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
The Defender with the white steel wheels the way The Bishop intended.
Steelies should make a comeback.
Pretty much any supercar. Or anything else where the top models are festooned with more aero than a 2008 Formula One car.
The Fender Precision. Fancying up with extra pickups and gold hardware is just a waste.
Oh. “Base” models. My bad.
The 1998-2002 Firebird. The Tran Am’s gigantic nostrils were hard to look at.
The only reason you came here for was to hear me say a 1990 Nissan Axxess.
Fox body Mustang LX trumps the GT every day. Especially in 5.0L Notchback form.
Gawd I hate the GT taillights.
That’s why I bought the LX Sport 5.0 version (black on black convertible) Still could get the nice tartan GT interior. Always like the pre-87 GT looks.
Technically they aren’t trims and are different models, but I’ll take a ’55 150 over a ’55 Bel Air any day of the week.
Besides specific paint colors locked behind higher trims, almost universally base models look better than the higher trims.
I’ll take unpainted black plastic over paint matched plastic any day.
S Class, because the Maybachs look actively worse.
Viper, because the 6 vent hood is cooler.
Anything with an actually cheap base model looks worse, almost by definition. Black plastic is not attractive.
All full-sized trucks.
It’s because they always go for chrome as the luxury model signifier. And a giant wall of chrome looks cheap and chintzy. Like a pair of jeans with rhinestones glued on.
Base models also keep the workwear-adjacent aspects of a truck – you look like you’re tougher and can fell a tree and fix an air conditioner. The more crap you glue on, the more it gives “all hat, no cattle.”
Agreed.
WT trim is a truck without all the cosplay.
When I was a kid, they referred to a cushy, loaded pickup truck as a “cowboy Cadillac.”
Nowadays, a truck that looks like an actual cowboy would drive it is way less common than a cowboy Cadillac is.
I’m still amazed Cadillac hasn’t come back out with a pick-up. While I’ve got a hankering for an Avalanche (and that’s part of what made it cool), you’d think some sort of Caddy pick-up would be offered today.
I think the reason they haven’t is for the same reason Ford hasn’t had a Lincoln pickup in about 20 years. Buyers want luxury pickups, but they don’t want them from a luxury brand. Pickup buyers still seem to want the appearance of being tough blue collar workers, and so owning a truck from a hoity-toity luxury brand doesn’t align with that vision. They want the luxury trappings, but not the luxury name. Ford realized this when they first made the Lincoln Blackwood, which failed for being too luxurious to even use as a pickup, and again with the Lincoln Mark LT, which was essentially just a Lincoln-badged F150—so more useable as a pickup—but it still failed to sell well, because of the Lincoln name attached to it. I think GM saw this and decided against a full-fat Cadillac pickup, except for the Escalade EXT, which wasn’t really considered a “real” pickup truck anyway.
You reasoning doesn’t make sense, because Ford’s experience with the Lincoln Blackwood and Mark LT is a heck of a lot different than GM’s experience with the EXT, which sold decently well for over a decade.
Not to mention that fake chrome wrinkles with a little age.
I have dubbed it Scrotal Chrome
I wish you could get fog lights on base model trucks. Used to be able to, now it’s less common because fog lights are no longer basic round things that fit in a hole. They are weird mini LEDs that designers like to put in weird spots that stop existing because the base model gets a far more basic front clip.
I always thought this was the oddest comparison, that by somehow having the cheapest, less feature filled truck, the more it’s actually for work; yet no one has that expectation for other stuff. It’s not like we think a chef is better if they use some cheapo walmart knifeset and cook on a $400 electric range. I doubt office workers think they do more actual work with chromebook vs their Macbook Pro or X1 Carbon, even though we all know they only need to do is some basic word processing and spreadsheets. Hell, lots of commenters here are probably sitting on something like a $1,500 Herman Miller Aeron only to criticize some other guy for wanting pleather seats, a decent radio, and heated steering wheel in his work truck that he bought himself. If you’re actually spending a lot of time in your truck, fuck yeah am I gonna want creature comforts, just like any other worker would want with their office or tools.
Amen.
A lot of commenters who’ve never owned a truck, let alone worked with one, presuming to know best for actual owners.
The idea that I’d be afraid to track a drop of mud on my King Ranch seats is frankly weird and insulting.
To be fair, carpet is like the worst truck material ever. And it’s seems standard on even work truck trims these days. I actually am hesitant to get the carpet dirty some times–especially with dog hair–just because it fuckin’ sucks to clean.
