David Bowie once sang of cha-cha-cha-cha-changes, and when it comes to cars, the Thin White Duke’s message of transmutation could be taken to mean anything from minor modification or outright replacement. Sometimes a car maker hits the mark with a particular model and a year-over-year change is demanded, not by inequity but simply by expectation. In those cases the car maker typically tries to hew a narrow line between new and different and old-sock familiar.
The recently announced update to Audi’s A4 platform is an example of this. While on paper better in most of the important ways, it doesn’t seem to reflect all that much of a change in the metal. I’m not saying it’s a drab redesign as the A4 has and is a pretty taut design with few miscues in either the looks department or its mechanical specification. But is the 2016 a Meh update? And if it is not what cars have been?
Image: Audi USA
Hooniverse Asks: What has Been History's Most "Meh" Major Model Update?
By Robert Emslie
Jul 10, 2015
Jeff Glucker
Technically these are two different generations of F-150, not just yearly model changes.
8th gen.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/Ford_F-150_–_09-07-2009.jpg
9th gen.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/92-96_Ford-F150.jpg
Looks to me like the whole front clip and doors are significantly different.
Doors are the same, mirrors are different.
Yeah, OK, I was mostly focusing on the mirrors. I wonder if there’s a lot of difference under the skin, too.
Virtually none IIRC. Same engines, suspension. The dash changed, but it was still all parts bin vents, HVAC controls and stereo.
The last of the carbureted engines in the 8th-gen F-150 was 1987. The whole front clip was redesigned. The interior was completely redesigned as well. Just a few things off the top of my head.
They should have kept the ’80-’86 Front end through to ’92.
http://static.cargurus.com/images/site/2009/10/08/19/41/1984_ford_f-150-pic-4058292558250941545.jpeg
Yep. The 87-91 clip just looks outta place.
I always thought the 9th-gen 92-97 model was sort of a tribute to this. And yes, one of the best-looking trucks ever built.
I’d say every Audi ever since 2000.
I would completely agree.
Lexus LS400’s first to second generation. The most noticeable external difference was two- vs. one-piece headlamp covers.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/1995_Q45.jpg
And just like that, Infiniti established a Standard of Mehxcellence that they’ve fallen back into recently.
I know I am not entirely alone in this corner of weird when I say that meh taken to this level is coming around to be attractive in its own right again. I’d quasi-luxury the hell out of this fine vehicle.
I think separate from the knowledge of the original Q45, I’d be quite taken with the refreshed model – it’s still handsome, and slightly different. It’s just knowing just how aggressively…Japanese it was previously, normalizing it is disappointing.
The latest Lexus LS refresh, billed as a redesign.
Assuming that the “meh” descriptor excludes new gens that were truly face-plant, Mother-may-I-take-a-giant-step-backwards bumbleclusters (USDM Focus, 2nd gen Scion XB, 2011 Jetta), I would have to nominate the 2nd gen Fit. It was no worse on paper, and better in some ways, but lost the Gen 1’s scrappy little PT-boat feel. It was suddenly just another überefficient economy car.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/2010_Honda_Fit_Sport_–_09-03-2010.jpg/640px-2010_Honda_Fit_Sport_–_09-03-2010.jpg
It’s somewhat telling that the 2013 Malibu had a facelift immediately.
http://images.thecarconnection.com/med/2013-chevrolet-malibu_100373480_m.jpg
I could have found a flat window Super but this makes my case anyways…
http://www.thesamba.com/vw/archives/lit/74bug_sheet/front.jpg
http://www.thesamba.com/vw/archives/lit/74sb_sheet/front.jpg
I was going to use the same examples.
Major improvements under the skin though, which is why Beetle lovers don’t like them.
GM took the 1961 Chevy Impala from a beautiful thin pillar coupe to the 1962 chunky “formal” thick pillar 2-door hardtop.
http://image.superchevy.com/f/32385462/sucp_1004_06+1961_chevy_impala_ss+rear_view.jpg
http://cdn.barrett-jackson.com/staging/carlist/items/Fullsize/Cars/21359/21359_Rear_3-4_Web.jpg
BTW – It’s almost impossible to find stock unmodified 60’s Chevys with original hubcaps – most have hideous alloys.
I don’t care for the chrome/polished Torq-Thrust II’s that seem to dominate the restoration scene, but I can’t get behind hubcaps.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/1994_Ford_Mustang_V6.png
1994 Mustang. Yes, the Fox was painfully long in the tooth, but the dalliance with the idea of a FWD Mustang Probe took Ford’s eye off the ball and we ended up with 11 model years in the Mehs. It didn’t help that the Camaro’s death was known midway through that run. I was as big a Mustang fanboy as there was in 1993 or so when the first images leaked out, and I thought, “oh crap, it looks like a Celica, only worse”.
http://www.carfind.ca/93photo/toyota/celicalifback2dr-gts4wdturbo.jpg
Then they went and pulled the pushrod V8 out in ’96 and replaced it with a more complex and less powerful SOHC 4.6L. Performance didn’t match the ’93 5.0L again until ’99 when they made minimal changes to the engine that should have been included from the get-go, but even then they just barely kept up with the doomed F-bodies.
I remember the HP drop- Ford said they changed the way the HP was calculated and tested which may have inflated the 5.0 rating for years… Right. The 2v engine needed work.
Then they get bitten in the ass over the ’99 Cobra fiasco.
When Volvo presented the 850 in 1991, it was the first car without a significant carryover part from a predecessor since 1944. When they renamed the car to “V70” in 1998, they stretched that 1500 parts had been changed, it was all new and so exciting in its freshly rounded corners. It was hard to notice though.
http://www.swedespeed.com/emAlbum/albums/Cars/02%20Volvo%20(Modern%20Era)/800%20Series/from%201995/Wagon/R/1995-Volvo-850R-7.jpg
http://www.swedespeed.com/emAlbum/albums/Cars/02%20Volvo%20(Modern%20Era)/V70/from%201998%20(x70)/(EU)%20R%20AWD/volvo_v70_x70_r_awd_v70r_001.jpg
Latest generation Camaro, and to a lesser extent, the Mustang.
Both made all these claims of being on a new platform, that they were going to be smaller, lighter, more European. They they come out, and look almost the same as the last generation! In fact, the Chevrolet even advertises that all dimensions of the new Camaro are within 2 inches of the old Camaro!
http://o.aolcdn.com/dims-shared/dims3/GLOB/legacy_thumbnail/750×422/quality/95/http://www.blogcdn.com/slideshows/images/slides/348/374/3/S3483743/slug/l/2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss-002-1.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2013/03/01-2014-chevrolet-camaro-z28-new-york.jpg
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DsSBLhts9mc/maxresdefault.jpg
With the Mustang, I don’t see the “evolutionary” looks as a bad thing, but then again I own a ’14 model. The 2015 does have an independent rear suspension, so chassis wise, it’s a bit more of a big deal. For the Camaro, it actually is on an entirely new platform, but no one would ever know it by looking. I haven’t seen the specs comparing the 2015 to the 2016, but they could have left the styling refresh they did in 2013 or 2014 off and the style change would have been more obvious, but still not stark. Taking big risks is tough with one of your most recognizable models.
You raise some good points.
I guess with all the hype and anticipation surrounding it, I was hoping for a bit more of a visual change. I guess I fell victim to marketing hype, eh?