One of these 1980 cars's MSRP was 3 times that of the other. Can you guess which was the expensive one:

 

Now to the point.
One of these 2017 cars is 5.6 times the price of the other. How can you tell?

Edited January 12, 20188 yr by balthazar

Easy...the Cadillac in the top pic, the Mercedes in the bottom pic.

Discussion about automotive design is part & parcel of C&G.

To paraphrase the question above - How does one car in the 2nd pic look 5 times more expensive than the other?
What details in the lower pic telegraph that to the average consumer?

I get the point you were trying to make @balthazar, but I might have used a different example for the modern lower end comparison. Some suggestions.

IMO, just looking at roof lines nothing looks 5 times more expensive than something else. I mean I guess it could be argued a little box like a Spark vs the elegance of a CLS.. but "for the most part" no roof lines says "I'm worth 5 times as much".

6 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

IMO, just looking at roof lines nothing looks 5 times more expensive than something else. I mean I guess it could be argued a little box like a Spark vs the elegance of a CLS.. but "for the most part" no roof lines says "I'm worth 5 times as much".

IMHO, there is only one that can manage that effect....

I think the same way about the Bentley Continental and Mercedes S-class coupes when all the windows are down...that hardtop look just screams expensive in today's increasingly coupleless market..

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I might have used a different example for the modern lower end comparison. Some suggestions.

Those all look to be the 'same thing' IMO. No distinction, no class tiers.

 

IMO, just looking at roof lines nothing looks 5 times more expensive than something else.

ccap- you don't see any degree of difference in the top pic at all?

1 minute ago, balthazar said:

Those all look to be the 'same thing' IMO. No distinction, no class tiers.

I was agreeing with you while disagreeing.  I think you should at least keep the roofline styles similar. The cheap car you posted has more of a fast back  hatch back look while the upper class car is more of a melted sedan.  The VW v. Benz comparison makes your point more by having a shape that is much closer.

7 minutes ago, balthazar said:

ccap- you don't see any degree of difference in the top pic at all?

I didn't say I didn't see a difference in them. I do, but I don't see value in a roof line that could possible by worth 5 times as much as most other roof lines. 

I'm not sure of the significance of looking at the roofline alone...you have to see the the full profile.   The cheaper cars have the weak FWD proportions w/ the short front axle to door lengths, while the Mercs, Rolls Royce, etc have better RWD proportions...

Edited January 12, 20188 yr by Cubical-aka-Moltar

2 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

I'm not sure of the significance of looking at the roofline alone...you have to see the the full profile.   The cheaper cars have the weak FWD proportions w/ the short front axle to door lengths, while the Mercs, Rolls Royce, etc have better RWD proportions...

But then a first gen Genesis or SS or Charger should have that look too... And they don't look that premium.

Exactly, its still an entire package deal.

9 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

But then a first gen Genesis or SS or Charger should have that look too... And they don't look that premium.

They look better than a FWD appliance, though.  I'll admit I'm biased towards RWD styling, though.  

Edited January 12, 20188 yr by Cubical-aka-Moltar

Any design is a subtotal of it's parts, or like ccap says; a package deal. But any given sedan can be topped with some variety of rooflines & greenhouse details- creating a differentiated package. Why should all brand differentiation be primarily clustered in the grille/headlights & tails? And in heavy traffic, most of what you see is a field of greenhouses.

This was not meant to be a criticism of greenhouses, but it IS indicative, IMO. Everything has become so depressingly homogenized.

 

Edited January 12, 20188 yr by balthazar

Just now, balthazar said:

Any design is a subtotal of it's parts, or like ccap says; a package deal. But any given sedan can be topped with some variety of rooflines & greenhouse details- creating a differentiated package. Why should all brand differentiation be primarily clustered in the grille/headlights & tails? And in heavy traffic, most of what you see is a field of greenhouses.

This was not meant to be a criticism of greenhouses, but it IS indicative, IMO. Everything has become so depressingly homogenized.

 

Most of that is aero.

