I was honoured to be invited on Car Design Fetish's Podcast the other day. Along with Stephen Donald, a young car designer from north east England (who we hope to bring you more on shortly and who's just secured a role with MacMotorcycles), I chatted with Dali Dimovski, Dustin Shedlarski and Arvind Ramkrishna about car design today, design education and the perception of American Automobles from 'across the pond'.
They've got an interesting concept going here - producing weekly podcasts talking about issues pertinent to the industry at the time, and interviewing designers as they go. We're number 14 in the series to date, and some of the previous episodes are very well worth checking out. You should stay tuned too, because next week they've got Drew Smith on... so expect some fireworks! Check out Stephen and I, and episode 14 of the CDF podcast here.
CCS, Art Center, Coventry, Pforzheim. To those in the car industry, and specifically the design part of it, these names will be well known. They represent the handful of educational establishments with dedicated automotive, or transportation design courses that exist around the world. It's likely that the person heading the team of designers who designed the car you're currently driving, attended one of these schools.
Perhaps most renowned of all the educational establishments teaching vehicle design though, is the Royal College of Art in London - whose graduates include Peter Stevens (McLaren F1), Peter Horbury (a multitude of Volvos), Peter Schreyer (TT), Marek Reichman (Aston Martin) and Martin Smith (recent European Fords). Which is why half of the auto design industry appears at Kensington Gore, every year, on one (typically hot and sweaty) night in late June, as the current year's crop of MA students graduate, showing off their final projects.
This year, their challenge of securing a job in one of the world's handful of automotive design studios is made all the more challenging by the economic meltdown - which has seen car makers go bankrupt, selling 30% fewer cars than a year ago, and shutting down design outposts. This year, two of the most interesting projects on show come from Magdalena Schmid and Hong Yeo - and we captured their projects, and the conceptual thinking behind them on video. They're well worth checking out... (yes I know we would say that) but these models are the result of many months of hard labour, and are quite beautiful objects in their own right. More than that though, what these designers have to say, and their respective attitudes towards the industry, gives hope that the flagging auto industry could still have a bright future. Oh, and if you know of a job going in a design studio near you, then they'd love to hear from you! (their email addresses are at the end of their respective videos).
Magdalena Schmid's BMW "Pixie" concept:
Hong Yeo's VW "Build your own car" concept:
Hopefully, we'll have some more coverage of other projects at the show before too long, so watch this space... Posted by Joseph Simpson on 30th June 2009
Disclosure: Joseph Simpson is a visiting lecturer on the Vehicle Design course at the RCA, and graduated from the college with an MPhil in Vehicle Design in 2009.
As the world wakes up to news that Aston Martin next year plans to offer its existing customers an Aston-ised, tricked-out Toyota iQ to complement their purchase of that Vantage/DB9/DBS, you'll doubtless be able to read truck-loads of alternately fawning and cynical views from the automotive blogosphere over the course of the next few days.
I'm wussing out, and won't profer too much opinion on the car's design here - you can make your own mind up on whether grafting an Aston face onto a city car works, and whether it is a vehicle that has appeal. But it's worth delving just a little deeper into the idea here.
Aston realise that lots of its customers own a small city car - such as the Smart or iQ, alongside their DB9, Vantage, etc. That's what designer Marek Reichman told me a few years back, and it's a market that Dr. Ulrich Bez - CEO of Aston Martin - has seen fit to exploit here.
From a size and environmental perspective, the Cygnet serves as an interesing counter-weight to the badly-received Lagonda SUV concept from Geneva. Yet in terms of the thinking behind it, it feels no less cynical.
On first impressions, Aston are not being unreasonable by believing that its customers could easily spend an extra £10k or so over the regular price of that second-car Smart/iQ they put in their garage. What's more, for something that has a bespoke feel and will be rare, they believe they'll jump at the chance.
Such thinking stacks up on paper, but being that it's only planning to sell these to existing customers, my initial take would be that Aston may be mis-judging the market and its brand. That's because the customer who keeps both a Vantage and a Smart in the garage tends to be fairly sophisticated, intelligent and not overly-flashy. The reason they have a Smart isn't just for its city-friendly proportions, but for those moments when one needs to keep quiet about the size of one's back account, fly beneath the radar or blend into the crowd to appear classless and ordinary. Nothing says classless more than a Smart car. And in my book, nothing will say clueless, and "I have more money than sense, look at me" more than turning up in a Aston-detailed £20k Japanese city car.
