Fireball Asks… What If?

PureBusiness
Sep 14, 2009 at 4:49 pm

We use to rally behind the industry and hoped they would take risks and end up building something completely spectacular that works,not just that but,the first time out the door,not so much anymore.
Just a thought

GTwildfire
Sep 10, 2009 at 5:43 pm

Kudos to GM for the Volt though. I hope it works out for them. That’s a bold move I’m talking about.

GTwildfire
Sep 10, 2009 at 5:36 pm

…”I believe that Toyota took a leap with the xB, Nissan with the cube, Chrysler with the PT Cruiser (no idea why I thought of that as an example)”…
-
I don’t think any of them were breaking new ground. The most notable of the aforementioned was the right choice Chrysler made with the PT’s retro styling which lit that trend on fire and Nissan for making a stylish asymmetrical move on the cube, but there’s nothing that really sets these rides apart, functionally, from what else is on the market.
-
“Prowler, so on and so on… ”
-
The Prowler was more significant, because of its mini fenders over an essentially open wheel front end and bringing back the boat body. That was a very bold move, perhaps the most bold carryover from concept to production. The problem with the Prowler was it was a niche vehicle, it was expensive and focused on few people.
-
I’m going beyond esoteric things. I used Lambo doors as an example, but I’m talking about so much more. So many concepts have exhibited brilliant advances that I feel are and probably will go nowhere unless auto makers are forced by the competition to make a move.
-
Sure, some features like talking robots that sense your emotion are ridiculous and (I hope) will go nowhere, but others like certain EV propulsion concepts, the skateboard chassis and other exhibited technical brilliance is little more than an intellectual rights whoopie cushion.

GTwildfire
Sep 10, 2009 at 12:43 pm

Some of the most brilliant people in history lacked formal education. Formal education is a formality, not a guarantee.

PureBusiness
Sep 10, 2009 at 6:02 am

But it takes someone with a masters degree in engineering to make this happen,,or does it?

GTwildfire
Sep 10, 2009 at 4:52 am

I prefer Aunt Edna when she was on the family truckster’s roof…

fallenkeep
Sep 9, 2009 at 4:37 pm

I think what you say is true and false. It depends on the automaker, and if aunt Edna is in town that week.

I believe that Toyota took a leap with the xB, Nissan with the cube, Chrysler with the PT Cruiser (no idea why I thought of that as an example), Prowler, so on and so on… Money rules all though, and with cars like the PT and the Cube, they are making a semi-concept that will be in a price range that people will buy. If I remember correctly, the Scion line was at least initially marketed to early 20′s, as sporty, easily modified, and especially AFFORDABLE cars.

But then, I think you’re not specifically talking about affordability. I think you’re talking about real vision. So is Fireball Tim.
[Ramble on]
PTCruiserlinks’ forum has had several posts recently about some pretty decent mods…a very sweet coupe thats getting a big variety of opinion, and one fellow who has been handmaking his Cruiser into a PT with a cab and a bed, a PT Truck. Both of those ideas have been thrown at Ma over the years (along with gettting a nice 6 cylinder engine), but it takes someone with vision to make it go.

Yes, I’d love to see that 2 door 300, or one of those sweet Firebirds with a flip back canopy, but who going to make them? I tell you who, the car lover, in his garage with his own hands and tools.
Business is like government, it’s run by the people who vote. And the people who vote most, are not the people who want low, fast, slick cars, they are people like Aunt Edna.
[Ramble off]
Tim, great blog, great pics! I’d love to have a peek in your sketchbook sometime.
No, the one with the CAR pics in it, thanks.
Cheers!

TOPlamborghini
Sep 9, 2009 at 3:10 pm

….im pretty sure i have some hotwheels cars that look oddly similar to most of those pictured..

GTwildfire
Sep 9, 2009 at 10:34 am

Oh and Tim, THANKS for the Firebird theme. The Prez of my ‘bird club believes if all goes well for GM they’ll bring back the Firebird in aa few years. Wishful thinking? I’d rather expect the worst and be pleasently surprised if it happens someday than hold my breath.
-
There is an upside to the industry’s excitement shortcomings… the aftermarket industry and heightened interest in awesome movie rides. but I’d trade that in a heartbeat to drive a new last gen ‘bird (or Batman’s Tumbler) to work everyday.

GTwildfire
Sep 9, 2009 at 10:20 am

I both have loved concepts and have been thoroughly annoyed by auto companies as a result. They come out with some absolutely stunning, enticing ideas and sometimes-sometimes something that shares its name makes it to production that looks like Aunt Edna had a redlining session with the production designers.
-
I can see it now, “I don’t like anything low to the ground or with big doors” then “It has to have LOTS of trunkspace” follwed by “all those lights and holes in the front… looks too flashy” followed up with “ooh its too fast, it scares me” and so on and so on until that futuristic and majorly SICK concept you saw at the car show hits the market with slightly more umph than a Tata Nano.
-
It has happened time and time again but sometimes… sometimes auto makers take a leap of faith – then prematurely trash production after a short lived run.
-
I don’t think auto makers take the right approach with concept car designs much of the time. They’re been quick to show all different types of entry/exit designs but aside from a couple trick suicide doors, lambos (in Lambos) and gull wings on Mercedes and Deloreans… they all slam the same way. They could have taken the leap but no… and they knew they wouldn’t the whole time.
-
THAT sucks and that’s just one example. It’s a symptom of their disorder. I hope they find a cure.