Make vinyl an option in all trim levels!
Plus, I’m not sure how plastic carpet got seen as more luxurious/”better” than vinyl (plastic) floors. THEY ARE BOTH PLASTIC, ONE JUST GETS ALL NAPPY AND TRAPS ALL THE DIRT AND GETS SALT STAINS…
I just do not clean the inside of my jeep. Problem solved.
I can’t speak for all trucks, but vinyl flooring is an option in every trim of the Super Duty (and one that I ordered)
Just to add to your argument, what is one of if not the most popular after market accessory? Weathertech (or similar) floor covers, I have a hard time referring to something that totally covers the existing carpet as a simple floor mat.
Pay extra for carpet, then pay even more to keep it clean and protected by something that is aesthetically no different from vinyl or rubber floor material…
I’d actually prefer it if my plumber arrived by a wagon drawn by just a single scrawny nag. Wood wheels and all. If that wagon has bearings in the wheels instead of greased and sleeved nave, you know he’s a prissy little prima donna.
I agree. I had a tree removal estimate and the guy showed up in a wrapped f-350 with about a foot of lift and giant fancy rims and that was even on his estimate flier. He was very off-putting and the most expensive estimate.
I think you have to separate creature comforts from appearance packages – which all truck manufacturers do, in fact. It’s rare that you can’t spec up those “base” models to rival the more expensive models that they sell.
We’re talking about looks, and the chintzy appearance packages, pointless baubles and other crap truck manufacturers glue onto the high-end models make them look like the driver is a total poseur. The trim looks fragile, the chrome looks cheap, the entire thing looks gaudy. Is it all true? Not always, but when we’re talking about looks, the top end looks worse and it looks like the driver is a bit of a twatwaffle.
As for your laptop comparison, gaming laptops have the exact same effect.
A good pair of work pants costs more than most pairs of jeans.
My friend who owns a stable and teaching riding says that nothing says “I don’t ride horses” more than rhinestones on jeans. They mess up both your saddle and your bottom.
None. I can’t think of a single example.
I never understood this obsession among enthusiast circles for base models. They always look cheap because they’re deliberately designed that way.
The automaker wants you to upgrade. That will be baked into the design.
Yeah – cheap = virtuous is way too common here and elsewhere.
This virtuous bastard disagrees.
If it’s an obsession, it’s an obsession with vehicles that don’t have too much extra crap screwed and glued to them.
Yes, higher-end models of the same vehicle often look more attractive than base models of the same vehicle. But as often as not, you look at the base model compared to the top model and think to yourself, “Why add all that junk?”
Porsche 911
Yeah… no. Wide body > narrow body 911 by a long shot.
Wide bodies ruin the lines of basically every car that has such a variant
For my money, many of them just b/c the wheels are invariably simpler.
Seems like once you go up the levels, wheel designs get way busier, colored in hip now but soon to be dated hues, and are usually comically large for the actual vehicle size.
I’ll agree, adding that it’s not just because the base wheels are simpler, but because they are smaller.
The +2 and larger wheels with needless thin rubber just look silly. they only good thing they do is distract your eye away from overly creased “pile of laundry” body side designs. I don’t need my car to look like it is riding on bare aluminum cylinders.
THIS. I got a more base model EV6 because it came with 19” wheels instead of 20s, and I wanted the extra sidewall given the shit roads around me. It also gave me an extra 30 miles range, I assume at least in part due to lower unsprung weight.
Or possibly that the energy returned rather than absorbed and turned to heat is better with more sidewall. Similar to having a high coefficient of restitution, though that is a material property, not a property of a complex system. Or, more of the road irregularity bounce takes place in the tire and less in the shocks, where it turns to heat. Likely a combination of all of these and more.
Whatever the cause, this was seen from the outset with Teslas – upgrade rims gave lower range.
As a fan of steelies, I agree.
Alloy wheels tend to be stronger than steelies, but that strength comes at a cost.
Alloy wheels don’t deform much, they tend to break, and it takes much more force to break them.
Steel on the other hand has no problem deforming and flexing back for smaller impacts, and larger ones can easily wreck the wheel.
That deformation absorbs more of the impact, whereas an alloy may stay completely intact but transfer that energy to the much more expensive, much harder to fix, and much more vital steering and or suspension components, whereas the steel wheel is cheap and easy to replace.