Clearly, Aston believe I'm wrong. The non-auto nerd won't notice, they'd argue - seeing it as just another iQ at a glance, thus leaving driver and the automotive congniscenti to revel in its specialness - which is surely half the point of the Aston Martin brand. Yet I can't help feeling that this vehicle, while an interesting project for the Gaydon team to be working on right now, says much about the deeply cynical thinking of the people running Aston Martin today, which makes the whole affair seem rather ugly.
Images: iQ/Cygnet - Toyota GB PR, Lagonda Concept - Drew Smith
I’ve had several conversations recently with people who are either in or strongly connected to the auto industry, who’ve all told me the same thing:
“In the future, we’ll all have two cars – a petrol/diesel/hybrid for long distance, and an electric car for city/local trips.”
This isn’t just interesting because it’s completely different to what they’d have told you two years ago (although that in itself is an important sign of how much the market and mindset has moved). No, it’s that in all straight-faced seriousness, they believe a majority of people will park (and own) two cars on their drive in years to come.
While conversations with people in the industry tend to be a bit abnormal anyway, as they quickly turn to talk of how many classic Porsche’s they’ve got in their garage - due to it being their passion, the stark truth is that in the UK less than 30% of people have access to more than one car, and in urban areas that figure shrinks dramatically. Most people view cars as a convenient, comfortable way of getting direct from A to B – and choose a single vehicle that best suits their need. Their car tends not to be something they’re obsessional about.
Currently, focus, energy and cash is all going into new powertrain development. In many regards it needs to. But there’s an unstated assumption (alluded to by those guys I quote above) that once we’ve overcome the current roadhump, and get workable electric / hydrogen cars to market, business in the car industry will continue pretty much as it did before. People will go down to their local car dealer and choose what suits their needs and desires, every two or three years.
There’s a problem with that though. The average person can afford to run, maintain and often only has space to park, one vehicle. Which vehicle they choose to buy right now depends on what their personal circumstances are and the types of journeys they do. Hence young people living around cities tend to buy small hatchbacks, and middle class families buy large estates or (more recently) SUVs. Both work best within a certain usage envelope, but if needed, can cover every single transport base (what I mean by this is that a city car often isn’t at home on a motorway, but if needs be, you could still drive one all the way to Milan tomorrow).
This cover-all bases approach is one of the reasons current vehicles are so comparatively inefficient. Creating right-sized vehicles with the right powertrains, for a variety of different journey scenarios, therefore makes a load of sense. But it creates a scenario where suddenly, your average one-car buyer is faced with the prospect of buying something that can no longer meet every single journey need. That the car industry’s answer to this appears to be “well, you’ll just have to buy two cars!” makes me feel a little bit sick. Reports suggest that even if we replaced most of the current gasoline vehicle fleet with EVs, the planet would still be in fairly major mess. To quote BP’s incoming Chairman: “The growth of car ownership and airtravel is unsustainable.”
This is one reason we’re seeing start-up car companies such as Riversimple promoting the idea of leasing rather than selling to customers - their argument is that it encourages them to develop long lasting vehicles, without built in obsolescence, which are absolutely optimised for their environment. It’s probably why Daimler are quietly building out a potentially very interesting next generation car club in the shape of car-2-go, and most shockingly of all – one of the reasons we’re seeing Exxon getting not only into electric cars, but vehicle sharing, with the announcement this week that they were behind an EV being dropped into a pilot programme in Baltimore.
Of course, while most customers aren’t as car obsessed as your author or those working in the car industry, they are however, quite accustomed to the idea of owning their own car. It’s a big jump to just having access to one as a means of mobility, one that other people can also use. In the average customer’s mind, this throws up a whole set of doubts and concerns.
There are ways to begin to address this, and I’d argue now’s the time to focus on doing so. Primarily, having recognised automotive brands address the issue and be present in the space is a key step. Not to do a disservice to Zipcar and their ilk who really kick-started and ‘own’ the car-share space right now, but Daimler getting into the sector excites me quite a lot more. They have the name, size and capital to lever mobility on demand/car sharing as a key part of their business, if they so choose. They can reach and communicate to people, that not only they offer such a service at all, but fundamentally, communicate what the hell it really is and why you might want to consider using it. The name, presence and PR machine means that – done wholeheartedly, they could reach millions of potential customers in a way it would take Zipcar years to do.
