AutoCritical

Talk about generous, Autoline ‘After Hours’ is sharing with AutoCritical readers an interview with Larry Erickson. Erickson, former chief designer for Ford and now the Chair of Transportation Design at the College for Creative Studies in Detroit, will be talking about some of the school’s esteemed alumni, as well as future design trends – Look out!.

A key topic they will discuss is if design will take a back seat to aerodynamics in the battle for fuel efficiency.

Larry is responsible for the 2005 Mustang, before leaving to CCS in 2008

Thursday’s show starts at 7PM ET / 23:00 GMT.

Live Broadcasting by Ustream

Pop-out Chat Window

Subscribe to the podcast version

Having high expectations on designs that come out from Ford would not be unreasonable if you were to see the examples of the Mondeo, Fiesta (Fast as a spear) and in some ways, the Taurus (Elegance that needs cosmetic surgery). I have to be honest, the first visual impact-opinion I had when seeing the new Focus was that of a brave boldness, mostly referring to the gaping vents at the front, and to how dramatic they were.

I don't mind the front end in the production version. It is distinct. But you can see what they were trying to relate to (the Fiesta - sketch)

Now that I’ve calmed down a bit and seeing the front end as an isolated element, I can see where they were coming from with that front end in its relation to the successful Fiesta, but am struggling to see why they didn’t try and make it more obvious as the vertical bars that support the lower in mouth seem weak, almost flimsy.

Front end comparison

Along the fenders are muscular wheel arches created by curved lines that lead over a belt line that connects them visually. A resultant intersection of surfaces and lines has a dynamic effect which again is pretty cool in isolation, but I have to admit struggling to see the harmony in relation to the rest of the car. It just seems a bit forced… can you see it?

A typical rear end - Not sure about that rounded section though.

Rounding up the rear is effectively a result of connecting the surfaces over the rear fenders. The graphical breakup is typically Ford, being inoffensive except for the tail lamp that seems out of place, and the surface of badge placement that seems a bit round. The front also seems a bit stiff around the bonnet area, now that I take a second look.

Some lines create forced surfaces that don't match. The tail light also seems out of place.

Overall the proportions of this design are desirably proportioned, just like the other products in the Ford range. However, with the high standard expected from those products, it becomes easy to notice the awkwardness when there are a couple out of place elements.