Finally, after what seems like an eon of teasing, Kia has pulled the lurid vinyl wraps off the Tasman, the brand’s first entry into the piranha-infested waters of the compact pick-up truck market. Kia and their sister brand Hyundai have latterly been gaining a lot of praise from some quarters for their current designs, so the world has been waiting to see exactly how they would approach a new, and potentially very lucrative segment.
It’s worth remembering that the pickup truck, as much as it defines the US market, is not a uniquely American proposition. We’ve been enjoying Mitsubishi L200s, Ford Rangers and VW Amaroks in the UK for a couple of decades now, and the Toyota Hilux for even longer. American full-sizers do occasionally make their way on British shores as well via private import or specialist dealers. Farmers love their combination of capability, performance and comfort; this combination of attributes is not available in anything else. Regarding compact trucks, a quirk in UK tax regulations meant small one-person businesses could buy a higher trim Ranger Wildtrak and use it as a personal vehicle, something that Ford UK, ever with their eye on the ball, was happy to exploit. Although that tax loophole has now been closed, the fancy compact pickup has remained popular with the sort of people who decorate their houses with stone bulldogs on the outside and union jack cushions on the inside.
It’s a similar story in the upside-down colonies. The traditional car-based Aussie ute died when Holden was killed, so consequently American full sizers have exploded in popularity. Toyota is soft-launching the Tundra to fleet customers ahead of an official rollout. Along with the usual compact-sized suspects from Ford, VW, Toyota and now the Chinese OEMs, it’s a bloodbath down there. All this is a roundabout way of saying the worldwide compact pickup market is vast, and the various marques have consolidated their offerings. Essentially the same trucks are available across all non-North American markets, so it’s no surprise that Kia, currently enjoying their time in the sun, wants to get involved.
What Exactly Is A Kia?
As a car designer, it’s always a fun and useful thought exercise to imagine a brand coming up with something they don’t currently make. For car design students it’s a useful jumping-off point for a project, and as an educator it tells me a lot about how well a student understands a brand’s design language, identity and the market.
For example, when I was a student, a compact Fiesta-sized baby Jaguar was an old chestnut that kept popping up because everyone was angling for a job a JLR. I never thought much of the merits of that idea, because fifteen years ago Jaguar was an ostensibly premium brand attempting to be a British BMW. You have to consider what fits. When I studied at the RCA, my tutor J Mays told me to look for the gaps in an OEMs range – what don’t they currently make that they could?
Back then the idea of a Ferrari, Rolls Royce or Aston Martin SUV would have seen me laughed out of the studio, but the market got too lucrative for them to ignore. How successful these cars are from a design point of view is a discussion for another time, but there’s no arguing with what they bring to the bottom line. For Kia, the issue is slightly different.
For an OEM with a strong brand and a clear visual identity it’s easier to transpose those characteristics onto a new type of vehicle you don’t currently build. With Kia, it’s a bit tricky, because what exactly is a Kia? Some willfully different for the sake of being different detailing aside, taken individually their cars are mostly pretty good, although I really cannot get on with the Z shape of the lights on the K5, nor the down-turned mouth rear lighting on the EV6. But taken one by one on their own terms, they are not bad at all.
The problem comes when you look at the entire range. It’s hard to draw a consistent through-line across all their cars. There’s no underlying theme joining them all together. It seems like nothing really unites them visually. Now, this is not by and of itself necessarily a problem. I’ve talked before about how this allows mainstream OEMs a great deal of freedom to make compelling-looking cars without having to adhere to a family look. The problem comes when you do move into a totally new segment; then you’ve not got brand recognition to fall back on – nothing to tell consumers that “this new pickup is a Kia.” The way to avoid this trap is to create something really compelling that’s impossible to ignore. Unfortunately for Kia, they’ve made something that’s impossible to ignore for all the wrong reasons. The Tasman is hideous.
Eugene Levy Wants His Eyebrows Back
The first thing your eyes are drawn to, because you simply cannot avoid them, are the totally incongruous fender flares. Standing proud like Eugene Levy’s eyebrows, these oversized slabs of black polypropylene look like they’re from a completely different truck. Because they extend too far forwards and backward in the longitudinal axis, they don’t fit the shape of the wheel arch at all. Neither do they wrap around the entire opening, hampering their ability to protect the painted sheet metal. Look at how a Defender uses its cladding if you want to see this done properly.
According to our friends over at Motor1, Kia Australia CEO Damien Meredith knows the fender flares are contentious:
“It’s very good news. I can assure you that accessory [fender flare] will be there at launch.” What I like to call the “Tom Selleck mustache” will be optionally swapped out in favor of extended fender flares surrounding the entire wheel arch.
