One long-running trope of which I’ve become less and less tolerant is that of Japanese automakers’ failure to innovate. I think many of their cars have a look all their own, but if someone wants to confront me with a good argument as to why this stereotype has some basis in truth, then this E80 Corolla sedan (that’s the 84-87 model), uploaded months ago by Mr. Tactful, makes an excellent example.
The car Toyota copied to give us this Corolla was, in fact, sold here, but only after an ill-conceived restyle and renaming as the Alfa Romeo Milano, which was widely criticized for its bizarre looks.
But the Milano was based on a more sane looking predessor, the 1977 Nuova Giulietta sedan, and that’s the car Toyota copied. Think of the Milano as a Nuova Giulietta wearing a Members Only jacket.
My attempts to bring this to light were panned on some other car forums, as was my appreciation for the Alfa’s styling, so I’ll let you guys be the judge. But the resemblance is most evident in the C-pillar and taillights mounted at the top of the pert rump.
Keep in mind, as much as I like the early front-drive Corollas, that I’m not saying the Toyota wore the look as well, but the resemblance is clear.
This may be less the case from other angles, however. The Corolla’s front end has a slight rearward lean, where the Alfa’s mid-70s nose is a bit more bluff.
But in the world of automotive styling, innovation is an infrequent occurrence. Sometimes you just gotta learn from the best. Unfortunately, that allegedly wasn’t the case in Toyota’s obtaining inspiration from one of the least-loved Alfas.
Least-loved by others, that is; I feel no shame in my appreciation of the ’77 Giulietta’s kicked up tail and high mounted light clusters.
What other similarly shameless copies can you all think of?
This one.
Funny you should mention the Jetta since as I read this I was wondering whether the Corolla sedan was designed first or the hatchback:
Forgot the pic:
I love that hatch. It’s very odd looking, specially the tail lamps.
May I please say that the prior model KE Corolla was a nicer vehicle to drive in a spirited fashion. It had neutral handling, steered well, and felt lively and predictable. I know I will be pilloried for saying this but I believe the move to FWD turned the Corolla into a less interesting vehicle from a driver’s POV.
I even used to think back then that Toyota had given the KE a somewhat ‘Alfa’ appearance..and I lusted after a brand new KE in dark red. Instead I wound up with a beige used but near new Fiat 128 1300 (duh) 🙁
Having driven an AE82 for some years I can say that the little thing was very enjoyable.
Ours didn’t have rear sway bar and had a carby+points 4AC + 4 sp manual + manual steering (89 model in YV). Even so it was peppy and willing, the weak points being the brakes (crap) and that it became particularly treacherous whit blown rear struts.
I probably would get another here, just for the heck of it and before they become extint… probably hatch, 4AGE+EFI and 5sp manual
My guess would be that there was about a 90 percent chance the sedan was first. The sedan was always the ‘core’ Corolla model — the Liftback wasn’t added until 1976 — and I’m pretty sure the sedan was consistently the better seller. (Toyota actually got caught out on the E80 models because at launch they didn’t have a three-door version, a body style of which Japanese buyers turned out to be unexpectedly fond.)
Great story on the AE80 Corolla in your site sir. Same goes for the Soarer.
…and pert rump with high-mounted taillights.
ummm, yeah, pinched from Wolfsburg, or vice versa
Shameless copies ? Scroll down this list, that’s how they roll in the Far East….
