Pat’s Point of View

Have you ever noticed how car designers can really screw things up when they create a new ‘generation’ of a model? Quite often there’s a serious fuglification factor involved.

It’s like the old adage “never buy version 1.0 of a Microsoft product”, it sometimes takes a few updates/facelifts before the new generation achieves a balanced, harmonious look. And sometimes it never does, just stays plain fugly.

Here are five examples. (I’ll admit up-front, some of these vehicles weren’t absolute stunners before fuglification but they were at least adequate, even handsome.)

Mazda 3: 1st Gen to 2nd Gen

Definitely a case of a lovely looking car hit with the fugly stick. Especially the hot MPS version, which is a real shame. The 2nd gen is bigger (which I think is a running theme here in this list) but looks gangly and is smiling like a doofus. Fail.

Nissan X-Trail: 1st Gen to 2nd Gen

OK when I said some of these cars weren’t that great looking before, I was talking about the X-Trail. The first version wasn’t pretty, but the second is fugly. And bulbous…it’s got a big arse.

Subaru Liberty: 4th Gen to 5th Gen

Ahh the 4th gen Liberty, a really elegant design. But they had to make it fugly with the introduction of the lunchbox styling of the latest model. Sure it’s bigger, allowing Subaru to compete with the large sedans, wagons and SUVs in the family market, but it looks bad. I feel ill.

Holden Commodore: 3rd Gen to 4th Gen

The VZ was a refined evolution of the 3rd generation shape, a very nice looking vehicle. The VE that replaced it may be technically superior (it’s a “billion dollar design” after all) but it’s fugly. The HSV models based on the VE are much better looking, but the standard models look misshapen and boxy. I was disappoint.

Toyota Hilux: 6th Gen to 7th Gen

Where I grew up, real men drove a Hilux. Preferably a 4WD dual cab version. And the 6th generation were nice a design. But they got well and truly fuglified with the next model, especially the 2WD versions which look tubby and moronic. You’d look a right berk doing donuts in a paddock in one of those!

After quite a while comparing models and features and hunting around for a good deal, we’re now the proud owners of a Ford Territory. It’s the best car for our growing family, with 7 seats and enough room for 3 baby seats.

Our particular model is a 2007 Territory TS AWD, an ex company car with low kilometers and an excellent service record. Rory, as we have already named him, is in great condition and should see us through quite a few years before we need to change cars again. He’ll be a suitable replacement for Annie, our little Subaru we bought a few years ago.

We’ve looked at plenty of vehicles over the last 6 months or so, both new and used. When we found this one at Titan Ford in Brookvale, we knew it was the one for us, well worth the trip to take a look. After a test drive—including a delightful scenic trip along the very Territory-esque Wakehurst Parkway and through Oxford Falls—we got to bargaining and didn’t leave until we’d made a deal.

Our first trip to test out the long distance comfort, 6 speed ZF gearbox, and all wheel drive road-holding will be a trip to Canberra for UX Australia, followed by a few days up in Thredbo country.

I like analogies, metaphors and similes. They can help transfer understanding from one domain, or concept, to another. Here’s an analogy that I think helps illustrate the pros and cons of a agile software development approach, using an explanation of a popular automotive safety feature: Anti-skid Braking System (ABS).

A common misconception is that a vehicle equipped with ABS will stop more quickly than a vehicle without ABS. This is incorrect. All else being equal, when stopping in a straight line, ABS will necessarily cause the vehicle to take longer to come to a stop, because of the very nature of ABS. When the driver of a vehicle fitted with ABS applies the brakes very hard, a computer will continuously turn the brakes on and off very quickly, such that the wheels continue to turn some of the time and thus do not skid (well, not as much). The driver maintains the ability to steer whilst braking, because he or she can steer during those moments when the brakes are off. Thus you can brake very hard but still steer your way around objects, maintaining control of the vehicle.

Without ABS, when the driver brakes very hard, the wheels would stop turning, causing the wheels to “lock up” and skid, making steering impossible. This is when maximum friction occurs, and hence when the maximum braking force is in effect. So you can stop most quickly without ABS, but you won’t be able to steer and will more than likely lose control of the vehicle and crash. All things considered, it’s better to sacrifice some braking force in order to have control of the vehicle. Hence the popularity of ABS.

I see striking similarities between this and the argument over agile software development methodology. Agile will not make the project go quicker! In fact it might take longer to finish the project (but when exactly you “finish” is contentious). Just as an ABS-equipped vehicle can steer while braking, a project using an agile approach will be—as the name suggests—more agile, maintaining the ability to control the direction of travel. Collectively, the project team can adjust their aim if they have wandered off on a tangent, say for example if the product strays from meeting core objectives. By bringing forward design and iterating quite quickly, the end result of the project can be kept in focus and development can be kept on target (incidentally this is where agile can be very beneficial for UCD and vice versa). Agile allows you to not crash head-long into failure!

