Question Why are today's cars so butt ugly?

[jsmithepa]

In the olden days, I can spot a Mercedes, a BMW, a block away, they had distinctive stylings. These days, unless I get close to read the badge, they can be another Japanese.

I have a theory automakers these days have to mold the bodies for good aerodynamic in order to achieve mandated fuel efficiencies, and basically nature steer bodies shapes to be a certain way... but HOW BORING! But surely electric cars are efficient? but they too, boxy and comics-books like.

Rebuttal?

 

[Ralston18]

Hmmm....

Rebuttal for "butt ugly"...?

Will sit on that for awhile.

 

[Colif]

The only exciting body shapes you get on cars are the exotics. I don't think I seen a boring Ferrari or Pagani yet.

Basic people movers are boring as hell... unlike a Lamborghini. they will never end up peoples walls as posters... or works of art if you rich enough

I seen arguments that the emissions of Electric cars is higher than current if you factor in what has to produce the electricity in 1st place. So while cars themselves might be "efficient" the means of powering them isn't.

The cars are boring because people keep buying them. Stop buying the stuff and they will soon change.

 

[DSzymborski]

In the olden days, I can spot a Mercedes, a BMW, a block away, they had distinctive stylings. These days, unless I get close to read the badge, they can be another Japanese.

I have a theory automakers these days have to mold the bodies for good aerodynamic in order to achieve mandated fuel efficiencies, and basically nature steer bodies shapes to be a certain way... but HOW BORING! But surely electric cars are efficient? but they too, boxy and comics-books like.

Rebuttal?

How can some rebut an aesthetic preference?

I like parmesan cheese. Green is better than yellow. PROVE ME WRONG.

 

[Colif]

Green is better than yellow. PROVE ME WRONG.

I know you didn't really want me to do this but Green bananas are better than Yellow? You can have them then

 

[DSzymborski]

I know you didn't really want me to do this but Green bananas are better than Yellow? You can have them then

NOW DO THAT WITH TRAFFIC LIGHTS

 

[jsmithepa]

Exotics are another animal, but I wouldn't get one just because all the ridiculousness like zero trunk, tinny footwell, cheesy interiors. The only Exotic I lust over is the Kode 0.

Of all the working man cars, I can go for a modern 2-doors Porsche or a BMW i8, but other than that, don't feel anything.

 

[AllanGH]

Well, if you hop into a BMW, please don't drive like the majority of BMW owners on the road today.

 

[USAFRet]

Semi exotics for me would be the original Acura NSX, or maybe even the new one.
Or, a 220hp Fiat X1/9 conversion. (why yes, I had an original '74 X1/9. My dad had a '75)
https://www.hagerty.com/articles-vi...ayless-fiat-x19-220-horses-worth-of-vitamin-k

A few years ago, all the econo boxes looked like different flavor jelly beans. Little roundy things.
Today, they're all trying to be edgy with the pointy angular lights and sharp creases. Even a base model Civic.

 

[AllanGH]

If we're going to talk "luxury" cars, I can be happy with this:

https://imgur.com/a/6cB59IW

View: https://imgur.com/a/6cB59IW

 

[USAFRet]

If we're going to talk "luxury" cars, I can be happy with this:

Powered by liquified Unobtanium.

 

[AllanGH]

Straight from Pandora....

....and it might be less expensive than what I'm paying per-gallon right now, too.

 

[RememberThe5th]

This is more like it

Its the way of moving foward i think? I really got sick of those bubbly wrapped cars (By bubbly i mean no pointy things, aka agressive look like this coupe, i guess same thing as smartphones dont have pointy edge).

 

[AllanGH]

I want my 1970 'Cuda back....

 

[sizzling]

Well in Europe cars now have to be designed to cause less damage to pedestrians to obtain certain safety ratings and meet many regulations. This significantly reduces the design options.

 

[aldan]

This is more like it

Its the way of moving foward i think? I really got sick of those bubbly wrapped cars (By bubbly i mean no pointy things, aka agressive look like this coupe, i guess same thing as smartphones dont have pointy edge).

that a 72?that was the last year for the steel bumpers.they couldnt pass a crash test.

 

[RememberThe5th]

that a 72?that was the last year for the steel bumpers.they couldnt pass a crash test.

1969

 

[PC Tailor]

I like parmesan cheese

No - just no.
Last thing I want is the essence of vomit on my spaghetti bolognese

 

[YT-CTECH]

The only exciting body shapes you get on cars are the exotics. I don't think I seen a boring Ferrari or Pagani yet.

Basic people movers are boring as hell... unlike a Lamborghini. they will never end up peoples walls as posters... or works of art if you rich enough

I seen arguments that the emissions of Electric cars is higher than current if you factor in what has to produce the electricity in 1st place. So while cars themselves might be "efficient" the means of powering them isn't.

The cars are boring because people keep buying them. Stop buying the stuff and they will soon change.

hmm dacia sandero but no a volvo v90 estate is not ugly!!

 

[King_V]

What percentage of people do you suppose are really car enthusiasts?

Most people need/want an appliance to commute to work with.

I drive a Prius to work, yet I also have a Mustang GT.

I've never owned a pickup truck, SUV, or van, yet I've had cars from the tiny 1987 Honda CRX (aka The Micro Machine) to a 1970 Chrylser Newport Convertible (aka Gigantor).

Even my "practical" cars have generally had something interesting I liked about them, whether looks, interior space, performance, comfort, or whatever.

And, take a look at the 1966 Ford Galaxie, 1965 Buick Riviera, 1967 Pontiac GTO, 1967 Plymouth Fury, etc. I'm sure back then some people were saying "Why the hell does EVERY CAR have vertically stacked headlights?" or "Why are they all getting straight and angular rather than having the graceful curves we had in the 1950s?" etc.

