DCK Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 (edited) http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs....YLE06/609130314 DEARBORN, Mich. — Auto designer Peter Horbury looks remarkably calm for a man whose boss once let the world know that Ford Motor Co.'s future depended on him. It was January, and Ford Americas boss Mark Fields had just laid out a distressing list of layoffs and plant closures that made up the company's recovery plan, the Way Forward. Then Fields declared that shrinking Ford wouldn't solve the company's problems. “The Way Forward begins in the design studio,†he said. Seven months later, the 56-year-old Horbury, an English-born designer who oversaw Volvo's styling renaissance before taking over Ford, Lincoln and Mercury design in 2004, is relaxed enough to make jokes about his new boss, former Boeing executive Alan Mulally. Last week's appointment of the aerospace engineer as Ford CEO and president “means the return of the tailfin,†to automotive design, Horbury said with a laugh. Photos of recent Ford concept vehicles flanked him, including the boxy wagonlike Fairlane, one of the first projects he oversaw. Here's what you can expect in design for the Ford brands he will oversee: Ford Bland is banned. Horbury wants polarizing vehicles. “If you have a huge customer base and try not to upset anybody, you'll never excite anybody,†Horbury said. “If I designed something half the American public hated, I wouldn't mind as long as the other half loved it. That's a lot of people, half the American population.†The model line will have some common elements, but buyers shouldn't notice them beyond an immediate recognition that the vehicle is a Ford. The chrome three-bar grille on the Fusion is a design element Ford will use broadly, he said. “That grille is the bright American smile. It's outgoing. It's 'Hi, pleased to meet you,'†he said. “The optimism of the pioneers that's driven America ... if you can translate that into the sheet metal of the cars, it'll attract American buyers.†Lincoln The brand's smaller sales numbers demand a more consistent family look than Ford will have. Horbury and his staff have been mining the brand's rich history for future design elements. “We were able to look back through the history of Lincoln and find examples of cars that were memorable,†Horbury said. He won't say which ones, other than the 1961 Continental, but the list includes models from every decade beginning in the 1930s and ending in the '80s. The recently revealed MKS luxury sedan has some of those features, but future models will have more, he said. “We may not use all the design elements, but if you use four out of six, you still get a Lincoln,†he said. Trucks Horbury's career designing cars in Europe didn't give him much exposure to trucks, and he brings an interesting outsider's perspective to the vehicles that account for most of Ford's income. The pickup and SUV are direct descendants of the American pioneer move into the West, he said. “The pickup is the ranch wagon, and the SUV is the covered wagon,†he said. The Edge SUV that goes on sale this fall takes the idea into the space age. “You've moved from the saddle to the cockpit,†he said. “That's a big move, but it's still an American hero: the fighter pilot sitting up in the front with the big glass screen and sitting up high.†Mercury Future Mercurys will look less like Fords than today's models, he said. A lot of that will be accomplished with unique colors and interior materials. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ As for the mercury statement all I can say is ............. :titanic: Also I am not too fond of the Lincoln retro designs, they are being over used, I believe lincoln should be a modern luxury car company, enough with these retro interiors. As for the rest, sounds great, Design is what made the freestyle and 500 duds, Two very good vehicles that were made terrible by their designs. Bright future for Ford brand, Lincoln could pull it off, Mercury seems to be a lost cause IMO. Edited September 13, 2006 by DCK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SysEng Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 (edited) So, it's gonna be more of the same? Badge engineering lives! And this guy comes from europe. Just what Ford really needs here... :rolleyes: OTOH, explains where the 3 bar grill comes from. Count the various makes from Mazda, to Nissan, Infiniti, etc... that all have these silly things. Fashion thats 5 years out of date. Edited September 13, 2006 by SysEng Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goingincirclez Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 OTOH, explains where the 3 bar grill comes from. Count the various makes from Mazda, to Nissan, Infiniti, etc... that all have these silly things. Fashion thats 5 years out of date. Don't forget Toyota... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 The chrome grill thing needs about another two years to become an "identity". One problem is that the Fusion is the lone offering until the Edge is out...then there's a whopping two Ford cars and a couple trucks sporting it. If they manage to incorporate it to the Five Hundred, Freestyle, and Focus next year without it getting stupid, then it becomes an identity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markfnc Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 (edited) I always thought the 3 bar grill looked like the "new" cadillac. and too much of the same thing gets pretty old (see the dodge cross hairs, or the mega grills on all dodge trucks). Too much of the same thng makes it all boring. Edited September 14, 2006 by markfnc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sizzler Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs....YLE06/609130314 ... Horbury's career designing cars in Europe didn't give him much exposure to trucks, and he brings an interesting outsider's perspective to the vehicles that account for most of Ford's income. ... The Edge SUV that goes on sale this fall takes the idea into the space age. “You've moved from the saddle to the cockpit,†he said. “That's a big move, but it's still an American hero: the fighter pilot sitting up in the front with the big glass screen and sitting up high.