Does Porsche need a Bangle?

[Guest]

I was at a BMW dealer today...and it dawned on me for the first time that Chris Bangle's approach actually works.He has ditched the heritage and evolved a design vocabulary that is challenging but actually quite appealling - particularly the interiors which could teach Porsche a thing or two.

Should "we"get a Bangle too?

Spizz

 

[daro911]

ORIGINAL: Spizz Oil

Should "we"get a Bangle too?

Spizz

[]Thought we did hence the beautiful challenging looking Cayenne

 

[Guest]

F A "Butzi" Porsche designed my car..........the 911 certainly needs to get more retro and back to basics for the European Market IMHO[8|]

 

[John H]

Spizz,

You are spot on.

It has taken me a while to "get" what Bangle is up to, and it wasn't till I saw a new 6 series next to an existing 3 series that I realised he has taken BMW on a paradigm jump forward. Not everything works (I hate the Z4) but he has made BMW's former conservative design suddenly look very passe. The 6 series coupe is a fabulous car.

Frankly I think the 997 is going to be a disappointment ... it is just treading water in design terms.

Heritage can become a millstone round your neck sometimes.

Just ask Harley Davidson!

John H

 

[924nutter]

Do BMW need a Chris Bangle? Didn't he design the pig ugly 5 series. It is so ugly I wouldn't even move out of the way of a 540i if Iwas driving my 924 lux. A 525i came up behind me on the way back from Bedford Autodrome last Saturday and I swear the 931 was scared into being 5 mph faster.

 

[Guest]

Porsche has a problem taking their designs forward.

Just like BMW, Porsche are running out of things to say with the design language they have evolved. Unfortunately their recent attempts to say something different have at best had mixed reviews.

Porsche has a strong design image and a fantastic heritage but a high proportion of their customers are not comfortable with any changes that they see as being "foreign" to the Porsche "style". Porsche, like any other manufacturer (bar Morgan) can't live in the past.

This is a high risk business. The cost of developing new models is MAD. I can't see Porsche taking the risk of employing a "Bangle". BMW are doing what they need to, but unfortunately for them Bangle is developing the new design language as he goes along. The new designs are not coherent, yet.

I should be a target customer for the new 6 series (I did have a 3 series coupe) but I think it's horrible. I like the 7 series but I think the 5 series and the Z4 plain ugly. I currently drive a 996 C4 (99) I love it, but I do not like the turbo "face lift" lights on the newer cars.

Yes Porsche car design needs to move on just like BMW but I think a Chris Bangle would kill Porsche. I find it difficult however to point any finger at Bangle because you never know how faithful the new cars are to the original designs or how much the cultural changes within BMW have modified or compromised the eventual designs we see on the road.

I think the new 997 will be too little a bit late. The 998 will be the big challenge.

 

[oldtimer]

This is a really provocative subject ! One man's Bangle is another man's bungle , especially when you are fiddling with a historically successful formula.

The analogy with Morgan was a good one, it's true that designs have to move on and that fashion , or 'what looks good' is not static...or is it ? [8|] In the case of Morgan there will probably always be enough people who want a 1930's style 'sports car' , so Morgan could carry on small volume manufacture , just upgrading the mechanicals and electricals with outsourced stuff and asssembling to order. Morgan just have to stay the right size for the market and get the pricing/costing right , its not very scaleable business model.

In the case of Porsche, who want to be bigger , and who generate sufficient profit to be able to extend the business model, then maybe there is room to introduce radical 'design language' - not for all models but say for a new product line. It strikes me that a Bangle could be hired / seconded from BMW to revamp the Cayenne - nothing to lose there []

In the case of the 911 , I just saw some achingly beautiful pictures of a black 964 'RS wannabe' posed against the Hong Kong skyline ( posted by Asianbond on rennlist) , with the classic stovepipe front wing and narrowbody look complemented by the lowered suspension and deep chin of the front / rear bumper moldings. Being a 964RS owner I naturally am biased towards that particular rendering of the 911, and although its obsolete by 10+ years, IMHO this will still be a desirable model some 20 years hence . I don't feel the same about all 911's...however over a 40 year period we all put on weight and lose a bit of our looks []

Anyway back to banglerising the brand, the original Porsches were Porsches because they were designed ( at least in part) by Porsches , so maybe here we are talking about making a new product line (Bangles ? or Baubles & Beads ? or Paprika ?)

 

[lee fulford]

i wouldn't let bangle anywhere near Porsche car design although I reckon he must have had something to do with the ugly Cayenne so that the X5 stood a chance.