http://www.alletop10lijstjes.nl/10-chinese-auto-rip-offs-van-westerse-modellen/
Even a big bus gets a copy/paste treatment:
(The one on the left, the original, is a Neoplan by the way. There’s no such thing as a plan for a Neon)
They may not innovate (or better read as “take risks”) but they sure do know how to generally make something work better and simpler. A German engineer will seemingly try to use as many components as possible to build something while a Japanese engineer will use a lot less to accomplish the same result. Witness the lowly cup holder. Only the Europeans have given us some impressive technical feats that rarely last the life of the car or even do a very good job of locating the beverage as intended. (Saab 9-3 origami dashboard mounted complexity, Audi A6 dashboard pull out that often fails, BMW 528i console mounted that only holds the bottom 1″ of a cup, all but guaranteeing a Venti spill…). Contrast that with the in-dash pull out cup holder assembly for the Honda Odyssey (’05-’10), which I only recently noted had one spring loaded piece coming out from the wall of the cupwell that retracted with a large cup in place but when using a standard 12oz can stayed fully extended and served to perfectly hold the can in place without actually touching the can. Good engineering in my mind is being able to make something perform a given task using the lowest number of components at the lowest total cost with the greatest reliability without compromising the functionality of said item compared to the competition.
Yeah German engineers seem to live by the philosophy that the more complex they can make something the better it is. To me good engineering is doing it in the simplest manner possible with as few parts as possible.
I don’t know if complexity itself is the thing or if it’s just that the archetypal German engineer figures out the approach he or she thinks must be Right and then reacts to any implication that it’s unnecessarily complicated or otherwise flawed as an unforgivable affront to the engineer’s skills and moral character.
Being a German, that’s how I react when Perry edits my submissions 🙂
Being German and an engineer, I concur! 🙂 🙂
Haha. I think that’s just part of being human.
Toyota has never and most likely will never copy anyone – this is a figmentation of your imaginative !! A form of pure, dried, powdered B.S. !
I’m possibly the biggest Toyota fan-boy on CC and I completely disagree with you.
It’s not a purely Japan always copies Europe thing; as proven with the Audi post earlier, the ’86 Taurus has obvious cribs from Audi. Someone hits on a good idea and then people pour their own sugar into their particular flavor of Kool-Aid, and sometimes Red Kool-Aid tastes….. Like Red Kool Aid, no matter if it’s Strawberry or Cherry.
Behold the 1974 Plymouth Fury by Buick….
This was the second thing I thought of; the first was the ’79 St. Regis by Buick.
As a closet fan of both the Fury shown and the St. Regis, I will state Chrysler took a good aesthetic design and improved it greatly. Your mileage may vary.
To my eye it appears the ’71 Buick cleaned up (much in the same way the 1970 model was simplified from the ’67-69 models) and called back a lot of thematic elements present on the 1965 B/C Buicks.
So for Plymouth to be copying an evolution of a nearly 10 year old look (that actually had roots in a more tailored 1963 look for Buick B & C cars) makes the Plymouth And Dodge ’74 cars look….. vintage…. like cars of the late 60’s in the middle of the 1970’s.
Not necessarily a bad look. But not a very forward looking one….one that makes me like them out of pity (the public rejected the Fuselage cars) and not out of genuine love.
I took quite a bit of razzing once when I showed up at a WPC Club picnic with my 77 Gran Fury sedan. “Hey, what’s that old Buick doing here”….
Everybody copies from everybody. There’s very few completely original designs in the history of the automobile. Maybe the better question for a post might be what are the truly original car designs?
Harley Earl and Bill Mitchell made annual trips to Europe to look at the newest cars as well as to buy several of them and bring them home, where they were prominently displayed all around the Design Center to “stimulate” the designers.
Completely original is dangerous, as its history is littered with failures: Airflow, Pacer, TR7, Mark II Continental come initially to mind. Surely the original failures outnumber the original hits.
And often, design successes that seem bold are not so much original as original for their specific market segment. For instance, the Rover SD1 — a good-looking car for all its faults — cribbed from the Ferrari Daytona in a way that was daring for the executive car market, if not in the overall scheme of things.
Yes, it is the most sincere form, but only if it has been improved upon. In your example of the Toyota vs. Alfa, I cannot see where there has been a visual improvement. This generation Corolla has always looked like the little old lady whose head is too big for her body.
It’s a little reminiscent in that of some of GM’s downsized 1986 cars, probably for roughly the same reasons.
An Eagle Premier is a blatant copy of an Audi 5000/100
You’re making me kick myself for not snapping a photo a couple of months back.
