What matters more, form or function?

In the long run I’d have to say that function is quite important. However, there are some cars that have such great form that their lack of functionality can be overlooked. However, I believe that you probably will miss that functionality at times, should you aim solely for form.

Form over function is fine if the function is adequate. Ferrari until the 2000’s.
Function that improves function and form will likely succeed. Lancia Delta Integrale
Function that only improves function will not save form. Any BL car
Poor function and form will fail. Pinto
Poor form and good function will likely fail. Subaru XT, Fiat Multipla.
Good form and poor function can succeed. People are not logical. Ant Lambo before the Diablo
!

You can’t put them away from each other. But in last case, I would say form. Or better yet, desirability. You don’t desire a car just for it’s performance, it has to be desirable to you, and in last case, that’s what speaks louder most of the time. It might not work very well, but you can excuse that for it’s beauty. Jaguar was a brand that lived that kind of approach. Beauty was the business card. The E-Type is the Anthem of Beauty. The Citroën C-Cactus is the last “form follows function” example the I’ve seen in the market.… Read more »

To me, it’s ‘form’. Charter, style, and handling specifically. My daily driver is an ’89 Toyota MR2, which seems pretty impractical, but it fits everything I need (a folding display table behind the passenger seat, a curbside drum kit, a tent, air mattress, small cooler…). It gets good gas mileage as well. But it is tricky to work on, and at 250k miles, it needs a bit more attention than a typical Toyota.

That’s easy;

A great car is a car that’s able to appeal to- and maximizes the stimulant of- all sences; the feel, the eyes, the ears and the nose…..

Beautiful form follows performance-driven function.

Neither and both! The Alfa Romeo 33 Stradale, in form of a dazzling sports machine, on top (and, in part, because of its) stunning shape, could launch from 0 to a hundred km per hour in 5,4 seconds.

In the most desirable cars form follows function to create something beautiful.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
So there are no rules.

Although the person who came up with the idea of building my beloved Beetle is one rather not to mention, the designer Ferdinand Porsche is! The instructions were clear: the car should be able to drive a 100km/ph, carry 4 people plus bagage, and drive across the high peaks of the Alps.

Form follow function. But Italian-car enthusiasts like my dad could disagree with me.

It’s a really interesting question, and the one that’s been around since an automobile as we know it was invented. First and foremost, one has to define (the relationship between) the form and the function. And also the notion has to suit the purpose of the object in question. You see, when talking about form and function, Loewy designed pencil sharpener is totally different from a notion applied to, say, a Countach, but at the same time, very similar. Earlier automobiles were designed, and engineered through, not much from science, but instead, a lot from imagination. A designer exercised an… Read more »

To each his/her own, and so on. In my opinion it’s a sliding continuum between the two, depending on what the intended purpose of the car is – and merge that with company pedigree to get it right. A Land Rover Defender is beautiful in the sense that neither it’s design nor function is compromised by one another. It’s car design and architecture blended into a purposeful machine that shows it’s intent right away. But to be honest, maybe a car that is not a compromise in any way, might force one self to some compromises..?