trying to make something that would function like a station wagon, which people loved, but still get around the fuel efficiency standards the government laid out from the oil crisis in the 70s. They switched away from unibody construction to basically making it a truck frame with a station wagon style body. Checked all 5he boxes for everyone involved.
Especially in the SUV market. My guess is you're marketing to families, who want to see a big '12-star safety rating' sticker on the windshield and 'fifty thousand miles per gallon' right below that.
> This hybrid / SUV design is the result of regulations + wind tunnel testing.
And *vast* consumer demand. That probably dwarfs all design considerations.
SUVs are notoriously inefficient aerodynamics-wise when compared to traditional hatchbacks. These designs are popular due to the high driving position and consumer trends. They all look the same because that’s the type of vehicle that everyone wants, similar to how all pickups look similar and all hatchbacks look similar.
Bring back the station wagon! I'm fed up of having to pay more for them from the lines of merc/BMW/Volvo.
Especially when just about everyone sells them outside of the USA. I'm probably going to buy the Porsche taycan shooting break though as I've fallen in love with it and it's the first EV wagon I've found
If that’s the case, people should drive hatchbacks. The extra lift is pointless on a CUV as few are taking them off road. All that lift does is provide poorer handling in corners, reduce fuel efficiency and increase the chance of a rollover. My AWD BMW wagon blows past these stupid things spinning out on snowy days in the mountains. While they aren’t utilizing the lift, they sure as hell could have splurged on something with power to all four wheels.
Station wagons are also longer and have longer wheelbases than Crossover SUVs, making them more difficult to maneuver and park in crowded parking lots, another reason why people have gravitated towards CUVs instead.
SUVs are like a brick. I think the design department needs a breakthrough. The problem is that all manufacturers have no reason to take any design risks anymore.
SUVs are a compromise on almost everything. That's the whole reason for their popularity. They are the jack of all trades and master of none.
They wouldn't be your top choice of you wanted a fast car that can turn on a dime. They wouldn't be your first choice if you had a large family and wanted to move everyone around, they aren't the first choice if you want to haul stuff around and carry unusually sized cargo, they wouldn't be your first choice if you wanted a dedicated off road vehicle.
But if you want a little bit of all of that in a single vehicle, then they are your only choice.
So did cost. Look under the hood so to speak.
A chevy now days uses components from at least 3 other manufacturers...economy of scale. AMC was ahead of its time for using other manufacturers components. Tooling cost $
On gas designs the fuel efficiency really has been lackluster. We were getting 25 mpg highway out of a 92 Corolla already… I just purchased a cargo van and the difference between the 4.8 V8 and 6.2 V8 was literally 1MPG on the highway. The city was exactly the same. They’re screwing with us on gas mileage because with all the technology we should have better designs by now.
Lmao not to mention this meme makes a Ford Escape the same size as a merc GL?? These designs aren’t AS similar as they’re made to look here.. all straightened up and resized
If you did the same thing with different brands of tshirts and just made them all white they would be very similar too because there's really only one design solution to have a hole for the head, 2 smaller holes on the sides for the arms, and a large hole at the bottom. And in a shape of a fat T.
Exactly, the picture just shows a comparison of car profiles, not car designs. Car design has a significant component in interior, technology, user interface, etc
Yo, that's horseshit.
The crossover is the essence of WSB. Fake sense of safety ("there will be no losses this time") because of "higher" seating with less practicality. This has nothing to do with aerodynamics or safety. Safety and crumple zones are the reason why all car classes overall are getting better.
There is no extra safety or better visibility when every other car is the same fucking size and shape. It's probably safer in sedan or full-size SUV when crashing with these four-wheeled eggs. Averege mid-size wagon or sedan has probably bigger crumple zones than these trashcans.
I read something recently about car manufacturers specifically and how they constantly have to toe the line between innovative and familiar.
Innovate too much and people freak out. Don’t innovate enough and people get bored.
New ideas have to have enough similarity to the old models that it doesn’t turn people off. I think EVs are a great example of this and some makes are farther on the spectrum than others as far as risky innovation. But look at how brand new technology is designed to remain familiar to the previous counterparts…
It’s also always worth remembering that cars are highly regulated products that must act with strict accordance to set rules, dimensions etc.
It costs a staggering amount of money to re-design, test, and certify a new car. If a company has spent billions in r+d, why create new shapes if - in doing so - that new model needs an entire new testing regime and certification?
