I don’t think I’ve been too shy over the years expressing certain doubts about the direction of new car design in recent decades. The slammed armored car look is just not my thing. So when Ford showed this 021c Concept in 1999, my spirits were raised, only to be dashed again when it was poorly received and left no lasting impact. The influence of the original Falcon on the 021c is all to obvious.
Ford Design Chief J Mays engaged Marc Newson, who normally devotes his design skill to furniture and other non automotive applications. That should be done more often perhaps, since it seems that all-too often, automotive design is a perpetual game of copycat and one-upsmanship. Regardless of how you feel about the 021c, it certainly broke out of the mold, and that alone is mighty refreshing.
Swivel seats are back too! Chrysler was big on those in the Falcon era. Regardless of whether that’s such a hot idea or not, getting in and out of the 021c was certainly addressed in a very accommodating fashion.
The most antithetical (heretical?) aspects of the 021c were its clean horizontal lines and its superb Falcon-esqe visibility. Now that’s a timeless idea. I say bring it on, with a wider choice of colors, perhaps.
I like it. Give it an advanced 4cyl gas engine, an optional 4cyl diesel, and lastly optional 4cyl hybrid power. I actually think it will sell well now, it is the logical extension of the xB, Cube, and Kia Soul.
Well, it’s a start. Open and airy – what a concept!
The seats on my friend’s 1975 Monte Carlo did that. I thought it was a cool touch. Attention please for any Ford execs reading this – this is an instantly recognizable car, much like the 64 1/2 Mustang, there would be nothing like it on the road. I am tired of cookie cutter cars that all look alike to the point that I can’t tell the difference between a Honda and a Hyundai or a Ford and a Chevy. I’d buy this car, especially if my wife’s wheelchair will fit in that kewl trunk drawer. It also looks like there’s enough visibility for it to be safe in traffic when around motorcycles. This would be my very first new Ford, I’d march right out and buy one on the very first day.
This is one concept car that I hope DOESN’T hew too closely to the concept if it sees production.
Back in ’99, I couldn’t understand this car. Why so much glass? Why so linear? Why name a car after its color? Now that I’m older it makes perfect sense. So you can see out of it, so you can see where it begins and ends and because you can. Put the new 1.6 Duratec in it, get it road legal and it’ll probably sell better than the Fiesta. Have it available in Pantone Colors of the Year. I’m partial to 14-0848. That icky chartreuse not so much.
I don’t like it, in much the same way that I don’t like the Smart Fortwo or Toyota FJ Cruiser. Reminds me of something you’d buy at Ikea.
I will note that the symmetry reminds me of the Studebaker concept where the front drivers door was interchangeable with the rear passenger door, and vice-versa. This car looks like at least the front and rear glass glass should be interchangeable, which would save money. Perhaps that’s something the car companies should look at to reduce costs in the compact car segment.
Falcon era? are you for real Falcons are still made today in OZ not the shitbox that fell to pieces in 60/61 ie the US model that was utter rubbish and it took Ford here a long time to put those old dungers behind them.
Back in 1978 and 1980 I bought Consumer Guide’s Used Car Buyer’s Guides, which were little paperbacks chockful of info on used cars from roughly the late 60s until the print date. I eventually tossed them because the specific car data was getting out of date (I’m sorry I did that), but one thing the editors emphasized very clearly was the importance of large glass areas for good sightlines all the way around, and seating in which you sat up straight, which enhanced sightlines and comfort as well. Every time I see one of these old Mayberry-era Fords I admire the expansive greenhouses and thin roof pillars. Now throw in some good R12 Freon air conditioning and we’re talking, baby! 😛
In re: Falcons, did you see the two-parter I just did on the Australian Falcons? (I did a piece on the U.S. cars a couple of years ago, more specifically focused on Bob McNamara and Lee Iacocca.) Intersecting factoid: J Mays’ predecessor, Jack Telnack, was chief designer of Ford Australia from 1966 to early 1970, and led the design of the XA, the first Australian Falcon without any U.S. counterpart.
Yes I did, and very much enjoyed the Aussie Falcon piece. Excellent work indeed. I linked to it in the ’61 Falcon CC that just went up.
The original Falcon was, at best, a mixed success: a vehicle which was, briefly, right for an abnormal time; a vehicle that sold but made little money; a vehicle that marketing dean Lee Iacocoa derided as the “anti-car.”
There might be a market for such a vehicle now; but that market is shallow and quickly sated. And there are downsides that weren’t faced in 1959: aerodynamics, so important to attaining the best mileage, isn’t just a selling point but a CAFE requirement. The boxy form doesn’t yield structural strength as well as the inverted-banana shape. And carmakers are scrounging to make every nickel they can; and that is seldom realized with a Cheapskate Special.
For what it’s worth.
I loved it when I first saw it in ’99 and still like it today. After 12 years this design still holds up, Ford should put this into production pronto!
I really thought this concept was great at the time. Reminded me a lot of the Falcon, along with the Fairmont and Cortina. Simple, honest cars. I really hope there’s a shift towards more practical dimensions, visibility and simplicity of design in the near future. I’m tired of the bloated blobs offered by every manufacturer.
I loved it when it came out and I still do. I can’t stress enough how great it would be to have low beltlines again. My arm belongs outdoors!
The internet, is a wonderous and terrifying thing…
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Via+della+Rocca,+19,+Turin,+Italia&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=50.02446,89.208984&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Via+della+Rocca,+19,+10123+Torino,+Piemonte,+Italy&ll=45.063079,7.692447&spn=0,0.02178&z=16&layer=c&cbll=45.062998,7.692371&panoid=fPGnjuMkdq6Fk_nvvNtkSg&cbp=12,136.57,,0,14.13
Looks more like a Trabant than a Falcon IMO )
That said, I’m still all in for clean horizontal lines and good visibility.
Part of me really wants to like this car. It looks to me very similar to the old East German Trabant, a car I really like the look of (I personally don’t see the connection between this car and the Falcon). But damn, its just too ugly for me. I’ve always hated IKEA furniture and this car just looks to much like it.
But, I have to admit the design has held up. It doesn’t look like something designed in 1999. And I would definitely like to see some of the design choices put into a better designed car, like the straight lines and visibility. Considering how overpriced many cars in this market segment are, I think if they could pretty it up and put a cheap price tag on it it’d sell.
Also, for the love of God, name your car! Nobody’s gonna remember 021c, and a jumble of letters and numbers doesn’t get me excited to go out and buy a car. It just makes it sound like they never bothered to name it.