BMW sales have fallen as results show. All other prestige sales were up on the 1st Qtr this year except BMW who failed miserably their outright volume was thrashed by MB for the first time ever.

Time will tell

 

[Guest]

I think Porsche need to look at what is happening at Aston Martin and Lamborghini. I think they are both good examples of how a brand identity can be taken forward in design terms without being out of touch with your past. Skoda had to be reinvented but Porsche needs to evolve.

The Cayenne is Ok in the metal but the design has tried to carry over too much of the old design language. The boxster is far too much (in style terms) a small 2 seat 911. This was a mistake. I know its a success but in design terms they should have used it to push the evolution of the "Porsche style" further.

Porsche are fortunate that they have the function and performance of their products at the front of the field. I could go on and on but as far as Porsche design development goes I would suggest Ian Callum would be a far better option than Chris Bangle.

Will[]

 

[Mark_Bennett]

The reason the Boxster and 996 are so similar is purely financal.
Porsche needed a design that would serve both as a 911 replacement and 2nd model (968) replacement.
Using the same engine, and body up to the screen, enabled them to produce two model lines whilst reducing massivley the design and manufacturing costs.
It would be nice if it was different, but at the time Porsche was in real trouble financially and needed the efficiant option.
Now they are the most profitable car manufacturer - it seems to have worked.

 

[Guest]

I understand the financial reasons the Boxster used 911 bits and looks the way it does. But if we are talking about Porsche designs progressing the Boxster is still an example of economics rather than good design strategy. I quote it as a success but not as a way forward for design.

Porsche are now very succesful and if the Cayenne helps fund the development of better looking (performance is an other issue) cars then good.

I still say from a design perspective the Boxster to too similar to the 996 and the Cayenne has tried to carry to much 996 DNA.

I must go and get some work done.

Will (996 C4)[]

 

[oldtimer]

Hey Will, don't want to distract you further from work, but you are right about Aston Martin and Lamborghini []
The DB9 looks like a brilliant evolution of the DB7 ( Ian Callum) and confusingly looks like the other Astons in current range..shades of boxster looking like 996 from front.....and as striking as the DB4 ( specifically DB4GT) was in its day some 40 years back.

By remarkable coincidence to DB4 & DB9, the Lamborghini Miura (Marcello Gandini) is almost 40 years old , the more recent Gallardo being a striking design maintaining Lambo tradition.

Maybe the answer is to maintain a strong inhouse design capability for certain long lived models that are best improved by evolution, and to complement this by bringing in outside talent from time to time eg for introduction of new model lines.....that would avoid the crossing of 911 with truck ....[&:]

Perhaps there's also a golden 40 year rule for great car designs...look at the BMW 1600 of the mid 60's which started a class leading sporting saloon look for BMW that lasted right up to the current unbangled 3 series...[8|]

 

[Guest]

ORIGINAL: oldtimer

Hey Will, don't want to distract you further from work, but you are right about Aston Martin and Lamborghini [] .................

Maybe the answer is to maintain a strong inhouse design capability for certain long lived models that are best improved by evolution, and to complement this by bringing in outside talent from time to time eg for introduction of new model lines.....that would avoid the crossing of 911 with truck ....[&:]

I think inhouse design talent/resource is a must. Porsche must control their design evolution from within but you need fresh eyes/talent to prevent stagnation. Ian Callum is a very talented designer, I was a student at Glasgow School of Art with him. Bangle went to BMW to "Bangle" Ian went to Aston Martin and created one of the greatest car designs but paid due respect to the marques heritage. I wait with interest to see what he will do at Jaguar.

Design is about coming up with creative solutions not preaching some preordained creed.

Regards Will[]

 

[Guest]

What an interesting debate. Some themes:

1. A consensus isvthat evolving the 911 look can only go so far ( the Morgan analogy is fair.)
2. Porsche won its current status from being adventurous; endless evolutions of the shape while safe are a dead end
3. Shapewise, 997 is a 911 too far. (I am sure it will be a fab drive nonetheless.)
4. A strong designer who works with a brand will do more than a hired gun.
5. Callum and Bangle both talented.

Me - what will I do?

Take the 997?
Have a test drive in a 645?
Buy my friend's hardly used DB7 when his DB9 arrives?
Wait for the 998 - and keep my fingers x-d?