Toyota LandCruiser 200 Series (GX) it has barn style rear doors to top it off. Perfect
Suburban with barn doors too.
Mercedes-AMG SL43
Actually – pretty much any non-AMG & non-Maybach Mercedes-Benz looks better.
While we’re at it – the standard Rolls-Royce looks better than any Black Badge.
Also –
Ford Mustang – preferably with spoiler delete – always better than a GT or special-edition-du-jour.
We bought our 2024 Chevrolet Trax LS specifically because it was a base model. We added the LS convenience package, which gave us 17″ silver painted aluminum wheels instead of the silver plastic hubcaps provided on the base model, but those look just fine if you’re focused more on cost than convenience.
The higher trims have blacked-out emblems and black painted wheels, which cheapens the look of the 2nd-generation Trax. It looks best with gold bow-ties and aluminum (looking on the true base model) wheels. Plus the dash looks better with the analog-looking gauges instead of yet another big screen behind the steering wheel that you’re forced to get if you want the LT or Activ trims.
Plus, our LS with the three options was still less than $24K out the door including tax and registration.
Here’s a similar one:
https://autoimage.capitalone.com/dealer/2024-Chevrolet-Trax-LS-KL77LFE24RC198996-dealersync_KL77LFE24RC198996_47414H-80e2ebab74751da351a86899e2ed08a3.jpg
I like this and agree. If the Trax/Envista had a NA 4-cylinder engine, I’d strongly consider actually buying one.
I was a little apprehensive about the 1.2L 3-cyl. turbo with wet timing belt at first. It’s actually quite peppy. I have to be careful taking off around a corner or it will spin the tires pretty easily.
Then the stealership threw in a lifetime powertrain warranty for free so that made it a little better.
Time will tell.
Yes, a lifetime powertrain warranty would make me feel better about it, assuming it’s a manufacturer warranty and usable at other dealerships in case the first one goes kaput. I don’t even worry so much about the small displacement and turbo, but the wet belt thing freaks me out. I’ve yet to see/hear/read anything convincing that says it’s a good idea.
I’m sure the turbo 1.2 is more than peppy enough… I’m never in a rush. It’s more the longevity that I’m worried about. I recall a basically bulletproof naturally aspirated 1.5 liter four-cylinder from the Toyota Yaris… 1Zsomething. Admitedly, Yarii engines were moving a lighter car, but me personally (who likes to be able to keep running a car for years) I’d prefer GM had simply licensed a known/simple/reliable engine from Toyota (or the NA 1.5 or 2.0 from Mazda) instead of going with the modern/tiny/stressed/iffy design. I presume it’s less profitable to do it this way, and those 15-year old Japanese designs probably don’t meet current emissions.
Still, a good/simple/likely long-lived powertrain would make these even more appealing. The metallic copper paint on the Envista is so nice, that it tempts me despite the wet belt. 🙂
It’s a 3rd party warranty, (WarrantyForever) and there are limitations.
I am not allowed to change my own oil, for one. They prefer I bring it to the stealership where I bought it for all recommended maintenance, but that’s not required. What is required is that all service needs to be done and documented at an ASE certified shop. If it’s not at the place of purchase, you have to call the warranty people to let them know in advance.
The other caveat is that they will cover everything from the turbo down to the wheel bearings with unlimited mileage, but once the vehicle gets older, if the cost of the repair is more than the book value of the vehicle, then you’re S.O.L. and they will not cover anything.
So obviously I’ll keep an eye on the book value of it. We don’t put a lot of miles on it (less than 6K over 2 years) and we store it for the winter as it’s not our primary vehicle. There’s a YT video about a guy who tears down one of these motors that failed with 133K on it, but it sounds like maintenance was not much of a priority in that case.
Licensing a N/A engine would cost quite a bit of money (even if it is not much).
Also, the EPA/CAFE would be, well…anyways.
Time will tell with respect to the reliability. The Trailblazer seems to have gotten this engine first, or did it have another engine?
Many people are scared of this engine, but so far I haven’t heard of serious issues.
I think that was a move to reach emissions as well.
Lexus LC500, which is admittedly already loaded, but the two option packages offer little to improve on it.