Motor1 goes on to say that it will also be possible to option them in body color. I think the effect is going to be like attempting to cover a particularly angry spot on your face with one of those flesh colored make-up sticks. This all suggests that after the body in white had been signed off someone, somewhere in the studio found their glasses and realized an almighty clanger had been dropped, and they had to scramble to come up with last-minute solution fixes. If you think I’m talking out of my ass, look at the short cab in black with the drop side (tabletop for our resident Australians) bed. Because it instantly banishes half the fender flares and camouflages the remainder against the bodywork, it instantly looks 100% better. Well 50%.
Whales And Planes
Moving around to the front, bloody hell. Oy vey. Insert your choice of hands-in-the-air expression here. I think the Kia exterior team must have had either a Beluga whale or Beluga Airbus, or possibly both on their mood board. How else to explain the Tasman’s oversized grill surround which protrudes into the air like a giant metal forehead, neglecting to bring the headlights or radiator grill itself along with it for company? Or indeed visual balance. Ripped straight from the Kia Global Tasman press release:
“The Kia design team deliberately shunned the familiar form language that has dominated the pickup genre for decades. This fresh approach to aesthetics strips away the unnecessary to begin with a basic, honest form that highlights the vehicle’s sense of solid power through simple yet functional elements, without relying on the oversized styling that has come to dominate the pickup segment.”
Now it’s no surprise that from a design point of view the embutchification of pickup trucks has been an ongoing problem ever since Dodge debuted the Big Rig second generation Ram way back in 1993.
Since then it’s been a chrome-plated arms race in the manner of ‘Fuck Everything, We’re Doing Five Blades’ as OEMs try to out do each other to make the most aggressive-looking trucks known to man, subtlety, nuance, and small children be damned.
Kia’s word salad appears to say they are deliberately attempting to not do that, but they didn’t exactly not do it either. In a way, by integrating the headlights into the fender flares they designed themselves into a corner – forcing the lights to be too small in comparison to the height of the hood and consequently the grill surround. A kind interpretation would be that it references the Dodge Power Wagon. But I’m not being kind so I’m going to say it suggests the Kia Retona, an abysmally cross-eyed device from the late eighties that was a civilian version of the K131 Jeep that was foisted on an unsuspecting South Korean military. Everything at the front is just out of proportion – like a particularly derpy sea creature from the bottom of the Mariana Trench whose features are too small for its face. Yikes. Chuck it back.
The Quartic Steering Wheel Is Back, Baby!
Opening the door and stepping inside the situation gets better. It’s not Tacoma, Defender or Wrangler levels of rugged, but it’s cohesive and pleasant enough, even if there’s a paucity of hard controls. Considering the Tasman is meant to be a working vehicle as well as a lifestyle one, this is curious. No amount of knurling on the door handles is going to make up for a lack of chunky switches that can be used with gloved hands on the worksite. Also, the steering wheel is giving me British Leyland flashbacks, as it appears to yoinked straight out of an Austin Allegro. The center console has a natty fold-out table, but like the under-seat storage, this is something we’ve seen before. It does all feel tilted toward the lifestyle part of the brief though, so it will be interesting to see what the more basic, harder-wearing commercial versions are going to look like.
Remember what I was saying about Kia not having a consistent visual identity? That’s why KIA is stamped on the tailgate in letters so large they can be seen from the International Space Station. The view from the rear is much more successful than the front, but then again there are fewer ingredients to fuck up. If it all aligns and makes sense and you don’t try to add features that are not necessary you’re golden. Given their propensity for mangled, messy surfacing on other cars in their range Kia has surprisingly not given in to that temptation here. There are corner steps in the rear bumpers, but again this is something cribbed from other pickups.
How Did They Manage To Mess Up The Brief?
I’ve been following the online discourse on the Tasman since it was revealed this morning, and the consensus to put it mildly is one of abject horror. A sentiment I agree with wholeheartedly. [Ed Note: I actually love it, but I also love the Australia-only Jeep CJ-10 pickup from the 1980s -DT]. The whole thing is just too stodgy, too blocky, and too upright. You don’t want a pickup to look sporty and dynamic because that would be stupid, but angling the sides a bit above the beltline to give the cursed thing some tumblehome would help a lot without pinching any head and shoulder room. Likewise raking the rear windshield forward just a couple of degrees would loosen the whole thing up, and make it look less brutal.
Kia can and has made some genuinely terrific-looking cars in the past. I always thought the Optima was a solidly handsome thing, and the Stinger was one or two overwrought details (the tail lamps wrapping in line down the rear fender always bothered me) away from looking really nice. The Sportage, Telluride and Carnival are pretty good for what they are. They are capable of good design when they try.