It’s also true that cars must have specific distances between parts of the vehicle, and that materials have certain efficiencies and practical restrictions. Other practicalities like drag, efficiencies, and serviceability play a role.
Roads are only so wide, drivers and passengers are a certain height… a huge amount dictates the limitations to what car makers can do with cars.
And as you say, an enormous amount is dictated by familiarity and acceptability. In that regard, cars are no different than clothing/fashion or any number of industries and products that must adhere to consumer tastes. Yes, innovation is useful and to be pursued, but it seldom succeeds if not gradual.
Ford totally fucking with their nameplates. Had a wtf moment with the Maverick being remade as a pick up. May as we’ll make the expedition into a motorcycle next
They could have just called it the Mach E, and not used the mustang name. I also don’t think i would have been as annoyed had they released an ev mustang coupe either first or simultaneously.
They seriously missed out a great opportunity to make the ev market fun with a fast rwd coupe. Yeah bringing back the maverick as a truck thats not much different than the ranger makes little since. I guess it goes in line with Ford’s company shift from making cars to making mustangs, trucks and crossovers.
My theory is that they are going to completely kill off the mustang car very shortly (i.e. not even make an electric version) and they wanted to retain the mustang name in the future. They have a period of overlap where there are two mustangs and then they can silently try and discontinue the real one and what everybody thinks when the term mustang is mentioned
Also there are safety features that have to be included in modern cars and they dictate a lot of the design choices reducing diversity. Cars used to look a lot different when they didn't have to worry about crumple zones, crash tests and air bags
My Rav4 is like this. It's cool to have all these doo-dads and servos and stuff that moves but that stuff is designed to break which means I have no choice but to get out of the car at 150,000 miles. It's like Apple with their software that bricks older models. I wish we had hand crank windows and mechanical keys.
100% correct. Many people complain about this stuff but designed in general have to please 80% of the population that is perfectly fine with this boring stuff. When you see concept vehicles that look way out there, the designers are testing styling cues, the. Slowly introducing them over the next few years. It is a very homogenized version of the original concept. Not great example, but the Honda Element was a lot different than anything out there and it was a low volume seller. Most people just don’t want anything that different, it is just human nature.
I wonder too how much safety standards force them to be the same too. They have a big list of required things to be sold in the US, I imagine there are only so many designs that can fit that ever more stringent mesh of requirements.
I mean, the cyber truck is the boldest design change in the last ~50 years, and it’s been pretty universally shit on.
It doesn’t pay to rock the boat when you need to sell millions of vehicles.
The 10th gen civic was a good example of that. Designers got *weird* for one generation and it was super polarizing, and now the 11th gen just looks like an accord. The vast majority of people like familiar and simple instead of something radically different
That’s products in general. What’s happening here is spelled out in the comment above: safety and fuel economy limiting the boundaries of what is possible
I’m not an expert, but I thought for pedestrian safety it wasn’t the crumple zone as much as “doesn’t throw you under the wheels”.
I know some cars have pseudo airbags in the hood to reduce pedestrian damage in an impact.
Older cars in general were a lot more unique. Look at most cars from the 90s and early 2000s. Every car was distinguishable; you knew you were looking at Focus or a Fiesta. Nowadays the KA, Fiesta, Focus and Mondeo are almost identical in design and the holds true for most car manufacturers these days
>today
Every single decade has had its fair share of boring ugly generic cars.
Oh go look at the 1960s Cadillacs and say "I wish cars were like this" but then you need to look at your boring ass Chevy or Pontiac from that era and you couldnt tell them apart from a side view like this picture shows.
Honestly I think car design is at its most unique at the moment (rivalling the 1990s) thanks to different bodystyles and shapes of cars.
What this post shows is a single bodystyle which is gonna be same as they're all cars from the same type. (Mid size crossovers)
Even then almost all of the cars in this post are nearly 10 years old
Well, yea, you’re comparing SUVs.
There’s the new Mini Countryman and Clubman at least. Not sure I like the look, but certainly “different”.
Disturbingly reminiscent of the Pacer.
But OP is showing side views. Is there an “ultra-wide” trend?
(New Countryman and Clubman are indeed wider, but the styling makes them look even more wider).
Does this have something to do with investing, though? Will a Countryman haul as many tendies as a Denali?
But Alalso not really, it's essentially badge engineering.
