Tesla sponsored a concept by the Instituto Europeo di Design of Turin and the well-known design school didn’t disappoint.  Assuming all you’re after is EYE candy, of course.

The concept, called the EYE, was showcased at the Geneva Motor Show and features some very forward looks and style.  A model of the design was on display at the show and Auto Blog Green got photos.  One of those appears here, along with the IED’s official CAD-produced model (below).

One look and you can see that aerodynamically, this car is unrealistic.  I mentioned that much at FutureCars.  That’s the obvious bit.  What I wanted to note was the style trend itself, which appears in a lot of recent concepts.  While the looks of this care are definitely unique (mainly because of that front fascia), they are part of a larger, overall trend in design concepts I’ve seen the past year or so.

Have a look at the computer-produced model here and tell me what you see in the overall design of the car itself – the whole look, not just the interesting front end..

With the details removed (door lines and such), you can see the general look of the car without eye-sucking details to distract you.  What you’re seeing is that general half-moon shape that most cars seem to be taking now days – a shape that is highly conducive to aerodynamics and slipstream testing from both front and side.

Also note, though, that the windows appear to be the entire top end of the car – the whole passenger compartment is one giant window.  In real life, this rarely happens in a production car because of several key factors: safety, practicality, and cost.

The safety part is obvious, though a well-designed roll cage can be integrated into the fish-tank-like glass dome without being too obtrusive. Although this does little to stop shrapnel and bits of whatever in a wreck from penetrating the interior.  In any case, safety requirements can be met while retaining the generally fish-tank look of the windows.

Practicality is the big one, though.  The more glass a car has, the hotter it gets inside.  The interior of a car is basically a terrarium and the more glass it has, the more exposure to sunlight (heat) it gets.  Thus the higher cost (in energy) to combat that for comfort.  Any generally round-shaped interior with a fair amount of glass gets this way.

Finally, we come to cost.  Glass costs money.  The panel bits and little metal parts they fabricate to hold them in place in non-structural areas of the car are relatively cheap.  This is why most cars don’t use a ton of glass in their cab work.  A roll cage is cheaper to build if you don’t have to try to hide it and plastic/fiberglass panel parts are cheaper to mass produce and slap on the car than is safety glass with UV protective films and all that go with it.

Despite all of this, most concepts appear to be trending towards the glass dome (they’re always dark, though, so I wouldn’t go so far as to say “Pope Dome”) look.  I suppose this is to give the car the automatic “future” feel that this kind of design can emulate, but I think it’s more to do with just general style trends.  Since designers, like any other group of people, tend to hang out with each other, read the same magazines, look at the same photographs of others’ designs, etc. it seems obvious that their trends would follow one another as well.

This happens in other clique groups too.  Computer geeks, for instance, all generally have the same habits, speech patterns, and flock to the same sites and magazines.  They create their own jargon and eat the same kinds of foods and consider the same kinds of things as being “cool.”

So, currently, I guess the darkened terrarium look for auto design is fashionable amongst the design set.  I personally find it annoying and see no “style” in a big chunk of darkened glass on top of a vehicle.  But hey, I’m a fan of Unimogs and tractors.  Some would say that this hardly qualifies me as a design critic.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.