AutoCritical

Proportions of vehicles are always changing, both to fit the new regulations to do with things like safety and style. Proportions are also one of the design elements that can really ‘make or break’ the design of a vehicle and how a designer uses this to their advantage is to exaggerate them. The end is usually a result of a sketch with large wheels, and a small DLO.

2010 Chevrolet Equinox - Strong body side, bug-eye front...

From a few key elements, I think the proportions on the Chevrolet Equinox takes on characteristics of a concept sketch, starting with the bulky wheel arches that dwarf the more ‘production’ looking wheels, and the small DLO that is separated with a C-Pillar to the rear glass.

Concept-style wheel arches - smaller more realistic wheels - Unusual 'C-Pillar'

Just because a production car has concept-like features, doesn’t specifically or instantly make it a good looking car, or a successful design for that matter. In the instance of the Equinox I think the front wheel arches are a bit too dominant in comparison to the rear. If they were measured, they would probably be quite similar, but because there is less body color mass around the arches of the front than the back, the illusion results in the wheel arch sizes seeming a bit off balance (looks too heavy in the front).

Perhaps what is needed is a more aggressive front?

Although a heavy, planted look on a SUV may be successful for other designs, on this design it doesn’t suit when viewed holistically with the rest of the car. For me, the front of the car guides the feeling for the rest of the car and I don’t think the Equinox’s bug-eye almost cute face matches the heavy set arches. An attempt to ‘aggressify’ the front fascia of the car can be seen, but is not pulled off. The spears formed from budging lower vents and the under-hook of the lamps in theory is aggressive, but for some reason I think the soft and flat bonnet and peaky front grille, (and possibly that bow-tie badge) seem to be cheekily grinning at me. Is it grinning at you too?

A rear that is neither bold or cute

The rear of the car is quite anonymous and neither aggressive nor cutesy. It almost looks like a result of drawing horizontal lines between whatever was happening around the corners of the body side. Just as disappointing as the rear are elements that also don’t fit in with the rest of the design. For example, the rear glass solution on the side view around the C-pillar has an unusual solution that makes the roof look bent. Another is how the details around the head lamps meet the grille and front of the bonnet contradict each other.
Overall this design is all a bit mixed up. The front wants to be a small car, the side wants to be aggressive then the rear is nothing… literally…It’s a shame that this GM Designed car is so directionless compared to its Ford rivals…

Do you find the current BMW 1 Series, 3 Series, 5 Series ugly?
I’ll get back to this later.

To design something innovative is what many designers strive for. Their main reason for this is to come up with an idea that no one has thought of before, or to interpret something in a way that no one has. I guess its all about innovation and being ground breaking!

Do you like it? Flat blocky front...

I have to admit, the first time I saw this car with fresh eyes, I couldn’t look past the two vertical areas of the front glass (windshield) and front fascia. It just looked blocky, and if I was asked by BMW what I honestly thought, the only polite answer I would have is ‘…it’s different’. Now, there are two ways to interpret ‘it’s different’ – one being refreshing, innovative, and ground breaking, and I like it! – or – simply not liking it.

Cohesive connection from the upper and lower half of the car lowers the visual 'height'.

Trying to interpret the designer’s intent on the BMW X1 is like uncovering a thought process though the use of their lines in the end product. In recent models I have always found the body side of BMWs to be the most interesting, most notably coming from the ‘slap in the face’ design of the Z4. Following the body side crease from the front to the rear, it shoots up above the rear fender, pointing to the crease that is coming around the DLO on the C-pillar. This creates a notion of connection between the upper and lower half of the vehicle, and it makes sense since it’s a tall car.

Comparison of concept sketch and actualized model. Note the difference amount of 'light' between the lower feature.

Overpowering that body side feature is the standard issue belt line that has been built up creating a tension and speed in this dynamic theme. However, although important to the rest of the design, I think it takes away from what I think is a far more interesting feature on the body side/DLO mentioned earlier. In turn, I believe they still could have played up this feature by increasing the visibility of the crease as much as they had in the sketch.

Complex interesction of lines result in a surface solution that is just as complex. Surprisingly the rear is clean looking and does not look heavy due to the clever use of color and black.

From the rear of the car there are many lines that are coming together to create an interesting variety of surface solutions. A subtle line from just above the side rocker flows into the rear fascia to join the story from side to back. It is complemented by a crease that defines the bumper to the body panel, which in turn is intersected by a hook line that is framed around the tail lights (Creating that complex interplay of surfaces). Across the rear the surfaces are quite simple. This makes a focus on the proportions of the dark and color areas to be seen. As to not look heavy, the bumper is mostly black and when compared with the glass it creates a wider elongated color section that reduces the visual height of the car. To reduce the visual weight of the black, a bright metallic nappy also creates an elongated black section of the bumper. This keeps a the car looking visually planted to the ground, not looking like it may topple over due to the nature of this vehicle type.

Front lamp detail and bonnet buldge details

Similarly themed around the rear lamps are the front head lamps, having an interesting treatment of line work that makes up the front fascia. As a result I have mixed feelings about how it has turned out. The crease in front of the wheel arch coming out from the lamp suggests an angled front, yet the crease on between the grille and lamp is quite vertical. So the visual comparison exaggerates the boxy appearance of the front end. The only way of saving it from looking even boxier is a similar technique as the rear of the car, having a large area of black to make appear, just like the rear, wider than it is, and in this case making the proportions of the front similar to likes of a 5 or 7 series.

Are these the original concept proposal sketches?

If the released sketches of the X1 proposal were the ones used to make the concept X1, and from that, to the production X1, this BMW designer needs to be awarded for doing something that is quite hard to do, and that is to stick to his original idea, the one that he sketched, earning him the privilege to design this car!

I think the lines and creases all over the BMW X1 are quite fresh and exciting for their design language, however when it comes to the surfaces that excitement and tension is lost by becoming softer. If I was to compare this with the new Z4, it does make sense, having all this drama of lines mixed in with more elegant surface work, and by that, I guess it is quite ‘different’, and I mean that in a way that is good, as it is something exploratory, and something I can learn to like. I do like the current 1, 3 and 5 Series, and this X1 shows BMW evolving that style.