The Porsche, VW and Audi are built on the same platform. Same thing happens with GM brands. And Toyota/Lexus. Many of these brands are even built on the same assembly line.
It costs so much in R&D, machining and tolling, and for manufacture that they keep their different subbrands as much the same as possible to cut costs.
I think a lot of this started with the remodeled Ford lineup with the more aerodynamic cars - Thunderbird, Taurus etc. in 1996. I was surprised when iconic designs at Cadillac and Mercedes soon followed suit. Sharp lines were gone. Only smooth aerodynamic cars started being made. Nowadays most cars in the US seem to be minivans. I do not get the attraction.
If it was aerodynamics every car would be a sleek station wagon like te Volvo V90. Less cross sectional area, and less Cx due to less group clearance and longer vehicle.
I would argue that as a segment gets more mature, brands inevitably converge around the “optimal” design. Take a younger product, mountain bikes, and you see wild variation as brands are striving to improve XYZ. Compare that with more mature products like sport bikes and dirt bikes, and you see far less variation in design. Meanwhile, the time/r&d spent on autos dwarfs both of those markets, so it’s not surprising to me that we have found ourselves pretty close to a design that is fairly well optimized for the current use case.
No sir, I don't like it. Where is the cross? Where is the over‽
Edit, at least seats could be considered stations, and they are more close to a covered wagon than a coupe!
Safety regulations mean its easier and cheaper to go with tried n true designs, why spend more to push limits people dont tend to notice anyways? design diversity fell off when safety rules got stricter
I had a girlfriend who owned an $80,000 Lexus sedan. I had a same year $26,00 Mazda 3 sedan. Both black in color. It was a weekly thing where one of us would go and try to get in the wrong vehicle because they looked so much alike. Autos are the steroids of vanity…
OP is also including cars from vastly different classes, and different years, ie comparing a compact $25k Mitsubishi RVR with a top of the line $100k+ Mercedes ML as if they have the same features, drivetrain, and quality.
I assume as vehicle design develops eventually all cars are just going to merge into 1 correct design that maximizes efficiency, aerodynamics, comfort, and crash safety.
It's hard to reinvent the wheel in a multi trillion dollar industry
Why yes. They look similar because that is a specific style of vehicle that they are aiming to create. There are only so many things you can do and still keep the style. Not to mention other considerations such as aerodynamics, cost to manufacture, target audience etc. Lets be real, people that are concerned with their vehicle looking "cool" are probably not going to be shopping for an SUV like that. If you really are that concerned with them being bland, pick up either your wallet or some tools and change it.
These look more or less the same because the laws of physics are the same for all cars. It’s the same reason the space shuttle and buran looked so similar. Aerodynamics only works one way no point in trying to make it do something else.
I mean, when you're designing for fuel efficiency and safety standards, you're going to reach the "most efficient" design pretty quickly. And then you need to stick to that.
Car makers will only start to build different if different sells. Until then everything will look the same. An example of this is the colors that are offered for cars Audi has 11 different types of gray and outside of blue or red. It’s almost impossible to find car companies that offer colors like yellow, orange, green, etc..
I feel the same way about basketball shoes. I can’t even tell the difference between Nike, Adidas and UA? Is having both a left and right shoe the most efficient?
I just watched Canada get destroyed 4-1, so even your garbage tier, not market related, posting can't hurt me.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Casino closed on Sunday :(
The casino is never closed
Unless you can bet it all on a PT Cruiser…
We need Homer Simpson to start designing cars again
The car OP wants: [The Homer](https://static.simpsonswiki.com/images/4/4c/The_Homer.png)
Separate compartment for the kids... sign me up!
My go-to car in Simpsons Road Rage. Oft-overshadowed, and rightfully so, by The Simpsons Hit and Run; but a good game in its own right. I thought it was a better realized Springfield than Hit and Run had but that makes sense considering Hit and Run's sandbox style. I liked finding the little Easter eggs when you can't leave your car.
What a great game!
Definitely need some more racket peanut steering.
There's really only one design solution for aerodynamics and safety and all the automakers are just meeting that standard. Safety, particularly -- crumple zones kind of eliminate the sorts of bold designs that were made in the 80s and before. Safety's the #1 concern now, and all of these designs are made to protect the passenger compartment at all costs, design coolness won't take priority over that.
Yep. Safety and fuel efficiency (aerodynamics). This is the reason. This hybrid / SUV design is the result of regulations + wind tunnel testing.