What they’ve served up this time is a sort of NPC compact truck. The Tasman doesn’t have the reputation of a Hilux, or the market ubiquity of a Ranger. For a fickle and competitive sector, you need a compelling-looking, cohesive design. Instead, the Tasman looks like a truck built out of parts from several other trucks, made from Lego by someone being given a description over the telephone. The stance is bad, the fender extensions are misguided and the whole thing is just a horrible inconsistent mess.
On some fundamental level, pickup trucks are just cool. Or at least, they should be. It comes with the territory. It’s a bit like designing sports cars or muscle cars – a dream assignment. I used to love drawing pickup truck versions of the [redacted] when I was in the studio. You’ve got to try really hard to fuck it up. But that’s what Kia has managed to do. The Tasman is the sum of several bad parts and somehow manages to be less than all of them.
Unless otherwise stated, all images courtesy of Kia
Top graphic: Eugene Levy in Schitt’s Creek
- The 2025 Kia Tasman Has a Very Important Job To Do
- I Drove The 2024 Ford Ranger And It Feels Like The Old Truck In A Nice Suit
- I Didn’t Think The New $57000 Ford Ranger Raptor Would Be Worthy Of The Raptor Name. Then I Drove One
- Why The Fourth-Gen Tacoma’s Design Is A More Successful Version Of The Third-Gen Tundra
The headlight units on the absolute corners of the front end/fenders are the worst location on a truck given that’s the first spot that you are going to clip anything with (brush guards should be mandatory here). Also the front end looks like the aped RAM’s macho man ‘stache in a bulbous caricature way. It’d be smart to offer a couple different designs for the front end based on trims, but those headlights are just garish.
Also, it should say Tasman across that hood space instead of KIA. The tailgate looks okay with the wordmark, but think it would look better with Tasman in big letters and offset smaller KIA logo. Or Tasman moved to the side of the bed. It’s too much lettering back there like they had to fill the space like on a hatchback, but with half the space.
I don’t mind the chunky fenders if they offer this in color combos similar to a Honda Element (black/grey/blue/paint-matched) or a blue/green/white exterior with sand colored plastics would be outdoorsy. This of course would be the majority of the cladding and snag the portion of the population that wants that customization to their vehicle.
Agreed on the overall mess that is the finished product, but seems on brand for Hyundai/Kia as they just aren’t making fully cohesive designs.
Brand separation between the two is problematic as well.
“ The headlight units on the absolute corners of the front end/fenders are the worst location on a truck given that’s the first spot that you are going to clip anything with (brush guards should be mandatory here).”
I am guessing the spare parts sales department looks at that like a feature, not a bug.
The tone of this is wildly harsh. I don’t LOVE it, but I far from hate it. At least it doesn’t look like everything else. And a few of these configurations seem genuinely attractive. Depending on price, expected fuel efficiency, and ride, I’d potentially be in. And be happy that I’m unlikely to walk up to the wrong vehicle in a crowded parking lot–even here in Texas.
You might think it’s ok. That doesn’t mean it’s any good.
What IS any good these days? Cars have gotten extremely boring. Three colors, every manufacturer uses the same basic profile with minor “groundbreaking” tweaks that most people don’t even see. I recognize a lot of this is driven by fuel economy or making the car as “slippery” as possible. All the more reason to celebrate when someone colors outside the lines–even if it’s not entirely successful.
I’m a graphic designer/creative director. Not that it makes me an expert but whenever a new design comes out I always make it clear that honesty is important so if there are concerns about it, better get those out early on.
With this thing… either nobody said anything or they were scared to say something. Those plastic things over the wheels look fucking awful! Thats the very first thing I saw when looking at this article. So does the front end. And what sucks is that there is a lot of good stuff happening here. The design could also be “saved” if those two things were addressed, which should be easy since they’re just plastic.
If you read the linked article from Motor1, there’s going to be optional full fender flares or you can have these ones body colored.
Looks like the designer took a half gummy, then took the other half because the first round “wasn’t doing anything.” THEN they designed this.
To me the single cab is the Tasman’s saving grace.
I don’t know. It’s not the worst thing I’ve ever seen. Kind of like driving an Igloo cooler. Kia is good for a weird design element or two in its designs. Those Tom Selleck flares are to this thing as the rear quarter reflectors are on the Stinger; unnecessary.
Also, suggesting to rake the backlight forward on the back of a cab where there isn’t a whole lot of space behind the headrests makes me take you a little bit less seriously.
You don’t need to make big changes for them to have a big effect.
Would… For the 2 door long bed.
