h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

One of the most common reasons people give for owning a "classic" car is that "all modern cars look the same". Whilst I drive a classic (in my opinion - not everyone's!) Triumph TR7 I just can't see the logic behind this statement. The TR7 looks very like the Fiat X1/9. And can anyone honestly say that a new Ford Mondeo looks exactly like a Vauxhall Vectra any more than a Peugeot 404 looks like a Farina Austin Cambridge, or even a Morgan and an MG T series. What does everyone think?

I do think that a lot of newer cars tend to look the same, and I think mostly, it's because a lot of cars are built on pretty much the same chassi and by pretty much the same copanies.

For instance, take a VW Polo, a Suzuki Swift and a Ford Fiesta and put them side by side. If you removed all the tags and logos and badges and stuff, would you honestly be able to tell which was which with no hesitation at all?

On the flip side, take the 80's models of a Saab 900, a Volvo 440 and a Ford Escort, and do the same test. Would you be able to tell which car was which without hesitation?

Fairy easy with you examples, but some examples

Mazda Xedos , Ford Mondeo

VW Passat, Audi A4 (okay, so they are nearly the same car, but with £5000 difference, you'd hope for something)

Peagout 306 and 106 similar

Given the huge advances in aerodynamics and such it ias fairly easy to why cars are looking more similar nowadays

What about cars of the 1930s? Can you tell the difference between an Austin 10 and a Morris 10 without the aid of badges? Cars look the same in any period because they adhere to the fashion of the time.

And how often do you actually drive that TR7? All my son's discretionary cash is going on having one rebuilt, and it wasn't on the road that often before he started.

Back in the mid 1980's - I'd have said that lots of cars did indeed look very similar. But things have improved. There are some bland cars being built still, but the current retro fashions have helped considerably.
The new MINI, new Beetle, Audi TT, Chrysler Prowler, Crossfire, PT Cruiser and so on all look quite distinctive...

There will always be dull and boring cars - and even some ugly ones (which are probably better than just 'boring') but I reckon things are getting better.

Can anybody actually tell me what these cars looked like straight off:

Mazda 626
Nissan QX
Toyota Carina
Proton Coupe ?

Though one thing, what is it with the cuty eyes on small cars eye the Dawoo Matiz cause they all look a bit tries too hard to be loved

I drive about 5000 miles per year in the TR winter and summer and I love it. They're great cars to drive with some of the best seats I've ever sat in.

All budget cars look pretty much the same because they use the same stock parts. As you go up the price range you get more individuality though.

I think that cars have the same exact style what ever happened to the good old days when each car company had its own style. Aswell I feel they all have almost all the same features.

When I were a lad, you could recognise most cars at a distance... nowadays it is a lot harder, but I would suggest that, as well as the limitations caused by shared chassis, the fact is that a wind tunnel doesn't design for style. Modern cars are driven by the need for effficiency in terms of fuel and use of steel, so the answers tend to come out about the same.

The cars designed with 'character' are less efficient and so carry a surcharge.

It is no wonder cars look similar, the fact that there are very few independent auto makers left in the world is the main reason for this.

For example look at the American Big 3.

Ford owns;
Land Rover, Astin Martin, Mazda, Volvo, Lincoln, Mercury, and Jaguar.

Daimler-Chrysler owns;
Mercedes-Benz, Maybach, Smart, Dodge, Chrysler, Jeep and partnerships with Mitsubishi, Hyundai, and KIA

General Motors own
Opel, Vauxhall, Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Cadillac, GMC, Saturn, Hummer, Saab and partnerships Toyota and Isuzu.

There are also the French with Renault, Citroen, and Peugeot.
And the German owned; Volkswagen, Audi, SEAT and Skoda.

All of these design teams use the same or very similar base designs.
Any questions?

GM also own Subaru, and I think Dawoo

VW own Audi (who own lambo), Seat, Skoda and Bugatti, as well as having deals with Porche (the new Cayanne looks nothing like anything else, which ain't a good thing)

Renault owns Nissan, which may explan why Nissan's new cars are but ugly

Fiat have Alfa Romeo, Ferrai, Massarti and Lanci, they tend to look differnet from act other

GM also owns Holden in the land of Oz!

GM marketed the Vauxhall Astra(Daewoo Nexia) in America as the Pontiac LeMans

Ford marketed European models in America under the nameplate of "Merkur" which included the Ford Sierra, Cosworth and the english version of the escort, as the Scorpio, Scorpio GT and the XR4Ti respectively.