Spizz

 

[Guest]

In general I would say no.
What it needs is individual models that look distinctive, but look as if they come from the same manufacturer.
I do not think it is necessary to go for some passing fad, such as front or rear lights that go over or round a corner, like Lexus front lights, BMW front lights, Gallardo rear lights. These features will date quickly.
Similarly, adding creases to the sides (like Audi) or front, or having some overtly ugly grille, adds fussy detail that will pass.
These types of things will be copied by Korean manufacturers and the game will move on.
IMO smooth flowing compound curves are aesthetically the most pleasing and are generally quite aerodynamic. They are also more difficult to make and were found on more expensive cars in the past for this reason.
This is what makes the look age more slowly and keeps residuals high. It is important not to move too fast so that the desireability remains (look at Japanese cars, previous Evo's, Skylines, etc. are not wanted once the new shape appears).
You need to consider also that legislation changes and the requirements for pedestrian safety and crash worthyness affect the general structure and appearance of the front. At least with the engine in the back, the 911 does not need a pop-up bonnet like Ford are planning to do, or external airbags.
The 911 is also the vehicle for the racing programmes so the design has to be competitive on the track, unless we want to see the link between the road cars and the track severed (which I think we don't). They do not have a free hand.
The 911 has such a history that Porsche would be unwise to be too dramatic with it.

However the Boxster is another kettle of fish. I think they should be bold with it.
I also think they should have a 4th model line that takes the design in a new direction.
Aston are stuck in my opinion, they have 3 cars that look the same, because they are scared to try something. One car should keep all the cues (the flagship model?) and the others should try to be different and to move things on.
The Carrera GT is an interesting design, clean, functional and distinctive.
Porsche's philosophy is that form should follow function, this means that fundamentally a Bangle approach is wrong.

On a separate note: Just like Ford have recreated the GT40 as their living legends, I want Lamborghini to produce a Muira with modern running gear and build quality. I'd buy one.

 

[Guest]

For what it's worth, this is what I think the basic parameters for the998 or 999 should be:

1. same footprint as 993
2. rear engined - choice of flat 6 or flat 8, 2wd or AWD?
3. 2 plus 2
4. develop front graphic of Carrera GT
5. shape should be dictated by aerodynamics and spoiler free; feminine rather than macho; modest rather than **** you.
6. as light as possible - use of composites
7. interior should surprise and delight; as simple as possible; imaginative use of fabrics
8. theme should be function rather than form
9. should not look backwards
10 derivatives can follow.

What do you think?

Spizz

 

[ianbanneville]

Should a 911 be anything other than six cylinder? Discuss!

 

[Guest]

As long as it's at least six and an even number I don't mind.

Will[]

 

[Guest]

Should a 911 be anything other than six cylinder? Discuss!

The issue here is what makes a 911 a 911? I am not sure.
Clearly the current 996 has no common parts with a 911, or a 964 I think.
The engine has grown from 2.0 to 3.6, and may go to 3.8 (as it was once before on an air cooled car).
It has changed to water cooled, gained more gears, got longer, wider, with different exhausts, framless windows, different bumpers, spoilers, wings, windscreen wipers, dials, etc., and even gained four wheel drive, stability control, traction control, sat nav, air conditioning, etc.
Whilst some of these things can be removed, it is not the same car it was. It is also stiffer and faster, in general, than previous iterations.

I think if it is harder, faster and more sexily styled, then few will complain whatever route it follows. It cannot stand still.
However, it would have a different character and perhaps lose something. If the lineage was broken, then perhaps it would be free of the baggage and be able to develop and progress, although it would ruin the marketing somewhat.
Perhaps the best answer is to provide both.

If they want it to go much faster, then I guess there is a point at which the engine gets large enough to require more cylinders. From other manufacturers, it seems that around 4 litres is when 8 cylinders comes into play.
8 cylinders would (I believe, but stand to be corrected) be popular in the US.
However, whilst the US is an important market, it should not be the only consideration.

If they make a 4th model, then this can be the luxury GT car with all the trimmings, powered by a Cayenne 4.5 litre turbo, leaving the 911 to be more focussed.

I think that if they were to make the 911 focussed and keep the weight down, then the additional cylinders will not be necessary. The emphasis should be on handling and weight. Whilst it has to fulfil the role of the GT car, this cannot fully happen.
Of course there is also the requirement to be competitive in GT racing - it will need to be the configuration that meets the rules for the appropriate class.

 

[Guest]

ORIGINAL: Spizz Oil

Should "we"get a Bangle too?

Spizz

My real answer is simple, get a Porsche to design a Porsche as in F.A. "Butzi" Porsche as they use to do extremely well.................he is still around and the creator of the 911, need I say more[8|]