The Range Rover Evoque is supposed to be posh… so in 2012 it was launched by Posh. Posh Spice of course, the infamous Victoria Beckham. At the time the event and project that was organised by JLR to launch the car gently raised a few eyebrows when Mrs Beckham presented a special edition of the new Evoque ‘designed’ by her. Little did we realise that one of the very people who orchestrated this event, and this special edition, was not particularly happy at the time. Quite strangely this story has resurfaced 5 years later, with comments from design director Gerry McGovern.
Mr McGovern said at a publicity event last week: “She didn’t design the car… I’ve forgotten more than that woman will ever know about [car] designing – to be a car designer takes years.”
This could be aimed at boosting current Range Rover publicity? Who knows what Gerry’s motivation is to appear in The Sun, but it’s currently being reported by the British tabloids such as The Sun and The Daily Mail, who call it an “extraordinary row”. It is certainly unusual, especially as the main complaint is coming 5 years after the incident. It opens up a debate around the attributing of design originality to specific designers. Credit for certain designs is a complex issue and 7 years ago I wrote a post here on this subject. Design Directors and chief designers are the public face of any car design story, and often they seem to be claiming work they didn’t do as their own. They are of course responsible for an entire design department and must take the good and bad comments about any design, sometimes directly. The headlines and articles from the tabloids contain very inaccurate (as usual) statements such as a claim that Gerry McGovern MADE the Evoque. The Sun journalists seem to think that a design director gets out his spanners and welding equipment, to personally construct every one of the 1000s of Evoques that the Range Rover factory turn out.. Terrible lack of expert knowledge or research. The reality is of course, that even Gerry McGovern did not design the Evoque. His very talented and large team of exterior and interior designers, plus clay and CAD modellers, colour and trim designers and even digital GUI designers DID. The teams that work together to create any vehicle are large, and that is simply the design stage. Then there is engineering teams that number in the 100s sometimes 1000s to get a vehicle ready for mass production. finally the factory starts production and another entirely different set of robots, and people, begin to bolt the cars together at astonishing rates. Design leaders protect their hard-working teams from negativity, and we might suggest that McGovern is annoyed in this instance for Victoria Beckham claiming credit for his teams work. Victoria Beckham has her own fashion label- and therefore counts herself as a fashion designer. In this capacity she ‘designs’ clothes and accessories, and that process involves zero engineering – but it does involve design decision-making. When she was asked to create a special edition Ranger Rover she of course contributed in a way that she was familiar with, and one which she has learned to call ‘design’ (because it IS design). She choose unique colours and material choices for the factory to piece together into her limited edition Evoque. To all intents she was right to say that she ‘designed’ her VB edition car, that she then stood in front of in 2012. It is of course, almost impossible for the depth of the automotive design business to be explained in a simple soundbite or tweet- to enable JLR to explain the difference between what Mrs Beckham did, or what Gerry McGovern did, or what his fabulous design team did. Words should be chosen very carefully, and indeed, Gerry is upset that she went off-script at that time- when we can imagine that the word ‘collaboration’ was something the Range Rover team had in mind? Much like Gerry’s own design collaborations… with the fashion world.
Well this year has been incredibly busy, especially with my job where I’ve seen progress on my Vehicle Design course connecting with the industry. Meanwhile Twitter seems to be a place for my connections to grow and this led to a very fun situation where I was asked to be interviewed by Andrew Clews of The Motoring Podcast. Andrew managed to draw a lot of personal history from me, over the course of 3 hours chatting! A very pleasant experience, it was split into two instalments due to length and I can part 1 and part 2 with you all now. Part 1 is about 1 hour, and covers similar topics to this blog. Part 2 is 2 hours talking about my own car ownership history!
By the time you read this maybe this car has actually been launched, or maybe not. I suspect not. It’s vapor in my opinion, which will never be put into production (mostly because it can’t be engineered as it is). The design is a mess, poorly photoshopped together based on other mid-engined designs (Bugatti) and the packaging has been ignored in terms of driver/passengers visibility. This design could work perhaps, with some tweaks and development carried out by a trained designer (please speculators, hire professional car designers!). I couldn’t resist very quickly showing a few form tweaks that improve the design instantly. See my hastily hacked together GIFs below. The proximity to April 1st launch date is the biggest clue on this however…. so let’s see in a few days if it was all a hoax. Oh and this is how to design a proper hypercar.
edit: So the New York show has been and gone, and this car did not of course appear. Meanwhile, here’s a scruffy mechanic in a shed- who has bashed together a supercar. Styling was “a little bit ‘o this, and a little bit ‘o that” in the mans own words!