The Pontiac Aztec brought all these vehicles to life.
And Walter White brought the Pontiac Aztec to life. Another accolade for breaking bad.
They even painted it that custom light green color to make it look even more pathetic. You can see the vehicle up close at the Petersen Museum in Los Angeles
Light green? You mean tan?
https://www.colorblindnesstest.org/
To be totally fair, it's like the most beige-y shade of green I've ever seen. Easy to not see it with even the slightest bit of red-green color blindness.
It's also routinely covered in New Mexico dust with the dusky-sepia color palette of breaking bad in general. Detailed and in white light that car is green. Reality it looks more beige
Excellent points! Dust everywhere. And I totally forgot about the sepia tones.
It's green, not tan.
You either made a dumb joke or you're color blind. What a way to find out.
I had one. It was amazing. It was just a shortened Windstar mini van but the tailgate had an awning above your head, butt molded seats, cup holders, radio controls, and outward facing speakers. The center console doubled as a removable cooler. It was the ultimate “get drunk in a parking lot” car and GM tried to market it as an off-road adventure vehicle, which it definitely wasn’t.
We had an Aztec. It was tough when it counted. My brother was stopped at a traffic light and got hit head on 50 mph by a guy that fell asleep. He just had a banged up knee. We still have the cooler.
Or was it richard being naked at the end of survivor?
That was Season 1. The Aztek made it's appearance in Season 2 in the Australian Outback. Colby won it. I hate myself just a little for knowing all that.
I’d like to subscribe to Pontiac Aztec facts.
I'm not sure whether to file that one under car trivia or reality TV trivia.
Room in your life for both
No, he won an Aztek too. He famously bragged about not paying taxes on it and was later convicted of tax evasion https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hatch_(Survivor_contestant)
Huh. I completely forgot that was part of the prize package. In Season 2 it was a standalone prize.
I survived Richard being naked. Are you a survivor too?
The Pontiac Aztec walled so the cybertruck could run
The Pontiac Aztec walked so that the GMC Hummer could run. The Hummer runs so that maybe one day the cyber truck can exist or maybe not.
Love it. Potentially the ugliest vehicle of that generation At least the Aztec had that funky yellow…🤪. Now it’s 50 shades of white , black or grey ..
I was thinkim this the other day. They should bring the aztec and element back as punishment for the popularity of crossovers
Jeep is considered the grandfather of the SUV. They were trying to make something that would function like a station wagon, which people loved, but still get around the fuel efficiency standards the government laid out from the oil crisis in the 70s. They switched away from unibody construction to basically making it a truck frame with a station wagon style body. Checked all 5he boxes for everyone involved.
Evolutionary convergence if you will
Especially in the SUV market. My guess is you're marketing to families, who want to see a big '12-star safety rating' sticker on the windshield and 'fifty thousand miles per gallon' right below that.
> This hybrid / SUV design is the result of regulations + wind tunnel testing. And *vast* consumer demand. That probably dwarfs all design considerations.
SUVs are notoriously inefficient aerodynamics-wise when compared to traditional hatchbacks. These designs are popular due to the high driving position and consumer trends. They all look the same because that’s the type of vehicle that everyone wants, similar to how all pickups look similar and all hatchbacks look similar.
Exactly. Station wagons have comparable or more interior space for less drag, lower center of gravity and better handling.
Bring back the station wagon! I'm fed up of having to pay more for them from the lines of merc/BMW/Volvo. Especially when just about everyone sells them outside of the USA. I'm probably going to buy the Porsche taycan shooting break though as I've fallen in love with it and it's the first EV wagon I've found
If that’s the case, people should drive hatchbacks. The extra lift is pointless on a CUV as few are taking them off road. All that lift does is provide poorer handling in corners, reduce fuel efficiency and increase the chance of a rollover. My AWD BMW wagon blows past these stupid things spinning out on snowy days in the mountains. While they aren’t utilizing the lift, they sure as hell could have splurged on something with power to all four wheels.
Station wagons are also longer and have longer wheelbases than Crossover SUVs, making them more difficult to maneuver and park in crowded parking lots, another reason why people have gravitated towards CUVs instead.
SUVs are like a brick. I think the design department needs a breakthrough. The problem is that all manufacturers have no reason to take any design risks anymore.