I walked past two vehicles parallel-parked end-to-end in sequence on a city street. Both were painted white: A Hyundai Tucson and a Nissan Rogue.
There’s no better illustration of the lack of imagination in contemporary car design that these two viewed in profile. Maybe there just aren’t that many ways to make the aero work, but even small details like the fender flares and the roof racks are the same. The side windows look like they’re interchangeable.
Here’s a Google-scrounged photo of a Tucson, with a Rogue photo to follow:
Here’s the Rogue:
I laugh everytime I see one of these! ‘Rogue’ conjures up images of some lone wolf, rebellious badass. Nothing about a tubby CUV says that at all. The XTerra seems like it should be called ‘Rogue’ since it rejects all the coddling family friendly ways of todays SUVs. Its more of a bare bones stripped down ruffian aimed at outdoorsy types and even offroaders.
These examples are fun to look at. Also fun are design cues that get copied by everyone in the industry like Audi’s Sticky Fingers tongue/grille. Then there are cars like the new Hyundai Genesis that set a new record for cribbing. There must be 10 different cars in that thing.
I didn’t get a chance to join the Prius-party the other day, and from what I did read of the comments, I’m glad I missed THAT party! Sorry, but the Prius is a fascinating piece of engineering that actually delivers, its looks notwithstanding. They impress me, anyway, FWIW.
What the Japanese did accomplish in their cars was refinement, though their designs may not strike a “romantic” cord in many cases. What I noticed in the early 1970s in the USAF in California, was that those cars RAN and RAN WELL! Everything worked on them, though I couldn’t get past the squishy sun visors and other really cheap interior panels compared to the American cars.
The lowly Corolla above? It wasn’t real pretty, but neither were many other cars on the market regardless of OEM. The “Nova” sold through Chevrolet caught my attention, but was pretty small for a family sedan at the time.
Plagiarism? Maybe, but everyone copies designs that are successful no matter what industry it is.
Question: On those Japanese cars with the black rubber(?) on the bumpers, does anything turn into a blacker black as it ages? The deepest, flattest black I have ever seen, it amazes me.
The Japanese automakers have had stylish cars of their own over the years. Toyota 2000 GT, Datsun 240Z, Toyota Soarer/Lexus SC, Mazda RX7 — and even the little Honda CRX had small & cute nailed.
The 240 is very E-type influenced and the RX7 borrows from the 924 in the first gen and the 944 in the 2nd gen.
You nailed it with the RX-7. It was such a disappointment — “Porsche” on the outside and fake stitching on the inside lol — after the incredibly pure 1st generation car.
The 2nd gen Tiburon reminded me of a Ferrari 456 but in a good way.
See, the Datsun 240Z reminds me less of the E-type (although that was there, certainly) and more of the Ferrari 275 GTB/4.
The 2015 Subaru Legacy and Hyundai Sonata look a little too much alike for comfort.
Could it be that the 1984 Corolla looked most like a FWD adaptation of the styling used on the 1980 Toyota Corolla? BTW, none of the Toyotas ever looked as awkward and downright ridiculous as the Nuova Giulietta. Copying is Japanese? That explains why an entire generation of European cars all cribbed their looks from the first Corvairs.
Beat me to it. The Nuova Giulietta premiered in November of 1977; the E70 Corolla in March of 1979. That’s probably not really enough time to crib it. But that look was in the air at the time.
I have to vouch for Perry, since I don’t see as much of the wedge profile that seems more a part of the ’84 Corolla in the 1980 Corolla.
The 1980 Corolla looks more generic Japanese (by the way of diluting European design trends) and there’s elements that make the ’84 Corolla look less generic, more detailed. Plus the high trunk with “cheeky” tail lamps have little to no relation to the Corolla that came before.
Given the time elapsed, I’d have to agree that there was more cribbing from the Alfa than some would want to admit, although there was an effort to include evolutionary design cues from the previous Corolla.