Time for some design trend analysis. This started as a small observation of a certain car, but as usual the observation seems to apply to so many new cars this post has expanded hugely. Trends spread fast in the automotive design world, and when one large corporation owns many brands it can infiltrate across the range very rapidly. In 2014 VW showed some design concept cars that exaggerated a styling theme developed by more than just their own brand. Then in 2015 we have seen ever more extreme versions, but Audi seem to have slowly grown into this particular theme, only to abandon it perhaps with their latest styling statement. Brands such as Infinity and VW are using it to maximum effect, but who did it first? The usual answer applies here and that is BMW of course. Let us start to analyse the technique I am writing about.
The VW Cross Coupe GTE concept displays a large number of pinched feature lines among it’s surfacing design. Around a similar time, a chance encounter with a new model VW Passat spurred my interest in this design detail. I noticed that the Passat had a very pronounced pinch shaped feature line, but the Cross Coupe has 4 of them along the front wing!
So this got me thinking about the history of this feature, about it’s function. The technology involved is fairly new (in car design terms) and involves a deeper draw for the steel stamping tools that make car panels. The stylistic function is to create a shadow, and of course a strong highlight, to clearly define the shoulder of the car. The reason this feature has become popular I believe, is because cars are getting larger and customers demands are for more interior space. Cars must be packaged to be squarer (with less 3D form) but aesthetic demands are high and customers want drama, speed or just that difficult to pin down “sportiness”. A blocky shape gives limited scope to “sculpt” the surfaces inwards, to design broad shoulders. Any angled surfaces reduce interior space, or make a car wider (too wide). Good car styling has come to rely on great light/dark contrast. A flat sided car panel does not offer this. Early days of using an undercut gave a subtle clue as to why this feature has made a comeback. A VW Passat is a great example as it has class leading interior space, simply huge, but has fairly ordinary external dimensions. To maintain a pleasing design, the designers must deploy some tricks.
BMW established a long tradition of very handsome saloon cars, the E28 5-series is a great example. On this car we can see a small, but very effective undercut. This is the early days of the pinched bodyside feature. It gives a nicely angled (to the sky) upper shoulder, with a shadow emphasising the lower bodyside, and of course a strong horizontal feature that lengthens the whole car, adding elegance.
Fast forward 20 years or more, and BMW under Chris Bangle really set the formula for current car design, so of course the revival and exaggeration of that undercut began with his BMW 1-series of 2004.
This has been much copied… but let us move along to where we are now, with the help of Audi and their slow evolutionary approach to design. This helps us see progression, in one vehicle.
As is the way with Audi design, the technique here is subtle. You may need to zoom or enlarge the image above to see the profile shapes that the green lines describe. I have used the Avant version of the A6 to show more clearly a horizontal shoulder, without a c-pillar to blend into the rear wing. We can see from the very first A6 that the high and solid shoulder feature is part of Audi DNA. The surfacing is very simple, and quite soft in radii at changes of direction. See how the upper facing shoulder blends into the main door profile, then it very steadily curves towards the sill. The only negative curvature comes where the flared wheel arches extend from the main body surface. Next (silver car) we can see a small but significant tightening of the radii and surface definition. The 2nd generation A6 shows a sharper shoulder edge, and slightly more flare to the entire body (flare, like flared trousers). The sill position is further out, and the wheel arches have grown wider too. This car shows exceptional definition of the previously developed form language. A minimalistic and sharply defined design. Onto the 3rd generation and Audi are at this point trying to inject a little more dynamism and sportiness into their cars (oh dear..). They do this by going wide and low. The 3rd gen car is very wide and surfaces flare a lot towards the lower body. The door protecting body side strip is now out of fashion (and we all end up with dented doors?) and the sill is emphasised by being body colour (glossy, not matt) and the door surfaces actually waist inwards. The really significant, but very subtle update here is the “pinch” or crease, or more accurately an undercut appearing on that core shoulder transition line. Can you see the very small undercut there? A negative curvature surface, under that main shoulder surface change. The wheel arches are getting very flared now, like a sportscar. So this is the fashion, across the entire VW group in fact, for emphasising surfaces and their transition points (light/dark highlights concentrated) with a “pinch”. The latest Audi A6 is again evolutionary from the previous version, but the key part that has grown, is the pinch! That undercut has grown from being not just under the shoulder line, the radius has been drawn out from the bodyside because the shoulder surface above it is now negatively curved. The surface flows negatively (concave) into the base of the windows. This 4th gen (and 3rd) also has a subtle trick on the wheel arches, where the edge is again pinched to emphasise that edge as “sharp”.
The Cross Coupe at the top of the post has so many of these as I mentioned. Other car companies are doing this and using it to very dramatic effect. Meanwhile, Audi chose Geneva to continue previewing its future design direction with a Prologue concept car. This features razor-sharp surface radii, which seem to have backtracked slightly by using the “pinch” technique very very subtly in order to express sharpness. Concave or negative surfaces flowing into those edges are very subtle too. We don’t yet know if Audi will be able to mass-produce (metal stamp) these insanely sharp creases. Let’s hope so, as it’s a very nice feature.
