OT: What do you think of the new 370Z vs your boxster or a cayman?

[Samson]

Originally Posted by Pieman

I just signed up for this forum today...

Welcome

The Boxster received the major interior upgrade/redesign in 2005 with the release of the 987. The 986 (1997-2004) is the model with the original interior.

Thinking about a TT and the Boxster? Go drive them back to back... you'll probably end up with the Boxster if what you want is a good driver. I say probably because if the TT you drive happens to be a TT RS, well... yeah.

[threpwood]

Originally Posted by Samson

threpwood - I disagree with your originality complaint. All things considered, the 370 is a pretty good evolution of cars like the 300zx. Sure, it has some questionable design details, but they are anything but unoriginal. It has interesting features like SyncroRev.

And Japanese sport cars in general? What's unoriginal about an RX8 or S2000? Those are all very unique in their own right. Rotary, real 4-door coupe (not that CLS or CC abomination), 9k redline on both cars... Sure, the MX-5 is just a modern interpretation of the classic British sports car, but it brought the entire genre back to the masses in a fun, reliable, and affordable way. Without the incredible success of the original Miata, I doubt we'd even have the Boxster.

Ah yes the engine. Of course, most car makers have their own uniqueness in their engines because engine is the backbone, but what I was referring to is the overall design of the car to the eyes of the drivers, which IMO truly lacks the originality.

I noticed that many of these Japanese car makers is trying too hard to make these sport cars to 'look' like Porsches, Ferraris etc which they are not. That is why I said these Japanese car makers are lacking originality and 'lost' because to make something look "good", they must copy the current European style and make these cars into something that they are not. For example, for the thing as simple as A/C vent, how many Japanese sports car or even passenger cars that now have that European-style round A/C vent?

As for the Japanese car makers trying to be original, a good example is probably Toyota Prius (not a sports car but a good example). The car has a very good invented engine, but they are truly lacking in the design department because the car looks like a running rice cooker or microwave-oven for trying to look 'futuristic'. In the next few years, I am quite positive that they will get a photograph of newer Porsche coupe, Maseratti etc and totally rebuild the shape of the car based on that styles.

As for American sport cars, I am kind of glad that it went back to the basic style of muscle cars, such as Mustang & Camaro because it shows the originality of the product.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by threpwood

I noticed that many of these Japanese car makers is trying too hard...

Round A/C vents are European now? I had no idea that they invented the circular dash vent! Many, many, many cars have had various shaped/sized/colored what-have-yous over a wide range of years. It has little to nothing to do with country of origin and everything to do with whatever design trend happens to be popular at the moment. By your logic, I could say that those fancy pants rounded Euro-pee-an A/C vents were ripped off from the Italians. I mean, a 1966 Fiat 124 had round dash vents.

The "euro" taillights that my other car (the 100% Japanese Lexus IS300/Toyota Atezza) unfortunately popularized are used in all sorts of cars from all countries these days. Even ze Germans. Know what? It doesn't mean that they are unoriginal; they are just giving the customer what they want.

Hell, even the "Bangle Butt" isn't even original. A similar design was first used by Hyundai on the 2001 XG300.

The point here is that everything is derivative of everything else. Sure, there are some unique elements that might be indicative of a certain country of origin... but what are we talking about again? The 370z and the Boxster? Yeah. They're both unoriginal derivations of the 1991 Geo Metro Convertible. All Porsche and Nissan did was double the cylinder count and add some leather, so they both suck.

Oh - The design of the Prius is dictated by the wind tunnel. It is a car made to have a very low coefficient of drag, and a truncated teardrop is the current shape of choice. Look at a Honda Insight or, to a lesser extent, a Shelby Cobra Daytona Coupe. It is that shape for a reason. Now, the inside of the Prius might be ugly as sin, but it is designed for the intended techy audience, and it works.

[Lil bastard]

+1 Samson. Everything is derivitive of something which came before. There really is no more truly unique design.

Add to that the 'computer' guides the designer's hand these days much more than any muse.

Even the original Z design was derived from the e-type coupe. It's uniqueness stemmed from the performance available at it's unheard of pricepoint.

The inspiration for the legendary (and many say groundbreaking) Miura was the GT40 and the Mini Cooper.

[Lordblood]

I saw it had a "auto-blipper" in the manual gearbox, basically it revved the engine a bit when you downshifted and were taking your foot of the clutch. That turned me off it, part of the fun of driving a manual is to be able to perfectly blip it into a lower gear.

I have the same problems with the new Z as the old, looks fat to me, and it may have a good bit power more than the Boxster but it 300 pounds heavier, so it needs the extra grunt.