Really dig the interior door handles.
Reception here in upside-down land has been universally terrible – and it was named after Able Tasman (of mapping Tasmania fame)!
One thing I would like to see is someone photoshop some proper headlight on it – has anyone seen that yet, of have the necessary app and skills?
I have both but can’t be bothered.
A map of Tasmania is far more pleasant to look at than this abomination!
“ever since Dodge debuted the Big Rig second generation Ram way back in 1993.”
I initially read that as ‘the Big Dick second generation Ram’.
And I agree… this Kia Tasman thing looks like it got hit by the ugly stick repeatedly.
Now having said that, if they price this competitively, I predict it will sell judging by the number of people I see driving around in Jeeps with those ugly/stupid ‘angry face’ grills.
It definitely isn’t the definition of handsome, but I do think there is cohesiveness here. Everything does work together in its uprightness. And it’s interesting. Not an A+, but a solid B for originality.
That’s why I’m the car designer and you’re….whatever you do.
So was the person who designed the Tasman… Which cars did you design?
I worked on the Land Rover Defender, had responsibility for the 130. Plus other things I’m not at liberty to mention because they were cancelled or haven’t been revealed publicly.
I only ask because I didn’t see much info online about what you had a hand in and I wanted a little more context for your design principles. I would say the Defender and Tasman are aiming at different targets, and Kia is taking more big design swings than Land Rover is, for what it’s worth. But also being a car designer is rarified air, and knocking someone’s opinion just for not being a part of that exclusive group is pretty low; it’s like discounting someone for their opinion on a movie because they’re not a director. Most people aren’t, but if they’re passionate they can still develop comprehensive opinions. And again, a car designer also made this so obviously yours is not a universal opinion even inside of the industry.
Normally only the chief designer gets any PR, because that plays into the ‘rock star’ designer angle. But the reality is there a tens of junior designers and managers working under them who do the work, aside from the clay modelers, hard model team and the digital guys and girls. The chief usually only approves or edits, then gets the credit at launch. This isn’t always the case but 90% of the time it is. So the underlings like me tend to toil away in anonymity. Also, no design studio of any discipline is going to talk about ongoing projects or alternate proposals that never made it, until decades after the event (and sometimes not even then). We had a drivable Defender concept years before the actual launch that was never revealed to the press or public.
You’re right in that being a car designer is a rarefied air. It’s an incredibly difficult profession to get into. I’ve always said you need to be extremely talented, work hard, go to the right college/university, have the right temperament, do the right graduation projects, be extremely lucky, and be extremely talented. If all of those things line up you have a chance. All that being said, it’s not just about having the vocational skills (sketching, rendering, digital modeling). You need to have a good sense of aesthetics and style, but you also need to understand how and why something is working, and why it does not. This is something that is hard to teach – you either have it or you don’t. Ultimately this is what separates car designers from the really great car designers, and it’s not something that’s universal. I once sat in a lecture about ride and handling, and how a lot of the numerical data that makes good ride and handling are known. At the end of the lecture I asked the tutor if all of this stuff is known science, why don’t all cars ride like a Rolls and handle like a Ferrari. He simply replied not everyone can do it…
Finally different OEMs value design differently – it all depends on the organizational structure and who design report to. Companies that take it seriously place the chief designer near the top – at JLR Gerry McGovern is on the board. It may be the case that the Tasman’s design wasn’t the chief’s favored proposal and he was over ruled. Ultimately I wasn’t in the room and can only make educated guesses based on my knowledge and experience. Ultimately the aim of the car designer is to produce good looking work that succeeds in the market place, but there a lot of external factors outside the studio as to why this isn’t always the case.
I appreciate the point of view and professional expertise you bring to the site, design is one of the major parts of the automotive world that I connected with early on and I’ve been excited to see more analysis here. That sense of aesthetics and style though certainly extends beyond that of professional car designers though, and I think there are a fair number of fellow design appreciators here, and there’s obviously going to be varying subjectivity on the topic. I just think there could be a little more tact in regards to other people’s takes on design when you interact with the commenters. And look I’m not trying to do the whole “everyone has a right to their opinion” in the “hey you can’t criticize opinions!” kind of way, as an artist myself I know there are clear signs of someone pulling incredibly uninformed opinions out of their ass, and I fully support you taking swings at that sort of thing. But I don’t think that was the case with your comment I took issue with initially. Anyway thanks for the thoughtful responses and I look forward to more content from you in the future.