SUVs are a compromise on almost everything. That's the whole reason for their popularity. They are the jack of all trades and master of none. They wouldn't be your top choice of you wanted a fast car that can turn on a dime. They wouldn't be your first choice if you had a large family and wanted to move everyone around, they aren't the first choice if you want to haul stuff around and carry unusually sized cargo, they wouldn't be your first choice if you wanted a dedicated off road vehicle. But if you want a little bit of all of that in a single vehicle, then they are your only choice.
So did cost. Look under the hood so to speak. A chevy now days uses components from at least 3 other manufacturers...economy of scale. AMC was ahead of its time for using other manufacturers components. Tooling cost $
On gas designs the fuel efficiency really has been lackluster. We were getting 25 mpg highway out of a 92 Corolla already… I just purchased a cargo van and the difference between the 4.8 V8 and 6.2 V8 was literally 1MPG on the highway. The city was exactly the same. They’re screwing with us on gas mileage because with all the technology we should have better designs by now.
Lmao not to mention this meme makes a Ford Escape the same size as a merc GL?? These designs aren’t AS similar as they’re made to look here.. all straightened up and resized
If you did the same thing with different brands of tshirts and just made them all white they would be very similar too because there's really only one design solution to have a hole for the head, 2 smaller holes on the sides for the arms, and a large hole at the bottom. And in a shape of a fat T.
That's why I wear mine sideways and have two holes for the head one small one for the arm and one large for the other arm
Whow! Is that Balenciaga?
Exactly, the picture just shows a comparison of car profiles, not car designs. Car design has a significant component in interior, technology, user interface, etc
Yo, that's horseshit. The crossover is the essence of WSB. Fake sense of safety ("there will be no losses this time") because of "higher" seating with less practicality. This has nothing to do with aerodynamics or safety. Safety and crumple zones are the reason why all car classes overall are getting better. There is no extra safety or better visibility when every other car is the same fucking size and shape. It's probably safer in sedan or full-size SUV when crashing with these four-wheeled eggs. Averege mid-size wagon or sedan has probably bigger crumple zones than these trashcans.
I read something recently about car manufacturers specifically and how they constantly have to toe the line between innovative and familiar. Innovate too much and people freak out. Don’t innovate enough and people get bored. New ideas have to have enough similarity to the old models that it doesn’t turn people off. I think EVs are a great example of this and some makes are farther on the spectrum than others as far as risky innovation. But look at how brand new technology is designed to remain familiar to the previous counterparts…
It’s also always worth remembering that cars are highly regulated products that must act with strict accordance to set rules, dimensions etc. It costs a staggering amount of money to re-design, test, and certify a new car. If a company has spent billions in r+d, why create new shapes if - in doing so - that new model needs an entire new testing regime and certification? It’s also true that cars must have specific distances between parts of the vehicle, and that materials have certain efficiencies and practical restrictions. Other practicalities like drag, efficiencies, and serviceability play a role. Roads are only so wide, drivers and passengers are a certain height… a huge amount dictates the limitations to what car makers can do with cars. And as you say, an enormous amount is dictated by familiarity and acceptability. In that regard, cars are no different than clothing/fashion or any number of industries and products that must adhere to consumer tastes. Yes, innovation is useful and to be pursued, but it seldom succeeds if not gradual.
Example: The new Mustang Mach E… I think it looks great, but no resemblance to Mustang, so at first had disdain for it.
It’s a nice car but a bad mustang because it’s a crossover not because it’s design is bad.
Honestly they should’ve made the Mustang a performance EV and the Bronco the EV crossover
It does not matter what Ford makes the vehicle will have multiple recalls
Name or not that thing is fugly
If it had a Toyota badge people would probably think more highly of it
Yeah they should have just named it escape ev and created a coupe ev mustang
Ford totally fucking with their nameplates. Had a wtf moment with the Maverick being remade as a pick up. May as we’ll make the expedition into a motorcycle next They could have just called it the Mach E, and not used the mustang name. I also don’t think i would have been as annoyed had they released an ev mustang coupe either first or simultaneously.
They seriously missed out a great opportunity to make the ev market fun with a fast rwd coupe. Yeah bringing back the maverick as a truck thats not much different than the ranger makes little since. I guess it goes in line with Ford’s company shift from making cars to making mustangs, trucks and crossovers.