Boxster and the Z4 are still my favorites in the range as far the overall quality and performance, even with the higher price tag.

[threpwood]

Originally Posted by Samson

The "euro" taillights that my other car (the 100% Japanese Lexus IS300/Toyota Atezza) unfortunately popularized are used in all sorts of cars from all countries these days. Even ze Germans. Know what? It doesn't mean that they are unoriginal; they are just giving the customer what they want.

Hell, even the "Bangle Butt" isn't even original. A similar design was first used by Hyundai on the 2001 XG300.

The point here is that everything is derivative of everything else. Sure, there are some unique elements that might be indicative of a certain country of origin... but what are we talking about again? The 370z and the Boxster? Yeah. They're both unoriginal derivations of the 1991 Geo Metro Convertible. All Porsche and Nissan did was double the cylinder count and add some leather, so they both suck.

Oh - The design of the Prius is dictated by the wind tunnel. It is a car made to have a very low coefficient of drag, and a truncated teardrop is the current shape of choice. Look at a Honda Insight or, to a lesser extent, a Shelby Cobra Daytona Coupe. It is that shape for a reason. Now, the inside of the Prius might be ugly as sin, but it is designed for the intended techy audience, and it works.

You can argue all you want, but you know what I am talking about. I wasn't mentioning features, I was referrring to the car shape. If everything is a derivative of everything else, it means that there is no difference in buying Geo or Boxster, isn't it?

What I said is that these Japanese manufacturers should preserve their originality, not copies. "It doesn't mean that they are unoriginal; they are just giving the customer what they want." which exactly proves my point. Just because the other cars sell well, it does not mean they should jump the wagon and copy. That is unoriginal.

Just because the wind tunnel shows that design has less drag, it does not mean that they should went with that design even if it looks ugly. There must be another option to make the car looks better? Excuses..excuses..now where did that "dorky car" slurr for Prius come from?

This further proves my point that they have no sense of car design. Talking about Honda Insight, have you seen how similar the car is to Prius? I test drove one the other day and the car looks like a copy of Prius, but made with cheaper material (they cost less too). It gives a good therapeutic when you seat on the back though because the rear suspension bounces.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by threpwood

You can argue all you want...

Just because the other cars sell well, it does not mean they should jump the wagon and copy. That is unoriginal.

So then, Porsche is unoriginal by jumping on the Miata bandwagon, which is nothing new when you think of an Austin Healey, which is nothing more than an affordable rehash of a Bugatti Type 35. OK. I'm fine with that, I guess. Hell, a 911 is just a fancy 1936 Beetle with a chopped top.

Now you know your Prius "ugly" argument is completely worthless, right? Ugly? The car is designed to be as efficient as possible (within the confines of the accountants), and is 100% function over form. (<- I thought that was the essence of the Europeans... what's that, my peeling soft-touch dashboard?) Another option to make it look less dorky? Well, not if you want a Cd of .26. The new Prius looks much better, but like the Insight, it's that shape for a reason. It works.

Hell, have you seen a Mercedes Bionic? It looks like a bloated Prius with severe head trauma, but guess what? Cd of .19. That's impressive. Terribly unattractive to those interested in beauty that is only skin deep , but an amazingly impressive design.

Geo vs Boxster? True, there is no fundamental difference. They're both cars. They will both get you from point A to point B in relative comfort and like all cars, they are both fun in their own ways. The difference comes in when you look at the important stuff... the engine, the feel, the noises. That has nothing to do with how a car looks. On top of all of that is personal preference and all that nonsense... that's where the interesting part comes in. You can get what speaks to you for whatever reason, be it a Cayman S or a 370z. Image, design, fun, resale value, reliability, trunk size, whatever.

Lil bastard - As a designer, I totally agree... there really isn't a truly unique design anymore. There may be a new style based on something old, or a great combination of existing languages with your own personal touch (that is inspired by something else) that produces a groundbreaking product, but it's damn hard to come up with something that is original. Or maybe I'm just burnt out at the moment...

[threpwood]

Originally Posted by Samson

Just because the other cars sell well, it does not mean they should jump the wagon and copy. That is unoriginal.

So then, Porsche is unoriginal by jumping on the Miata bandwagon, which is nothing new when you think of an Austin Healey, which is nothing more than an affordable rehash of a Bugatti Type 35. OK. I'm fine with that, I guess. Hell, a 911 is just a fancy 1936 Beetle with a chopped top.

Now you know your Prius "ugly" argument is completely worthless, right? Ugly? The car is designed to be as efficient as possible (within the confines of the accountants), and is 100% function over form. (<- I thought that was the essence of the Europeans... what's that, my peeling soft-touch dashboard?) Another option to make it look less dorky? Well, not if you want a Cd of .26. The new Prius looks much better, but like the Insight, it's that shape for a reason. It works.

