What is it with car designers? Why is it, when any particular car is praised as fantastic, the next model that is released looks like it’s been on steroids? The new Impreza’s been discussed ad nauseam here (funny, that), but look at the others:

Golf Gti Mk1; pretty amazing for its time. Look at Mks 2, 3 and 4. Now the Polo is the same size as the original Golf.
BMW 3-series; I don’t know the body numbers (E36 etc), but look at the original M3 and the ones available recently. 5-series too.
Porsche 911; the chuckable model 83-88, the yuppie’s favourite. And what was released in 1989? Mr Blobby.
Ferrari; lithe they ain’t (flame suit on). Tom Selleck has probably put on less middle-age spread than his 308.
Lotus Esprit; try the Spy Who Loves Me trick with the current one, and Bond would be swimming with the fishes.

Does anyone else notice this? Or should I just go off and join FLAB (which I seem to remember Not the Nine O’Clock News explaining as “Fat Louts Against Bikinis”)?

BJH

I guess the are rounding and bubbling out a bit. The new Ferrari is aweful.

Scotty.

Same with the 2nd version of the Toyota MR2.

I think marketing men always want to appeal to the widest cross-section of buyers, so as to maximise sales. Hence, sports cars also have to have all the trappings of posher vehicles.

It certainly annoys the purists and magazine journos, not sure about the effect on sales though.

Maybe it has something to do with the evolution of the human race.
And Happy Meals.
Go into your local McDonalds and look at the average size of the customers.
And when you design a car with golf clubs in mind, something is going wrong!

Funny that as I was just thinking the same today when I was reading a review for the new A4. It always seems that when a new car comes out it is both heavier and bigger than the previous model. This appears to be praised and constantly raised as a good point in most magazines reviews (pure performance magazines aside). Does this mean that in 30 years the latest supermini will be as big and heavy as a current 7 series beemer and be praised for it, who knows?

Yes, MR2 was another I'd thought of.

I've wondered if it was something to do with aerodynamics. But a larger frontal area and heavier load to lug around just don't make sense.

BJH

From another point of view, Toyota have made the MR2 (part3) smaller and lighter though .. and to be honest I think they have ruined the way it looks.

MR2 (part2) was bigger/wider heavier but IMHO I think it's the best looking car of all 3 (yes, I had one http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/rolleyes.gif )

S'pose it depends what you've bought your car for i.e looks/safety/handling etc

A lot of people on this board are posting it wouldn't matter whether the new scoob did 0-100-0 in 2 seconds they just WONT drive something that looks like that http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/wink.gif

Seems to be the way manufacturers are going though, bigger, fatter, safer?

Doofus

[This message has been edited by Doofus (edited 02 November 2000).]

But bigger, fatter cars cause more damage when they hit something....

.. yeah i mean look at the new micra http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/wink.gif

Nice list - but you forgot to mention the new Mitsi EVO VII which tips the scales at nearly 1500kg. May as well get a Skyline R32 (oh yeah, that's another one that hit the happy meals - R35, pah!)

Seems the moral of the story is that if you like performance cars, you shouldn't bother with subsequent versions of revered models. Better to wait until another manufacturer comes along and hits the nail on the head, the way Subaru did a few years ago (and as Lancia did a few years before that). That Noble M12 is looking mighty attractive right now - 980kg, that's my idea of a kerb weight.

It seems that the major manufacturers have no choice but to increase weight due to the more and more stringent safety regs. They cant use expensive lightweight materials like expensive limited production companies can. But it is a real shame when it just results in flabby new cars !