Detailed third-scale model of Qazana SUV and a full-size clay being milled

Nissan Design Europe opened its doors to the public for the first time last week since its inauguration some 6 years ago. The occasion was the Nissan East West exhibition which formed part of the 2009 London Design Festival.

From September 23rd to the 25th, Nissan organised a series of tours of its West London facility enabling visitors to discover more about the automotive design process.

Digital Group Leader David Harrison showed us around an exhibit that included a detailed third scale model of the Qazana SUV which, he said, is due to hit the market in 2010 - although the name is yet to be confirmed.

The studio setting provided a viewing platform overlooking the clay-modelling facility which included a full-size  plate as well as third-scale and quarter-scale set-ups. Watching the robotised arms carving away at the clay was quite hypnotic and the whole experience gave a fascinating insight into the key stages of vehicle design.

The Paddington studio was set up in order to deliver designs more suited to European tastes and the results have really borne out the exercise. The Qashqai for example (designed completely in London), has smashed all expectations, selling well over 300,000 units per year.

Scale models were supported with extensive design renderings and non-automotive products which provide influences to the designers - things like lightweight flasks, running shoes and backpacks.

As well as the tour, a series of arts and design installations were exhibited by various artists under the theme of ‘East meets West: the cultural crossroads of creativity’.

I say well done to NIssan for relaxing its usually watertight security to allow us a rare glimpse behind the scenes of designing and creating a car.

Check out our gallery for more pictures from our visit to Nissan Design Europe.

From top - Riversimple fuel cell car; Gail Porter crashes the eco-driving simulator; electric MyCar

Yesterday, London Borough of Camden Council staged a ‘Green Motor Expo,’ in a city square frequented by lunching workers. A follow-up to the Eco Rally held back in the summer, former model and Camden resident Gail Porter was the celebrity urging the public to ‘go green’, having ditched her own 4×4 recently. 

Of particular note however was news that Camden has awarded major contracts to several partner companies now adopting electric and biofuel fleets. And why not - looking beyond private ownership, doesn’t ‘going green’ actually make a lot more sense to business users? Many leased local delivery vehicles could easily be electric, depots can accommodate recharging stations… the decision to buy into a limited range EV is a lot simpler for fleet managers with big budgets than for you or I, agonising over £20k of our hard-earned dosh.

Forget the family cars, let’s have more eco-business please.  

I live quite close to the farm in Surrey that featured recently in news stories about the outbreak of E-coli.

But during a recent trip to another part of Surrey I encountered an outbreak of another sinister visitation, namely E-bygum.  In the coach park of a famed beauty spot I noticed a Yorkshire-registered coach, the occupants of which were marveling at things we take for granted: sunshine, trees, and the whiff of rich pasture land – land that once was farmed but which now is merely owned by the rich.

This set me thinking. What kind of carbon footprint would be left by this 400-mile round-trip? And what would be the cumulative footprint of hundreds of such excursions every weekend, not only by coach, but by car as well?

We are urged to live green, and reduce our individual carbon footprints, yet we allow people to roam freely – far from home and in total disregard of the environmental costs of mere recreational travel.

Although I am a keen environmentalist (in fact, I have just sold a V12 car and replaced it with a V8) don’t get me wrong: I’m all for a weekend drive, but do we have to travel so far? I have written to George Brown and suggested that Britain could lead the way in reducing our CO2 footprint by insisting that tourists be confined to the county in which they have chosen to live and work. I appreciate that some counties have little to offer tourists however well they might know the area, so I have suggested that residents of certain counties be allowed to visit contiguous counties: for example, that Lancastrians be allowed to visit Yorkshire; or that folks from Bedfordshire might be allowed to nip into Cambridgeshire or Northants, but not Hertfordshire in case they could not be persuaded to return home.

In one fell swoop we could cut our CO2 output by millions of tonnes each year, our roads would run more freely, and in these credit-crunched times people would spend less on fuel and have more money for bingo.  Enterprising caterers could offer a form of virtual tourism; pubs in Leicestershire could serve Cornish pasties; tea shoppes in Yorkshire could serve Devon cream teas; and Surrey restaurants could serve potee chaud du Lancastre.  Indeed, with a little imagination an entirely toponymic menu could be contrived.

But to be fair, people must first be given a chance to choose the county where they must work, rest and play, so I have suggested to George the idea of a ‘transfer window’. A period of six months during which people could up sticks and move to the county of their choice. Unfortunately Surrey and Sussex are full, but I’m told that Northumbria has one or two nice spots.

We’ve been putting some effort into social media over the last few months, setting up a presence on Twitter, creating a Facebook page, sorting out our YouTube channel and, most recently, setting up a Flickr account.

The aim in a nutshell is to reach out to our audience and engage with them in a space in which they feel comfortable. Informed opinion suggests that a less formal approach is favoured by users so simply replicating website content and posting standard newsfeeds is not the way to go.

Hence we try to add genuine comment from the team and also occasionally create bespoke content which is not available on our website. This can include snapshots taken on an iPhone, witty (well, we think so) comments surrounding a news story, outtake videos or additional photography from a road test shoot.

We keep an eye on what our friends at the car manufacturers are up to in the social media space and most recently, the gongs for the best use have gone to Fiat, for their tie-up with music-sharing service Spotify promoting the 500C, but especially Citroën for releasing a shadowy photo of a forthcoming concept car which demonstrates a somewhat 2CV-esque silhouette on its Facebook page ahead of any official release from the press office.

This simple act demonstrates a company that understands the value of reaching out to its friends/fans/followers and rewarding them for their loyalty by sharing a little secret - behaving more like a human being than a corporate body.

A thread titled “What is the point of the X6?” has been running for a while now on a rival automotive website. Tuning into a Fifth Gear repeat the other night, I watched Tom Ford begin his review of BMW’s latest behemoth with the words “What is the point of the X6?”

In case you’ve missed it, the main vitriol directed at this car seems to come from the controversial styling (think BMW X5 crossed with a coupe), reduced utility (low roofline, it’s more of a 2+2) and firmer suspension. Adding to the conclusion that the X6 is not a ‘real’ offroader.

Arguably though, isn’t the X6 is the most honest sports utility/activity vehicle thingy so far? Despite the compromises, an X6 boot can lug the entire contents of an Argos catalogue. It is better to drive on the road than its rivals, if a reluctant Tom Ford et al are to be believed. Finally, the X6 is also utterly overwhelming to other road users – for the target audience then, I’d suggest entirely fit for purpose.

Personally I’m not in the market for a luxury 4×4, but if I were, the X6 would get my money. It’s the only luxury 4×4 with any point at all.  

The words on the wing mirror read “OBJECTS IN MIRROR ARE CLOSER THAN THEY APPEAR”. I would never, ever buy this car. No way. I’d be so angry every time I caught sight of the idiotically unhelpful message that it would shorten my life.

Why not tell us that the objects are behind us? I often forget that.