Yes. Call it 'forced homogenization', to be more accurate.
Still, there has to be room for improvement.

9 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Why should all brand differentiation be primarily clustered in the grille/headlights & tails?

That's a very good way to put it. For some reason this sentence opened it up for me. 

10 minutes ago, balthazar said:

This was not meant to be a criticism of greenhouses, but it IS indicative, IMO. Everything has become so depressingly homogenized.

Agreed but I feel like that's been forced by trying to improve fuel economy numbers. ..Pretty much what Drew said. 

38 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Yes. Call it 'forced homogenization', to be more accurate.
Still, there has to be room for improvement.

Since we have seen crease lines on the lower section of the sides of an auto, you would think you could play more with the Aero roof and pillars to give it a better look. I agree with you totally right now the Coupe 4 door look is so homogenized to be forgettable.

Dave- there's no "4-dr coupe", it's simply a more sloped rear glass on the same 4-dr sedan. Maybe if we collectively drop using the mis-nomer, it'll go away.

That aside, the 'fastback sedan' is actually an attempt to do something different. Sure other brands are going to offer their version- the industry is STARVED for ideas right now. Not that the fastback thing is anything more than a crumb of an idea, but I welcome/hope for design diversity.

I'm talking about generalities- the range between 'cheap' sedans and very expensive ones, stylistically, has immensely contracted.

3 minutes ago, balthazar said:

I'm talking about generalities- the range between 'cheap' sedans and very expensive ones, stylistically, has immensely contracted.

I don't know about that..look to past eras--a '59 Impala ht has the same roofline as a '59 Coupe de Ville, for example. The squared off formal roofline of the original Seville is very similar to the roofline of the early 80s Malibu, Regal, etc sedans.  Especially with GM in the 80s, the stylistic differences between the bottom and top brands was minimal--grilles and taillights identified brand differences. 

8 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Dave- there's no "4-dr coupe", it's simply a more sloped rear glass on the same 4-dr sedan. Maybe if we collectively drop using the mis-nomer, it'll go away.

That aside, the 'fastback sedan' is actually an attempt to do something different. Sure other brands are going to offer their version- the industry is STARVED for ideas right now. Not that the fastback thing is anything more than a crumb of an idea, but I welcome/hope for design diversity.

I'm talking about generalities- the range between 'cheap' sedans and very expensive ones, stylistically, has immensely contracted.

Fastback sedan isn't even a new idea. 

But the '59 CdV's roofline wasn't visually the same as a '59 Chrysler or '59 Galaxie or '59 Rambler or '59 Mercedes or '59 BMW or '59 toyota or '59 Alfa Romeo or '59 Holden or '59....

10 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Dave- there's no "4-dr coupe", it's simply a more sloped rear glass on the same 4-dr sedan. Maybe if we collectively drop using the mis-nomer, it'll go away.  

The other aspect of what I think constitutes a 4dr coupe like the CLS is the frameless door glass...

1 minute ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Fastback sedan isn't even a new idea. 

Conceptually, or course it's not. There's NO automotive design concepts left to discover- it's all been done before.

I tell you, for those championing the futurist move to autonomous community pods for transportation, the stylistic time was never riper. >:/

2 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

The other aspect of what I think constitutes a 4dr coupe like the CLS is the frameless door glass...

Here's an old 4-door coupe :

The future autonomous transport pods may look like toasters..the future is going to be bold

 

They look like Trams.

@Cubical-aka-Moltar @Drew Dowdell We need a Puke Reaction, All I could do is laugh at those toasters / trams rather then Puke! 

Toyota's Design for autonomous auto's does not give me much faith of having exciting transport.  

1 minute ago, dfelt said:

Toyota's Design for autonomous auto's does not give me much faith of having exciting transport.  

Bold and dramatic..imagine what a Lexus version would look like with the Predator grille..

I'm no artist, but trying to imagine how a Cadillac autonomous pod will look like..a sleek sharp-edged black toaster, with pointy fins, tall lights up the back, and lots of chrome...