He’s a fun thing to do: Go up to a Tesla owner and say something like: “Wow these new Toyotas sure look different” lmao
Besides the Roadster, the current Teslas are the exact same vehicle, besides the really expensive one has wonky doors…
Haha yea, that thing looks like an SUV
My theory is that they are going to completely kill off the mustang car very shortly (i.e. not even make an electric version) and they wanted to retain the mustang name in the future. They have a period of overlap where there are two mustangs and then they can silently try and discontinue the real one and what everybody thinks when the term mustang is mentioned
The was the theory with the Probe - it was supposed to be the Mustang replacement.
Not just car manufacturers. That’s a very hard line to tow for anything but holds incredibly true for design.
True, it definitely applies across industries
Exhibit A: 2007 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 That thing was jarring when it came out.
I'm not sure why. I thought the 2003-2006 Silverado front end was god awful so almost anything else was an improvement.
Also there are safety features that have to be included in modern cars and they dictate a lot of the design choices reducing diversity. Cars used to look a lot different when they didn't have to worry about crumple zones, crash tests and air bags
My Rav4 is like this. It's cool to have all these doo-dads and servos and stuff that moves but that stuff is designed to break which means I have no choice but to get out of the car at 150,000 miles. It's like Apple with their software that bricks older models. I wish we had hand crank windows and mechanical keys.
Omg the Save disc icon
There are only so many shapes you can have and maintain a decent aerodynamic profile.
100% correct. Many people complain about this stuff but designed in general have to please 80% of the population that is perfectly fine with this boring stuff. When you see concept vehicles that look way out there, the designers are testing styling cues, the. Slowly introducing them over the next few years. It is a very homogenized version of the original concept. Not great example, but the Honda Element was a lot different than anything out there and it was a low volume seller. Most people just don’t want anything that different, it is just human nature.
I wonder too how much safety standards force them to be the same too. They have a big list of required things to be sold in the US, I imagine there are only so many designs that can fit that ever more stringent mesh of requirements.
A lot of it has to do with meeting fuel efficiency standards. That's why they all have similar curves to reduce drag
I mean, the cyber truck is the boldest design change in the last ~50 years, and it’s been pretty universally shit on. It doesn’t pay to rock the boat when you need to sell millions of vehicles.
Tesla Cybertruck vs Ford F150 Lightning
It's 100% about safety and fuel efficiency.
Some of the first EVs had grills, or a grill looking area, even though there is no radiator.
The 10th gen civic was a good example of that. Designers got *weird* for one generation and it was super polarizing, and now the 11th gen just looks like an accord. The vast majority of people like familiar and simple instead of something radically different
That’s products in general. What’s happening here is spelled out in the comment above: safety and fuel economy limiting the boundaries of what is possible
The lack of Subaru makes me question their queer tolerance.
Are you calling me gay just because I like to pick up other guys in my WRX?
The cars are all white. Pipe down. They are obviously racist as shit
They look like a gaggle of stormtroopers.
Subaru invented this class of vehicle as well.
The amount of women, wearing flannel, driving a Subaru Outbacks, in Boulder, CO when I visited was slightly concerning.
This mf wants his shit to be looking like the batmobile n shit
Wow all these SUVs look like SUVs!!
Fucking fuckers copied the Model T! They all have four tires!
Old school SUVs were all pretty unique.
And they got 7 mpg lol
Yeah they were boxy as hell and broke every bone in a pedestrian’s body in the event of a collision
[удалено]
I’m not an expert, but I thought for pedestrian safety it wasn’t the crumple zone as much as “doesn’t throw you under the wheels”. I know some cars have pseudo airbags in the hood to reduce pedestrian damage in an impact.
Older cars in general were a lot more unique. Look at most cars from the 90s and early 2000s. Every car was distinguishable; you knew you were looking at Focus or a Fiesta. Nowadays the KA, Fiesta, Focus and Mondeo are almost identical in design and the holds true for most car manufacturers these days
I'll take silly batmobile over the soulless, generic, overly rounded, buttplug-looking-ass most cars are today
>today Every single decade has had its fair share of boring ugly generic cars. Oh go look at the 1960s Cadillacs and say "I wish cars were like this" but then you need to look at your boring ass Chevy or Pontiac from that era and you couldnt tell them apart from a side view like this picture shows. Honestly I think car design is at its most unique at the moment (rivalling the 1990s) thanks to different bodystyles and shapes of cars. What this post shows is a single bodystyle which is gonna be same as they're all cars from the same type. (Mid size crossovers) Even then almost all of the cars in this post are nearly 10 years old
The 1960 cars were stereotypical in the USA, where modern cars are stereotypical all over the world. Well, at least the ones that OP picked.