†Outsider or geriatric viewpoint? How old is this guy? I want to be a fighter pilot?! I want to be an astronaut?! Yeah, if I like moving the joystick when some yahoo a thousand miles away tells me to or if I like firing off the missles at something I can't see, won't see, and just as well don't care to see. Maybe when enduring big G's in an RV that's not under my control or direction and that, when it (not I) run into trouble, relies on a computer or those yahoo's thousands of miles away to fix, while I laze about in a ruminative state considering the years I've wasted to get into this smelly tin can with camera's and telemetry literally up my yingyang being monitored by perverts around the world. Yeah, make me a vehicle where I'm just a wart and that drives itself, fixes itself, and decides for itself where to go and how best to get there. I want to be a fighter pilot; right. Strap me in, lock me down, tell me what to do. The American way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 It's not about the reality of those jobs, it's the perception. Geez. Didn't you pay attention to "A Space Oddity"? Or "Rocket Man"? The papers wanted to know whose shirts Major Tom wore. He was a hero. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sizzler Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 It's not about the reality of those jobs, it's the perception. Geez. Didn't you pay attention to "A Space Oddity"? Or "Rocket Man"? The papers wanted to know whose shirts Major Tom wore. He was a hero. and how OLD is Major Tom today? Still stuck in the 70's? When Rocket Man came out there were still a lot of cars with fins slouching down the byways and stuck in the gutters. They've finally gone away and been cleaned up now that we've gotten into the 21st century. It's an oldster's perception. I think people TODAY are a little more tuned into the actual REALITY of being a cheap ECM for the joystick jockeys huddled safely away thousands of miles away. Did you SEE the latest batch of shuttle hitchers? Obviously PE is not required in schools anymore, or in the Air Force (is that where they come from nowadays?). Yeah, I want to ride a lazyboy into near space and back again taking up a mass allowance that might be better served with a robotic contraption that could accomplish 10 times the experiments I could. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 and how OLD is Major Tom today? Still stuck in the 70's? When Rocket Man came out there were still a lot of cars with fins slouching down the byways and stuck in the gutters. They've finally gone away and been cleaned up now that we've gotten into the 21st century. It's an oldster's perception. I think people TODAY are a little more tuned into the actual REALITY of being a cheap ECM for the joystick jockeys huddled safely away thousands of miles away. Did you SEE the latest batch of shuttle hitchers? Obviously PE is not required in schools anymore, or in the Air Force (is that where they come from nowadays?). Yeah, I want to ride a lazyboy into near space and back again taking up a mass allowance that might be better served with a robotic contraption that could accomplish 10 times the experiments I could. LOL...the endless pit o' negativity now decides that Peter Horbury, speaking of his wide view of American traditional icons (with fair accuracy, IMHO), is speaking from the geriatric standpoint!! Congrats on turning modern electronic warfare and space flight (if madly overgeneralized) into an uneven analogy on Ford's styling direction. You ARE aware that modern aircraft are capable of G-forces that can cause require thicker "trunks" on pilots? Anyway, way to make...well, fail to make a point. At least, I think that's what you were doing. It's hard to tell. Peter Horbury isn't from here, and he wants to look at what AMERICANS want. I think his statements showed a large view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 "When Rocket Man came out there were still a lot of cars with fins slouching down the byways and stuck in the gutters" And now, mint condition 'finned dinosaurs' bring in 6 figures at collector car auctions. ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 and how OLD is Major Tom today? I thought about putting a note at the end that said "(tongue in cheek)" Decided against it because it seemed too obvious. WRONG!!! Just jerkin' your chain sizzler. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harley Lover Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 (edited) The instant negativeness is unreal. I don't care what Horbury says per se, as he's only attempting to explain his thinking. I care tremendously about what he designs, and how it looks. If he delivers the goods, then he's done his job. Since we've seen virtually nothing of his work thus far, give him a chance to reveal the designs first. Hopefully, we'll get something at the new Los Angeles show in December, and of course we should see quite a bit at NAIAS in January. Arguing over the words of a designer - come on, he's not a novelist! Edited September 13, 2006 by Harley Lover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 Bland is banned. Horbury wants polarizing vehicles. “If you have a huge customer base and try not to upset anybody, you'll never excite anybody,†Horbury said. “If I designed something half the American public hated, I wouldn't mind as long as the other half loved it. That's a lot of people, half the American population.