Beaten By The Ugly Stick – 7 Cars That Look Worse After A Redesign
Updated May 21, 2018
One would expect that with each new model, the appearance would improve. That’s not the case with these 7 cars that each took a big style step backwards.
It’s hard to pin down why. In some cases, the corporation is looking for a cheap update, and what they get is a cheap-looking update. In other cases the intention is to move in a new design direction. The problem that happens from time-to-time is the public doesn’t follow that direction.
The earliest Lamborghini Countachs were angular and aggressive, with nothing unnecessary added to their sculpted bodies anywhere. Fast forward to the 25th anniversary edition and its hard to determine whether it’s a real Countach buried under all that plastic or a Fiero kit car.
America fell in love with Taurus when it was introduced. It was the antidote to existing American sedans. People liked the way it droved and they liked the way it looked. Until Ford felt it neccessary to change their “design language” as the Taurus was subjected to the same circle upon circle theme that plagued the rest of the Taurus line (which just about killed it)
The clean lines of the original 350Z (like those of the first 240Z) were exemplary. The designers of the 370Z took those clean, flowing lines and made them all angular, over-complicating the design and making it look more like an escapee from a graphic novel than a serious sports car.
The 512TR was itself a tasteful updating of the original Testarossa so as to bring its styling more in line with the 348 and other Ferraris of that period. The next update to the Testarossa was the 512M and whoever was responsible for the update took what was great about the TR and ruined it (the job was probably assigned to an intern). The grille looks like the kind of camouflage device car companies use when they test not-yet-released cars in public, the headlight configuration is a mess, and the modern tailights were replaced by the type of round units used by Ferrari in the 1970s (and rumored to have originally been for a truck). Who would have paid good money for this mess?
Somewhere, somehow something went wrong between the second and third generation Acura Integra. Where the second generation had a chiseled nose with aggressive horizontal headlights the third generation came with a bulbous nose with four round headlights that looked that a bug that had been opened from a deep sleep. Acura in the US actually took a pass on the nose used in the rest of the world, which looked more like generation two, which has become a popular retrofit among tuners in the US.
The 993 generation of the 911 was among the most attractive in its history. The 996 had the same flatter hood profile and headlight assembly as the already-on-the-road Boxster, which immediately made people believe you were driving a Boxster with a roof. Not what a 911 customer expects.
The Mazda3 has always been an excellent car. When magazines run comparison tests between compacts, the Mazda3 always finishes near the top. So why did Mazda feel it was neccessiary to give the latest Mazda3 the proportions of a front-engine car? The attractive balance of design of the previous two generations have been lost by what appears to be a long snout that the cynical might claim has been added only to deceive.
Categories: Gear Grinding