Bob You always seem to have such disdain for designs that are 'retro' and/or retain/pay homage to the past. While I understand you dont like it, there are those of us (many in fact) who arnet enamored of the modern 'hot wheels' school of auto design and feel the designs of the past are better. Back in my SPFX designer days we had a guy in the business who was always coming up with really crazy unique designs...but while they were unique, they also werent very good. We created a saying for this guy, 'different isnt always better'. I respect your right to prefer modern design, but it would be great if you didnt make it sound like those of us who didnt like it, and preferred older designs, werent simply 'wrong' and/or ignorant of 'design' in general. Not trying to argue...just pointing out a running theme in your design related posts.
This is not a Porsche thread but a subthread has drifted off into Porsche-dom. IMO the major thing that has happened at Porsche over the past 10-20 years has been the vast improvement in manufacturing build quality. They were always fun to drive but they were terrible to own. I owned three 911s spaced over about 20 years before my 997 GT3, and the early three were all disasters. My earlier Ferraris were actually far superior in reliability. But the GT3 was perfect and a ball to drive hard. It is a real authentic sports car that is light years ahead of any other roadgoing 911 in terms of driving experience. The new 991 seems to lose some of that authenticity but we will see how the GT3 version is rendered.
Actually, I do for the most part (although I like the retro Mustang 10 years ago). The Camaro however is a terrible cartoon. The Challenger is pretty cool (but way too big in person). The reason I do is it lacks imagination and doesn't move styling forward. It's safe. It's like a marketing person saying "don't take any risks --- just warm it over so we can sell X amount over the next 4 years again". To me, there WAS a time when retro didn't exist. In those days, when the originals were designed, designers had more freedom than today. And, we respect today those "classic" cars because of their design purity. We are in a sea today of either dull retro cars or ugly cars. It's a pity because we all know designers can do a better job if they are under the control of other designers and not marketeers who rule the industry today. But we are getting way off track. Let's talk about this car and not personal views of car design today. I only brought up the 911 because someone said it was better than a 458, which I think most would disagree with.
Had a professor in Design school that always said," Walking around the Ritz Carlton Hotel with your "unit" hanging out of your pants is DIFFERENT,but that doesn't necessarily make it GOOD!"
Yes well seeing Meryl Streep up for an Academy Award every year for 20 years doesn't add to our viewing enjoyment of movies either. At some point, you want something new and fresh to see. I think the 275 GTB is an amazing bit of design. What a pity it would have been to have done a retro version of it every 6 years for 30 years. Sound familiar?
+1. One of the reasons we are all excited about the new 12 cylinder is the expectation that it WILL move the styling forward. Ferrari takes risks. They are not always successful but when they are, their creations are spectacular. They excel at moving in new directions while including nods to their past.
Yes.I agree,and it's getting off topic,but I've never been much of a "retro" design enthusiast. But that's just a personal opinion.It seems to sell quite well i.e. Mini,Camaro,Mustang,etc.I think people just connect with their past.Newness scares most people, IMHO.
Continuing on this theme, the world is not going to wait breathlessly for the new 911; we KNOW that it will be little different than the current one. And 911 owners can be confident that their models will still look pretty current. This is a winning formula for Porsche which they would be foolish to abandon. But the interesting thing about Ferrari is that although they are often revolutionary rather than evolutionary in their new models, this does not obsolete their older models. Older models attract adherents to them, and these owners often swear that they love their (for example) 550 or their 308 more than the newer models. And these earlier models do have enduring virtue and value. I think that this risk taking without obsolescence is an enduring feature that helps make the marque as great as it is.
The new Porsche looks very 2012, especially inside. It has classic cues that I wouldn't call retrograde; that would imply the style has gone backwards which the 911 never has.
I haven't seen the inside. You may have a good point there. But, again, we need to be talking about the 620 (or whatever it's called). Sorry to have gotten this thread off track.
I dunno. I will reserve judgement until I see it in the flesh. The front end looks a bit busy IMO. Ya gotta agree that Lambo pushes the design edge radically. I don't want a Lambo (well maybe in addition to my Ferrari), but I do like their cutting edge design.
Actually I don't agree. Lambo's successive designs are pretty much derivative of their 80s concepts. They restate the same cliches within their framework of a cubist-modernity theme. That doesn't mean that they are not attractive and desirable. I think they are. But they do not break new ground.
I'm not sure I agree with you there. I like the Aventador (best looking car since the Countach) but every Lambo has been a variation of the Countach since it was discontinued. I would have loved to have seen Lambo do something other than a folded paper design once and a while. Can you imagine if they went back to the sweeping curves of the Muira? I'm not talking about a retro look -- just the more flowing design that Ferrari likes to use instead of creases and sharp lines everywhere. The Countach is magnificent. But, is that all Lambo is or ever will be?
The 599gto is as much a production car as the 288gto. The 288 is, after all, a 308 with some modifications.
A good point but you have to admit --- the 288 has A LOT of major modifications. A lot more than the GTO has compared to the 599. I'm not sure I would say an inline engine vs transverse layout, a different gearbox, a different differential, and different suspension along with 2 additional turbos is just "some".
agreed and if we´d take that line a little further, the F40 is also derivative of the 308. However, in the current line up the 599 GTO does not play the part of the super Ferrari such as the F50 and the Enzo have.
What modifications? The 288GTO has a different engine(displacement) transmission, suspension, engine/gearbox layout, body, materials, wheel base, length, width, the list goes on.