†Richard, what do you think of this philosophy? You have remarked over the past year that this is not a smart business tactic in your opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 I dunno, I've yet to see something from Ford that is truly polarizing. The Edge isn't, the Fusion isn't the Five Hundred certainly isn't. I wouldn't call the Explorer polarizing, so much as I'd call it ugly. I think it's dangerous to overly style vehicles (especially to the extent that it impedes real world operability). I also think that if you're going to some extreme stylewise, you have to do all your homework to make sure you don't fall flat on your face. "Edgy" styling can payoff big time, but like most things that carry big upsides, the downside is similarly big. Chrysler did alright with the 300, so-so with the Charger, terrible with the Magnum, and the Sebring looks like a total dud. It's very hard to be consistent, if you give your stylists too free a hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchdevil Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs....YLE06/609130314 “We were able to look back through the history of Lincoln and find examples of cars that were memorable,†Horbury said. He won't say which ones, other than the 1961 Continental, but the list includes models from every decade beginning in the 1930s and ending in the '80s. The recently revealed MKS luxury sedan has some of those features, but future models will have more, he said. “We may not use all the design elements, but if you use four out of six, you still get a Lincoln,†he said. I fail to see a single design element in the new MKS that looks historically like any Lincoln... All I see are design elements from several different imports from the present... Future Mercurys will look less like Fords than today's models, he said. A lot of that will be accomplished with unique colors and interior materials. Will someone please explain to me how paint colors and interior materials will make a Mercury look less like a Ford? It's unique exterior and interior style and design that will make Mercury look less like a Ford. The way it is now, Mercurys just look like luxury trimmed Fords with alternate grille, lamp and interior fabrics and trim. In the old days that was the difference between a Galaxie and LTD. Now Mercury IS the luxury model trim level of a Ford. And the Lincoln models are further differentated the way Mercurys used to be from Ford models. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sizzler Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 ...Congrats on turning modern electronic warfare and space flight (if madly overgeneralized) into an uneven analogy on Ford's styling direction. You ARE aware that modern aircraft are capable of G-forces that can cause require thicker "trunks" on pilots? Anyway, way to make...well, fail to make a point. Peter Horbury isn't from here, and he wants to look at what AMERICANS want. I think his statements showed a large view. yes, modern aircraft can do amazing things. more things than pilot-equiped aircraft currently allow. which is why the new direction in aircraft design does away with pilots. it is only the pilot unions today who keep pilots on board airliners today. aircraft could fly farther, probably better, certainly safer without pilots. truth. instead of having a warped time-sensical view of what modern man, would that be with-it guys? wants, why not just look at where things are headed and get there first? a foam-encased pod with viewscreens showing whatever: outside scenery, web, tv, family photos. said pod equiped with one, two, how-ever many lazyboy recliners. the place ground transport is going, if you're getting all spaceage, is: settly your fat-bottom into a plushy seat, speak or punch in your destination, sit back and endure the ride as best you can with the entertainment, communication, and/or gustatory options provided within your pod. I don't know why we send useless mass into space, I don't know why we're still using pilots, and I don't know why we don't just podify automobiles since "everyone wants to be 'safe'" is the driving consumer goal of the era. NOT fins, not size so much as womb-safe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sizzler Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 That....and common sense. :rolleyes: Atta counted on that 'common sense'. My common sense says its better to have locked in coordinates guiding a fully-armed aircraft than some guy who may be drunk, hungover, busy, tired, crazy, or suicidal. But that's just me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchdevil Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 (edited) So, it's gonna be more of the same? Badge engineering lives! Mercury's design on a dime team... Rest assured will be able to finally give us a Cougar in no time... Let them just whip up a chrome waterfall grille, taillamp reflector extensions for the decklid, plastic trim to cover up the hockey sticks, plastic interior wood trim, Cougar nameplates and emblems to put on the Mustang.... Oh yeah and don't forget the unique exterior colors and interior fabrics... Ah but they always have enough in the the budget to make unique cast aluminum wheels not shared with any Ford model... No need to change any sheetmetal, not even the bumper fascias or openings.... Just design Mercury styled parts to fit in them... Oh wait while they are at it... Let's do a Thunderbird on the Mustang... Whip up an eggcrate grille with a