Hell, have you seen a Mercedes Bionic? It looks like a bloated Prius with severe head trauma, but guess what? Cd of .19. That's impressive. Terribly unattractive to those interested in beauty that is only skin deep , but an amazingly impressive design.

Geo vs Boxster? True, there is no fundamental difference. They're both cars. They will both get you from point A to point B in relative comfort and like all cars, they are both fun in their own ways. The difference comes in when you look at the important stuff... the engine, the feel, the noises. That has nothing to do with how a car looks. On top of all of that is personal preference and all that nonsense... that's where the interesting part comes in. You can get what speaks to you for whatever reason, be it a Cayman S or a 370z. Image, design, fun, resale value, reliability, trunk size, whatever.

Lil bastard - As a designer, I totally agree... there really isn't a truly unique design anymore. There may be a new style based on something old, or a great combination of existing languages with your own personal touch (that is inspired by something else) that produces a groundbreaking product, but it's damn hard to come up with something that is original. Or maybe I'm just burnt out at the moment...

Uh...911 is a 1936 beetle chop off? And you have to write a book just to explain your point? Like I said, you just don't get what I said so I guess no point in arguing with you. I do not think your opinion is worthless, but I do think you are living in lala land. My opinion is not worthless and yes, Prius design is ugly. If Prius do look NICE then heaven forbid nobody calls it dorky car. I agree the term is not nice, but it proves my point that to be original, Toyota has no clue in making Prius looks original and looks "good" without copying other European design.

"Everything is just a derivative of everything else" is a typical argument of counterfeiter, no good patent infringer, no offense. If you are really a designer, then you should understand this better. Wait till someone grab your design, alter it here and there and call it theirs.

Out of topic, I see you drive a Lexus and Atenza, but you know what? Lexus is famous in Japan because the dealerships are known to discriminate buyers based on how deep your pockets are or how much gold rings that you wear. But I guess you do not know that because all your care is that you drive a car that gets you to point A and B and acceptable to you. Oh I am not jealous because I can afford a few top class Lexus if I want, but I see beyond just a car. I really wish I live in la-la land like you, but it's time to wake up

[Samson]

Yes, a 911 is more or less an evolution of the Beetle. Look into the history of Volkswagen and Porsche. They are closely tied together, and always have been.

The Beetle was rear engined, flat-4, mostly designed by Ferdinand Porsche... his son, Ferry Porsche, came up with the 356. Same flat-4, same suspension, same etc. Then on and on. This is an example of getting inspiration and borrowing from other sources. I could go on and on, but seriously, pick up a book. Great reading.

If you're talking strictly about looks, well, open your eyes.

I never said the Prius wasn't ugly, just it was designed for a purpose other than aesthetics. Nothing more, nothing less.

No, I'm lying about being a designer in an attempt to impress this place...
Go ask any body who has been in the design industry for any length or anybody who is worth the time and they'll tell you the same thing. They might word it a bit differently, but that's the beauty of the art. Inspiration comes from all over the place. Design 101. Taking an established design, changing an element or two, and releasing it as your own is not what we're talking about. That's what Geely does in the car world. There is nothing wrong with a company wanting to make their own version of a type of car. Of course they'll share similar characteristics.

Lexus and Atenza? No, I drive a Lexus and a Porsche. I've never owned a Mazda 6, aka Atenza. Not my cup of tea. It's great that Lexus has that reputation in Japan. That's awesome, really. It's also quite boss that you can afford a top class Lexus. I can't, and I'm OK with that.

That too long?

[boxster1]

In grade school English class, here in the States, they teach us a simple concept for authoring what is generally considered original work. Framing it humorously, it can be stated that "plagiarism is when you steal from one person and research is when you steal from many people".

With the rise in prominence of intellectual property rights over the last two centuries, what is original and what isn't has become a very contentious point and, to use the grade school example, it all depends on where we decide to draw the line and decide that something is research and not plagiarism.

Now I'm not a design expert or automotive historian but, I do think I have a pretty keen eye when it comes to differentiating design. Therefore, when I casually see a car drive by on the road that is so close in design appearance to another car that I mistake one for the other at a glance, I'm sorry, but I have to think that is not original work.

[Lordblood]

Hah, if you really take copying that far we can go as far as saying any car is a copy of the horse and buggy: Both are bodies with wheels being propelled by something that creates power.

