Detroit 2009: College for Creative Studies students reimagine the car
Posted Jan 20th 2009 7:10PM by Sebastian Blanco
Click on the image above for a high-res gallery of the concept models
Vehicle models designed by students at the College For Creative Studies are on display at Cobo Hall as part of the Detroit Auto Show this year. Fanciful and outlandish, these models give an idea of what the automobile of the future could be like. That vehicle above, for example, is a redesigned Model T. Other examples of student creativity:
- A unique battery recharging station
- A Speed Racer-esqe Honda
- Something that looks like it should be pulled by a horse
Most of these flights of fancy have a green message, which shouldn't be a surprise. There's a biodiesel race car, for example. Check out a video after the break and you can see more futuristic vehicle ideas in the Design Challenge Motorsports 2025 from the LA Auto Show.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Ignatius 8:52PM (1/20/2009)
Obviously a design team doesn't have safety in mind...
Reply
T 10:51PM (5/15/2009)
This wasn't a team project. Automotive design teams typically have 2 years to factor in safety and ergonomics, this only represents the first stage of the process and it was done by 1 student in 16 weeks (4 or 5 spent just on the model).
Gary 9:04AM (1/21/2009)
Ignatius... you said it.
My first thought was... these would never pass a safety (crash) test. Then I started to wonder how the driver would see out when there wasn't a windshield or side windows or lights or rear view mirrors or...
Fanciful doodling like this, while interesting to look at, sets expectations that are unrealistic. Look at the Volt. The prototype was mostly well received from a design perspective. Then they stuck it in a wind tunnel and realized it needed major changes. Now the Volt design looks quite generic and makes me think of a whole slew of other vehicles out there.
Doodle to reality just disappoints as long as the doodlers don't factor in real world constraints and requirements. Show off designs that actual might have a chance at making it to production with minimal to no changes.
Reply
T 10:52PM (5/15/2009)
Missed the reply button. See below.
jpm 12:47PM (1/21/2009)
Dam that's ugly, no offense.
Reply
T 10:54PM (5/15/2009)
Hahaha. Agreed. Just remember one person's ugly is another person's beautiful. The real question is if it's a successful design or not.
Waldrich 12:14PM (1/22/2009)
Many questions, I have:
Why do they all have 4 wheels? Why do they all sit low to the ground? Why do the forms all have multiple compound curves? Was the cost of tooling considered? Why is the glasswork so complicated? Why are the tyres so enormous? Were cultural visual language issues taken into consideration? How does one of limited physical ability use it? Have any of the students or faculty read "Design for the Real World" by Victor Papanek or "Form, Function & Design" by Paul Jacques Grillo?
Reply
T 10:25PM (5/15/2009)
1: Because it's the automotive class. the transportation class deals with the 2,3,5+ wheeled vehicles.
2. Low stances and big wheels add drama and emotion to the design. Concept cars that you see at the auto shows are the same way.
3. No it wasn't.
4. Who said that was glass? Although, you should check out what PGW has been able to do with glass these days.
5. See #2.
6. I'd be surprised if they did.
7. The same way that they use any other car.
8. I can't speak for every other student or teacher on their reading habits, but I have read the "Art of Innovation," which is about IDEO's design process and how they take into account real world problems and issues.
Right now I'm a 2nd year Trans design student at CCS and I've witnessed first hand that the "CCS culture" is centered around styling more than actual design, an issue that I'm trying to change through leading by example, but you're correct in noticing that a lot of these designs have their shortcomings.
T 10:24PM (5/15/2009)
While some of these designs are more conceptual than others, you seem to have a very narrow view on what a "car" should be. The assignment they were given was to redesign the model T for the 21st century. By 2070 we might not be using side mirrors to see around the vehicle, we might not be looking through a glass windshield to see the road, and the term "driver" might not be referring to a single human located inside the vehicle using manual controls. You mentioned setting "expectations that are unrealistic" in the same paragraph as the Chevy Volt, which tells me that you're missing the whole point. Electric cars like the Volt WOULDN'T EXIST if no one had challenged realistic expectations.
I'm going to disregard the wind tunnel comment assuming that you know just how much those tests cost. CCS barely covers lunch at our student gov't meetings, so I don't think they'll spring for a wind tunnel.
I agree that concept cars need to factor in real world constraints and requirements, but those 2 factors are constantly being revised and there's no way to predict what they'll be 50+ years from now. I suggest you look at the concept vehicles from the 2008 LA Design Challenge and go bother Mitsubishi or Honda about "real world constraints". Oh, and take note of how many have side mirrors.
Reply
Martin 11:13AM (5/22/2009)
If you don't have a wind tunnel or software that will simulate air movement, then you should not be designing things that move and require huge amounts of expensive fuel to do so. Otherwise, you are just designing clever looking objects, which is highly questionable.