We Need A Name For Stubby, Inflated-Looking Automobiles So I’m Proposing ‘Pufferfish Cars’

Puffer Top
ADVERTISEMENT

I like classifying things. I’m not exactly sure why, but taxonomy can be fun — at least when it’s being done for useless, foolish, and/or just stupid reasons. Luckily, I have a perfect useless and foolish taxonomical goal for today, and it’s an automotive one: There’s a class of car that, if my research is sound, has so far never been officially grouped into a coherent category. And yet these cars, different in many ways, nevertheless are all quite clearly related. They’re related by a specific set of aesthetic and physical design criteria — criteria that have less to do with size than proportion, overall shape, and a general look that seems to imply something inflated, kind of like what I always thought Aldous Huxley meant when he used the word “pneumatic” in Brave New WorldThis new category of car is called “Pufferfish.” Please allow me to introduce you to the world of Pufferfish cars.

Essentially, here are the necessary criteria for pufferfish cars, shown on one of the finest examples of the genre, an Audi A2:

Puffer Criteria

Like all categorical criteria, there may be some examples that don’t quite hit all of these exactly, but like that judge said about dirty pictures, you’ll know a Puffer when you see it. The cars tend to be from the 1990s and up, they generally tend to be smaller cars but with an emphasis on space maximization, and, interestingly, they’re remarkably agnostic regarding brand status. There are Pufferfish cars built by premium brands as well as some of the cheapest cars ever made. Really, it’s kind of remarkable that way.

Let’s look at some examples of the category, which your intense, active minds are already likely forming as we speak:

Pufferexamples

Look at that range: the cheapest car ever sold new, the Tata Nano, to Mercedes-Benz and Audi. That Taurus wagon definitely pushes the hood-to-body ratio rule, but it still has that overall inflated, sea creature feeling about it that I think keeps it in the Pufferfish camp. The Mercedes-Benz B-Class is a bit more subtle, but it has the look. The Xsara is a uniquely French take that pushes the proportions via inflating that greenhouse almost to a one-box design, but not quite. The Buick Encore I think may be my least favorite of these, because somehow it looks like the one least happy to be in this category, somehow. It should feel honored.

If you’re still having trouble getting on board with all this, maybe this will help — an example of a car that caused me some taxonomic difficulties here: the Renault Twingo.

Twingo

So, by most criteria, the Twingo should fit here: proportions, minimal overhangs, all that. But the Twingo is lacking the one crucial trait: it doesn’t really look inflated. Somehow, the Twingo maintains just a bit of leanness in its look that keeps it out of the Pufferfish camp. It doesn’t look like it’s about to burst; it’s in a balance of tension there in a way that Puffers are not. Puffers give the sense that the pressure inside them is greater than outside them.

Does this make sense? [Ed Note: Sure, in a Torchtopian sort of way I guess. -DT]. I’d love to hear your thoughts and what other examples you come up with. I’m fond of this peculiar category of car. It’s slipped under the radar, for the most part, but I think it’s high time we take a moment and recognize these bouncy members of the greater automotive landscape.

Let’s hear it for the Pufferfish!

Relatedbar

The Tiny Rear Wipers On Modern Cars Are Pathetic But I Have A Solution

Regulations Made The US Version Of The New Morgan Super 3 Have A Spider Face

A Professional Car Designer Explains What Makes The Honda e So Wonderful

It’s Time To Stop Sharing That Meme With All The White SUVs Because It’s Wrong And Stupid

 

117 thoughts on “We Need A Name For Stubby, Inflated-Looking Automobiles So I’m Proposing ‘Pufferfish Cars’

      1. Right? It’s like the designers could only think in cursive.
        The solar panels shaped like leaves on a branch on the glass roof are pretty cool. The fact that the power they generate is fed to the battery using a ‘tree trunk’ within the car as a conduit is pure bonkers cool. The interior looks like an IKEA sponsored heaven.
        I think it fits perfectly within Jason’s parameters of a blowfish car.

  1. How about calling them Bowlers, but after the hat, not the “sport” participants.

    A bowler has a stubby brim and a bulbous crown, not unlike how these types of cars have low hood and trunk areas (if they have them, like a Toyota Echo), but the greenhouse gets some serious altitude.

  2. I drove a Sable wagon like that Taurus for a while, but still, what came to mind first was the Yaris in my avatar. It’s a blueberry! (Thankfully, not quite the Violet Beauregarde sort. That was a different car.)

  3. An opportunity was missed by using a pic of the post-1999 4th generation Taurus. The 1996-99 3rd generation was much more aquatic-looking.

  4. If it looks like a blob and drives like a blob, call it for what it is: a blob. Much more identifiable to the masses. Some don’t know if you meant an inflated pufferfish or not, much less what one looks like. (I was originally going to agree with calling it “Twingo-like,” but a lot Americans don’t know what they look like since they’re not normally imported in the US).

    1. Hey now, watch it. As a SOB (son of blob) I must take offense sir ! Seriously, my dad did the special effects for the original , can confirm Steve McQueen was not a nice guy. Jason will need to compensate for full dis closer. I always thought these cars constipated.

  5. I always thought the Encore looked like a Pokemon of a Buick, especially in pre-facelift form when it had a toothy chrome grille and even (stick-on, inward-facing) “portholes” on the hood!

  6. I love the A2. I love that it’s a perfect recreation of all the current (at the time) Audi design cues just miniaturized and in baby form

  7. First generation Toyota Yaris hatch, Mitsubishi Mirage hatch, Mitsubishi i-MiEV, Tata Nano, first generation Nissan Leaf.

  8. I like Pufferfish as a category. A friend of mine just bought a Buick Encore, and I actually think it looks pretty good, and the stubbiness is part of that. It looks better in person that in your illustration up top.

  9. You’re missing the worst offender currently produced: the Tesla Model Y. It looks like they took a Model 3 and inflated it with a tire pump.

    1. Seconded! People give GM shit for making the same vehicle in 5 marginally different sizes, but at least the design language, while bland, works in all of those sizes. Tesla tried to do the same thing and ended up with… whatever that abomination is.

  10. I wonder how David and his i3 feel about this…

    On a side note, I learned to drive on an A2 TDI; awesome little car but god help your spine and internal organs if you hit a pothole or a speed bump.

    P.S. Do 50s/60s bubble cars also qualify as puffers?

    1. I’m glad Ford stayed consistent and applied the Aspire moniker to another puffer when it introduced an India-exclusive sedan version of the Figo/Ka+ in 2015, named the Figo Aspire.

      Sedans based on city cars are inevitably puffers, my favorite being, of course, the Chevy Spark/Beat sedan, which found its niche as a somewhat popular taxi vehicle in Colombia.

  11. These may have been originally touted their “organic, edge-less” design, at least to brochure writers. For the sake if discussion, I would nominate “bulbous” as another contender. A more modern, though fleeting, term would be “Swole”.

  12. “Pufferfish” doesn’t flow off the tongue. Stumpy/Stubby + Bubbles = Stubbles!

    (Naturally a group of Stubbles is a Shadow, a fleet a Beard.)

Leave a Reply