This leads me to the second key element, which is education. It’s easy to assume that most people now know what someone like Zipcar actually does. But the truth is, most probably still don’t. The name, ‘car sharing’ is confusing, for a start. You don’t actually get in the car at the same time as a stranger – but a lot of people think you do.
I’d advocate a large-scale education programme – which reaches all the way from teaching groups of kids about mobility and the future of cars, as demonstrated very ably by Dan Sturges:
And it should run all the way through existing industry and governmental channels, reaching right up to dealership education programmes. Helping the people in the sales end of the automotive industry not only develop new models of ‘selling’, but to assist people navigating their way through various mobility and transport options of the future may be the key to making this stuff work in a big way.
Done right, the people in the car showroom of the future could offer much more than the ability to simply sell someone a vehicle on a three year finance deal. They could help consumers overcome the misconceptions that currently surround not only diesels, hybrids, EVs, and hydrogen cars, but also car-sharing, leasing, and mobility on demand. Ultimately, the car dealership of the future becomes a one-stop mobility shop; which does much more than just sell cars. In times when many car dealerships are struggling to stay in business due to plummeting car sales, surely it’s an idea that many could embrace?
Speak to most people, and they'll tell you that the real revolutionary area of car design in the next ten-to-fifteen years will be the interior - and more specifically, the interface. J Mays went to great lengths last month to emphasize how important the HMI would be in future, and just how quickly it's changing.
Ford wants to be a leader in this area - and the Lincoln C concept, with its all singing, all dancing future-format of Sync, complete with apps, avatars and assistants, is the company's statement of intent to this end. Ultimately though, digital convergence in vehicles has the potential to be problematic. As Jean Jennings suggested in our recent interview with her "I always say, 'if it doesn't make you drive better, make it go away'". This gives designers and engineers a potential conflict when it comes to a future pointing towards future hybrids, EVs and so forth.
Put simply, three main factors determine how efficient and economical a car will be. Its configuration (size, weight, drivetrain type). The conditions (traffic and meteorological) within which it is being driven. And the difficult one for designers - the person behind the wheel. How the driver physically inputs on the car's controls (accelerator, brake, steering) massively impacts upon its economy - which is why we often see huge disparity in fuel economy figures on a given car. Clubfoots Charmer and Simpson managed a rather pitiful combined figure of 38mpg from our week in a Honda Insight. But Honda have been running a hypermiling challenge which has seen people get up to 80mpg.
It was this issue that a Ford team set out to solve with their Smartgauge system - the instrument panel on the new Ford Fusion Hybrid. The question at hand, in it's most basic format, was how to help people get the best possible economy from the vehicle, without distracting or annoying them - and without frightening away those new to hybrids. Jeff Greenberg, project leader on the Smartgauge programme, explained to us how the team developed two guiding principals based on this. The first was the notion of a journey - allowing a driver to progress, learn and develop their driving by growing with the system over time. The second was the idea of a coach - a positive encouragement to help drivers get the most out of their vehicle, as opposed to being lectured and bossed into how to drive more economically. Over to Jeff...
Ultimately, the key breakthrough Ford have made with Smartgauge feels similar to Apple with the iPhone. They have created something simple to look at, which by using just screens (rather than physical knobs, buttons or gauges) can display different information, which is (potentially) infinitely configurable and changeable via software updates. Using two, 5.5' TFT screens either side of the central speedometer, Jeff and his team were able to arrive at four different 'levels' of operation by which a driver could use Smartgauge and interact with the Fusion hybrid. All of which sounds a little daunting before you see it - so the car is set up to be quite simple, and welcoming upon your first acquaintance with it, as demonstrated to us in this video...
While other hybrids tend to feature either a basic setup to indicate how the drivetrain is working (Ford's own Escape Hybrid), or a complex set of show-off graphs and complex diagrams (Toyota Prius), the Smartgauge is designed to make the Fusion Hybrid appeal to all-comers - from those buying their first hybrid, to those who are committed hypermilers who've clocked 100,000 miles in their Prius(es). The driver can choose from four different levels of display, which, as they progress from one to the next, gradually adds extra layers of information to help inform on what the car is doing, and to help the driver extract the best economy. The levels are known as Inform (most basic), Enlighten, Engage and Empower (most advanced)...
