BMW unveiled the new iX3 electric crossover earlier this month, and Thomas says it looks way better as a base model. He says with the M Sport package removed, it’s less busy, more restrained, and ultimately more visually agreeable. I… kind of see what he means, but to me, the car still just looks like a slightly odd, not-quite-terrible, not-gorgeous-either blob that reads slightly more attractive than its new Mercedes rival, regardless of trim level.
In any case, his blog got me wondering. Other than the iX3, which car looks best as a base model? Which car, on sale today or otherwise, is actually visually more appealing in its most basic form rather than with all the lipstick and whistles?
A whole genre of car that arguably lends well to this question are off-roaders. On the trail, basic, destructible, scuff-ready aesthetics look and function better than big wheels and glossy trim.
The base Mercedes G-Wagen, for example, still rocks reasonable wheels, gets a factory bull bar, and for just $200 extra you can even fit these cool 19-inch monoblocks. G63? Tacky in comparison. The new Toyota Land Cruiser’s base 1958 model even comes with its own, very retro, very puppy dog-eyed front end. More expensive Cruiser trim? Still cool, but not as cool as the 1958. The base Ford Bronco, meanwhile, still comes with steelies. And you can’t beat a car on aesthetics when it’s wearing steelies.
Moving away from the off-roaders, though—and apologies for once again picking on BMW’s M-whatever designers—but purely from an aesthetic standpoint, the current-gen 3 Series looks the most tasteful in base 330i form. Nobody needs a rehash on the stylistic flaws of the M3, but even the M340i (or a 330i with the M Sport appearance package) feels awkward and overdone, especially post-facelift.
Here’s the base 330i:
Now, here’s the M340i:
That lower front grille makes it look the way my partner does when she’s taking pictures of her teeth with the Invisalign phone attachment thingy in her mouth. The shape of the glossy black part of the rear diffuser feels random and styled for style’s sake, and why are the mirror caps black? Back in my day, black mirror caps meant you couldn’t afford to have them painted, not the other way around.
But we’d like to hear from you. Which cars look better, or even best, in the bargain basement trim?
Topshot: Toyota
GMC “Altitude” Sierras look great, as well as F150 XL’s, especially the 21-23’s.
It’s been a while now that the lowest trims of pickups have looked the best, typically having color keyed or blacked out trim, as opposed to a bunch of chrome and giant wheels.
Jeep YJ, the top of the line Renegade model was the ugly duckling amongst all the lower trim models.
I just wish actual colors weren’t locked behind the ugly (or at least not AS cool) squared land cruiser 250 LEDs :’( atomic silver isn’t bad but dang give me da blue or a classic red and white FJ appearance package one of these days and they’ll print money
11th Generation Ford F150 looks pretty dang good in a stripped down XL work truck version.
Isuzu D Max. Base Spec, single cab, long bed, 3.0 Diesel 4×4, manual…halogen headlamps. Who can ask for a more basic vehicle?
Second would be a used GMC Sierra base. Has everything you need, nothing you DO NOT.
One of the reasons I specifically ordered a poverty spec 6G Bronco base 2 door was those steelies. With big chunky AT tires the stance and look were darn near perfect. The problem was that the rest of it screamed “cheap” and I sod it after a couple of years.
The prior gen Camry LE’s were the best looking version w/ its 17in rims perfectly sized for the vehicle and halogens giving its front end a cleaner look than the LED DRL cluster built into the XLE’s units. Most of all, the LE was free of the theft magnet wheels and tacky fake “sporty” design cues of the SE/XSE models, especially the poorly proportioned Pep Boys quality fake vents on the lower front fascia.
Ford Maverick on steelies!
Taming my disdain for cars with extra bells and whistles that aren’t actually needed and the use of DUB wheels on higher trims, my answer is pretty simple:
Fiata
Extra handling enhancements aside, I like the appearance of the Abarth trim less than the base model. Bumpers have too much unpainted plastic trim at the bottom, I don’t like matte paint on modern cars, it only came in 3 not-very-exciting colors in NA, and I think the Fiata looks better on 16s with a little extra sidewall which was only offered on the base model.
Im still salty that NDs got top colors other than black though 🙂
I was gonna say the new Land Cruiser, but of course you beat me to it. It simply looks right with round headlights, and odd without.
Someone mentioned that they prefer painted plastic trim to unpainted black, but I’m not sure I agree in all cases. The one that comes to mind where the trim SHOULD have been painted body color instead of left unpainted black is the Mazda CX-30, which has excessively noticeable black plastic wheel arch trim. Painting it body color (as they do on most or all trims of the CX-5) would make it less visually annoying. Still, it wouldn’t keep me from buying one… it’s just a bit visually jarring, that’s all.
Like the new Bronco in the base 2-door configuration with a nice color on it, but not that weird ‘retro’ look (which might be more $$??).
Definitely the current Impreza.
The WRX gets acres of hideous black plastic in the rear, while the regular Impreza is body color and looks far cleaner.
I wanted a cx-30, but as mentioned in Scott’s comment, about 1/4 of each side is black plastic cladding which is destined to fade to grey black. I bought a base Impreza instead, all painted metal, no cladding. Can wash it in ten minutes, and wax it in an hour and a half.
Base Jeep XJs with OEM steel “sawblade” wheels with beefy all-terrains. Lifted or stock ride height, it just looks right as rain. Or any base 4x4s with steel wheels for that matter.