Pringles New Logo vs. Old: A Practical Design Evaluation
A practical visual comparison of the Pringles logo redesign, covering the changes to the mascot, wordmark, shape and color, and what they mean for brand recognition and vector asset use.
Contents
What is the essential answer to my logo design question?
The essential answer is that the Pringles logo was simplified. The redesign kept the core identity, a round-faced mascot with a thick mustache and bow tie inside an oval or circular frame, but removed facial detail, hair definition, texture and dimensional styling in favor of flatter shapes, fewer colors and a cleaner wordmark. The new version is more legible at small sizes and easier to reproduce as a vector asset, while the old version had richer illustration detail but could feel visually dated or noisy in modern digital applications.
Scope of the comparison
This evaluation covers the widely circulated previous mascot-based logo and the later flat redesign. It does not cover every historical packaging variation or regional adaptation. The comparison focuses on observable design features, not legal trademark status or permission to reuse the logo.
Mascot changes
The old mascot, often called Julius Pringles, had a more dimensional face with shading, separated hair strands, expressive eyebrows, detailed eyes and a fuller range of skin tones. The mustache had curl and volume, and the bow tie showed folds and highlights. The new mascot reduces the face to a small set of flat shapes: solid dark eyes without visible pupils, simplified eyebrows, a smooth bald head with only a side patch of dark hair, and a flat mustache with fewer curves. The bow tie becomes a simple two-part shape with minimal or no internal detail.
The practical effect is that the new mascot holds up better when scaled down to a favicon or app icon. The old version could lose clarity at small sizes because subtle shading and fine lines became muddy or disappeared.
Frame and layout changes
The old logo often placed the mascot inside a white or light oval with a darker outer band or shaped background. The wordmark sat below or around the mascot in a curved or angled layout. The new logo tightens this structure. The mascot appears in a cleaner oval or circular container, with the face centered more predictably and less overlap between the character and the frame.
The redesigned composition is more modular. It works as a standalone icon without the wordmark and still remains recognizable, which supports social media avatars, package icons and small digital placements.
Wordmark changes
The old wordmark had a chunkier, more playful or slightly retro letterform style, sometimes with outlines, shadows or a curved baseline. The new wordmark is cleaner, with more even stroke weights, simpler letter shapes and reduced decorative effects. The spacing is more consistent, and the overall typography feels contemporary rather than snack-aisle cartoonish.
For vector logo work, the new wordmark is easier to convert to outlines and resize without losing legibility. The old lettering required more cleanup and often looked best only in its original packaging context.
Color changes
The old logo used more realistic gradients, beige skin tones, reddish-brown hair, and multiple accent colors that created depth. The new version flattens the palette. Skin tones become simpler, the hair and mustache often use a solid near-black or dark brown, and the red or background color becomes more consistent. Some versions remove gradients entirely or keep only one or two subtle tonal shifts.
A flatter palette reduces color separation problems in print and on screen. It also makes the logo easier to reproduce in one-color situations, though the loss of dimension can make the mascot feel less warm to some viewers.
Legibility and scalability
The new logo is designed for small digital surfaces. At icon size, the old logo's facial features and hair texture collapsed into unclear shapes. The new logo keeps only the strongest identifiers: the mustache, bow tie, oval head and dark eyes. Those remain readable at very small sizes.
The trade-off is personality. The old mascot had more expression and character detail, while the new one reads as more neutral and systematic. Designers often describe this as a shift from illustration to iconography.
Practical implications for vector assets
If you are comparing vector versions, the new logo typically has fewer anchor points, simpler compound paths and more consistent curves. It is easier to recolor, resize and match across different file formats. The old logo may arrive as a more complex vector with layered shading, gradients or embedded details that require manual cleanup.
A filename or file extension alone does not prove that a logo is a clean vector or that you have permission to use it. Availability in a download library or an editable format is separate from licensing rights.
Which version is better?
There is no absolute better version. The new logo is more efficient, modern and consistent across digital and print formats. The old logo has more illustrative charm and nostalgic recognition for some audiences. The right choice depends on the use case: a small app icon or simple one-color print favors the new design, while a large retro-styled campaign or heritage-focused packaging might intentionally reference the older version.
Key takeaways
- The redesign simplified the mascot from detailed illustration to flat iconography.
- The wordmark became cleaner and more evenly spaced.
- The color palette lost gradients and gained consistency.
- Small-size legibility improved, while some expressive detail was lost.
- The new version is generally easier to maintain as a vector asset, but that does not imply automatic permission to reuse it.