I stand corrected.
1 Like
Why hasn’t this been posted yet?
It’s a Caterham Seven- an evolution (looking very similar, but with none of the same parts) of the Lotus 7 as seen in the opening titles of The Prisoner. The engines are modern- the top-end version will hit 60 mph in well under three seconds and beat almost any other road-legal car (Ferraris and McLarens included) around a track.
7 Likes
Personally, I’m more of a fan of the Westfield XI than the Caterham seven…
Not at all. It’s… Boring.
3 Likes
I’m curious how IP works in this context. Is the “look” of a car under copyright, or trademark? Is it a use-it-or-lose-it proposition, or is it something someone can sit on forever?
Automakers (and others) file design patents.
You can actually find some really cool art in design patent images:
1 Like
You’ll never see a car with a greenhouse like the Pacer again, under our “safety” regulations which apparently require individual airbags for the face, the knees, the earlobes, the armpits and the naughty bits.
1 Like
Most everything on the road I see today looks like vaguely bivalve-shaped “Generic Asian Car” as my sister calls them. And don’t get me started on the colors. You can have any color you like as long as it’s black, or white, or silver, or gray, or silver, or white, or gray, or black, or black, or silver, or white, or gray…
2 Likes
Aesthetically, I’ve never liked the safety trend toward a higher beltline, where the doors are taller and the windows shorter. Makes everyone look like they’re kids driving their parents’ car.
4 Likes
Not sure about this. For a while we were stuck in an era of fat pillars, incredibly high beltlines, and terrible visibility (all which ironically increased your chances of a crash in the name of increasing occupant safety).
That trend seems to finally be reversing thanks to improvements in metals and design. We’re starting to see new cars with thinner pillars, bigger panes of glass, and much improved visibility all while maintaining great crash ratings. Some cars I’ve driven from the last 4 or so years have some of the best visibility I’ve ever experienced in a vehicle.
2 Likes
Like @nemomen said. Also they file various trademarks vis a vis names badges trim levels and what have. I doubt any rebooted, new, retro design would fall afoul of past design patents. As anything in that regard would be wildly different than the original, even as it references the same. And plenty of cars make obvious reference to the design of past cars from other makes. But noone else is gonna be using the name “Pacer” but Fiat Chrysler (via Jeep).
2 Likes
In for the fancy, Dijon ketchup.
1 Like
That right there was my first car. It caught fire while I was driving it, but I loved it and I’ve been looking for one in reasonable shape (and at a reasonable price) ever since.
1 Like
Part of that is aerodynamics. For most models fuel economy matters a lot, and the smushed teardrop with a Kammback is the most efficient design for the problem. Sports cars aren’t as optimized for fuel economy, but are still optimized for aerodynamics (and downforce).
Another part is due to safety regulations for pedestrian impact safety - higher hoods, front end shapes, windshield angles, and a number of other design requirements to make it less likely you’ll kill someone when you hit them are required on new cars.
Regulations require one driver and one passenger airbag. Car companies add the rest since they’re a safety feature to help market the cars and improve NHTSA ratings which many buyers care about. A good NHTSA rating also improves insurance rates.
1 Like
When it comes to small and medium sized cars, everything is the same blob shape. I blame aerodynamics. I think it’s become harder and harder to come up with superficial flare that can make a car look distinctive while still eeking out decent mileage. Or at the other extreme, you have something like the Aptera which was quite distinctive because it was way more aerodynamic, but people tend to not be interested in something too different.
1 Like
Just missed it! Wait, define “reasonable” price 
3 Likes
I don’t get the scare quotes around “safety”.
I’m an auto enthusiast and I think the push toward improved safety (just like improved emissions) is a good thing! Why shouldn’t the impact of pedestrian impacts be reduced? I’ve been hit by a car as a pedestrian and even though it was at a low speed (I was hit by a car that was starting from a standstill) I still ended up with a severe sprain.
The real problem is the poor implementation of safety devices, and it’s an iterative process.
Everybody remember how terrible the cars of the late 70s/early 80s were when strict emissions controls were put into place? You had Corvettes with like 180 horsepower and 9 second 0-60 times. How ridiculous is that? There’s a reason this was called the “Malaise Era”. Then things got better; engines got more efficient and clunky emissions control systems improved thanks to things like computerization and fuel injection. These days you can drive a reasonably priced and well equipped family sedan that will blow the doors off a typical exotic from not too long ago all while getting 30MPG and putting out emissions on par with a mouse fart.
Safety is the same way. Regulations keep getting tougher (although I can see this changing in the future under 45 and his push to make us plebs all die out quicker), car buyers continue to prioritize crash safety, and automakers struggle to keep up. The recent introduction of the small overlap test from the IIHS (not NHTSA) really killed safety ratings for many vehicles and automakers had to react quickly – but damn if that isn’t a net win because those are some nasty crashes.
Anyway my point is like with emissions, safety is an iterative process but in the end once the designers and engineers figure out how to work well within the constraints, things will be much better for everybody.
Compare and contrast:
The person in the new car would walk away from this crash with a possibly broken leg or nose. The person in the old car would probably be killed or severely maimed.
6 Likes
The steady development of improved safety features and standards have worked and improved really well over time. If you sort the chart here by fatalities/100 million there’s a strong trend and it’s a very good one.
Indeed, testing that kind of really nasty crash has pushed car makers to respond, and the downsides to that just can’t compare to newer cars on the road faring better. And, yeah, it’s the IIHS, my bad there. When we’re car shopping we look at their ratings (and watch some crash videos) and rule out models that fare poorly, since having anyone in the fam. winding up maimed/disabled by a car crash is something to avoid.
2 Likes
The problem is that we don’t seem to be able to increase safety without adding so damn much weight. A new Miata weighs over 2500 pounds! Lighter cars would be better for the environment and in many cases a heckuva lot more fun to drive.
Damn! I only paid $400 for mine!
If I found one in good shape for 5K or less, I’d consider that a win.
