Aztek Rendezvous

The consensus (until a spasm of revisionism takes hold) is that the 2001-05 Pontiac Aztek was one of the worst designs ever.  In a way, that seems strange because in these wonderfully postmodern times, the whole aesthetic is edgy, ugly, transgressive, in-your-face bourgeoisie-shock, isn't it?  Perhaps those are the seeds of future revisionist rehabilitation.

Regardless, the small crossover SUV was derided and as the Wikipedia link above states, sales never came close to expectations, so both critics and the car-buying public seem to have been in agreement.

What isn't generally realized is that the Aztec shared its platform with another compact crossover that had more conventional looks and sold a lot better.  That car was the 2002-07 Buick Rendezvous.  Let's compare them.

Gallery

Aztek

Rendezvous
Following a period in the 1980s when certain Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Buick models were badge-engineered to the point that their similarity became an embarrassment to General Motors, the corporation worked much harder to make sure that models shared by different brands were visually distinct.  That is the case with the Aztek and Rendezvous.  If you compare the windshield shapes, wheel housing positions and door cut-lines, you can see that the underlying structure is the same.  But all the exterior sheet metal is different, and the cars even have differing rooflines abaft of the rear side doors.

In terms of general appearance, the Aztek has a flatter look whereas the Rendezvous is more rounded. These differences are physically slight, yet sufficient to affect the way highlights play on the surfaces.  The Aztek has an odd, double-deck version of the (since 1959) Pontiac split-grille.  The Rendezvous' grille is also a bit "off" in that the ensemble features an oval shape sliced horizontally near the top edge by the hood cut line.  Above the cut is a chrome panel with word "Buick" on it.  This geometric composition is at odds with more flowing lines of the rest of the car.

Here is a 2001 Aztek with with cladding slathered over the lower third of the car.  This touch was altered the next model year because it was so unpopular with potential buyers.  The horizontal ridges on the front door cladding are probably intended as a nod to Pontiac's "Silver Streak" chromed stripes, its key identification feature from the mid-1930s until the late 50s.

A side view of the Aztek without the heavy cladding.  Actually, the cladding panels (without those ridges) are still there, but now they have smooth rather than matte surfaces.  What we see here isn't seriously awful, though the rear quarter window glass seems somewhat too large.  The downward roofline break is okay from a styling standpoint, but probably was yet another sales deterrent because it drastically reduced trunk area carrying capacity compared to the Rendezvous and other competing small SUVs.

Comparing rear ends, we get a better look at the odd, dark shape applied to the Rendezvous.  It conceals a small rear quarter window while creating visual camouflage and confusion as to whether it's a sedan with a bustle back or (as it really is) a small station wagon.  The Aztek's rear styling is clean, yet awkward in terms of its back window placement, making the car seem taller than perhaps it should be.

Fiat 8V Berlinetta: Postwar Streamlining

For me, the high point of Italian sports car styling was reached during the early 1950s.  Most famous are the automobiles designed and built by famous coachbuilding firms such as Zagato, Ghia, Pinin Farina and such.  But even Italy's largest automobile mass-producer Fiat got into the act in the form of its 8V version produced 1952-54.  Before World War 2 and for a while after, Fiat was active in racing, especially in events such as the famed Mille Miglia where racing versions of sports cars sped through ordinary streets and roads from Brescia to Brescia over routes that varied over the years that the Mille was run.

The 8V, called by some Web sources a Berlinetta, was an in-house affair, designed and built by Fiat rather than the coachbuilders. Its shape was wind tunnel tested, so to some degree styling considerations had to take second place to aerodynamic efficiency. Nevertheless, I find the design attractive, particularly the original version pictured below.

Gallery

A factory image showing the initial front end design. Later versions had the grille-mounted headlamps repositioned to the fenders in an early version of "quad" headlights. I suspect this was done because the original configuration might have reduced airflow to the radiator, though it's equally possible that the move improved illumination coverage.

Another factory photo, this showing the profile. Rear fender skirts have been removed.