But what's it actually like on the road? Having had Jeff walk us through the system at a standstill, we went out on the roads of Dearborn to experience it for ourselves...
What's impresses about the display is its clarity and functionality, regardless of which level you are in. It could clearly appeal to multiple different types of driver. Newbies won't be scared off, while those who enjoy showing off their Prius's fuel economy graphs will love the most advanced levels where you can do things like see how much power drain the vehicle's accessories are creating. Crucially, as it's on the dashboard and in the driver's line of site, Smartgauge really makes it easy to coax the car along in EV mode for long periods (therefore achieving better fuel economy) without taking your eyes off the road. The bright green glowing EV symbol that lights up in the more advanced modes is a great 'corner of the eye' tell-tale to this effect.
The project illustrates the clear benefits that come from new ways of thinking, and greater openness and collaboration in the auto industry. The Smartgauge team worked closely not only with designers and engineers within Ford, but with the most famous user-design/research guys of them all - IDEO, and conducted extensive, ethnographic research - not only with hybrid drivers, but with those who drove hummers, bicycles, and even professional athletes and their trainers. Ultimately, this advanced and comprehensive approach to research, coupled with a simple, but subtle, rethink of how to utilise TFT screens to make most appropriate use of available software - as opposed to hardware - results in a highly impressive, engaging vehicle.
That the car itself is really impressive, needing no excuses for being a hybrid, helps. However, this display is the car's piece-de-resistence, one that will not only help drivers to achieve greater fuel economy than they might on their own, but keep them engaged, surprised and delighted by the car in a way that many vehicles don't once that new car sheen has worn off. Not only does the system make the car more fun to drive, it makes those behind the wheel better drivers. In our view, that means the team behind it deserve the upmost praise and respect.
Posted by Joseph Simpson on 18th June 2009
Disclosure: Ford is sponsoring The Movement Design Bureau's design and research work throughout 2009. We have an independent brief - and want to hear from you if it doesn't seem that way.
Today, on the terrace behind London's Somerset House, Riversimple launched the culmination of nine years research and development - their new open source, hydrogen powered city car. Like Local-Motors in the US (more on whom soon), Riversimple are utilising open source principals to design and develop a new car. But that's only half the story. Riversimple have, in effect, today launched a blueprint for how the car industry could reinvent itself - with wholesale changes to the way vehicles are designed, how they're fueled, where and how they're built, and how they're sold.
We captured a heap of footage at this morning's launch event and we'll get much of it online over the next day or so. Like us, you might be sceptical about the potential of hydrogen fuel cells, or the application of open-source principals in a hardware, rather than software setting. In this first video, Hugo Spowers - CEO of Riversimple, explain some of the principals behind, and answer some of the pressing questions about the car and the company behind it. It makes for interesting watching...
Full photoset by Mark, from today's event (click on photos to go to the flickr page):
Note: All of The Movement Design Bureau's published content - including our videos and photos you see, is creative commons 3.0 licensed. That means you can use it, republish it or mash it up on your own site - just include a link back to this page.
Until recently, the typical hybrid buyer tended to be the sort of person you’d try to avoid sitting next to at dinner parties. Ok, perhaps that’s a bit mean, but one had to be fairly committed to the cause to go hybrid.
However, things are changing. A new Prius is here, which (whisper it) doesn’t drive like a mooing double bed on castors anymore. A couple of weeks back we reviewed Honda’s Insight, which can be had at a cheaper price than a hybrid’s ever been before. And then you can throw into the bargain the new Ford Fusion Hybrid - we’ve driven it, and it’s brilliant (unlike the Mercury Mariner Hybrid, which isn’t). Hybrid’s going mainstream.
