[digitalnirvana]

There probably should have been a third option - "It depends".

Take the new Tata hatches for example - the Tiago & Altroz look almost the same from the front with their humanity line and concave grille; same with their SUVs right from the Hornbill to the Harrier with very similar grille, high DRL & headlamp-in-bumper look. Doesn't sit well with me at all! Same with the new gen Hyundais. Family look shouldn't mean copy - paste of the same design in its entirety across the range. It dilutes the value of each car.

Porsche have perfected the concept of family look while retaining individuality & character of each car. And to an extent I like Ford & Jaguar Land Rover - think they've got it right. Closer home, Kia too with their tiger nose grille. And of course how can I forget Rolls Royce!

[samee_arian]

IMHO if there is a good bit of design being carried on on all the cars, like using similar grills, it looks nice. For example I love grills by Skoda and Mercs, however for some reason I hate Hyundai grills (not the latest iterations of i20 and Verna though, I thought they look much better than ones in Creta, Palisade and Venue). Iconic cars like Porsche, Lamborghini and Ferrari are a different class altogether, they are anyway exclusive in markets like India and even when they have one off models that breaks the design forms, it takes the exclusivity to another level.

I loved the way Audi and VW cars looked similar yet different across classes, but if I were to think about an expensive Kizashi looking more like a large SX4 or older TATA cars sticking to humanity line just to retain brand familiarity, it does not really make much of a sense for me.

[superguy282]

Voted for I'm ok with it.

I've always liked subtle styling tweaks on cars that differentiate them from others. Mercedes's C,E and S look absolutely fabulous. Not only that, the taillights also (to an extent) resemble an actual C,E and S with their single, double and triple streaks .

[Maky]

I completely agree.
You can have certain common elements, such as BMWs Kidney grill, to help immediately attach a car to a manufacturer but to have cars look so similar is just ridiculous. It doesn't distinguish the models enough and ends up just taking away from the upper end of the stack I feel.

[Kingston]

Voted "I'm okay with it" since I would feel good owning a C class and knowing that most people can't tell the difference between that and the S

[TheGearBox]

I guess it depends where on the hierarchy your car lies.
Take the example of Mercedes. A C-Class owner may have no problem with the "Family look", given that his car looks similar to an S-Class which costs twice the price. But an S-Class owner might take offence in having bought a car that looks the same as a C-Class which costs half the price.

[francisvellara]

Voted for 'I'm okay with it'

I actually quite like the trend of having cars look similar. It gives an extra layer of brand identity, and I really enjoy and appreciate the differences that different cars of the same company are given. I think I might be in the minority here, but I especially like it when the differences are subtle, such as with the Karoq and Kodiaq, whose front and rear ends can easily be confused between by most people.

But, like a lot of people have already mentioned, this means that if a brand adopts a potentially polarising design, then all their cars can look ugly to people.

[charanreddy]

The consideration for the car manufacturers may also be economics.

By making a C look similar to an S class, if Mercedes is able to get a lot more units of C shipped, then it makes sense. Also some one going for an S Class is going to go for it regardless and perceived similarity to C will not matter.

I like the idea ! also enhances brand appeal and consideration.

[Neversaygbye]

Voted for "I'm okay with it"

Some common design elements help in reinforcing the brand identity and ease of brand recognition. However, there should be enough differences to make each individual model stand out else it gets confusing. I think BMW and Porsche do a better job of it than say Mercedes. I find Honda cars across all segments quite recognizable as well, due to some commonalities in the design language, but they are usually quite differentiated otherwise. That is how it should be.

[vishwasvr]

Voted not ok with it.

Primarily because it is very tricky to ID the cars from a distance. Also the models lose their ''identity'' from a distance.

I prefer distinctly different design so to speak.

[autobahner]

I am fine with it for the obvious reason below. Pardon the W210 for photobombing.

[amitayu]

Family looks are like trademark/branding for a brand. Companies today are looking beyond logos and are designing their all cars as their visiting cards.

I think the earlier concept of signature look worked well for me. Even 20 years ago you could recognise a Merc or BMB or even a Chevvy or VW from a glance. This was mainly because the engineering and design elements were distincly different for each brand.

Today, we have an added factor; making smaller cars look like their bigger and expensive counterparts, for eg Kia (Seltos and Sonnet) or even the VW/Skoda sedan (Rapid/Octavia). Perhaps even that is acceptable to some extend.

But I have real issues with different category of cars, say a hatchback and a sedan and a SUV..all carrying same looks! At times I feel it simply does not work. For example, the Jag or Bentley attempt of SUVs look awkward simply because they tried to carry forward the family look.
A hatch make to look like a pseudo SUV is another irk for me.

Each category can have their own distinct design and look element befitting its dimensions. A signature look is good enough and all cars do not need to look like distant twins!!

[manubg92]

Same case with VW cars as well. However I thought that is done to reduce costs for the spare parts as they can manufacture them in numbers without worrying about the demand . Isn't that the case atleast for mass market cars?

[batladanny]

The family look is definitely a good thing conceptually. Reinforces the brand connect.

Big brands that don't share a family look just don't feel right to me. As if each car is some random thought rather than being part of a unique philosophy. Case in point, MG motors — the Hector, ZS and Gloster all look like they are some generic cars with an MG badge slapped on (which they are) and hence I just can't buy into the brand.

Obviously if not executed tastefully, a family look will ruin all models appeal. But taste is subjective.

[1.2TSI7DSG]

I have a different perspective. For a 3 series owner, it's a matter of pride that it looks like a 7 series. But for the 7 series guy, the sentiment is exactly opposite.

In such cases, I love what Mercedes does. They introduce a game changer look at the S class. Then over next 5-10 years get it to the A class. Then again they refresh the S class, keeping it distinct from the other designs. The advantage they have is that there is no single feature on the looks (like the grills of Audi and BMW) which they have to retain to maintain the brand look. They can go all out and design from scratch and put the tri-star logo on their designs making it the Mercedes. This however is not true with BMW and Audi. BMW needs those kidney grills on every car. So technically they are designing from a unclean slate.

And hence I am ok with it. If a car doesn't look good would usually avoid it. Thar looks like Jeep and ok with it. But not ok with horrible grills that come with Xylo, XUV etc...