RE: Nissan GT-R ... design classic? PH Blog
Discussion
amusingduck said:
I find it highly amusing that you criticise the GT-R interior, when this is yours:
I'm glad I've amused, you 
you have found no other comeback apart from criticising a Volvo interior...you need to read up on your Swedish car interior design history my friend 
.....The C30 specifically has very clean (boardering on bland) lines as can be seen, but it is not a mess or ugly.I find it amusing that "a 'keyboard warrior' like me who has probably never driven the GTR" has to....
Why do I have to drive it to recognise the aestehtic mess interior wise?
Surely driving a car has more to do with its performance and feel, no?
It may be lifted by colour and material, but like a car that needs a colour and specific wheels to look good, if it needs those things to look half decent then the underlying design is pants...
Shame really as the other than the front end the rest of the car is a powerhouse, literally and aesthetically (although I've never driven one
)Agoogy said:
Why do I have to drive it to recognise the aestehtic mess interior wise?
Surely driving a car has more to do with its performance and feel, no?
It may be lifted by colour and material, but like a car that needs a colour and specific wheels to look good, if it needs those things to look half decent then the underlying design is pants...
Interior design is more about ergonomics than anything else (how's your Volvo's interior in that respect?) whereas you seem to be talking about interior styling.Surely driving a car has more to do with its performance and feel, no?
It may be lifted by colour and material, but like a car that needs a colour and specific wheels to look good, if it needs those things to look half decent then the underlying design is pants...
Ergonomics are quite often totally ignored in these discussions. I'm particularly interested in the differences between LHD and RHD versions of the same model, for example.
And if you've never driven one, how can you know how they work from an ergonomic aspect?
I'm a little biased (have owned a R34 and R33 GTR), but I think it has a beauty of its own. Like art, it speaks to people in different ways, some not at all, others in spades.
The fact it is so large, and heavy, whilst seemingly defying the laws of physics is a beautiful trait in its own right in my humble opinion. You get the feeling that every line on the car has a job to do in achieving that goal. It's the poster child for "hiding one's weight".
That being said it is definitely an acquired taste.
The fact it is so large, and heavy, whilst seemingly defying the laws of physics is a beautiful trait in its own right in my humble opinion. You get the feeling that every line on the car has a job to do in achieving that goal. It's the poster child for "hiding one's weight".
That being said it is definitely an acquired taste.
PZR said:
Interior design is more about ergonomics than anything else (how's your Volvo's interior in that respect?) whereas you seem to be talking about interior styling.
Ergonomics are quite often totally ignored in these discussions. I'm particularly interested in the differences between LHD and RHD versions of the same model, for example.
And if you've never driven one, how can you know how they work from an ergonomic aspect?
quite so, which is why I usd the word 'aesthetic'......Ergonomics are quite often totally ignored in these discussions. I'm particularly interested in the differences between LHD and RHD versions of the same model, for example.
And if you've never driven one, how can you know how they work from an ergonomic aspect?
The ergonomics in my car are superb thanks, as in most Volvo's.
'Design' is generally the title header of how something looks, how it performs is an (important aspect), of course...depending on the product form can follow function or vice versa.... Ergomics is a science and contributory factor of anything where the human body has to interact with a product. In this regard we all know old Italian cars fail, and Swedish cars succeed....most modern cars now, have the science nailed, apart from the odd example.
So accepting that the car interior is a form that follows function, and that that function is generally accepted and nailed down... What we're left with to subjectively discuss is the look....
And the GTR fails in it's look IMO.
selym said:
So his choice of car doesn't make his opinion on the GTR styling any less valid then, does it?
It does. Had I visited his profile and saw that he drives an XJR (for example), I wouldn't have posted. If the GT-R's interior is "one of the worst in any class of car", what does that make the C30 interior?
We shouldn't confuse terrific design with 'pretty'. Great designs are all about clarity of purpose - you look at something and are left in no doubt as to what it does, or what it's for.
So, for example, this is often bandied about as a 'design classic', because it looks pretty:
But, it's clarity of utility isn't all that clear. Is it a lemon juicer or a sex aid?
This is also often talked about as a design classic:
...purely because it's purpose and its utility are so clear from the design. It's partly wooden, modular, so easy to fix, but it looks scary, like it's killing without even being fired.
The GT-R is a great design, because it's absolutely clear what it's designed to do. Go fast and try to scare you a bit. It's angular - cut to slice through the air, and the rear looks like all that air will be sliced and spat out the huge pipes. It looks fast, aggressive, and distinctly japanese. It's a design not of a time, but of a place and culture.
It's awesome. One of my big regrets is that I didn't follow through on my order when it first came out. b
d banking collapse saw to that
So, for example, this is often bandied about as a 'design classic', because it looks pretty:
But, it's clarity of utility isn't all that clear. Is it a lemon juicer or a sex aid?
This is also often talked about as a design classic:
...purely because it's purpose and its utility are so clear from the design. It's partly wooden, modular, so easy to fix, but it looks scary, like it's killing without even being fired.
The GT-R is a great design, because it's absolutely clear what it's designed to do. Go fast and try to scare you a bit. It's angular - cut to slice through the air, and the rear looks like all that air will be sliced and spat out the huge pipes. It looks fast, aggressive, and distinctly japanese. It's a design not of a time, but of a place and culture.