Manufacturers are falling over themselves to ready hybrids – even once staunch opponents such as VW – because the technology is settling as one pattern by which America will go green. Europeans have long known diesel will deliver similar fuel economy benefits as a hybrid – but those on the other side of the pond still aren’t too sold on the idea. Before we embark on a Euro-bash of Americans and/or hybrids, there are fairly credible reasons for this. Diesel’s more expensive to buy in the US than in Europe – here, diesel’s been pushed (with tax breaks) – particularly by the French and Germans, so there’s now much more refinery capacity, for instance. And while diesel delivers better fuel economy (and hence lower CO2 emissions) than petrol, NOx and particulate matter from diesel exhausts are still problematic. They contribute to local respiratory diseases, and cost big money to reduce. Just ask Mercedes, BMW and VW who are adding expensive ‘ad-blue’ exhaust treatment systems to the cars they sell in North America, in order to pass the Tier II Bin 5 regs (don’t ask).
In Europe, we've long believed diesel is the way to go - particularly when you need serious torque, in the world of SUVs and pick-ups.
What’s really significant is that Porsche and, yes, even Ferrari, will soon debut hybrids. Hybrid technology in performance-orientated cars is serious news. It’s easy to argue manufacturers who are about to get hit over the head (with heavy fines) by the EU over fleet emission have to go down this route, but that misses the point.
Firstly, it means that hybrid technologies can be seen to have benefits in a wide spectrum of automotive applications (not just ones primarily aimed at city-based, compact family vehicles bought by people who aren’t gear-heads). Secondly, it alludes to the notion that hybrid technology could actually enhance, rather than detract from the driving experience. The Prius and Insight are automotive cardboard. One doesn’t extract pleasure from piloting them down a challenging road. But if the technology is arriving in a Porsche and a Ferrari, then you can be sure that is about to change. ‘Fun’ and ‘hybrid’ will shortly be appearing in the same sentence, without being followed by guffaws.
This slow but steady greening of the automotive industry bears remarkable similarity to a previous automotive ‘trend’, which resulted in a complete attitudinal change in consumers back in the 1990s.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, only Volvos and Saabs were famed, and bought, for their safety. Of course, Mercedes had invented the airbag back in the 1970s - and it was appearing on top of the line S-classes in the late 1980s, but very little else. Then in 1993 Ford launched the European Mondeo – the first real mainstream affordable car with a driver’s airbag fitted as standard across the entire range. Except, in the UK, Vauxhall decided to beat Ford to it, literally by weeks, by doing the same in their updated Cavalier.
Once upon a time, only Volvo (above) and Saab were renowned for safety prowess.
By 1995, buying a new car that didn’t have a driver’s airbag was the exception rather than the norm. Then in 1997, Euro NCAP appeared. Suddenly, buyers knew which cars were ‘safe’ and which weren’t – and it was being thrust in their face. Safety became a selling point – which brands like Renault capitalised on. Come 2009, and it’s odd for any vehicle not to get 5 stars (the top crash rating) in a Euro NCAP test. Cars are much more crashworthy than the ones of twenty years ago. Consumers expect safety. They believe if they’re involved in a 40mph shunt, they’ll walk away. It took them a while, but it became the expected norm. Cars which flunked tests, suffered in the sales figures.
It sounds cynical, but I think that’s what you’ll see with hybrids, and green cars generally. Before long, it looks likely most new cars will include - at a basic level - something like stop-start technology. This is a big deal in itself, because emissions and wastage from idling cars in traffic is huge. But it’s looking like many vehicle will include some kind of hybridisation – regenerative braking, additional electric motors, a road-going version of F1’s KERS.
One day, will all vehicles wear this badge?
So what you might say? There are three main reasons this is important:
It will cut emissions and raise fuel economy standards across the board.
It means the fun to drive, performance-orientated car is far from dead.
It conditions the market. Consumers, brought up for 100 years on a constantly running petrol or diesel motor, get used to the fact their car turns itself off at the lights, needs starting up in a different way, or doesn’t have a conventional gearbox. That’s good news – it leads us down a path of faster acceptance and uptake of new technology, and new forms of vehicles.
BMW's efficient dynamics campaign
The revolution is here now, and already being advertised. BMW calls it efficient dynamics. Audi’s just jumped on the bandwagon – and is calling it ‘recuperation’. Just as safety was the selling point of the 90s, judging by current adverts, hybrid, energy and green have now gone mainstream too. Before long, the consumer will expect – and likely demand - it. Posted by Joseph Simpson on 10th June 2009
Images: knitted jumper - janetmck on flickr, Touareg V10 TDi - Asurroca on flickr, crash XC90 - hollesdottir on flickr, BMW banner - BMW
We spent a fine afternoon at the Angel pub in Rotherhithe, London on Friday, talking with one of our favourite design commentators - Drew Smith, aka @drewpasmith on Twitter, who edits the DownsideUpDesign blog. The conversation was, in several ways, atomic.
