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 World. This 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:
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:
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.
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!
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
Instead of hoopties we can call them Hooties, after Hootie and the Blowfish. I’m sure Darius Rucker won’t mind.
Insert Key and Peele “I’m not Hootie” gif here….
Mercedes actually designed a car based on the shape of the boxfish:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/18/74/c8/1874c8aeddae4526c0f704fe41d25307.jpg
Oh! That’s cute! I assume it was a concept, not a production car?
When my kid was 5 and saw one of these cars, she would exclaim “There’s a nugget car!” So that’s we call them now.
I call them “cartoon cars” they look like cute caricatures of automobiles like you see in the movie Cars or golden age 40s and 50s era cartoons.
I propose the AMC Pacer should be allowed in this category. It’s pushing the hood dimensions but otherwise fits the bill of Curvy Inflated Fishy Car, certainly much more than the Taurus wagon does at least.
I don’t have a better suggestion for the category name atm, but I’m very fond of this kind of vehicle, particularly when offered as a sort of ‘practicality and function first and foremost’ thing.
I have a few suggestions for additional cars that fit the bill, though some (the Volvos) are borderline:
Volvo EX30 and C40
Toyota iQ and Aston Martin Cygnet
various Smart cars
Also, the Microlino Swiss electric two-seater, and the BMW Isetta that inspired it… and all those early ‘bubble cars’ from the postwar period, which is what this kind of car is usually called I think.
[img]https://d31xsmoz1lk3y3.cloudfront.net/games/imgur/eRjbxNU.jpg[/img]
BTW, how do you attach an image to a post so it displays? Obviously, the [img] tags don’t do it.
I would argue the original Ford Ka is different, stretched over its extremities in a way that reduces mass and materials in a logical way. Fit for purpose if passengers were occasional. The second gen was totally different and disappointing but understandable commercially
My wife’s ex liked the phrase “Pregnant Rollerskates”, which seems applicable here.
Pregnant Rollerskates would be a great band name
I saw a Scion iQ this morning and immediately thought of this story. I think it fits perfectly into whatever this category is, but after looking at pics of it, I think they look more like happy toads
Nissan Jukes are also very amphibious in their looks
The Taurus is too long, not tall enough, and with too much overhang to be a pufferfish/blob.
I propose the name “Cadburys” after the famous Cadbury Egg which has a hard shell with a soft, gooey center.
Here’s a picture of one after a minor traffic accident
https://us-browse.startpage.com/av/anon-image?piurl=http%3A%2F%2Fdel.h-cdn.co%2Fassets%2F17%2F14%2F1600x1200%2Fsd-aspect-1491510420-4486938481-603ee4a8b3-o.jpg&sp=1688056856T6e2c54a5ba40c2b27741b84a64edf4534cc47cf1c50d7a5d722b6a37d92b8098
Does the van from Canoo and Faraday Future 91 count as pufferfish? I would like to add the i3 as well.
The i3 clearly fits this category. How could i3 evangelist David Tracy have allowed this to be published without it? 😉
Oh man, finally a category for the late Ford Ecosport to fit into.
I had put them into the “crap can” category.
In honor of the Chevy/Buick/Opel variants….I always called them “squishmobiles”
ie: They’d look like a properly proportioned vehicle if they weren’t squished.
Also, if the Taurus made the list due to inflation, then the Subaru Ascent needs to be a similar exception. It looks like someone over-inflated an Outback. That said, I don’t consider either the Taurus or Ascent as vehicles in this category.
Puffers are a fine descriptor, and I suspect Stef might approve. I’ve long described a lot of these as being overinflated versions of their smaller brethren (A2, C-Max, Model Y, Model X, Kia Rondo, chevy bolt, etc.).
Nano, Twingo, and Ka are just a small hatchbacks (or hatchback-resembling as the Nano doesn’t have a hatch IIRC), encore is a crossover (though just a taller chevy sonic), Taurus wagon is an, um, wagon, so your grouped visual examples aren’t the best, but the A2 is. A Fiat Multipla is another great example. Perhaps even the Cayenne, though really the Panamera is a better described as a deflated Cayenne, as it were.
convergent evolution
My mom has a C-Max. I always identified it as a “blob” category car, but now I’m wondering if it is, indeed, a Pufferfish?
My C-Max was always described as a fat Focus when people asked what it was.
Tall Focus is fair, or truncated 2WD Escape, whichever fits the narrative better.
Both are very accurate.
This generally feels right, but the Twingo is in (it’s got most of the proportions), and the Taurus is out (way too much hood).
How do we feel about the Canadian market Chevy Orlando. It has a bit more hood than most pufferfish cars but I think it borderline fits.
They’re Pugs….that is all…
Can’t believe nobody’s suggested the Fiat Multipla (the modern one, which is wonderful but perhaps not everybody’s cup of tea).
Any SUV based on a regular car could fit.
Renault Captur ( a puffed up Clio )
Peugeot 3008 ( a puffed up 308 )
Peugeot 2008 ( a puffed up 208 )
There’s a whole list of Citroen ( the Spacetourer, the various Picasso because it wasn’t just the Xsara )
VW Gold ( compare a Golf 1 with a modern one.
VW Polo ( aka the Mini Golf, since it’s new bigger than a Golf 1 )
Even the Twingo ( sorry Torch ) got puffed up over the year ( compare a Smart based modern Twingo with the original one ( It’s easy for me I have neighbors with either, so I can always see both out of my window )
Has anyone mentioned the Toyota Previa yet? Possibly the puffiest mid-engine turbo out there.
Hey, now—if the B-Class fits, the Twingo definitely does. It definitely looks puffy and doesn’t get the “uwu Twingo so cute” pass from me that the internet loves to give it for everything.
I’d say the Models X/Y probably fit here, too. Those are cars that both look like a Model S/3 needs to fart.
Once the Tesla Model Y came out, the Model X has always looked bloated to me… though it never did before.