Future car designa certain sameness

Press, 10 February 1989, Page 30

Future car design—a certain sameness

GARS

Neil Clarkson

By NEIL CLARKSON Cars on display at the recent Paris Motor Show have drawn criticism for looking alike. It is an inevitability of having computers heavily involved in car design. Car makers are striving for the most aerodynamic and fuel-efficient shape for their vehicles. They are also intent on packing as much practical and usable space into a car. This has been one of the advantages of frontwheel drive; it allows the motor to be mounted sideways, doing away with the heavy and space-consum-ing differential and propellor shaft. Their efforts have certainly paid off. Cars are more aerodynamic, more fuel efficient and make maximum use of available space. The penalty has been a

computer sameness about today’s cars in the lower to medium-price range. A correspondent, Douglas Hamilton, said of the Paris Show: “The spaceage concept cars, though much ogled and photographed, looked illusory next to clone-like models shaped increasingly by the norms and dictates of a global mass market.” Mr Denis Chick, the product affairs manager for Britain’s Austin Rover group, said: “Character is being sacrificed to the craze for aerodynamic shapes.” What, then, were car makers offering as “futuristic dream cars” when computers were in their infancy and unable to help the design teams? . A search of. our files came up with the three 1964 offerings pictured, from the American motor-

ing giant, General Motors. Regrettably, the pictures carried no information about the “dream cars,” although casting a contemporary eye over the designs brings to the attention a number of design nightmares. There are the torpedolike noses capable of impaling troublesome pedestrians and the wellconcealed wheels, able to be changed after the removal of just a few body panels. The car resembling an old Triumph Herald was a German invention known

as the Amphicar. The photograph was taken at the launching ramp of the Sandringham Yacht Club in Melbourne, probably in 1964. The car is demonstrating its ability to "instantly change from marine to road drive ... without any delay due to changeover.” The Amphicar was powered by a four-cylin-der standard Triumph engine and had a claimed top speed on the road of about 125 km/h (75 m.p.h.) and 11 km/h (7 m.p.h.) on water. It featured two threeblade plastic propellors rotating in the same direction to propel the vehicle in water. The rudder action of the front wheels was used for steering. The inventors had grandiose visions for the use of their Amphicar, which appears to have. sunk without trace. They saw its use, apart from sporting purposes, as an emergency service car for use in flooded areas, for scientific surveys of lakes, rivers and harbours, “and for cruising on the river as a change

from the hustle and bustle on motorways.” The Amphicar appeared to have come with all the necessary extras. The blurb went on: “The stick and ball shown on the engine cover at the rear is a snap-in navigation light.” The Reliant Motor Group’s 1970 offering was called the Bond Bug. It was marketed in 1970 in three versions ranging from the "bare Bug” at £548 to the “super Bug” at £629. It was a three-wheeler with two seats, a top speed of about 133 km/h (80 m.p.h.) and had a claimed fuel economy of 60 miles per gallon. The Bug had an opening canopy in place of doors and, in the words of the manufacturer, a chopped-off tail exposing the rear axle, springs and works. It was powered by a 70 cu cm light alloy engine and had a four-speed synchromesh gearbox. Reliant maintained that the car had appeal to the young as a “fun car” and as a shopping car for the housewife, convenient for parking in the city.