By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Is it because you personally enjoy design freedom?
By that I mean, it must be great when a client gives you total freedom to come up with a design you want.
To please the public is a lot tougher. I guess the other extreme is design by committee, a la Aztek, so it's not like that's any better.
I don't know exactly how the Italians work their magic, but they seem to come up with handsome designs whether it's a car or an expresso machine! Korean car makers have been smart to go to them, and IMO the results are more successful.
Bangle is American and perhaps that's part of it right there, I think a lot of people don't like the idea of an American designing european cars.
What do you think?
-juice
The short and simple answer is I too have a design background, as you know. Because of that I am far, FAR, more open to new ideas than most, here (and elsewhere). And I've said this to you before too—when I see designs that upset me, or I don't feel comfortable with, I try to figure out what the designer had in mind, and then go from there. Bangle definitely had me struggling with some of his work. Like I said, I think the 6 Series coupe is gorgeous.
From what I understand, BMW management felt that their existing designs, while very good, were very safe designs, and were getting somewhat stale. They wanted Bangle to break the mold, and push the envelope of design. Since BMW is a cutting-edge brand in terms of technology and the driving experience, they felt that visually the car should also reflect that as well. Hence the new BMWs we now have...
I think if you were to ask the same question to a group of car designers, you will probably get those who hate his work and those who really respect it too. Controversial design is always that way.
Also, I absolutely do not believe the customer is always right. While customer input is important, I think it's far more important for the designer to do what he/she feels is right. That's what he's hired for. Sometimes it gets approved, sometimes it doesn't. Bangle was very fortunate in that he had support among BMW management to pull this off. His designs would not exist if his superiors didn't back him.
Sorry if my answer seems a bit foggy, or if it is lacking in depth, but that's about the best I can do at the moment.
Bob
I can see why that happens.
You might say that it was good that BMW took the risk and gave an American designer a shot. And there are different ways to measure success, also.
-juice
Pushing the envelope and leading design is great, but at the end of the day BMW is a business and needs to maximize profit. Generating buzz in the marketplace is meaningless from a business perspective unless it contributes to a customer purchase.
Given that every BMW introduced since the 7-series has had consecutively softened Bangle's influences, I'd love to hear the behind-the-scenes talk of their top management. Probably would make a good book.
Ken
That's very true Ken. I didn't mean to imply that designers are working in ivory towers. Yes it is a business, but you have to remember that Bangle and his gang have been at this for years. They know that if they move to far, too fast, it could cause problems. I'd say that BMW went right to the edge. Many here will say he went over the edge. I don't think so.
BMW seems to be doing well in terms of sales, but I don't know what he numbers are. Besides there are so many other factors that influence sales, I'm not sure that you could pin sales results solely on styling.
Bob
True, but IIRC BMW is a family owned business and there's always the idea of making your mark on the business. How many billions does one family need? Besides, although people may say they hate the design we all eagerly await the new BMW to see what happens. All publicity is good publicity.
Given that every BMW introduced since the 7-series has had consecutively softened Bangle's influences, I'd love to hear the behind-the-scenes talk of their top management.
Don't forget that the 7 has the lowest sales and the 3 is their volume leader. They took the greatest risk where they could afford to take the hit - on the 7 and Z4. Automobile in their April issue drives the new 3 and they stated that BMW sells 425,000 of them worldwide every year. No way would they have come out with the 7 look on the 3.
Totally agree. Not over the edge, but right there.
No way would they have come out with the 7 look on the 3.
Yes, but did BMW know that when they introduced it on the 7-series? Had there been less controversy,would they have just implemented across their product line? I think the fact that the 3-series was spared major changes was not a plan, but a course correction.
Ken
oh yes you are so right. i went right out and bought a 10 block of tickets after northworst airlines stranded those people forever in the snow storm a few years ago.
and omg how aztek sales are great since all of the discussion.
and yes all those watergate hearing made me love nixon.
and yes those 1 star ratings releases from the IIHS wanna make me get that car.
please think about your cliches before you use them
The sedans have lost market share, but SUVs have made it up. Hard to say if sedan intenders opted for the SUVs instead. Plus the SUVs are less controversial - no hump-back trunks.
I personally feel that the 7 did go a little over the edge, and this face-lift sort of pulled it back to the edge itself. The rest are close but none go over like the original 7.
swampy: take it easy, we're among friends.
-juice
Bob
so to me it's rather simple-- I keep the art in the museum or home, and some of it I appreciate, and some I don't care for. I respect the vast majority of 'art'.
however I cannot see a car as anything more than function. I don't ever forsee myself collecting cars that won't be driven-- cars are for driving first and looks are secondary but could be quite meaningful in a purchase when there is fierce competition and many good choices available.
I thought Bob's example of the 6 series was great, as I agree that it is bold, different and fresh. However to me those aren't the first adjectives that come to mind-- that would be ugly, overdone, and discordant. the contrasting swoops and sharp angles present in all Bangle's designs are probably the easiest thing for me to point a finger at and say-- "no."