 

[mihen]

All car manufactures go through an ugly phase. Right now thats GM, Toyota and Honda. Just don't buy them.
The main issue to me is a problem of over-design. They try to do too much with one design and don't keep it simple. What are your lines and shapes? Where do they lead the eye? I don't think it has anything to do with aerodynamics. There is no aerodynamic sense to many of these designs.

 

[YT-CTECH]

All car manufactures go through an ugly phase. Right now thats GM, Toyota and Honda. Just don't buy them.
The main issue to me is a problem of over-design. They try to do too much with one design and don't keep it simple. What are your lines and shapes? Where do they lead the eye? I don't think it has anything to do with aerodynamics. There is no aerodynamic sense to many of these designs.

Toyota Supra??

 

[Solandri]

I seen arguments that the emissions of Electric cars is higher than current if you factor in what has to produce the electricity in 1st place. So while cars themselves might be "efficient" the means of powering them isn't.

I did calcs based on the EPA mileage figures for the Nissan LEAF and the Versa hatchback (same body as the LEAF so aerodynamics should be identical, though I suspect the LEAF may have more energy-efficient tires). The numbers I got were:

Gasoline ICE car is about 20% efficient (20% of the energy in the gasoline goes into moving the car)
Based on that, diesel ICE cars are probably about 25% efficient.
EV charged with electricity generated from coal is about 19% efficient.
EV charged with electricity generated from natural gas is about 25% efficient.

The primary reason EVs are cheaper to operate per mile is because gasoline costs roughly 10x more per Joule than coal or natural gas. Notably, the fuel taxes on gasoline are more than the cost of coal or natural gas needed to power an EV. This is going to become important as EVs begin to comprise a significant fraction of vehicles on the road. Fuel taxes pay for constructing and maintaining roads, and right now EVs are getting a free ride. That will have to end eventually if we don't want our roads falling into disrepair. A few states are experimenting with a surcharge of about $300 when you renew the registration on an EV, to make up the fuel taxes you aren't paying.

https://tech.slashdot.org/comments....old=-1&commentsort=3&mode=thread&cid=56040159

Do note that which is better changes depending on what you mean by "emissions". CO2 emissions are lowest for natural gas. Diesel is next (it generates slightly more CO2 than gasoline, but the higher efficiency of diesel engines means you'd use less diesel than gasoline to travel the same distance, resulting in lower CO2 emissions). Then gasoline. Coal is the worst by a fairly large margin. So that's probably why you read that EVs could emit more CO2 traveling the same distance as a gasoline car.

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=73&t=11

For other emissions though (particulates, sulfur dioxides, nitrous oxides), diesel tends to be worst, followed by gasoline. Coal is actually the worst by a large margin again, but the fact that you burn coal in a factory means you can put extensive filters and scrubbers on it to remove most of the particulates before they enter the atmosphere. (Of course then you end up with mountains of coal ash, which causes its own problems.) Natural gas is the cleanest - it should produce only water and CO2 unless something is wrong with your flame.

As for EVs being powered by nuclear or renewables, that simply doesn't happen. Right now, nearly all our flexible electricity generation comes from coal and gas (hydro too, but its generation in a given year is fixed independent of consumption - depends on how much rainfall there is). So if you trade in your gasoline car for an EV, and plug the EV in to charge it, that increases the electricity the grid needs to generate. The power companies need to somehow supply that extra electricity, so they run a gas or coal plant a little harder. So pretty much 100% of the electricity used by EVs comes from coal and natural gas.

The only things that might change that are increased nuclear power (enough to absorb the additional load of EVs charging overnight), and battery storage of wind or solar. But battery storage makes no sense unless fossil fuel plant use during the day drops to 0%. If you're still running fossil fuel plants during the day but have excess wind/solar power, then it makes more sense to shut the fossil fuel plants off during the day and use the wind/solar power immediately, then turn the fossil fuel plants on during the night. Basically shift the fossil fuel plant's on-time from day to night, and use the wind/solar power immediately with no losses. If you run the fossil fuel plant during the day, and store the wind/solar power for use at night, you end up losing about 20%-40% of the wind/solar energy in battery charge/discharge losses. Meaning you have to run the fossil fuel plants more to make up those losses.

 

[Deleted member 14196]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Form should follow function and I prefer the reliability of new cars

 

[King_V]

I don't think it has anything to do with aerodynamics. There is no aerodynamic sense to many of these designs.

It may not outwardly appear so, or in some parts of the design may seem counterintuitive, but the auto manufacturers are going, at least for cars, grab whatever advantage they can in terms of acceleration and fuel economy, so they are absolutely making sure to take aerodynamics into consideration.

I did calcs based on the EPA mileage figures for the Nissan LEAF and the Versa hatchback (same body as the LEAF so aerodynamics should be identical, though I suspect the LEAF may have more energy-efficient tires). The numbers I got were:
(snipped numerous good points in addressing @Colif 's post)

In addition to that, let's keep in mind that the dirtier methods of producing electricity are falling by the wayside. Just casual observation in driving, where I'm in New Jersey, solar and wind are picking up notably. Hell, I personally know a guy at work who has an e-Golf, and solar panels, so, his own particular case solves both problems.

(also, for a while I worked for a Natural Gas company - while their primary business is natural gas, they were involved in renewables, building out wind generation, and offering incentives for people to get solar. They had their fingers in a lot of pies, as it were, energy-wise)

I never really understood where the idea that "electricity generation is dirtier than gasoline" came from, though I suspect its ultimate origins were in the sorts of interest/energy companies that were more interested in the status quo for their own profit.

Unless you're in some place where they still produce the bulk of their electricity with coal. But, since natural gas is what's making coal a dying industry in the US, the "electricity is dirtier than gasoline" argument is just not a valid one to make.