However, what an agile approach will not do is shorten your project. It’s annoying when people talk about “adopting agile” in order to “deliver in shorter timeframes”. They’re confusing agility and speed. As far as I’m concerned the only thing being delivered earlier are the early design prototypes. The final deliverable is not necessarily completed any quicker than with a good old fashioned waterfall approach, because during the iterations the design will evolve and some stuff won’t be used (either because it’s taking us off target or because it doesn’t work). In return for your agility, you must accept that there may be wastage or re-work caused by each iteration and that you might not finish any sooner.

What say ye?

[Photo source: DervMan]

Last week I went along to the Australian International Motor Show (formerly the Sydney International Motor Show) since I had a bit of spare time and a free ticket. Despite being an “automotive enthusiast” I usually find these shows dead boring (but that’s a whole other topic) so I tried to think of a way of making it more interesting.

I combined my career as a usability geek with my new role of daddy, and went in search of what might be our next family car. We’re not looking to buy one yet, but our ever-expanding family will necessitate an upgrade before too long. I visited every stand and examined what they had on offer for this market segment (wagons, SUVs and maybe some large sedans).

After a bit of snooping around, two things became obvious. Firstly the “booth bimbos”, female and male, had very little product knowledge. What’s the point? OK I know the point is to have a bit of totty that will attract people (mainly guys) to the stand. But if you’re seriously shopping for a car, you need to bypass the bimbos and find the actual sales staff. I can’t believe it, I’m stating a preference for car yard dealers!

(In this regard the highlight of the show would have to be the Subaru stand, which was staffed by knowledgeable sales people dedicated to each product line. It was one such lady who told me about the stand-out practical features of the Forrester and in essence started this little usability study.)

The other thing I found was that there are several key measures of usability for a vehicle intended for use by a young family. By that I mean two parents and two kids, one in a child’s car seat and the other in a baby capsule, who go on the occasional driving trip and need to take some luggage in addition to a pram and a stroller. And the mum is rather short :)

The emergent metrics were:

A. Size of boot. A fairly obvious metric. When you need to fit prams, strollers, bags of shopping and maybe some luggage, you need a decent sized boot. Most small SUVs fall down in this area, particularly if their child seat anchors are not well placed (see next point).
Particularly good: Subaru Liberty/Outback, Ford Territory
Particularly bad: Peugeot 308 Touring, Volvo V50, Holden Commodore Sportswagon (space is severely hampered by sloping rear hatch)

B. Location of child seat anchor points. Often overlooked, indeed most staff on the stands didn’t have a clue where they were located in their own vehicles. Quite often they are located on the back of the rear seats (which doesn’t seem like a good design to me) or in a spot in the boot where the car seat straps would decimate the luggage space. Also, in many cars it’s too easy to mistake the luggage net hooks or shopping bag hooks for the anchor points (yes there’s a huge difference, you idiot on one of the stands who suggested I just attach my baby to a plastic hook that wouldn’t take the weight of a half a flea’s butt!).
Particularly good: Subaru Forrester (mounted on roof)
Particularly bad: Skoda Octavia Scout, VW Passat Wagon (on both of which they were surprisingly difficult to find)

C. Opening of side doors. Trying to get a car seat or baby (or both) in through the door and onto the back seat is pretty difficult when the doors don’t open wide enough. Ideally, the doors open out to 90 degrees perpendicular to the vehicle.
Particularly good: Subaru Forrester

D. Height of seating position. With a car that is quite low to the ground, trying to get babies or bags into the back seat can be really difficult; you need to crouch and lean in. Not good for your back. Full size 4WDs have the opposite problem, especially for those who are “vertically challenged”. Most small SUVs are at about the right height, whilst most sedans and wagons are too low. Also related to this metric is the ease of entry and exit for the driver.

E. Height of boot “lip”. For similar reasons to above, the height of the lowest part of the rear door is crucial when it comes to lifting luggage or prams into the boot. If you have a flat lip and a low boot floor level, it’s much easier.
Particularly good: Mitsubishi Outlander (had a high lip but it folds down like a tailgate, very handy)

F. Opening of back door. The space needed to open the rear door of the vehicle to access the boot. Holden talk this up in their advertising for the Sportswagon, the fact that the hatch opens within the length of the vehicle. Some other models do a similar thing with their ‘lift up’ hatch, such that you require less space behind the vehicle and they open almost vertically so you get good access to the boot space.
Particularly bad: Suzuki Grand Vitara, Toyota RAV (both of which have a big ‘swing open’ door instead of a ‘lift up’ hatch…very disappointing!)

Note: this list ignores the more common facets normally associated with vehicles—at least by me—such as price, engine size/power, performance, fuel economy. These would of course be important factors in choosing a vehicle, but in terms of usability they are not relevant.