I also am firmly in Ken's camp here when he says that a business exists to drive profit. I have not reviewed BMW's public financial data, but I have this general perception that they continue to do well in spite of (or perhaps, as Bob suggests, in part because of) the Bangle design influence.
To me that's indisputable fact-- results. I find all their current offerings to be ugly (OK, the X5 is tolerable) but only a fool would argue that they are failing financially. Now, you could assert that BMW would be generating even more profit if they used different designs, but I see no accurate or meaningful way to assess that claim with publicly available data. Surveying BMW owners and seeing what their top criteria for purchasing would be a good start, if you could actually get a good % response and they were honest.
Regarding that last bit-- how many people that buy something purely for the image are going to admit that? Most will list other reasons first to seem more sensible and less superficial...
~Colin
I'm not so sure of that. Every time you buy clothes, more than likely "looks" comes into play. I bet you make art-based purchase decisions on far more than you may (consciously) be aware of.
I think most people's purchase are motivated by looks, or at least looks play a very large part of the decision making. I'm sure there are marketing studies out there that speak to this issue.
Bob
-Brian
Bob - have you seen how I dress? LOL
Normally I'm a slob. When I dress up, it's usually a new T-shirt. ;-)
-Frank
-juice
Now I see many cars beginning to take the same tack. CTS, Altima, to name 2 off the top of my head. Both cars, especially the CTS, get VERY slab sided in the rear quarter panel as a result. Bangle broke that slab surface up with the radical trunklid treatment, with the help of engineering who came up with very compact struts for the lid.
The other solution is to go the way of the S500, and just lengthen the car and retain traditional trunk geometry. It's still a lot of metal back there, and also looks slab sided and boring to me.
I find the Bangle styles grow on me after a bit, not unlike some of my favorite records. I agree that it isn't beautiful, but neither is your average Mercedes these days. So given the choice between the two, I'll take the riskier, modern, forward visionary BMW style language over the conservative, increasingly boring Mercedes. And that's the difference between the 2 demographics I guess.
As for Audi, well, those were handsome cars too. But I think I prefer dame edna glasses to baleen whale on the hunt for phytoplankton.
The "Americans are fat" excuse? I dunno, I don't really buy it. Remember the Takata seatbelt recall? They said the same thing, that was lame.
And are we really taller?
I do agree that space is a luxury, so I can see why they made the interior bigger.
I guess my beef with the 7 is the design was disjointed, there was no flow, no consistency. It seemed like two different designers did it.
I like Autoweek's BTWM take on the Audi - Culkin from Home Alone.
-juice
-Frank
and omg how aztek sales are great since all of the discussion.
and yes all those watergate hearing made me love nixon.
and yes those 1 star ratings releases from the IIHS wanna make me get that car.
please think about your cliches before you use them.
I never said it was good for sales but it keeps the brand name in the public's eye - at zero cost. If the publicity wasn't worth it why are we even discussing it? The automotive media and enthusiasts have been waiting with baited breath to see the next Bangle abdonmination have they/we not? Trust me, this design controversy hasn't hurt BMW one bit.
As for your examples, those are different IMHO - those are more negative than this design issue.
1. Chrysler 300C/Dodge Magnum: People seem to like these and I'm at a loss as to why. Do they like not being able to see out of the car? Are the cars supposed to be reminiscent of 1950's chop-topped lead sleds? Was "cab forward" and good visibility no longer a selling point?
2. Infiniti FX35/45: Same question: do people like not being able to see out of the car? Never mind that the whole vehicle looks like a turtle on dubs. Is the whole mini-trend of high-waisted, slit-windowed cars supposed to imbue the driver and passengers with some sense of security in an insecure world, sort of like a bunker?
3. Pickup trucks over the last decade: I blame Dodge for this one with its last-gen Ram's mini-Kenworth/sperm whale head nose, but that was a drop in the bucket. Ever since full-sized pickups have become more and more caricatured, cartoonish even. Grilles and wheels/wheel covers have become chunkier and more blocky, wheelwells more crudely angular, chrome trim thicker, surfaces more upright and angular as well. The trend has now spilled over into smaller pickups (which are not so much smaller than their full-sized counterparts) like the Frontier, Tacoma, Canyon/Colorado.
I think the pickup styling rankles me the most as these were once utilitarian work vehicles, and looked the part. Once it was realized that people used pickups as full-time transportation, manufacturers made them more carlike in styling and amenities. Somehow that wasn't enough and the styling pendulum swung in the other direction. Now pickups look like - well, I really don't want to say but let's leave it at "overcompensating for suspect masculinity."
Okay, rant off.
Ed
As for pickups, it seems that they are looking more industrial and more manly. No one wants to drive a girly looking truck.
Got me there. Many of us, actually.
Ed: I'll take a shot as offering some possible explanations.