That's why we can't say one is the copy of the other. As an oligopoly the car market is always in rivalries and must jump on the bandwagon if it wishes to stay alive. Manufacturers that try to go "solo" ends up dead or near dead, just look at TVR.

I think the Japanese aren't copying though, they still share many similarities. Most Japanese sports cars have turbocharged engines, they all tend to be really good handlers, and tend to be cheaper than what they compete with, isn't that a bit different than the competition?

[Lil bastard]

Originally Posted by boxster1

...Now I'm not a design expert or automotive historian but, I do think I have a pretty keen eye when it comes to differentiating design. Therefore, when I casually see a car drive by on the road that is so close in design appearance to another car that I mistake one for the other at a glance, I'm sorry, but I have to think that is not original work.

Well, you may be correct from a purely design standpoint.

Then again, we're no longer in an age where form is separated from function. Form must now intergrate into function. This is most often governed by the laws of Fluid and Aero dynamics. Gone are the days of exposed wipers, quarter windows, fins, square side mirrors, recessed lamps, etc. All these things were tremendous drag items on a car and greatly decreased Range (MPG).

This is what I meant when I said:" the 'computer' guides the designer's hand these days much more than any muse. ". In other words, cars MUST look the way they now do and this tremendously narrows any latitude the designer has to inject truly unique styling elements.

To use the arguement of Geo vs Porsche, no they're not the same design. But, they have been able to distinguish themselves through a series of compromises that eventually gets them both to the same relative point. The shape of the GEO may not be as aerodynamic as the Porsche's, but the trade off, at least in this case, has been weight. The Geo is much lighter than the Porsche allowing it's design to be slightly less aerodynamic, but through weight savings, reach or exceed the function (Range) requirements.

But, also be aware that while many cars now have similarities in such things as rounded fronts, shortened rears with little overhang, aerodynamic mirrors, etc. subtle differences do exist. The fact that the casual observer isn't always able to distinguish them doesn't mean it's not an original work.

[threpwood]

Originally Posted by Samson

Yes, a 911 is more or less an evolution of the Beetle. Look into the history of Volkswagen and Porsche. They are closely tied together, and always have been.

The Beetle was rear engined, flat-4, mostly designed by Ferdinand Porsche... his son, Ferry Porsche, came up with the 356. Same flat-4, same suspension, same etc. Then on and on. This is an example of getting inspiration and borrowing from other sources. I could go on and on, but seriously, pick up a book. Great reading.

If you're talking strictly about looks, well, open your eyes.

I never said the Prius wasn't ugly, just it was designed for a purpose other than aesthetics. Nothing more, nothing less.

No, I'm lying about being a designer in an attempt to impress this place...
Go ask any body who has been in the design industry for any length or anybody who is worth the time and they'll tell you the same thing. They might word it a bit differently, but that's the beauty of the art. Inspiration comes from all over the place. Design 101. Taking an established design, changing an element or two, and releasing it as your own is not what we're talking about. That's what Geely does in the car world. There is nothing wrong with a company wanting to make their own version of a type of car. Of course they'll share similar characteristics.

Lexus and Atenza? No, I drive a Lexus and a Porsche. I've never owned a Mazda 6, aka Atenza. Not my cup of tea. It's great that Lexus has that reputation in Japan. That's awesome, really. It's also quite boss that you can afford a top class Lexus. I can't, and I'm OK with that.

That too long?

Yeah too long and lost IMO.

Beetle is designed by his father and HIS SON produced the Porsche. So there you have it, father and son, close relationship, not a no good patent infringer.

It's not design 101. That is a patent 101. Intellectual properties, get it?

Short and direct to the point.

[threpwood]

Originally Posted by Lil bastard

Well, you may be correct from a purely design standpoint.

Then again, we're no longer in an age where form is separated from function. Form must now intergrate into function. This is most often governed by the laws of Fluid and Aero dynamics. Gone are the days of exposed wipers, quarter windows, fins, square side mirrors, recessed lamps, etc. All these things were tremendous drag items on a car and greatly decreased Range (MPG).

This is what I meant when I said:" the 'computer' guides the designer's hand these days much more than any muse. ". In other words, cars MUST look the way they now do and this tremendously narrows any latitude the designer has to inject truly unique styling elements.

To use the arguement of Geo vs Porsche, no they're not the same design. But, they have been able to distinguish themselves through a series of compromises that eventually gets them both to the same relative point. The shape of the GEO may not be as aerodynamic as the Porsche's, but the trade off, at least in this case, has been weight. The Geo is much lighter than the Porsche allowing it's design to be slightly less aerodynamic, but through weight savings, reach or exceed the function (Range) requirements.

