ipdamages
Roadster Sport 835
I'm not sure it is the "only" differentiating point, but I generally share your view that it is distinctive, and for me that is not in a good way, and that generally speaking the rest of the exterior is similar to other cars. And I think that Franz agrees it isn't very distinctive.
But obviously not everyone shares our view, and particularly not everyone on the TMC forum. There are lots of people who like the Model S look, and don't like the Karma - like Jerry:
In the press, the Karma's design is generally acknowledged to be more of an exotic than the Model S. I prefer exotic. Some don't. The problems with exotics are usually the compromises necessary to provide those looks and high performance. But if given the choice, many people would prefer the curvy to the straight/aero. Like the Maserati Gran Turismo vs. the Quattroporte. If given the choice on body style alone, I think most people prefer the Gran Turismo. But the compromises are what turns people away (and the price - though the Quattroporte isn't inexpensive either).
Here is an article that raises an interesting idea: the Karma has exotic looks and an underwhelming hybrid under the hood, which makes it ok for long trips but horrible off the line so it doesn't deliver on its looks, while the Model S is the opposite in that it looks more common, but has serious guts. However, those serious guts are better for short trips than long ones. As a result, the Model S and Karma have mismatched bodies and drivetrains. If the Model S drivetrain was in a Karma, it would match. Huge power off the line, but not so good for long distance driving. If the Karma drivetrain was in a Model S, it would match better. Less exotic, but would have the road trip advantage of a hybrid.
Setting aside that superchargers have improved the road trip potential for the Model S relative to ICEs, and in some folks' minds even surpassed the ICE, I think it is still an interesting point, and one that represents the viewpoint that the Karma is an attractive exotic - in appearance - while the Model S is not in that category.
Mismatched motors: Tesla and Fisker both built the wrong cars for their tech | Digital Trends
Other than the largesse of the Karma (which is shared by the Model S), the most frequently complained-about aspects of the exterior are the Rollie Fingers handlebar moustache, the long front end, and it being too curvy and Batmobile-like. While I like the look of the Batmobile and Karma and Gran Turismo, I somewhat agree with the other two points. If I had my druthers I'd modify the design accordingly, and that is IMO what we see in the Atlantic. Shorter front end, the moustache has been trimmed, and importantly, the car is much smaller. I walked it off when I saw it in person and it is between a 3-series and 5-series in size. So what do you folks think about taking design cues from the Atlantic for the Gen 3?
I realize that if the Karma's interior was a problem, the Atlantic has to be worse (assuming it has the center column), but setting that aside, is the Atlantic distasteful in exterior appearance? To me it is Henrik's greatest design.
Is that too curvy for you guys? If so, I guess we just agree to disagree.
For those who still hate the grill, maybe a front end more like the Destino?
And finally, of those who like the Model S over the Karma and Atlantic, do you like the Model S nose cone? The nose cone is the one thing that makes me cringe. To me the rest of the car is perhaps not as exotic as others, but definitely not unattractive.
Some of the elements of the Atlantic that I like best for Gen 3:
Not much car extending beyond the wheels
Found a way to make a four-door but still has coupe-like roof line
Pano-roof
Curvy around the wheels
Not tall
What I don't like:
I'm sure it is cramped inside
Probably can't be that low with a skateboard
Still has that grill (though not as severe as the Karma)
Storage is probably terrible (though if you got rid of the ICE that would free up some space)