Paul, I was talking about the E80, not the E70. Note my response to CJ below.
Hold the phone; I didn’t say copying is Japanese. I said that it’s a stereotype of which I’ve never had tolerance and that proving it would require a very solid example. To me, the E80 Corolla next to the ’77 Giulietta might be one to consider.
…and I wasn’t talking about the E70 Corolla, but the E80; I doubt the design was locked in by ’77 for THAT car, nor do I think the Nuova Giulietta is bad looking. In fact, I like its very smoothly integrated, high-set tail light treatment!
I think a lot of people, including myself, somehow misread the central point of the post. I initially thought you WERE arguing that Japan Inc. copies everyone else and has no original thought…now I get it.
You are right. I misinterpreted his opening paragraph.
I’m pretty familiar with both cars, having lived in the Netherlands in 1984 and seen plenty of those Alfa Romeos. One take on the car was that it was a shameless BMW copy, as the leaning forward grille, black horizontal grille elements, turn signals and horizontal hood cutlines that overlapped the fenders were all straight off the E21 3-series of 1975. None of those features are on the E80 Corolla, which suggests that it wasn’t much of a copy of the NG. All the cars discussed have the Hofmeister kink, but Toyota Corolla sedans had that from at least the early ’70s. I don’t find the taillight comparison particularly valid because of the proportions of the cars’ respective tail panels. The Alfa looks uncomfortable because of the large panel separating the trunk lid from the bumper. It is full width and makes the taillights look like afterthoughts because they are unrelated shapes above it. The E80 Corolla’s taillights are huge by comparison and span most of the space down to the bumper. The Corolla’s license plate is mounted on the full-depth trunk lid while the Alfa’s is mounted between the bumper and trunk lid. The Alfa trunk lid has a stamped in duck-tail spoiler. The Corolla does not. The Alfa has a thick c-pillar. The Corolla does not. The wedge shape was becoming ubiquitous for aerodynamic purposes.
It isn’t like I’m a fan of this particular Corolla. I test drove one and then immediately went back and bought the Jetta I tried before it. I was a fan of Alfas in general when these cars were made. The Nuova Giulietta was a car I once built a die-cast model of, in touring car racing trim. Seeing them on the road when I moved to Europe was a bit of a disappointment. Many of them were rusty and smoking, and it wasn’t like they used road salt in Hilversum. They were pretty graceless compared to the Alfettas, Sprints, GTVs and 33s that our local dealer also stocked. When the E80 Corolla came out, I saw nothing of the Guilietta in it. I didn’t think it was much of a looker, but I had relatives with good Toyota experiences and I was coming out of a used Mercedes-Benz diesel that was constantly threatening to turn me into a broke pedestrian. The test drive turned me off completely. The gas pedal was a toggle switch and the primary controls were hard plastic designed to last rather than provide any sort of tactile experience. I didn’t think that there was any level of dependability that could have justified the joylessness of that car, just in case you think my defense of its design inspiration is guided by some passion for E80 Corollas.
You can’t be serious that the Toyota was a copy of the Alfa.
If it was then the person who copied it must have had Big Beer bottle bottom lenses in their glasses.
Or else someone from Japan went over to Italy..Found an Alfa 75 on the side of the road and telephoned what it was like back to Tokyo on reverse charges!!!
Toyota were building the Corolla in FWD and RWD simultaneously and both look like cribs of each other and restyles of previous models I doubt they borrowed much from Alfa
+1
Opel Manta
Mazda Luce R130
The Luce was a Bertone creation, as was the Fiat Dino which inspired the Manta…
The difficulty for this whole argument is that styling exists within the aesthetic framework of its period. Everyone was using fins because everyone else was using fins. Sometimes a single design inspires many derivatives; see Paul’s articles on the Florida and Corvair.
Not even that close. I believe the E80 Corolla looked more like the early 1980s BMW 3 Series.
Well, the E80 Corolla was designed and released at very nearly the same time as the E30 3-Series, so any resemblance there was definitely coincidental.