But, also be aware that while many cars now have similarities in such things as rounded fronts, shortened rears with little overhang, aerodynamic mirrors, etc. subtle differences do exist. The fact that the casual observer isn't always able to distinguish them doesn't mean it's not an original work.

Thanks for the knowledgeable explanation. Very clear and well-thought without the need of any sarcasm in context.

"because of aerodynamic law and computer assisted design, cars that look the same to casual observer does not mean it is not original work".

Can I say that, if these Japanese car manufacturers produce a Porsche-looking sports cars with subtle difference and probably named the model "ORIGIN", it is perfectly acceptable to all of us? If yes, then I have nothing else to say.

[threpwood]

Originally Posted by Lordblood

Hah, if you really take copying that far we can go as far as saying any car is a copy of the horse and buggy: Both are bodies with wheels being propelled by something that creates power.

That's why we can't say one is the copy of the other. As an oligopoly the car market is always in rivalries and must jump on the bandwagon if it wishes to stay alive. Manufacturers that try to go "solo" ends up dead or near dead, just look at TVR.

I think the Japanese aren't copying though, they still share many similarities. Most Japanese sports cars have turbocharged engines, they all tend to be really good handlers, and tend to be cheaper than what they compete with, isn't that a bit different than the competition?

This discussion is never about engine, it is the look of the car.

If economy is the reason where car makers or any kind of manufacturer must jump on the bandwagon in order to stay alive, then we are all doom and our whole economy will be ruled by China (if not already) since there are no real intellectual property rules there (look at Tiffanys, Channel etc).

[Samson]

Originally Posted by threpwood

Beetle is designed by his father and HIS SON produced the Porsche. So there you have it, father and son, close relationship, not a no good patent infringer.

So, because the two engineers are related, the 911 is no longer an evolution of the Beetle (which was your original point of contention)? Man, you are really lacking reading comprehension, aren't you?

Intellectual properties? I'm sorry, did the Europeans invent the circle? Again, borrowing design concepts (such as the Z3 and Boxster riding directly on the coat tails of the Miata) is a way of life. It is a good way of life. It gives the consumer choice and drives up the product quality.

If you want to start an intellectual property battle, go see our automotive friends in China. THAT is a blatant rip-off. BMW releasing their roadster because the Miata was successful is NOT... Porsche releasing the Cayenne because SUVs are popular is not... Lexus releasing the IS as a 3-series competitor is not. Geely releasing the Merrie 300 as a C-Class clone IS a rip-off.

Anyway, I've said my piece. If you want to learn something about the automotive design industry or the 911/Beetle/VW connection, I recommend picking up one of the many books that have been written on the subject. It'll help with both general reading skills and give you a pool of knowledge from which to draw.

[threpwood]

Originally Posted by Samson

So, because the two engineers are related, the 911 is no longer an evolution of the Beetle (which was your original point of contention)? Man, you are really lacking reading comprehension, aren't you?

Intellectual properties? I'm sorry, did the Europeans invent the circle? Again, borrowing design concepts (such as the Z3 and Boxster riding directly on the coat tails of the Miata) is a way of life. It is a good way of life. It gives the consumer choice and drives up the product quality.

If you want to start an intellectual property battle, go see our automotive friends in China. THAT is a blatant rip-off. BMW releasing their roadster because the Miata was successful is NOT... Porsche releasing the Cayenne because SUVs are popular is not... Lexus releasing the IS as a 3-series competitor is not. Geely releasing the Merrie 300 as a C-Class clone IS a rip-off.

Anyway, I've said my piece. If you want to learn something about the automotive design industry or the 911/Beetle/VW connection, I recommend picking up one of the many books that have been written on the subject. It'll help with both general reading skills and give you a pool of knowledge from which to draw.

Whatever man No need to settle to insults. It's clear you have your view and I have mine, so be it. Like I said, wait until someone grab your design alter it here and there and call it theirs. Must be a great feeling indeed!

[Samson]

Originally Posted by Lil bastard

The shape of the GEO may not be as aerodynamic as the Porsche's, but the trade off, at least in this case, has been weight.

True, it isn't quite as aerodynamic, but you'd be surprised at how close they are: .32 vs .31. The increased mileage comes from a combination of the light weight and a tiny 3 (1.0 L) or 4 cylinder that was tuned for efficiency.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by threpwood

Whatever man No need to settle to insults. It's clear you have your view and I have mine, so be it. Like I said, wait until someone grab your design alter it here and there and call it theirs. Must be a great feeling indeed!

No insult meant... sorry. But sure, we can drop it. Seriously though, read up on this stuff. As a car guy, it's really very interesting.

[RandallNeighbour]

holy schmoley!