How Important is Design?

[Dr. Cranky]

Sometimes you see something you don't have to look at twice to know that you like it.

Here's an example of where design doesn't necessarily please the eye right away, but you know there's something different and beautiful about this.

If anybody knows what type of vehicle this is, chime in. Also, many of us (I guess we are an older crowd now) have been lamenting the death of automobile design since the early 70s.

I have hopes that there will be a group of designers, getting smaller by the minute, who will always sacrifice everything for the sake of design, as I think it should be.

[bbowser]

That is really odd, but strangely appealing. Maybe that says more about me than the design?

[Dr. Cranky]

Bruce, I think what you are describing will probably be the norm with this one. I keep thinking it's the fuselage of a plane with something else (what, who knows?) on the side. That weird grill thing joins the two disparate parts and of course the headlights look so 53 Corvette.

[Ramfins59]

Almost looks like someone combined an electric shaver with a streamlined motorcycle inspired land speed car...

[cobraman]

To me it sort of looks like a couple of fighter planes put together. Anyone remember the twin Mustang ?

[Deathgoblin]

Looks like a fast land vehicle from really early in Star Wars. I like it.

[Der Bugmeister]

Kind of reminds me of a cross between a VW Karmann Ghia and an early Porsche 356.

[Bartster]

l actually like it. l can't help but wonder if the black grille "thingy" is the lift hatch to feed the gerbils that power it?

[Shardik]

I've got no idea what it is, but I want one!

[Rob Hall]

I think that is a model of an actual '50s race car. I just don't know what it is, but I think I've seen B&W pics of it in magazines and online. Very cool pontoon design.

Edited September 12, 2012 by Rob Hall

[crazyjim]

It's ugly! The only thing I like is the SHINY :)

[Rob Hall]

Found it...it's the Nardi- Giannini 750 Bisiluro built for the '55 Le Mans race.

http://www.domusweb.it/en/design/the-asymmetric-racer/

[Foxer]

Here's another link with some more images

I like this right off the bat

[Chuck Doan]

The Delta Wing of its day! Smokey Yunick would be pleased.

[Ace-Garageguy]

I really like the vehicle in the first post. For sure different, but attractively so.

I think "design" taken as meaning 'visually pleasing' is important, but I personally have worked on a lot of stuff that sacrificed practicality, user-friendliness and serviceability for the sake of the 'wow factor'. Anyone who'e ever entered / exited a vehicle with 'Lambo style' doors will know what I mean.

It's a lot harder to design something beautiful that also functions beautifully, and the combination of the two, form and function, should be every good designer's goal.

Edited September 12, 2012 by Ace-Garageguy

[sjordan2]

"How important is design?" if you don't care about design, why do you build models and why are you here? This is right up there with "what is art?"

See you in 30 pages.

Edited September 12, 2012 by sjordan2

[southpier]

"How important is design?".....is right up there with "what is art?"...

and "form follows function"

http://janmichl.com/eng.fff-hai.html

Edited September 12, 2012 by southpier

[zenrat]

"designer" has come to mean overpriced and aimed at fashon victims who pay for the lable not the product - Designer Water and Designer Jeans for example.

[Chuck Most]

Almost looks like someone combined an electric shaver with a streamlined motorcycle inspired land speed car...

No, I think they clearly used two different land speed cars- the sides flanking the electric shaver don't quite match.

[Dave Ambrose]

I think it's cool.

The layout is intended to give 50/50 weight distribution, and a low polar moment (of inertia). The low polar moment would make it turn quickly and easily -- important for a track like Le Mans. The reduced frontal area makes for low drag. Yeah, this totally makes sense to me.

to the original question, I think design is very important. I've seen way too many well executed builds fall short for lack of good design.

[CadillacPat]

Without design there is no place to begin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CadillacPat

[blunc]

Based on CadillacPat's post I might accuse him of being a designer/artist...

I have to disagree with his post.... in most cases there is a machine/device that fills a desired function, IMHO the design aspect comes if the device "needs" to be pleasing to the eye also in order to sell.

Other than that...it's an exercise in art that has mechanical functionality added. (these are my opinions...)

A pelican or platypus is usually not considered "artistically beautiful" but they usually function well within their environment...swans ARE considered artistically beautiful and still function well within their environment, given a visual choice most people will choose a swan over the other two.

personally, I like the lines of the classic E-type Jag...I find it "artistically beautiful", I find the new Dodge Chargers "brutishly handsome" but not as beautiful as the Challenger redo or the classic Jag.

(again, these are my opinions)

[GerN]

For me, good automotive design should be functional, unified and balanced. If it can't be driven, it isn't a car, its automotive art. I enjoy even caricatures, but I probably wouldn't build one; I like trying to design a car I could enjoy owning and driving. Just my preference, not an ideology. For an example of extreme yet functional design, check out Colani.

BTW, good topic.

P.S. I tend to like two box car designs with a Golden Ratio of about 40% length of box one (front end to base of windshield) and 60% box two (rest of car).

[bbowser]

P.S. I tend to like two box car designs with a Golden Ratio of about 40% length of box one (front end to base of windshield) and 60% box two (rest of car).

I never thought of railroad boxcars as beautiful?

[southpier]

.... a Golden Ratio of about 40% length of box one (front end to base of windshield) and 60% box two (rest of car).

good proportions