Audi’s Preference for Styling Over Design Considered. The 2014 Prologue suggests Ingolstadt is losing its way.
One of the most satisfying aspects of Mercedes’ design for many decades was that styling served to make engineering and production needs aesthetically acceptable. This meant the vehicles had an inherent correctness that makes their 60s to 80s cars look good today. Audi also cleaved to this formula though you’d have to look at a photo since these cars are quite rare now.
The pattern was already in place for the Audi 100 of 1972. The 1982 100 saloon is striking for its freshness. I had to double-check the year of production. It could just as easily been a 1989 design. What you will note is the tight fit between the shutlines, graphics and sculpture. It’s what I call harmonic.
Unfortunately, Audi have changed direction. I am not sure why as their formula of contemporary classicism, the purest industrial design, has served them very well.
The Audi A5 of 2007 foreshadowed Audi’s turn towards styling for its own sake. The car has a sinuous feature line down the flank. Such an organic shape, though discrete, is markedly different in principle from Audi’s custom of the simplest lines at all times. Given that the rest of the car is calm and orderly, the feature line can be excused as a grace note.
It is made pleasant and acceptable as a mild contrast to the rationalism prevalent elsewhere. I think it would be excessive to say it looks incorrect. I don’t want to overstate my lack of warmth towards this feature. The A5 is as very pleasant and stylish car overall which is to say that were I given sufficient funds and a garage, I’d be happy to have one.
Other small changes to Audi’s design principles are in the small scale sculpture. The Q3 of 2011 has a less pronounced feature line compared to the A5 but it has more sculpting so as to create a shadow on the lower side and a highlight on the upper side. That’s pure styling. You could delete the feature from the car and it would be none the worse for it.
Moving to 2014, Audi showed the Prologue concept car which is notable for its Citroen-esque interior (compare it to a GS of 1971) and the manner in which styling now dominates over rational design on the exterior. The explanation is that “yacht-inspired styling” is now re-shaping the brand. As is now obligatory, Mark Lichte, Audi’s chief designer says he “is eager to push Audi’s exterior designs in a sportier, more progressive realm”.
How is this increased sportiness and progressiveness manifested? There is the extremely marked bright-work around the side glass and, more importantly, a blizzard of feature lines down the side. The shutline from rear bumper to body is not aligned to the crease above it. Heresy.
Note the way the central line under the side glass is discontinuous with the ones over the front and rear wheels. Pure fashion. Ford did this on the Mk3 Focus and it doesn’t look good there either. For Ford this kind of styling is part of their usual approach to design and is not pleasing but not jarring either. Ford are a pragmatic firm.
My contention is that Audi’s shift from austere, rational design to more overt styling is a false path. The Prologue is, in itself, a professional bit of work but it buys attention at the expense of a tradition that has served Audi very well for decades. The Prologue adds styling but loses the valuable Audi-ness that is one of the reasons people like and buy these cars.
Audi have managed the tricky art of renewing their models but not at the cost of making their outgoing cars look dated. What will Audi do next is the question. Adding capricious styling might draw looks and make some sales now. This direction has no obvious way forward, however. The next models will look different in some other way – and that’s how Ford, Renault, Fiat and others proceed. That should not be Audi’s path.