So to talk about other companies following the form trend of BMW, Audi and VW we can take a look at a few concepts recently displayed by Infiniti and Chevrolet. Infinity and Lexus/Toyota are using sharp creased surfaces as important parts of their design language. The Infiniti QX30 concept crossover coupe is the latest (and almost production spec) design that shows their designers love affair with the very sharp body crease or pinch as we are calling it here. Just look at that edge that runs through the door handle. Amazing! Here is Detroit’s latest design that uses the same surface treatment. The Chevrolet Bolt electric plug-in hybrid vehicle. The pinch line forms a strong part of the cars shoulder line, as it does on the VW Passat but this time the form continues on into the rear lamp shapes.
Finally we can return to a VW group design product, which was announced in 2015. The new Skoda Superb. It demonstrates a dramatic example of the concave, negative shoulder surface (looks nice above the front wheel arch) that pinches into a sharp crease, with very strong and deep undercut for the side surfacing. The aim here from Skoda seems to be about giving the impression of flat surfaces that intersect sharply. They are aiming for a “creased” look to their cars and non-design savvy public are picking up on this prominent design “message”. This use of concave surfaces reminds very heavily of Bangle’s E61 BMW 5-series, from 10 years ago!
(EDIT) Some industry insider info has been passed to me recently- and it is a fact- that this very sharp crease (or draw in the panel stamping) is patented VAG technology. No other manufacturer currently has this extreme level of sharpness available to them. Very interesting, and no surprise that all VAG brands are making use of this design advantage.
Well there we have it, watch out for the “pinch” effect on other cars. It really is very common, across cars from all brands and all market segments. To end I will add a gallery of images that formed the basis for this article.
I created this image board quickly to explain the design process to my students (vehicle design students, who are currently aiming for stage 3). Using excellent press released images of the CX-17 concept design, from the Jaguar design studio, we can see the stages of sketch and design development quite clearly. These are genuine drawings from before the car was created in 3 dimensions. Often released design renderings are created in post, from photography of the clay or even final production 3D models. Many thanks to Jaguar Design for making these available.
Yes.. I know that the CX-17 was a “concept” car, but the F-Pace production version is unlikely to differ much from this image.
Car design is often such a detail obsessed profession. The difference between the right or wrong design can be explained in mm often. Is that surface perfect, or better than perfect? The details also matter, but when the complex details of meeting worldwide homologation come into effect, designers have a tough task to keep their designs as they intended them. I was reminded of this recently, with a tiny fact previously unknown to me. Side repeaters have (or had) different angle/visibility requirements across even nearby regional markets. I live in Finland, and a Finnish road certificate tester pointed out the requirements being different here, to Germany. The same is true of other EU nations, in the past. So we quickly searched for an ideal example of this detail. The Mercedes-Benz W-124 otherwise more popularly known as the 200E.
This is how the designers intended the design to appear.
We can see them still for sale, and on the road (because old Mercedes last forever right?) here on a german sales site.
Here’s one from a UK second-hand sales website (AutoTrader).
So I highlighted the difference with that huge arrow. Growing up in the UK, I always wondered about the incongruity, and slightly out-of-place looking side marker design. My instinct was right. It’s added after production, for certain markets that require it. Finland included.
Very in depth look into the design process within Hyundai North America design studio. A simulation of events that probably mostly occurred, this shows the way designers must internally compete, then swallow their pride and work together on the winning solution. I suspect more designers initially competed, potentially across global Hyundai studios even. Note the chosen design- from quite a loose sketch. The skill of the clay modeller is also very evident in this video.
Recently we’ve seen a couple of major Auto Shows go head to head, West vs East in May with New York and Beijing shows back to back. Toyota chose the Beijing show to launch the production version of their Lexus branded small crossover. I’ve posted here before regarding crossover vehicles (and I once owned the trendsetting Qashqai myself). The new Qashqai has been underwhelming in design, and other manufacturers are still following the styling of the previous model. Toyota have been finding their design stride recently, especially with the bold designs under the Lexus brand. Risks are being taken, and that is very nice to see. Some designs are successful, others not so much. Their small crossover concept, the LX-NF, last year was radical in it’s surfacing treatment (incredibly over the top) but has translated very nicely to a less frantic production design. Thank goodness for those metal stamping production limitations… the changes are subtle, but for the better.
Here’s the original Lexus LF-NX crossover concept. And then the production version Lexus NX (this one is the 200T)which was launched in Beijing.
If we go back to March 2014 we also saw some great auto design work at Geneva, and another very nice transition from concept to production for the Citroen C4 Cactus. This one has been in the works for a long time, and began with the C-Cactus concept of 2007. The C3 Picasso for example follows a similar styling theme. The production version is very innovative, and not just in styling terms. Citroen are experimenting with selling the Cactus in a new lease contract based system. These two manufacturers can be applauded for their risk taking, unlike the ultra conservative German manufacturers who seem to be painting themselves into a corner.