(UPDATED 12/15/2022)
Volkswagen Group’s global design chief Walter de Silva is worried that optimizing aerodynamics in order to meet tightening emissions standards could hurt aesthetics and branding.
In an Automotive News question-and-answer piece, he complained that within the next decade the auto industry could become more like the aerospace industry, where achieving low drag coefficients could dictate the shape of exteriors to the degree that designers “can only influence the exterior graphics and color. True creativity is relegated to the interior” (Ciferri, 2014).
For example, de Silva pointed to the third-generation Toyota Prius and Honda Insight as having “almost identical” proportions and side profiles. He argued that the “only way to distinguish one from the other is with graphic elements.”
Missing the good old days that never were
This is similar to the narrative that aerodynamics are the reason today’s cars display less originality than those of the glorious 1960s. I critiqued that perspective here by arguing that in the good old days platform sharing and industry groupthink placed as many limits on design creativity as any regulations the auto industry has subsequently had to implement, such as fuel economy standards.
Yes, the Prius and Insight have similar proportions. But so do many mid-sized family cars, such as the Ford Fusion and Nissan Altima. I don’t think you can reasonably argue that the latter examples are primarily the result of aerodynamic considerations. So many contemporary cars look similar because automakers are usually afraid to deviate from market norms.
Also see ‘Yes, but WHY do today’s automobiles look so similar?’
I suppose it is less risky for designers to complain about the government than pennywise, pound-foolish corporate bean counters and risk-averse executives. Nevertheless, this line of discussion can perpetuate the industry’s reputation as fixated on superfluous glitz rather than meeting society’s needs.
Just as importantly, de Silva’s comments illustrate the dysfunctional silos between the styling, engineering, production and marketing wings of a typical contemporary automaker. He doesn’t appear to get that branding should be much more than an exercise in stylistic “creativity.”
Failing to recognize the genius of VW’s design heritage
It’s particularly sad to see such myopic thinking from a VW executive. More than any other major automaker, VW’s early success was built upon an iconoclastic vehicle whose branding was not grounded in styling. Quite the opposite.
The original Beetle was designed with a form-follows-function philosophy that somehow continued to permeate the post-war company for a number of decades. The basic shape of the car was dictated by engineering considerations, such as the placement of the engine in back and maximizing aerodynamics. And unlike just about every other major automaker of that era, after the war VW militantly rejected planned obsolescence, which is dominated by styling considerations. Instead, the company focused on incrementally improving the functionality of the Beetle (Hiott, 2012).
Also see ‘If you ran VW in 1959 how would you prepare for Detroit’s compacts?’
By the same token, when VW entered the U.S. market it placed an emphasis on addressing concerns about foreign cars such as parts availability. This was a crucial reason why VW was one of the few imported brands that easily weathered Detroit’s wave of compact cars in the early 1960s.
As a thought experiment, imagine putting de Silva in a time machine that travels back to 1960. His assignment is to advise VW executives about the Beetle’s design evolution. I am not seeing any indication that he would have the good sense to protect and enhance the Beetle’s exceptional branding. This is because de Silva appears to believe that styling should be the tail that wags the dog.
Could CO2 regs help industry update obsolete ideas?
One could argue that the Beetle is the exception that proves the rule — that by and large form should significantly drive function. Otherwise automotive sales would permanently decline because a larger share of the public would view cars as utilitarian devices akin to refrigerators. This perspective is so central to industry groupthink that it is rarely discussed, let alone questioned in any meaningful way.
One of the reasons why climate-change regulations have the potential to challenge industry groupthink is that they may eventually force fundamental questions to be asked of automotive designers. For example, why shouldn’t aerodynamics significantly shape a car or truck if they reduce energy usage — and thus operating costs — as well as environmental destruction?
Might de Silva’s anxiety partially come from having to differentiate the VW Group’s eight brands (Skoda, SEAT, VW, Audi, Porsche, Bentley, Bugatti and Lamborghini)? If so, he might look on the bright side — here is VW’s excuse to prune its unwieldy product line and blame it on the government.
VW, like the auto industry in general, has arguably gone too far in dicing and slicing ever-smaller market niches that supposedly require styling-dominated branding.
By the same token, does de Silva implicitly assume that he possesses supernatural powers to look into the future and determine that no one will come up with satisfying ways to differentiate highly aerodynamic vehicles?
de Silva’s ‘tailoring a dwarf’ moment
History is dotted with executives who undercut their company’s viability by clinging to outdated ideas about the automobile’s ever-changing role in society.
Consider William Mitchell. When he became General Motors’ vice president of design in 1958, Mitchell was an aggressive reformer in that he championed a less ornate approach to styling than his predecessor, Harley Earl (Wikipedia, 2014). Yet by the time Mitchell retired in 1978 he had lost touch with the market.
Also see ‘John Z. DeLorean: Downsizing GM cars for 1973 was opposed by Mitchell’
Here was an unabashed big car guy. Mitchell famously compared styling a smaller car with tailoring a dwarf (Crippen, 1987). He even insisted that small cars “are like Vodka. Sure people will try them out, but they won’t stay with them” (Cray, 1980; p. 490).
Of course, Mitchell’s prediction turned out to be false — particularly with small cars developed by competitors that took them more seriously. John Z. DeLorean argued that Mitchell played a major role in keeping GM from responding to the rise of foreign automakers in the 1970s (Wright, 1979).
Yes, but VW’s styling has been better than most
I’m hesitant to criticize de Silva because the quality of VW’s styling in recent years has been significantly better than other major automakers. A big reason why is de Silva’s commitment to clean and tasteful designs.
That said, his retrograde views about aerodynamics raise the question of whether de Silva has reached a point where, like Mitchell, he no longer has the capacity to adapt to significantly changing market conditions.
Also see ‘Brand management: The tail that now wags U.S. auto industry’
Given VW’s heritage of unusually forward-looking and engineering-oriented management, I would think its design chief should view CO2 regulations as a positive challenge rather than a creative imposition. Toyota’s success with the Prius illustrates how automakers that display leadership in responding to climate change and fossil-fuel dependence will be rewarded in the marketplace.
VW deserves a design chief who has the skills and commitment to help the company become the industry’s clear leader in aerodynamics — particularly for mass-market vehicles. Can de Silva change his stripes or does he need to retire sooner rather than later?
NOTES:
This story was originally posted on July 27, 2014 and updated on Dec. 15, 2022.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Ciferri, Luca; 2014. “VW’s de’ Silva: CO2 rules will hurt design.” Automotive News Europe (subscription required). Posted May 6.
Cray, Ed; 1980. Chrome Colossus: General Motors and Its Times. McGray-Hill Book Co., New York, NY.- Crippen, David R.; 1987. “The Reminiscences of William L. Mitchell.” Automobile in American Life and Society. Posted May 8.
- Hiott, Andrea; 2012. Thinking Small: The Long, Strange Trip of the Volkswagen Beetle. Ballatine Books, New York, NY.
- Wikipedia; 2014. “Bill Mitchell (designer).” Page last modified, April 22.
- Wright, J. Patrick; 1979. On A Clear Day You Can See General Motors. Wright Enterprises, Grosse Pointe, MI.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- wildaboutcarsonline.com (Automotive History Preservation Society): Volkswagen (1961)
One of the most significant designs of the 1980s was the Audi 5000 which was a real attempt to aerodynamically smooth out most of the details of the sedan. It’s hard to believe that the elegant Audi is pushing 40-years-old. Microprocessors were still evolving to allow for more efficient engine management, so aerodynamic and weight-saving designs were the reliable ways to incrementally increase the return mileage of vehicles.