It's awesome. One of my big regrets is that I didn't follow through on my order when it first came out. b
d banking collapse saw to that Agoogy said:
PZR said:
Interior design is more about ergonomics than anything else (how's your Volvo's interior in that respect?) whereas you seem to be talking about interior styling.
Ergonomics are quite often totally ignored in these discussions. I'm particularly interested in the differences between LHD and RHD versions of the same model, for example.
And if you've never driven one, how can you know how they work from an ergonomic aspect?
quite so, which is why I usd the word 'aesthetic'......Ergonomics are quite often totally ignored in these discussions. I'm particularly interested in the differences between LHD and RHD versions of the same model, for example.
And if you've never driven one, how can you know how they work from an ergonomic aspect?
The ergonomics in my car are superb thanks, as in most Volvo's.
Agoogy said:
'Design' is generally the title header of how something looks...
Maybe to the layman, but not for somebody with an engineering background.Agoogy said:
So accepting that the car interior is a form that follows function, and that that function is generally accepted and nailed down... What we're left with to subjectively discuss is the look....
And the GTR fails in it's look IMO.
"Fails in its look"..? Bizarre statement. Aren't you just saying that you don't like it? How can you judge it as having 'failed' unless you know what the stylists, designers and engineers set out to achieve, and what constraints (like cost, for example) they were working under? And the GTR fails in it's look IMO.
Elsewhere I see you waxing lyrical about the new Challenger R/T (an example of modern 'Retro' styling), which I presume "Succeeds in its look"...?
amusingduck said:
selym said:
So his choice of car doesn't make his opinion on the GTR styling any less valid then, does it?
It does. Had I visited his profile and saw that he drives an XJR (for example), I wouldn't have posted. If the GT-R's interior is "one of the worst in any class of car", what does that make the C30 interior?
Using your flawed logic, how dare you comment on a Volvo owners opinion when you own an Octavia? Is that fair? No, it isn't but that is exactly what you are doing to him.
PZR said:
Agoogy said:
PZR said:
Interior design is more about ergonomics than anything else (how's your Volvo's interior in that respect?) whereas you seem to be talking about interior styling.
Ergonomics are quite often totally ignored in these discussions. I'm particularly interested in the differences between LHD and RHD versions of the same model, for example.
And if you've never driven one, how can you know how they work from an ergonomic aspect?
quite so, which is why I usd the word 'aesthetic'......Ergonomics are quite often totally ignored in these discussions. I'm particularly interested in the differences between LHD and RHD versions of the same model, for example.
And if you've never driven one, how can you know how they work from an ergonomic aspect?
The ergonomics in my car are superb thanks, as in most Volvo's.
PZR said:
Agoogy said:
'Design' is generally the title header of how something looks...
Maybe to the layman, but not for somebody with an engineering background.PZR said:
Agoogy said:
So accepting that the car interior is a form that follows function, and that that function is generally accepted and nailed down... What we're left with to subjectively discuss is the look....
And the GTR fails in it's look IMO.
"Fails in its look"..? Bizarre statement. Aren't you just saying that you don't like it? How can you judge it as having 'failed' unless you know what the stylists, designers and engineers set out to achieve, and what constraints (like cost, for example) they were working under? And the GTR fails in it's look IMO.
Elsewhere I see you waxing lyrical about the new Challenger R/T (an example of modern 'Retro' styling), which I presume "Succeeds in its look"...?
Yes I am just saying I don't like it, (aesthetic)design is subjective, I'm giving my opinion based on the OP.
and yes I think the Challenger succeeds in it's look. Thanks for looking up my other posts to confirm back to me what I like
amusingduck said:
It does. Had I visited his profile and saw that he drives an XJR (for example), I wouldn't have posted.
I don't know where to start I have to own/drive a car of similar ilk, value or something to comment? hahaha.... oh dear
amusingduck said:
If the GT-R's interior is "one of the worst in any class of car", what does that make the C30 interior?
better...IMOPunterCam said:
Never a classic. It brought about the end of the analogue sportscar, so one has to hate it.
It is just an option, it didnt end anything, it brought new stuff to the party, and to be honest, if a car is enjoyable I dont care how it does it, GTR with all its electronics or a Healey on carbs, dont care if the end result is fun.PunterCam said:
I've never thought the GTR was attractive. I actually find it pretty ugly, and then you see it in the flesh and it looks even more ridiculous. It's massive, to the point of it being a joke. And presence? None at all. Just a big Japanese coupe. A similar presence to a honda legend coupe?
Capable, but so undesirable.
Details date , proportions are forever. It's already looking a bit silly, I don't think it will age well, not that anyone will be able to afford to run one on 10 years!
Never a classic. It brought about the end of the analogue sportscar, so one has to hate it.
Thanks for sharing your opinions, which are incidentally, like a'holes - everyone has one...Capable, but so undesirable.
Details date , proportions are forever. It's already looking a bit silly, I don't think it will age well, not that anyone will be able to afford to run one on 10 years!
Never a classic. It brought about the end of the analogue sportscar, so one has to hate it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff