Michael RodriguezNov 5 2009 6:18 PM
I really feel like the new wings cheapens the look. Side by side I see a high quality car logo (old wings) and then a cheap children like plastic car.
Another look, and I can see a mustache in the logo. It is possible that this is going to say the quality of new Chrysler.
Also I would like to point out the reflection fail in the second image that was provided by Oliver Francois of Chrysler.
Proves my point, a cheap logo, a rushed presentation.Bobby DragulescuNov 5 2009 6:54 PM
They were probably thinking about increasing legibility (which is a totally bass ackwards way to approach a logo for an 83 year old company, but I digress) however in the process they went from looking like a high-end roadster to looking sort of like a Dodge Ram or something in that category.
Not sure if they\'re trying to position themselves as being lower end, but then again why would they?Ian Storm TaylorNov 5 2009 8:25 PM
I don\'t understand. Do they not want me to be able to read their company\'s name? Disgusting.
Sean FousheeNov 6 2009 12:54 AM
Reminds me a streamlined, modern version of the Bentley logo, and I can see where they were going with the design. I\'m not going nuts over it, but seriously, its an improvement over the last cheap-looking wings with crappy ribbon center logo they had before (what were they thinking with that original logo?).
John Mindiola IIINov 6 2009 3:03 AM
@ Michael, I have to believe that the reflection graphic is on purpose. The company has a new logo, but it reflects their heritage . . . or some corporate speak like that.
The new crest with wings is a silver pancake. I wonder if the name Chrysler will be phased out? Playing down the name (and up the wings) would then make perfect sense, no matter how unfortunate.BrendanNov 6 2009 9:05 AM
People might think this looks bad on a screen, but I bet once we see it on a car we\'re going to love it. If it works there, then it\'s going to be a success.
@gariphicNov 6 2009 9:26 AM
Man, that\'s tough to read.
New logo looks like some badly distorted clip art you\'d find in a church newsletter. #justsayingTom WinnNov 6 2009 9:42 AM
I don\'t hold much hope for this new Chrysler. The new logo is hard to read at almost any size and part of their plan for the future includes targeting trendsetters with the PT Cruiser. That car was cool in 2005, but it\'s almost 2010 no trendsetter wants one.
I would think they would have put more time into the companies rebirth. Just looking at that slide presentation shows they don\'t really care.Carlos SeguraNov 6 2009 10:24 AM
Could not agree more regarding the PDF slide presentations. They have got to be the lamest I\'ve seen in years.
Brandon OxendineNov 6 2009 10:26 AM
It\'s Chrysler, what do you expect? They consider the PT Cruiser to be their \"trend-setter\" vehicle. I mean, they are a proven failure. The fact that they are even trying to salvage themselves is pathetic.
Joseph MaguireNov 6 2009 11:51 AM
Looks like fiat\'s restructuring / killing the brand to chrysler in one fell swoop. So much for that american icon.
But let\'s face it they own the company they can do with it what they want.RicoNov 6 2009 1:19 PM
Oh man, that pdf of the powerpoint presentation is absolutely pathetic. I\'m hoping for Chrysler\'s sake that Oliver Francois put that together himself. If that was something done by their marketing department, this company is in worse shape than I thought.
Kerri AugensteinNov 6 2009 1:31 PM
I have to admit I don\'t mind the revision to the wings. It does feel modern, and I\'m sure a better rendering would make the case much more clearly. However, why even bother placing the word mark in the wings. I see no reason they couldn\'t pair the new mark with the word mark sitting below as the identity. Seems to be a bit odd, feels forced.
ChrisNov 6 2009 3:18 PM
That logo is so bad. There is so much they could have done concept-wise. They should have worked with their name rather than hide it. A butterfly emerges from a chrysalis. Since Chrysler is also emerging and because the word chrysalis and Chrysler are very near in appearance, they could have totally played off this notion. The butterfly is quiet, swift—and beautiful. Butterfly populations increase when the environment is healthy. Butterflies have wings and they travel great distances (the monarch).
There is so much more they could have done in regards to their new logo and branding. That logo is actually really creepy looking.Butterfly = green
Kiersi BurkhartNov 6 2009 7:40 PM
I\'m pretty sure the bad reflection is intentional, to compare the \"old\" Chrysler logo with the new one being featured in the poorly-rendered jpg up there.
Tyler NorrisNov 6 2009 11:17 PM
The reflection is intentional, but I agree with @Michael, it looks rushed, the two aren\'t even centered with each other.
The logo as a whole really does look as though someone ran over it. There\'s a hundred better ways they could have went. Not good.Dale CampbellNov 7 2009 10:11 AM
Wow, it took every ounce of my being not to vomit over that PDF. I was stuck thinking \"is this REALLY what one of the American automakers presented?\" - looks like some sort of rushed college project.
With respect to the new winged logo, I can\'t say that I am disgusted by it as most others. I do think that there are parts to it which are in the direction of the future. For instance, I really like how simple the wings were executed - would look great on a newly designed car with clean lines and clean panels.
Mostly, it is the scale or proportion of the icon in relationship to the text within it. The text is virtually unreadable from any sort of distance. This is particularly weird to me because, it\'s not like there aren\'t a dozen examples of successful auto icons - mercedes, bmw, even toyota and honda are very recognizable.
This leads me to believe that the intent was to have the wings actually be THE element which makes one think \"Chrysler\". And I do think that may be stretching it a little much. Perhaps this is because over the course of history, brands like the ones I mentioned above have pretty much stuck to their guns with respect to their identities while Chrysler has flirted with a few different icons and shapes.
Summing it up, the ONLY way that I think this new direction for the company can become successful is to maintain it over time. That said, it is important to START with something that is strong. This leads me back to the whole scale proportion thing - which is the only element I personally dislike. If I were to be on the design team, I would prefer to keep the wings but develop the text (whether that means enlarging, or flat-out removing the text, I don\'t know) thusly keeping the core element of the brand in tact.
Damn, I can ramble...Jason MartinNov 7 2009 11:29 AM
Hated the old logo, hate the new one.
It\'s all about proportions and in this digital age we live in, having a logo that\'s aspect ratio is nearly 11:1 is just plain maddening.Scaling this piece is a nightmare! It\'s almost always too small (like the previous version) and when it\'s big enough, it takes up too much room horizontally.
Looks like even Fiat can get Chrysler right...Matt SteelNov 7 2009 1:57 PM
Wow, that\'s bad on multiple levels. I remember a couple years back, Underware (Dutch type/graphic designers) created a very attractive and unique word mark for Daimler Chrysler. They should\'ve been hired again, imho.
http://www.underware.nl/site2/index.php?id1=underware&id2=custom-type&id3=logotypes&start=0&findme=.&showthis=14&zoom=1#pictloaderJulioNov 7 2009 5:46 PM
@ Matt Steel,
You\'re talking about Underware on a thread that\'s about an automobile company on a blog that uses Underware\'s Auto typeface. Just wanted to point out the happy coincidences.Florian MenevisNov 9 2009 8:52 AM
Let\'s call it as it is: The new logo is complete shit!
Altough, the general idea behind it may be good, but how they realized it is really below any standard.Dustin RiedeselNov 9 2009 10:20 AM
Old wings felt like class. Anytime you try to overhaul something that already felt classy, it just sucks....at least for a little while.
Once I\'ve seen it in enough roided car spots, I might feel differently, but I doubt it.Spot on Julio, I knew this site uses Auto but didn\'t even think about that. I thrive on happy coincidences ;)
KJ BaysaNov 9 2009 10:54 AM
My immediate reaction was that the new logo resembled the plastic wings that one received for being a well-behaved child by flight attendants. [Back in the day, you were also invited into the cockpit to say hello to the pilots.]
Paul PoppenburgNov 9 2009 3:26 PM
I don\'t know but I really don\'t like the new logo, it looks way too flat!
chrisNov 9 2009 4:10 PM
What they should have done is just changed the name. Funny how they basically minimized it to make it virtually invisible.
chrystNov 10 2009 12:59 AM
The new wings will look nice on the grille of a car. To those who think the wordmark is too small, look at how illegible and small it is on the old logo. As in previous print applications, there is no doubt a large wordmark will accompany the wings. Chrysler needed a new identity, and I\'m happy they won\'t abandon the wings altogether. Expect the new lineup to reflect a much broader visual strategy.
But F- on the pdf. Who the hell made that? (Hopefully it was not meant for public eyes)f TalactacNov 10 2009 9:38 PM
The funny thing about it is that I think I\'ve seen that website and LOGO before...seems awfully close to a website we designed over 4 years ago and still have up. Thanks Chrysler and Fiat for the nod anyways, I guess I\'ll send you an invoice too...
www.strutwear.com - built in 05Michael LynchNov 14 2009 2:29 PM
Maybe it\'s the resolution or size or whatever, but the new logo looks bad. Like you said, the brand name is illegible. Unless that chrome really shines I can\'t see this being an upgrade. I prefer their prior wings.
IanNov 17 2009 7:26 PM
Despite how you feel about the logo, I can\'t get over that someone actually gave that branding presentation in a public forum.Someone described at as a college project, but it looks to me more like when they rolled out \"Prestige Worldwide\" in stepbrothers.Someone should have cut this from the presentation rather than let it embarasse the quality of the actual business work.
SonHouseNov 20 2009 9:52 AM
Looks like a company attempting to hide its own identity.
Douglas Bonneville | BonFXNov 23 2009 1:28 AM
I really like the new logo. It says \"much simpler\" very, very strongly. I also read \"out with cheap American ostentatiousness\" very loudly. The company is indeed presenting a new face while not entirely getting rid of the old. I think it\'s great. They have minimized the logotype on purpose, which if you think for 2 seconds is exactly what they need. They need to downplay the name an play up a new logomark now that Fiat is on board. If the succeed, the next revision will have bigger type.
Well, that was my immediate reaction.
This post seems to dovetail with the idea of \"logo psychology\" I recently explored here a few days ago:
http://bonfx.com/the-logo-psychologist-26-mouth-watering-restaurant-logos-and-profiles/
What DOES as logo say or not say about a company if you know NOTHING about that company?RMNov 27 2009 9:23 AM
The new logo does look far too flat and horizontally stretched, with the wordmark reduced to such a small size that it\'s become practically inconsequential.Is Chrysler intentionally trying to overcome negative brand perception by hiding its brand name from the consumer?
A far more effective solution would be to have the wings rendered without any wordmark on them, and displaying the Chrysler name underneath them in a larger font, perhapsthe same as the \"New Chrysler\" Pentastar logo.However, if they want to elicit positive, nostalgic and most importantly, patriotic feelings in American consumers, they could do far worse than try to design a modern interpretation of the classical Medallion logo, in much the same way that Fiat\'s current roundel is heavily inspired by its 1930\'s branding.DavidDec 4 2009 9:10 AM
So they took the Aston Martin logo and jumped up and down on it for a bit.
Tuhin KumarMay 5 2010 4:46 AM
What the hell were they thinking when designing this one. It is impossible to read the name and don\'t get me started on the aesthetics.