big bird in the middle... A full width decklid reflector with a big bird in the middle... and the finishing touch, a porthole window applique to fit in the triangle Mustang quarter window shape n the coupe... And a real glass porthole windows in the convertble tops... Inside... more bird emblems.... Oh yeah and unique exterior colors from the 1950's with matching co-ordinating interior trim.. Well it worked for the LS interior didn't it? At least the Cougar and Thunderbird will be able to take advantage of the nostalgia of the 1960's flowerpot steering wheel hub design same as the Mustang's.... Oh wow we are on a roll now... Lets do a Lincoln version... whip up the Lincoln grille, lamps and taillamp applique Mark LT style... WAIT A MINUTE... we have in the Lincoln budget puddle exterior lights and the retro 1960's dual cockpit dashboard from the Zephyr... Uh I mean MKZ... (which looks more like it was borrowed from the Zephyr of the 1970's) Well call this new Lincoln the MKMK... Now all we have to do is decide which grille... MKZ style or MKX... Scrap that... Lets just design it to look like an Acura... At this point I hope NONE of you are stupid enough to think that I am serious about this... Well, maybe the flower pot steering wheel.... Pretty soon, dealers will be shipped cars with no lamps, grilles and emblems... They will let the customer pick the Ford, Mercury or Lincoln box of brand identity parts at delivery time... Hell Ford might as well let the customers mix and match parts like "build your own bear". They could include a nameplate lettering kit and name it after their mother if they want to but they can be personally sued if they create a name that is similar to a car or unrelated consumer product of any other brand... However, they have a list of approved names you can use that require a monthly license fee of $49.99 per month... Edited September 14, 2006 by Watchdevil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sizzler Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 And my common sense says we have to have a human in the cockpit because computers are not infallible. And, if there were no pilots, then Atta would have only had to reprogram computers, and I bet he would have done more than 4. what Atta might have done is moot. It's what he DID do. And he was able to do it because a human had full control over the aircraft and was allowed to take it anywhere, point it at anything, he wanted. As for fallibility? The latest crash in Kentucky? was brought about because a human (several humans) missed the little fact that they were lined up on the wrong runway. No, computers may not be totally infallible, but I think their fallability rate is much much lower than straight-up human control. And with back up systems, computer fallibility declines exponentially. How many backup humans were around the plane lined up on the wrong runway? The pilot who put it there, the copilot who took over from the pilot, the air-traffic controller who didn't notice that, at his airport that he watched over day after day, the plane was pointed down the wrong runway, and the other air-traffic controller who wasn't around that day? Atta would not have 'just had to reprogram computers'. He would have had to override the built-in safeguards that would have prevented him from flying lower than x feet x miles from the nearest airport; that would have prevented him from deviating from a preprogrammed flight plan without authorization; that would have overriden his 'unsafe' piloting either programmatically or remotely. And this is not science fiction. There are very real, non-vaporware systems which have been developed and tested and presented to the FAA, airlines, controllers, airports and pilots. Guess who has been the major obstructionist force? All because a bunch of current-day caboose-tenders union guys want to wear wings. News flash: Cabooses are no more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 People wouldn't fly on a plane without a pilot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 People wouldn't fly on a plane without a pilot. I sure as hell wouldn't -- I program the things for a living... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemiman Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 I'm very hopeful! If his work at Volvo is any indicator, then we're in for some major improvements at Ford. Volvo defined bland on wheels for almost three decades. Anyone remember Robin Williams line, "Volvo, boxy but good" can't remember the name of the movie. Todays Volvos are the best styled ever, (maybe with the exception of the P-1800). I'm looking foreward to seeing his influence in Ford design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAC_Sparky Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 (edited) Speaking as someone that actually is a pilot, Sizzler, you have some serious misperceptions of avation and pilots as a whole, and about the reliability of in air avionics. If the aviation industry relied on electronic guidance to the extent you suggest, the results would make 9-11 look like a stubbed toe. Edited September 14, 2006 by OAC_Sparky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coupe3w Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 Where is J. Mays in all this? I thought he was the chief designer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted September 14, 2006 Share Posted September 14, 2006 Richard, what do you think of this philosophy? You have remarked over the past year that this is not a smart business tactic in your opinion. thats what the original Focus did, people did hate it but alot of people loved it, people just don't care about it now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.