Interesting observation Perry, but I suspect any “copying” was only general, and not limited to Toyota. The Mk 2 Vauxhall Cavalier saloon (J car) comes to moind as well, for the rear pillar/glasshouse shape.
But given the chocie of an Alfa or a Toyota Maybe-Copy, the decision is not hard….
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery/plagiarism, no wonder why during the mid to late 1990s that Toyota (in return of its NUMMI agreement with GM for building the E90-E110 Toyota Corolla based Chevrolet Nova/GEO/Chevrolet Prizm) selected and had an agreement with GM to import a newly redesigned back then Chevrolet Cavalier in Japan and badged equipped it with a Toyota name aka Toyota Cavalier with RHD as well. This is where the cliche’ states that “if you can’t beat them…then join them” like joining forces for instance between the two Worldwide Automobile Titans. Now Toyota for the past couple of years decided to form an alliance with BMW so both companies can create a new super sports car and possibly revive the Celica or Supra name.
Styling similarities here, but only one year between its introductions.
The Alfa Romeo Giulia, introduced in 1962
The Isuzu Bellett, introduced in 1963
Japanese cars of the ’60s are a somewhat different story because at that point, quite a few models WERE designed in Europe. The Japanese industry was still emerging from actually building European cars under license and even ones that were developed in-house were designed for the Japanese company by firms like Bertone (which did the first Mazda Luce and the aforementioned Luce Rotary Coupé). Of course, some of the Italian houses were quite willing to crib their own designs!
“crib their own designs”…You mean like this:
And this:
Yes, that was one of the examples that sprang to mind, although in the past Paul has noted various others.
Don’t forget too that the Italian coach builders supply theme cars to multiple makers that may not get used as a complete car, but spread certain details through the whole industry. The slot that runs hortizonaly along the side of the Ferrari Daytona comes to mind.
BMW Rear
Kia Optima Rear
Audi Rear
In the case of the Audi, more like a “self copy,” given who led the design of the KIA.
I am just surprised how many copies of this BMW rear have been produced.
And then even the Bangle Butt was copied by no other than Toyota’s Camry.
Infiniti Q50
Another one that popped in my mind, sadly really in-house:
1971 Oldsmobile Toronado wearing the ’67 Eldorado’s suit.
I always thought of this more as recycling than copying. The automotive circle of life? 🙂
The 1997 Malibu/Cutlass was a pretty blatant copy of the 1992 Camry
92 Camry actually debuted in 90.
Keep in mind that the U.S. Camry (a.k.a. Scepter) was not the same as the smaller V30 Camry sold elsewhere — the bigger U.S. car didn’t debut until the 1992 model year, more than a year after the V30.
The ’65 series Chryslers copied the earlier Lincoln Continental. No surprise as they were done by the same guy.
This one has always been my favourite.
Top: Fiat X19 by Bertone
Bottom: De Tomaso 1600 by Ghia
I think that Milano looks pretty racy, myself. Im assuming that’s a 5 door with a ‘hidden hatch’, similar to the Dodge Lancer/Chrysler Lebaron GTS? Theres a lot of 1st gen VW rabbit/jetta in the C pillar too….
I have to agree with Paul on originality being scarce. Not just in the auto industry, but in EVERYTHING. There are few ‘all new’ ideas, and even those were likely inspired by something.
As to Japanese ‘copies’…
The Toyotal FJ-40 Landcruiser is obviously what happens when you take a few army jeeps, chew them up and spit them out with a little ‘Toyota stank’ rubbed on them. Just because its a Jeep clone doesn’t mean its not a great rig in its own way. Those things are known for being overbuilt and near indestructible. The 2F engine borrows pretty heavily from Chevy’s stovebolt 6 cyl. I seem to remember them being just as notorious for needing the valvetrain redone religiously at about 70K or so just like the GM design.