Based on all these metrics, the front runners in my mind are the Subaru Forrester, Mitsubishi Outlander and Hyundai Santa Fe. Should we wish to go a bit bigger then we’d be looking at a Toyota Kluger, Ford Territory or Mazda CX-9 (though the Mazda doesn’t score that well in terms of practicality in my opinion).

Interestingly, there was no stand for Land Rover, Audi, BMW or Mercedes. All three of these manufacturers have vehicles that fit into my category, if not my price range, but I guess a motorshow in Sydney is not high on their priorities. Can you blame them when the majority of the local marketplace can’t see past Commodores and Falcons?

[Diagrams based on: http://www.brian894x4.com/LC62drawing.gif]

Another month, another in-flight magazine. Yet I was shocked to read about the imminent release of the next generation of Subaru’s Impreza in the June edition of Qantas’ Australian Way.

I’ve not kept up to speed with the latest in the motor industry, as this was news to me! They’re making a hatch version, as well as sedan. The last major body change to the Impreza was the deletion of the coupe—which included the epic 22B—but I don’t think a true hatch version (as opposed to the current hatch which is more like a wagon) is such a good move.

It’s fairly ugly too, especially the back of the hatch version. The sleek front end is not bad though, quite different from the brutish utilitarianism of past models. And it’s looking more inline with the current Liberty design direction.

You can find out more at Subaru USA (an interesting Flash website by the way).

See what people are blogging about: Subaru, 2008 Impreza, WRX

So, when did all taxis become Falcons? I swear there used to a mix of Commodores and Falcons, but last night I realised every single taxi in Sydney is now a Ford Falcon. You see the odd private hire car (‘HC plate’) which is a Statesman, but that’s all.

The car saga has ended—today we bought a car! A 2003 model Subaru Impreza RV, and a very tidy example too. Excellent condition, stock standard, low KMs and a good price.

I spotted it on the internet yesterday and emailed the dealer, looking for his best price for a quick cash sale. He rang back this morning and suggested we come take a look. Despite having to catch two buses to get there I managed to drag Jenn along, but she insisted “we’re not buying anything today!”. When we got there (Tom Kerr in West Ryde) it wasn’t long before Jenn was hooked and demanded a test drive. She gave it a good work-out and we decided it was a great find.

Although Jenn didn’t negotiate in her usual manner (ie the salesperson won’t get fired this time) we negotiated a good deal and walked away with a car. We pick it up on Wednesday. They even lent us a car in the mean time, which saved us from further bus-bound torment.

The RV is perfect for us: lots of room, sporty styling and performance, AWD for the snow/country trips and reliable Subaru quality. And we couldn’t have found a better example, it was like a brand new car (minus the ugly grill Subaru have added to the 06 Impreza range).

We’re very happy :)

In a sudden (but not unexpected) turn of events, we have decided to abandon the search for a really small car as reported in previous posts. After looking at more vehicles and baby buggies (just planning ahead) we decided these smallest of cars won’t hold what we want over the next few years.

Indecisive? No! To borrow a naval term we’re simply bracketing our target :)

So we’re back looking for something bigger, but not too big. A mid-sized hatch. So we’re slap bang in the middle of the biggest and most competitive segment of the automotive market! We need to narrow it down a bit before I short-list it, but we’re talking Astra, Corolla, Pulsar territory. Used, since buying new was just a pipe dream.

Unlike my friend Martyn, I don’t think we’ll be looking at a Mini Cooper or MX5….bastard! :)

Stay tuned, looks like this is going to be a saga.

See what people are blogging about: small car, automotive

As an avid car nut, and having a taste for the unusual, I have long had a fascination for unique automotive specimens. Something intrigues me about the way guys funk up cars that would normally be driven by people not part of the modified car scene. An analogy for this is that it’s a mums car, like a station wagon. Hence the phrase Pimp my mum’s ride, which combines the mum-ness and the name of a popular MTV series dedicated to sooping up old cars (Pimp my Ride). (more…)

I have had a bit of a re-think regarding our first family car, a family truckster may not be on the cards now (and the fact that petrol prices are heading towards $2 per litre has played no small part in this decision).

I’m now thinking of small practical, economical runabout that will handle some small kid-like creatures, to be replaced/supplemented by something larger in a few years. Must be 4 or 5 door, manual (but maybe CVT makes sense) and fairly cheap, we might even buy a new one!

My short list includes:

• Toyota Yaris YR 5dr
  
• Ford Fiesta LX 5dr
• Hyundai Getz 5dr 1.4
• Holden Barina 5dr
• Mazda 2 Neo
• Honda Jazz GLi
• Suzuki Swift (Suzuki’s website is quite good by the way)

Notice there are no Frenchies in that list (Citroen, Peugeot, Renault) because they’re just too damn expensive in Australia.

ps: “Dad’s car” is still a few years down the track :)