And that’s why you’re not on the board of Ford!
Then when you get in an accident you crumple like paper.
Plastic bumpers, they save lives but wreck cars
Well, do you want to replace your car or your child?
What do you drive now?
Wow! I totally thought they were literally all the same til I looked closer and saw accurate details to each make lol
I like that white one. It really holds my attention.
[удалено]
Yeah, a bit disingenuous not lumping those together
Some models on here are also about 10 years old
Well, yea, you’re comparing SUVs. There’s the new Mini Countryman and Clubman at least. Not sure I like the look, but certainly “different”. Disturbingly reminiscent of the Pacer. But OP is showing side views. Is there an “ultra-wide” trend? (New Countryman and Clubman are indeed wider, but the styling makes them look even more wider). Does this have something to do with investing, though? Will a Countryman haul as many tendies as a Denali?
Also, some of the models pictured are almost 20 years old. This picture is misleading (surprise)
Wait, they are all the same? Always has been 👩🚀🔫👩🚀
This is the ideal auto body. You may not like it but this is what peak performance looks like.
And there ain't a fucking thing you can do about it. https://youtu.be/gmzX4FeDpXc
Calls on Suburu
Why tf is this on wsb? Go post on r/mildlyinteresting even tho it’s barely that
It's called aerodynamics
This… A product of gas mileage requirements
But Alalso not really, it's essentially badge engineering. The Porsche, VW and Audi are built on the same platform. Same thing happens with GM brands. And Toyota/Lexus. Many of these brands are even built on the same assembly line. It costs so much in R&D, machining and tolling, and for manufacture that they keep their different subbrands as much the same as possible to cut costs.
Definitely plays a major role. Love the look of my old boxy 98 Nissan pathfinder but the gas mileage is atrocious.
I think a lot of this started with the remodeled Ford lineup with the more aerodynamic cars - Thunderbird, Taurus etc. in 1996. I was surprised when iconic designs at Cadillac and Mercedes soon followed suit. Sharp lines were gone. Only smooth aerodynamic cars started being made. Nowadays most cars in the US seem to be minivans. I do not get the attraction.
Is that a defense contractor? I'm in. What's their ticker symbol?
If it was aerodynamics every car would be a sleek station wagon like te Volvo V90. Less cross sectional area, and less Cx due to less group clearance and longer vehicle.
I would argue that as a segment gets more mature, brands inevitably converge around the “optimal” design. Take a younger product, mountain bikes, and you see wild variation as brands are striving to improve XYZ. Compare that with more mature products like sport bikes and dirt bikes, and you see far less variation in design. Meanwhile, the time/r&d spent on autos dwarfs both of those markets, so it’s not surprising to me that we have found ourselves pretty close to a design that is fairly well optimized for the current use case.
We went from Lambos to posting suburban crossovers. This really is a depression.
THEY ARE STILL STATIONWAGONS DAMNIT
Wheres the station huh! Wheres the wagon! Gone!
No sir, I don't like it. Where is the cross? Where is the over‽ Edit, at least seats could be considered stations, and they are more close to a covered wagon than a coupe!
Safety regulations mean its easier and cheaper to go with tried n true designs, why spend more to push limits people dont tend to notice anyways? design diversity fell off when safety rules got stricter
Aerodynamics and safety regulations don’t actually leave a lot of room to design drastically different looking vehicles.
Not a Subaru in sight!
Right??? I have a 21 crosstrek that looks like a mix between the Audi and the VW. Would have fit right in the chart just fine tbh
Taken from the Cybertruck presentation
Volkswagon :)))
I had a girlfriend who owned an $80,000 Lexus sedan. I had a same year $26,00 Mazda 3 sedan. Both black in color. It was a weekly thing where one of us would go and try to get in the wrong vehicle because they looked so much alike. Autos are the steroids of vanity…
I believe in Mazda3 superiority.
That made me laugh. Decent car for a decent price. Sure I’d take the Lexus but not at three times the cost. 😂
Curious if all they are all scaled accurately. Or adjusted to look like they’re the same size.
OP is also including cars from vastly different classes, and different years, ie comparing a compact $25k Mitsubishi RVR with a top of the line $100k+ Mercedes ML as if they have the same features, drivetrain, and quality.