While in the 1950s and 60s cars stayed in tune with their age - the space rocket you could afford to buy - Drew argues that the auto industry has failed to connect with the digital age.
We talk too about the role that notions of ownership play, and how, as a result of social networking, they are perhaps starting to dissolve. Will digital networks and services fundamentally change how a new generation views cars? Can anyone harness this?
Mark Charmer talks with Drew Smith and Joseph Simpson. Angel at Rotherhithe, London, 29 May 2009.
The film Objectified takes a behind-the-scenes looks at the everyday objects that dominate our lives – providing rarely seen insight and interviews with the people who brought them in to the world. The film is a primer. It’s the sort of thing that every would-be designer and student should watch before embarking on a career in the profession – because although it’s wrapped in a rich layer of cinematic lovely-ness, it also hints at the sheer blood, sweat and compromise that sits behind every industrially designed product that surrounds us today.
Sitting and listening to relatively secretive people – like Jonathan Ive at Apple, talk about their products, and their own design philosophy is enjoyable whether you’re in the profession, or simply an interested observer – the products provide a lynch pin around which everyone can engage.
Objectified didn’t start life as a book, but one suspects that from the research and interviews conducted here, and on the video cutting-room floor, lies a much more interesting, in depth piece that would make a cracking book. Indeed, anyone already working in the profession may find a good book on design (I recommend Bill Moggridge’s Designing Interactions) a more insightful way to spend time and learn new things. This isn’t to say that the film is without merits, merely that the viewer is left wanting to find out more.
The first half of the film is largely concerned with the way things come into being, and what actually represents good design. It’s the sort of information that most are probably already aware of – designer’s sketching, thinking, prototyping, the mass production process. It’s quite compelling to watch – because it’s filmed in a sweet way and the designers provide good sound bites – but doesn’t really tell us anything new.
Above: a trailer for Objectified
Where the film gets both more interesting, but also more frustrating, is in its second half. Here it moves away from the basic building blocks of design, and on to some of the issues facing the world today. As one might expect, sustainability is brought up – and one gets a profound sense from guys like the founders of IDEO of how the issue has come from nowhere, to be top priority, within just a few decades. The most pertinent comment that stemmed from this was a question about how designers might challenge an oft-unmentioned fundamental behind design, which involves building obsolescence into products in order to create more and more crap, which the ten percent of the world’s population who already have way too much crap already, will go out and buy. It was pleasing that this led into a discussion about designing things that improve with age, and discussion of cradle-to-cradle design processes.
Yet I say the film frustrates, because points like this aren’t explored in enough depth. Perhaps this is the design nerd talking, but if we’re considering the future of the design of things, then the critical issues were only scratched at, without ever penetrating below the surface.
The perspective on how digital interaction and the microchip has the power to change the form of products – but how it doesn’t appear to be doing so in many cases (cameras as the example) – was thought provoking. Chris Bangle once again talked about the importance of the product as a personal avatar – asking the question of what the generation growing up today truly wants from its products. He wondered out loud as to whether it would be a service-based function, or a form-based desire.
I kept trying to work out who the film was aimed at. Its makers appear to be trying to walk a fine line between appealing to a mass, non-designer audience, and providing brain food for those already in the profession. By a hair’s width they get away with it, because overall it’s an appealing watch, and to a designer, much of what goes unsaid here is the interesting, thought-provoking part.
The burning issue is not simply how designers use their skills to make the world a better place (which is what everyone sets out to do, right?). But how they actually break out from within the secretive walls of the studio, to go and really see and understand what’s happening in real people’s lives in the real world, involving them in the design process along the way. At present, certain design disciplines (I’m looking especially at you, automotive world) do this extremely badly. As one of the designers in the film suggested, sometimes the most innovative, clever designs, aren’t designed at all. They’re just elegant, impromptu solutions that someone with no formal training has created to solve a specific problem. Objectified reminds us that we would all do well to remember that.
Joseph Simpson watched Objectifed at The Barbican Cinema in London on 26th May 2009 - you can find out where more showings will be taking place, around the World, at the Objectified website, here.