As for the Germans; we are all aware of BMW and how they handled the Rover Group... which were only Hondas. Rover group tried to market their Honda knock offs in America under the short lived "Sterling" nameplate.


Honda and Vauxhall(GM) sold the Isuzu Rodeo under the names, Passport and Frontera respectively

Acura is Honda,
Infiniti is Nissan
and Lexus is Toyota.


Porsche and Volkswagen were once the same company...

The Beetle was designed by Ferdinand Porsche as an answer to Adolf Hitler's desire for a "people's car" which, I believe, is a rough translation of the word "Volkswagen"
Porsche actually spun off from Volkswagen in the late 70's (I could be wrong on the decade, of course)


Renault had a deal with Chrysler back before the germans bought them. they marketed Renault in the States for awhile in the late 70's and early 80's the models were the "Le Car" (renault 5) and the "Alliance" (Renault 9) and the "Fuego" (renault 1.9)

Another lesser known fact is earlier versions of the Renault Laguna/Peugeot 405 were sold in the States as the "Eagle Premier" and the Renault 9 had a longer shelf life... it carried on as the Eagle Alliance
"Eagle" was a short lived Chrysler product that replaced the "AMC" or American Motors Corp nameplate.(which oddly enough had a very ugly 4x4 car called the "Eagle")

The Eagle car company marketed Renaults under the Eagle name in the begining but were later transitioned to the new Chrysler Partner, Mitsubishi and later sold models that included the Talon(Mitsubishi Eclipse) and Vision(Dodge Intrepid)

Chysler also used Mitsubishi Colt in the US as the Dodge Colt and the Plymouth Champ.

and so on and so on.....

This info is true and acurate to the best of my knowledge... If there is a glaring error please feel free to point it out. But please don't nit-pick.

Ta

Correction to above...
The Renault 9 carried on as the "Eagle Summit" not Alliance as said above.

A little further research found that Renault actually owned AMC (American Motors Corp) which was the sole distributor of Renault in the USA and also owned Jeep.

AMC was bought by Chrysler in the late 70's or early 80's. Through the buyout Chrysler aquired Jeep.

Shortly afterwards the AMC Badge was eliminated and Eagle Motors was born.

Chrysler also eliminated a national icon in the years that followed by eliminating the Plymouth division. We all should have seen that coming when, in the early 90's, both Dodge and Plymouth designated there hot new generation compact car the "Neon". by doing this they blurred the lines drawn between the two divisions and basically paved the way for the phasing out of the Plymouth division.

Recent rumours abound regarding the resurrection of the Plymouth Badge. Although the plans for Daimler-Chrysler to base all of there next generation mid-size cars on the Mitsubishi Galant platform and the subsequent withdrawl of investment by Daimler-Chrysler in Mitsubishi, may quash any further speculation.

Time will tell...

The Rover 75 ain't so far removed from the Jag ... the S-Type or somehting? Then today I saw a Kia Opirus, which I think is just taking the p**s.

I just looked at pictures of the Kia Opirus and you are correct. They are taking the p*ss!

I always loved the unique styling of the Jag but in recent years their has been the inevitable Ford inspired castration of individual style and unique elegance that WAS Jaguar.

With the Kia Opirus, the Rover 75, the Astin Martin DB7 and Vanquish and even a very "X-Type" looking Hyundai XG-350 with the Hyundai Sonata being a bastardized "S-Type". I am sure there are more versions out there but these are the only ones that come to mind.

I like the fact that I can now afford a Jaguar but I think I will give it a miss because it is a diluted brand that looks like a bunch of other cars on the road. Jaguar may never recover from Ford ownership...

Now even my beloved "Jeep" which has so far retained a very unique look has been robbed of its unique styling by a cheesy knock off of the military Hum-V called the "Hummer H2" which sits on top of a GMC Yukon/Chevrolet Tahoe frame.

If that were not enough there are rumours that Daimler-Chrysler are going to launch a new Dodge mid-size SUV based on my beloved "Liberty" (The new Cherokee in the UK).

I suppose in the future we will all be driving the same car with the same styling... and the same colour...

Strangely this has alrady been done in Russia with the Lada. Did the world's auto makers not take note of the outcome of that venture?

Well you get all the people poncing about in their Audi TTs, they don't like it when you point out its the same underneath as a Skoda Octavia
Or Seat Toledo
Or VW Golf
Or VW Beetle
Or VW Bora
Or ....