This is the only photo I could find on the Web showing the rear as well as the wheel housing cover (the bulge was probabaly to provide clearance for the knock-off wheel hub).

The weakest part of the design is the rear quarter panel area.  It strikes me as being a little too bulky looking.  Cures might include a crisper fast-back roof profile, a larger back window, side windows extending a little farther towards the rear (though use of flat glass panes probably prevented that) and perhaps making the rear fender line a trifle higher and more rounded.  But such changes would have added a little weight and might have affected aerodynamic efficiency for a car intended to be raced.  So I really can't complain about the design.

Styling Plymouth to Death

The term "badge engineering" is used in automobile circles to refer to car models that are marketed under different brand names, yet are identical save for small details including differing nameplates.  This practice is often found when a manufacturer is running low on money, yet wishes to keep its various brands of cars on the market.

An example is the Plymouth, Chrysler's entry-level brand that saw production for more than 80 years until it was discontinued in 2011.  For many of those years, Plymouth ranked third in sales in the American market.  Unfortunately, beginning in the early 1950s, Chrysler Corporation entered a seemingly never-ending period of boom and bust sales levels.  The long, complicated story is summarized here.

From around the middle of the 1930s through the 1952 model year, all four Chrysler brands (in ascending price class order: Plymouth, Dodge, DeSoto, Chrysler) shared the same basic body, differing mostly in grille design, trim and length of hood.  However, the differences were strong enough to make each brand visually distinctive.  For 1953 and continuing into the early 1960s, Chrysler fielded two bodies for its standard size car lines.  DeSoto and Chrysler shared one, while Plymouth and Dodge shared the other.

Chrysler was profitable enough during most of the 1960s that its various brands could share bodies while maintaining distinctive looks, in part due to economies resulting from the elimination of DeSoto in 1961.  But the 1970s were increasingly difficult for Chrysler, and Plymouths and Dodges soon became almost indistinguishable.  Below are some examples of how this played out.  Plymouths are shown in the upper image of each pairing, Dodges below.

Gallery

1953
Even though the basic body was the same, stylists were allowed to create a number of fairly expensive differences.  Examples include the profiles of the rear side windows, trim on the body sides, a rear fender micro-tail fin on the Dodge, and different grille details (though the grille openings seem identical).

1978
Shown here are two compact-car models, the Plymouth Horizon and the Dodge Omni.  Price differences were small, the Dodge's interior trim might have been very slightly ritzier and the exteriors featured different grille bar patterns and placement of side chrome trim.

2000
We are now a model year away from Plymouth's demise.  Above are Neons, Chrysler's compact-car line at the time.  Differences between Plymouth and Dodge are insignificant.  Badge engineering at its finest.

Chrysler 300C: An Unexpected Preview

Some concept cars are intended to test public reaction to various styling ideas.  Others are thinly-disguised versions of cars scheduled for production within the next year or two.  The latter are often easily identifiable and commented upon in car buff magazines.  Readers are left to wonder which features are production-bound and which are camouflage.

It turns out that the show car conceptualizing Chrysler's iconic 2005 300C didn't have a speck of teasing to it.  People at Chrysler probably were mostly interested in exposing the public to a design that would take some getting used to, due the fact that it was a strong break from current Chrysler designs as well as from most other designs on the road.  I certainly thought the 300C was odd-looking when I saw the first photos of it.  Actually, it wasn't until I began seeing 300s on streets and highways that the design began to appeal to me; about a year later, I bought an entry-level 300.

What is odd is that the real disguised "teaser" concept car for the 300C came from Ford, not Chrysler.  Let's take a look.

Gallery

2003 Chrysler 300C Concept Car
The concept 300C is virtually identical to the 2005 production version introduced in 2004.

2001 Dodge Super 8 Hemi Concept Car
This concept car from Dodge contains some hints regarding the future Chrysler 300C design.  Those hints include the general brick-shape of the lower body, the fender shape (forget the grooves on the doors) and the wheel housing treatment.  Inclusion of a 1954-vintange General Motors style wraparound windshield is a cute diversion.