As far as Japanese innovation, probably one of the most unique and different cars they’ve ever kicked out is Mazda’s RX-8. I absolutely LOVE that car, since it offers 90% of the practicality of a sedan without being saddled with the boring frumpy looks of a 4 door. When that car came out, I figured that traditional 4 door sedans would be completely obsolete. The idea was cribbed from late 90s extra cab pickups when the 3rd door option started to come out. Saturn even had a 3 door coupe which I thought was absurd, since why not balance it out? The ion coupe rectified this and actually looked ok, even if it was a bit of a turkey. I dated a girl with an Element, which uses a similar clamshell door setup, and helped her move recently. We loaded/unloaded that thing a few times and having big open portals with no pillar on a short vehicle makes it EXTREMELY useful. So easy to access front to rear, and the longer front doors make entry/exit easy for a 6’1 beastman like me. To this day, I still cant understand why the clamshell concept hasn’t taken off like wildfire. The current Charger would look amazing with this setup, and it would be the perfect middle ground between the sedan 300 and the coupe Challenger.
Nope, Alfa Milano/75 is a conventional 4-door with a trunk. No liftback. Personally I like the design very much but realize I am in the distinct minority.
ah that’s a HUGE bummer. If you know how Zackman hates fixed quarter windows, then you know how I feel about fixed backlights combined with 4 doors. As sedans go, the Milano comes off actually sporty and aggressive….
Same here, never realized the Alfa 75 was considered ugly by anyone until they came up on here the last time.
Hmm I re-read the article and noticed the comment on the Milano I thought its pic was there to show a good looking car that was copied. Not sure how anyone could look at that sexy dark blue Alfa and say anything negative about it. The dark plastic trim along the sides and the power window switches on the ceiling were quirky but other than that what’s there not to like?
Madness, I know… but I do remember that the last time the Milano came up on CC, lots of people seemed to feel it was too weird looking. The bent tail section received considerable scorn form what I recall. However, looking at the Milano and Giulietta side by side, I think it makes a very strong case for itself!
Gentlemen, I have in the past very much appreciated your depth of knowledge and quality of comment, but comparing the styling of the Milano/75 favourably with its donor Giulietta is wrong. Wrongity wrong wrong. Here’s what it might have looked like without the plastic strip, a slight redemption…
BMW still has them:
I’ll just use the Miata as an example. British roadsters, GREAT IDEA! The Japanese obviously thought they could perfect it – and they did. Even though the idea came from an American who worked for Mazda it was up to the company to make it right.
In my view, the Japanese have always looked at what someone else is doing. Their adaptations of the original concepts are sometimes very good.
The first gen Celica is a good example. The notchback looks like a baby 67 Camaro, the fastback is more like a 66 Mustang fastback. You can see clearly the influence in the car, but the detailing sets them apart from the inspirarion. They both look very good IMO.
Some 70’s Coronas look like the Japanese version of an American car. And they look unique (and pretty in some cases).
Some other times, the result is unfortunate. The previous gen Camry for example, tried to use so many Bangle-BMW influences that ended being a caricature.
Based on my experience with trucks and what some friends from the industry tell me, they do take a long time to adopt new technologies.
The two cars I always found similar were the mid 90s Honda Accord sedan (triangular taillights) and the early mid 00s Toyota Camry.
Also agree with the “St. Regis by Buick” example above.
Finally, is the ’69-’70 Cadillac a copy of the earlier Lincoln Continental, or is the later ’75-79 Continental not somewhat inspired by the ’69-70 Cadillac…copy of copy of?
This Goggomobil really looks like Alfa Romeos from the same era, hehehe…
I think that the styling of the directional wheels on the Subaru SVX was copied by so many manufacturers even on wheels that were not actually directional, as well as on aftermarket plastic wheel covers, that their looks which were unique when SVX’s were new completely lost their individuality.
The taillight treatment saw the same thing happen – it wasn’t long before one could see taillights like that on half a dozen different makes of cars.
haha…well at least I got you talking 🙂
btw I don’t think there is any shred of early FWD Corolla Alfa similarity whatsoever