SlotForum banner

Design with a pencil

10K views 154 replies 24 participants last post by  rem 
#1 ·
There were days long ago when computers, and their aid to design, hadn't been thought of, or applied. To design a car a man picked up a pencil, and designed... a car. They didn't make a bad job of it. Did they?
Automotive design Automotive lighting Vehicle Grey Camera accessory
Grille Hood Automotive lighting Automotive design Motor vehicle
Water Automotive tire Automotive design Automotive lighting Hood
Motor vehicle Automotive design Bicycle part Rim Steering wheel
Car Automotive lighting Grille Hood Motor vehicle
Hood Motor vehicle Automotive lighting Automotive design Grey
Automotive design Font Motor vehicle Auto part Electric blue
Land vehicle Vehicle Car Grille Automotive lighting
Speedometer Odometer Gauge Vehicle Motor vehicle
Vehicle Car Grille Automotive lighting Hood
 
See less See more
10
#7 ·
Trisha, as for the first car designs...even today's cars first renders are still done with a pencil...and whether it's done with an HB pencil or a digital one...makes no difference at all.

What has changed however...is the paper. Those first designs were done on a clean sheet...where as the modern day designer has to scribble his ideas...between the directives already penned down by the Marketing department.

With kind regards
Tamar
 
#38 ·
Trisha, I agree but you left out one small thing…. A decent single malt whisky!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trisha
#19 ·
It has been interesting to watch the CAD "revolution" unfold. The computer allows average designers to make models and drawings of things they otherwise couldn't do by hand. However, they are still just average (at best) at design or engineering for that matter, so you see a large volume of mediocre work.

Before the CAD tools, only people with some genuine talent could really design anything.

I also think drawing by hand forces the designer to think through their choices and ideas much more completely. It is easy in modern CAD to just keep stacking features and parts until the desired objective is achieved, but it doesn't guarantee any elegance in the results.
 
#26 ·
I'd agree there PatB, and the Mk 1, with its curved front, was much nicer than the later 'gaping mouth' Mk 2.

I'm pleased to say that I was learning to 'drive' the Keller machine that cut the press tools for that Mk 1 front end at Pressed Steel in 1962.

And I know where the 'invisible fault' is on the RH headlamp housing. ;)
The Mk1 is my favourite too, although I think the Mk2 was a creditable updating effort without losing too much of the understated simplicity of the original.

I feel that Michelotti's work for Standard-Triumph and successors was something of a mixed bag. The Herald was very fussy, the Spitfire attractive but not outstanding (though I like them and consider them better looking than the blocky contemporary MGs), although the GT6 had some promise. The 2000 I consider a masterpiece, as I've said, although it's grand touring offspring, the Stag, does nothing for me whatsoever. The 1300/1500/Toledo/Dolomite family are competent, and pleasant enough in comparison with the Ford's and Vauxhalls they were in competition with, but their dimensions more or less preclude the perfection of proportion achieved with the 2000.
 
#27 ·
Occasionally, when I see cars from the 1960s on public roads, there are two things that strike immediately. The first is their diminutive size by comparison with today's elephantine offerings, and second the huge body overhang they have.

The E-Type is a good example of the latter. 'Filling up' the wheel arches is a modern facet of design I applaud.
 
Top