2003 Ford 427 Concept Car
This makes one wonder if Ford and Chrysler stylists were hanging out at the same bar in the early 2000s.  In reality, probably not.  That's because Joseph Baker, the 427's designer, was working at Ford's Irvine California studio, whereas I'm pretty sure that the 300C was styled in Detroit.  But aside from the front and rear ends, the two cars closely resemble one another.  Could the Irvine facility staff have included one or two recently hired stylists from Chrysler?

Hudson's Not-So-Italian Italia

I've tagged this post "Concept Cars," but the Hudson Italia of 1953-55 vintage was one of those cases where it was sort of a concept car while also being a car produced in very small numbers for sale to the public.  Background information regarding the Italia can be found here, here and here, but some of the details are contradictory and questionable, though the general story is correct.

By the early 1950s, Hudson, along with the other smaller American car makers, was in decline.  It was beginning to lack the financial resources needed to develop new models and the cost-per-sale of advertising its current cars was higher than that for the Detroit "big three," General Motors, Ford and Chrysler.  Hudson's management placed their financial bet on a new smaller-size car.  Nash had done so already with its Rambler, which was profitable.  Willys and Kaiser also had new small cars, respectively the Aero and the Henry J, but these were not successful.

Hudson's entry, the Jet, was too tall and too narrow for its styling theme and sales were poor.  According to the links, Hudson management placated styling director Frank Spring, who felt that his Jet design had been ruined by making it taller and narrower that he wanted.  That came in the form of allowing him to create a design for a sporty car that became the Italia.

Although Spring and his team styled the Italia in Detroit, the cars were built by Carrozzeria Touring, an Italian coachbuilder noted for its stylish, light-weight bodies.  So to that degree the monicker "Italia" was legitimate.  According to the links above, it seems that the plan was to build 50 cars, but only 26 were actually completed.  The reason given was the early-1954 merger of Hudson and Nash into the new American Motors Corporation, wherein Nash interests prevailed and the Italia was ditched.

Here is what Italias looked like.

Gallery

It's too bad Hudson didn't let Touring create the design.  Although Spring began his career at a coachbuilding firm, most of his designs for Hudson were mediocre.  Perhaps some of that was because Hudson launched only three completely redesigned models after the early 1930s -- a 1936 Hudson that was heavily (and, to Spring's credit, inventively) facelifted until the new, nicely done 1948 Hudsons appeared.  The Jet was the third design.

The Italia is an awkward design.  In part, this might have had to do with the fact that the Jet, narrow as it was, served as the platform for the Italia, and even the Jet was a bit wide for early 50s vintage sports car designs.  Which might be why the fenders are a little too rounded.  Alas, the other surfaces are not well developed either; perhaps Spring didn't have the time to refine them.  The rear of the car is bland aside from the outrageous stunt of disguising taillights as exhaust pipes.  The side trim is 50s cliche, and doesn't relate well to the greenhouse, fender line and other side elements; more thought and development needed here too.  A particularly amateurish (for automobile design) touch is the shape of the opening in the rear fender where the taillight housings emerge.  The air intake "eyebrow" over the headlamps is an odd, not very functional feature that echos the long-time Hudson triangle theme, but otherwise is an intrusion on the fender line.  The grille opening shape is soft, flabby.

I could go on and on, ranting about the shape of the hood, the wheel housing openings, the form of the C-piller on the greenhouse, and more.  So I'll conclude by saying the the Italia's design is nothing more than a collection of poorly styled elements that do not relate well to one another.  It is incoherent.  Which is sad.

Perhaps three Italias were built as four-door sedans. This might have been an exercise to see if the design might be suitable for a future production Hudson.  I think this greenhouse style works a little better than the two-passenger version.  In fact, the overall design seems better because it is more compatible with its Hudson Jet platform dimensions.  Otherwise, my criticisms hold.

Here is a photo taken in Italy confirming that Italias were indeed made in small numbers.  Due to their rarity and history, Italias can commanded auction prices approaching $300,000.