Since the Maverick is nominated, a Fiat 500 Pop on black steelies looks better than an Abarth.. Also old American cars with police packages. Dog dish hubcaps and bulging blackwalls look so much better than wire wheel covers, whitewalls and a vinyl top
If only they’d painted those steelies silver instead of black or matching the body color (especially on darker ones, talk about it taking a lot of work to look cheap at least from a manufacturing complexity perspective).
on that note I really like the color matched wheel covers Mercedes used to use.
Agreed, but they only really worked for Mercedes.
That’s weirdly true, though I’m sure Jason or somebody with an equally encyclopedic knowledge could come up with a few alternate examples (of body-color-painted steel wheels actually looking good). I love those painted Mercedes ones though. 🙂
On the flip side to that note: a girlfriend years ago drove a gray market 300D, and had it worked on by a great German mechanic in town. One day we were going to pick up her car at his shop, and he showed off the results of an experiment he was doing: he had sent out just one “Bundt” wheel out to be chromed just to see what it would look like, and all three of us agreed that he should send out three more and slap them on one of his cars immediately. Which he did, and put them on his 350SL coupe.
It made for a hell of a great looking piece of jewelry for a classic Benz, and was the only wheel I ever would have dreamed of replacing my girlfriend’s own body matched wheel covers with.
Chromed or polished “Bundt” wheels were common back in the day but I thought they were a bit gaudy.
Oh lord yes, me too! They are the best on those Benzes, which (IMO) were some of the best (least trouble-prone) cars MB ever made. There’s an unbelievably clean/lightly modded diesel coupe down the hill that I salivate for every time I drive by. The owner has promised to call me first if/when he ever decides to sell (which I’m sure he won’t).
Ooh, I would do naughty things for a clean 300CD coupe.
Me too, but the guy who owns the one down the hill is happily married, and I’m too old and fat anyway. 😉
Those comparison photos of the front and rear of the BMW remind me of old PS2-era street racing games where you could unlock “custom” bumpers and most seemed very, very random-looking
The Maverick XL, with steelies, in any color that’s actually a color. Though in a base model, even white looks good. Sexiest feature? The window sticker of $28k for a hybrid truck.
(Of course, it was even sexier three years and $8000 ago, but that’s still a good price for a little workhorse.)
Agreed. We have a 25 mav lariat for the options but the wheels and trim look awful… just slapped on pieces of shiny crap. The base trim is much cleaner.
From the rear, new M3’s remind me of the latest WRX, which isn’t good to my eyes.
Pretty much any boxy American car from the mid ’70s through late ’80s where the optioned-up model had things like fake wire wheel covers and a padded landau vinyl top. I can appreciate that stuff as kitsch from a bygone time now, but as a kid back then it made me actually glad my dad only bought base models.
The previous (10th) generation Civic, along with the current Hyundai Elantra. The designs themselves have so much going on that adding to it for the higher spec just makes for overkill.
In Japan, the Toyota Prius v was sold in fleet spec as the Daihatsu Mebius.
The only thing that appears to have changed is the badging, but come on, what a much better name, and the Daihatsu “D” logo!
…which is why I’m currently waiting on an eBay order of the OEM Mebius badging to arrive from Japan so I can rebadge mine.
And you will be the first person anywhere ever to rebadge a car as a Diahatsu!
I have been wondering if I’d be the first with the dubious honor (at least for the Prius v, specifically) but also how would I check and I doubt there’s any clout to be had from it…
It’s the least aspirational rebadge ever as well, which is what makes it such an awesome idea!
I agree! 😀
The V6 S197 Mustang. Smaller wheels and the bigger tires do a lot to make the design actually work without looking like a caricature.
All of the current “Big 3” pickups – both half-ton and HD models – look best in their base work truck versions. As you move to higher trims, they tend to get overwrought and over-chromed.
Generally, I agree. The only issue I have is that because the wheel arches are sized for monster truck tires, they look a bit like they are on their tiptoes with small wheels. But that is just because the rest of the truck is far too large, visually and otherwise.
I’d say you’re probably mostly right, but with the exception of the base Silverado 1500. I just can’t stand that level of black plastic on the front! On the other hand, my boss this summer had a base Silverado 2500, and I think that one managed to make the blacked-out front look mean rather than cheap.
Work trucks in any color but white are rare, but I’ve seen a couple base trucks in black, and the grill is much less ugly.
Yeah, but, I need more grille. maybe the front fenders and doors can be grille.
Has there ever been a grillside bed before? No? Well, there should be.
Plus a rear grillegate.
We can even put louvers on the windscreen and windows, because grille.