300C - in a sea of sameness, FWD bars of soap, it's distinctive and old school. While the windows do look chopped and that may hurt visibility, that may be offset by the lack of glare that you saw with steeply raked Intrepid windshields.
Another explanation: 7 series room at a 3 series price. And since it's RWD that is no longer a ridiculous comparison.
FX - yes, I do think it's about coddling people to make them feel safer, more surrounded by metal than glass. Plus this is more of a giant 350Z hatchback than it is an SUV.
Its performance sells it.
I don't understand pickup buyers so I won't even try to answer that one.
-juice
-Frank
However you are dead on with the Infinity FX. Wow that thing is awful. Try a Nissan 350Z, also.
~Colin
btw, I do like the styling of the 300C quite a bit. I'd own one if I had a wife and 2 kids. more than 2 kids and she's doin' hard time in a minivan. LOL
so publicity can be bad for the brand then? so all publicity is not good?
Cheers!
Paul
You sure it wouldn't be yours? ;-)
-juice
else it just becomes this curvy lookin thingee
No, I haven't, so I'll have to take your word for it. I did drive the last-gen 300M though, which begs the question: Why isn't the 300C the 300N?
Colin: funny you mention the 350Z. My wife and I were behind a G35 coupe recently and she pointed out that its rear is basically a solid slab, broken up only by the shape of the taillights which are still part of the slab. I never thought of it that way, alwsy felt the G looked better than the Z.
While we're picking on Nissan/Infiniti: What's with the lights on the front corners of the new Maxima? Tell me they can't be foglamps - they point out to the sides! Curb illuminators?
Ed
Actually, it's surveying those that considered a BMW 5 or 7 series and didn't get one because their appearance!
Jim
Basically when you signal left, the left one turns on and illuminates the path into the turn.
Nowadays they're starting to use headlights that swivel.
And if they made enough 300X letters, pretty soon they'd have a 300Z! LOL
-juice
it was the "300". I don't know if that was the displacement in cubic inches or just something witty they dreamt up.
anyway, in the 90s someone that probably wasn't alive in the late 50s decided that they should recycle the 300 name, sort of. 300M was born, a front wheel drive v6 sedan. ...not exactly like the original namesake. ok, not at all. :-D
then a few years ago they had a quandry-- now they actually were going to have a RWD sedan with an optional v8, and it would even have somewhat retro styling... so it became the 300 in its base form. there also are 300 Limited and 300C trim levels. the C is the V8.
to me it wouldn't been sensible to rename the 300M as it is a totally unrelated platform, but appearently Chrysler thought otherwise.
~Colin
great one, hey if they keep the model arouond long enough it might make it to 300zx
it was the "300". I don't know if that was the displacement in cubic inches or just something witty they dreamt up.
It was 1955, and the "300" stood for 300 horsepower. That was the first production car to advertise 300 horsepower. Keep in mind, back in those days they were using "gross horsepower" ratings, not "net horsepower" ratings, which is in use now, and has been for many years now.
The original Chrysler 300 was essentially a (relatively) lightweight Newport coupe, stuffed with this huge hemi engine, along with the front end clip from the Chrysler Imperial. It had wire wheels, and was quite a sensation at the time. In many ways this was the car that really set off the horsepower race in the mid – late '50s.
http://www.lhmopars.com/MOPAR_Ads/55-300ad.html
Bob
Didn't the Tucker do that with the center light on the front of the car?
Bob
(Seem to remember a movie as well ...)
geezer Bob (& proud of it!)
http://tinypic.com/2ai0s2
http://www.xkjeeps.com/
Many Jeepers mourned the loss of the original Cherokee, so I can understand Jeep going this route. I like it a lot better than the new Grand Cherokee, for sure.
Bob
scary.
~c
Almost seems like they tried to one-up Hummer, but then backed off and stuck to Jeep cues.
It'll make old Jeep loyalists happy, but will it bring in new customers? I doubt it.
That GM article shows that even car guy Lutz has to pay the bills, and trucks are the ones bringing in the money nowadays.
-juice
BMW: M6, 1 Series
Chevrolet: TrailBlazer SS, Malibu SS, Malibu Maxx SS
Cadillac: DTS limousine, Escalade ESVe limousine, XLR-V
Chrysler
Dodge: Caliber and Charger SRT-8
Ferrari
Ford: Shelby Mustang, Focus, and SVT Sport Trac Adrenaline
Hyundai: Accent and XG350
Jeep: Commander, Cherokee SRT-8, Rocky Mountain versions, and Unlimited Sahara movie edition
Lexus: IS 350 and GS 450h
Lotus: GT
Mazda: Miata MX-5
Mitsubishi: Evo IX
Mercedes-Benz: A-Class
Scion: t2b
Subaru: Forester
Suzuki: Concept X SUV
Volkswagen
Volvo
Many are US debuts, not World debuts, mind you.
-juice
-Brian