How Important is Styling?
I spent the weekend in a 2009 Acura TL, a car that's been widely derided for its elephant-seal-like face and Saturn-Aura-from-the-future butt. I'm not wild about it, but I don't think it's enough for me not to buy it. The allure of similarly priced competitors might, but the TL doesn't nudge the Aztekometer enough to repel me. I'd say being dull is a bigger turn off -- at least Acura is trying to make some statement, however potentially misguided.
So how important is styling for you?
Is it everything? (The Thunderbird buyer). Does it have to have a particular aesthetic? (Jeep or Volvo boxy only!) Is it just a tie-breaker for evenly matched cars? (C-Class vs A4) Is it only important if it's really pretty or really ugly? (Aston Martin vs Sebring) Is it completely inconsequential? (Any Subaru)
Finally, do you care to read about styling interpretations in car reviews, or would you prefer to leave the analysis to yourself given that everyone has different opinions?
James Riswick, Automotive Editor
- Posted by
- James Riswick October 21, 2008, 6:00 AM
- Permalink
- Categories:
- Car Buying, FAQ Friday





Styling will never force me to buy a car. It can, however, force me to avoid a car.
I used to be a huge Acura fan. After the new generation styling hit the streets, I am looking for a BMW.
Styling is very important consideration. In today's market, and particularly with realiabiliy becoming a wash, it's really the next best differentiator. It's often written off as fluff but your car is an extension of you. Those that care - do. Those that don't buy a Camry.
As far as styling reviews, Automobile mag has a great spread every month breakdown the styling cues of an interesting car. Check it out - like it allot.
Although a car's styling is not the all-important category when it comes to car buying decision for me, it is important enough in the ownership of the car. There is an artfulness (or lack thereof) in a car's styling. You know when you're looking at a beautiful car (Aston Martin Vantage, Ferrari 250 GTO) or an ugly car (Aztec). Though it's difficult to prove, I think most people would agree that the Aston and Ferrari are beautiful and the Aztec ugly, which indicates that beauty has an objectivity. Given the choice, I would much prefer looking at a beautiful car than an ugly car everyday. Just as it would be good for my soul to wake up looking at a beautiful park or lake or ocean or fountain (or you name it) as opposed to waking up to a view of a slum or a war-torn neighborhood or garbage dump, it would do the same for my soul to look at a beautiful car everyday. I'd give a caveat that if the beautiful car is relatively unreliable compared to the ugly car, then that might cause me heartache and financial ruin which wouldn't be good. However, if what mlaspina said regarding reliability becoming a wash in today's market is true, then I'd stand by my statement above.
"Is it everything?"
Nope.
"Does it have to have a particular aesthetic?"
Nope.
"Is it just a tie-breaker for evenly matched cars?"
Often yes.
"Is it only important if it's really pretty or really ugly?"
Yes.
"Is it completely inconsequential?"
No. Not completely, as evidenced above.
"Finally, do you care to read about styling interpretations in car reviews, or would you prefer to leave the analysis to yourself given that everyone has different opinions?"
Both. Reviews sometimes highlight things I might not have noticed initially. But in the end, I prefer to reserve final judgment for myself.
Truly awful styling can turn me off. But if I really really like the car based on other considerations (quality, reliability, fun to drive, value) then I'll accept a car as long as it's not too terrible. I considered buying an Impreza last year despite its looks. Nice interior room, very fun to drive. It was other things (value, fuel economy) that eventually got me in my Mazda3 instead.
Now, if I was going to spend $70K plus on some fancy sports car, I'd probably get really emotional about the styling and choose the best looking car since they're all so luxurious and fast. For example, I'd have to pick a Jag XK over a BMW 6-series. But if we're talking economy car for getting to work cheaply, or family minivan for the wife to cart the kids around, style becomes much less important.
I like reviews and photographs that highlight interesting stylistic things. But I don't give a hoot about the writers' opinions. Just the facts, ma'am.
I only buy cars that I think look fantastic, have a v8, and a good interior. To me bland is the worst way to go (audi), at least acura is trying for something, albeit with poor results. I do enjoy reading about others opinions on how a car looks, even though it wont influence my own. Personally of the luxury car makers i find cadillacs to look the best, followed by merc, bmw, lexus, audi, and acura.
Styling matters to me. I wouldn't buy a car I consider ugly. I'm not particularly big on cuteness or beauty, but there is a minimum beauty standard and if the car doesn't meet it I don't buy (unless, of course, I can't afford any other car).
More details:
"Is it everything?"
No. Reliability, handling, value, overall character also matter.
"Does it have to have a particular aesthetic?"
No.
"Is it just a tie-breaker for evenly matched cars?"
A resounding yes.
"Is it completely inconsequential?"
No. I chose my Protege5 over the cheaper Protege because I think the Protege5 looks way better...and, well, I could afford the Protege5.
ahightower: We're in total agreement.