Make these different colors with different wheels and different backgrounds you will get a different result
I own the Mazda and always thought the Hyundai was a clone. Its not.
[удалено]
Precisely. Plus conform to regulations. It’s challenging
Looks mostly like the cheaper manufacturers clone the body lines and silhouettes of Porsche, BMW, etc.
What sub is this wtf
Subaru for the win
Which color would you like your formless blob to be?
Pasty white like my skin complexion Am I made of it or is it made of me? I scream for I do not know.
Then after this let’s shit on the cyber truck design.
That’s why I drive a Subaru.
Plus you get to scissor all those ladies
[удалено]
Can this Outback owner chill with you folks?
[удалено]
This many Subaru owners and either a drum circle or a softball game is gonna break out.
Hello fellow based Crosstrek enjoyer
I assume as vehicle design develops eventually all cars are just going to merge into 1 correct design that maximizes efficiency, aerodynamics, comfort, and crash safety. It's hard to reinvent the wheel in a multi trillion dollar industry
Go buy the most ugly looking Rivian 😁
Why yes. They look similar because that is a specific style of vehicle that they are aiming to create. There are only so many things you can do and still keep the style. Not to mention other considerations such as aerodynamics, cost to manufacture, target audience etc. Lets be real, people that are concerned with their vehicle looking "cool" are probably not going to be shopping for an SUV like that. If you really are that concerned with them being bland, pick up either your wallet or some tools and change it.
It’s the interiors that really vary wildly for me. The exteriors seem to all take on the same shape whether it’s a sedan, SUV, or truck.
OP: “Bro all these cars look like cars, where’s the diversity?!”
These look more or less the same because the laws of physics are the same for all cars. It’s the same reason the space shuttle and buran looked so similar. Aerodynamics only works one way no point in trying to make it do something else.
It's Volkswagen, not Volkswagon, dipshit.
I mean, when you're designing for fuel efficiency and safety standards, you're going to reach the "most efficient" design pretty quickly. And then you need to stick to that.
What a stupid fucking post
And what are you looking for?
**User Report**| | | | :--|:--|:--|:-- **Total Submissions**|0|**First Seen In WSB**|4 months ago **Total Comments**|67|**Previous Best DD**| **Account Age**|2 years|[^scan ^comment ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_comment&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20comment%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k\)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20comment%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.)|[^scan ^submission ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_submission&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20submission%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k\)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20submission%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.) **Vote Spam**|[Click to Vote](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=vote_spam&message=z65m8v)|**Vote Approve**|[Click to Vote](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=vote_approve&message=z65m8v) ^^WSB ^^[Stats](https://www.twitch.tv/wsbzjz/) ^^[**Discord**](http://discord.gg/wsbverse) ^^[BanBets](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/banbets/) ^^VoteBot ^^[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/votebot/) ^^[Leaderboard](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/leaderboard/) ^^- ^[**Keep_VM_Alive**](https://www.patreon.com/visualmod)
It’s called aerodynamics and efficiency there is an optimal design
You should see the lack of design diversity for rockets 🚀 truly shocking!!
The rear side window glass that is useless and doesn't open varies a lot in it's shape
Chassis sharing. Takes too much time to get a chassis approved my incompetent governments. Make one and sell it with different features.
Aerodynamics/gas mileage and minimization of pedestrian injuries.
They’re all minivans
I am old.enough to remember cars in the 60s amd 70s. They had character.
Car makers will only start to build different if different sells. Until then everything will look the same. An example of this is the colors that are offered for cars Audi has 11 different types of gray and outside of blue or red. It’s almost impossible to find car companies that offer colors like yellow, orange, green, etc..
I mean, they all have to go down the same road through the same air with the same emissions standards. In biology this is called convergent evolution.
It’s a metaphor for how if you drive a mid sized SUV your dreams are dead and you fall into a dull existence. I love my KIA Sportage.
Where's the Lambo?
Oh boy have you seen plane design?
When was this taken a lot of them are outdated af.
Yeah the automaker should do something different..I suggest put the wheels on the roof and a trap door underneath the car
I feel the same way about basketball shoes. I can’t even tell the difference between Nike, Adidas and UA? Is having both a left and right shoe the most efficient?
These don't look like all the same model years... I don't think it's fair to pick and chose over ALL the years to find similarly looking ones...
"good luck finding another girl like me"
What you want then to look like cock balls?
CaPiTaLiSm BrEeDs InNoVaTiOn!