When i first started writing here, i took a lot of shit from commenters for what was perceived as arrogance – I’ve always tried to explain and justify my opinions in reasonably plain english, to hopefully enlighten and entertain. I do think sometimes (and this is not directed at you or anyone else in particular) there is this idea that ‘all creativity is subjective’ and therefore everyone’s opinion about car design is equally valid. But this also ties into broader questions about how creative work is valued (in all disciplines). Also (and this is partly why I started writing in the first place) there was little understanding in the wider car enthusiast community about what a car designer actually does, and how cars are designed.
I have two fall back analogies I like to wheel out: firstly, you might not like something I or any other car designer does – that doesn’t mean it’s a bad design – and conversely just because you like something that doesn’t mean it’s good.
Secondly (and this is less relevant to our discussion) – when I get heckled from the cheap seats I always say: would you argue with your doctor, or your lawyer when they are giving you their qualified professional opinion?
Anyway I will always discuss in good faith and with no little sarcasm and insults – I wrote a series of car design fundamentals for Hagerty that cover some of the reasons why good design is not subjective – which you should be able to find by Googling my name and Hagerty.
I just don’t think design is quite as prescriptive as medicine or law; enjoying brutalism despite the trends and values of modern architects is different from taking colloidal silver for cancer or representing yourself in court as a sovereign citizen. Design trends also change for different reasons than medicine or law change. I agree with the first analogy though, I’ve made the same argument about art in general. It can be something you don’t like at all but it’s still art, y’know? I think some measure of perceived arrogance comes with the territory though, you can’t be down on your own work and find success. People outside of that path don’t understand that though.
Yeah this was the point I was trying to make, I don’t believe that it is entirely subjective or that everyone’s opinions are equally valid, and experience and first-hand knowledge are definitely valuable. But it also doesn’t mean that all opinions from those who don’t have first-hand knowledge are completely invalid.
A curator at a renowned automobile museum who has worked with some very prominent car designers on exhibits focused on car design, but you know…
If you solicited their opinions on the Tasman and I’d genuinely be staggered if any of them think it’s any good.
I don’t think it’s very good, either, but I do think it’s at least cohesive. The different design elements do seem to have consistent forms. And it is a novel design. But neither of those things equal aesthetically pleasing.
I agree with you.
It’s all Bad.
Ts obviously a truck. That’s about as far as the cohesiveness takes me.
I mean, all the design elements are consistent. They just add up to an ugly truck.
Agreed, at least it’s interesting. Also, I’d buy one of these waaaaay before one of those four-door Wrangler abominations.
I dunno, I like it. It’s like a funky futuristic Wrangler with better proportions than their pickup.
{voice of Bob Uecker} Swing and a miss!
You can tell by how ugly it is that it’s aimed squarely at the American truck market. It will fit right in.
It’s highly unlikely to come to the US unless they build it here.
Maybe I am odder than I think…
H3 front end.
Side design was two door, short box, with the tail lights meeting the wheel arch, showing some front to back symmetry…
Also, why not show it in complementary colors to the dark, like British Racing Green?
Can we please get the 2 door in the states?
I’m surprised there wasn’t more images of the two door.
Everywhere you look just adds to conglomeration of shit design.
As if nobody saw the whole thing, prior to production.
That rear door looks like a loaded nappy.
So much potential for a fresh appearance, wasted.
I foresee “Don’t Tasman me bro!” trending on social media in the near future.
Maybe if it came out in 2011
I knew from the jump there was going to be an Ed. Note from David Tracy saying that he liked it.
That’s what sleeping in an Aztec will do to you.
That poor truck hit every ugly stick on the way down. Oof.
I hope Peter Schreyer expressed his feelings to them in some long, German, unpleasantries.
I can imagine him removing his funky classes, slowly cleaning them, letting iut an exasperated sign and then exploding into a tirade. In German.
“I’ll take Weird looking shit my kid builds with his LEGO for 400 Alex.”
The center section looks like a marine escape pod I saw in a video somewhere that looked like it would roll and toss everyone inside like a washing machine until they wished they’d stayed on the sinking ship. I don’t know why I don’t see drop sides in the US. OK, it happens to make this lawn grub look OK, but it also seems like it would be a lot more useful than a bed depending on the work someone used the truck for.
Yes, pretty much everyone here that actually uses a pickup for work had a drop-side/tabletop tray/bed.
Easy way to tell the real workers versus the supervisors or pretenders at a glance in most places
This is what happens when you let AI run your design department.
Great, another design where you have to order it in black to have it not look completely awful.
This is pretty bad even in black, but worse when you highlight those plastic “eyebrow” things.
Many such cases
Looks like the EV side of the KIA/Hyundai things to me. However if they would just put this bet on the back of a Telluride with a decent sized engine that can tow 7500 lbs then that would certainly be something.
Still looks better than Elon’s origami.