Forums
>Future Vehicles >Future Vehicles - Archived Discussions >BMW 5-Series Wagon 2004 RedesignRead Only
You have saved this page | See all saved pages
BMW 5-Series Wagon 2004 Redesign - READ ONLY
540 messages, Last post on Mar 04, 2004 at 11:43 AM
You are in the Future Vehicles - Archived Discussions Forum.- Your Host is kirstie_h
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Future Vehicles Host for Directions! discussion.
What is this discussion about? BMW 5 Series, Sedan, Wagon
#201 of 540 new here by 6_speed
May 07, 2003 (6:14 pm)
Perhaps a new blood to this group will help...I didn't like the new 7 when it first came out. Today, I'm OK with it but a 7 is not in my list, not because it's ugly but because it's too big.
I had a 1990 5 and when the 1997 5 came out, I was a little disappointed. It's not as if I had some other design/body-style in mind but I was disappointed because it looked so different from my 1990 5. A couple of test drives quickly removed any misfeelings! Today, I like both the body styles equally. In fact I own a 1997 5.
Same goes to the Z3 vs Z4. My wife came this close to buying a Z3 in 1996 when the only engine back then was the 1.9. I didn't quite like the design and with such a weak engine it was easy to walk away. I like the Z4 a whole lot better, both in body-style and engine choices.
When I look at Audi 4/6/8 I see ONE body-style - not very interesting. Same goes for Mercedes C/E/S.
But for BMW, I see as many body styles as there are models and yet they are instinctly recognizable as a BMW.
In short, I like what Chris Bangle is doing.
#202 of 540 Is Bangle right? by karmikan
May 07, 2003 (7:20 pm)
You make some good points 6_speed. When the Taurus first came out in the mid '80s, I thought that it was the most ugly jelly bean design. A couple of years later I bought an SHO and loved the styling.Bangle has a tough job in trying to update a styling cue that is (IMO) stunningly beautiful, particularly in the 5 series. I thought that the Z4 was weird in photos but I am beginning to appreciate the styling the more I see it. The 7 series still looks odd and I'm not at all taken with the E60 photos.
But think of the "radical" Taurus design and how it became the norm. I guess that only time will tell if Bangle is setting a trend that will seem obvious in the future or if he is creating a family of Azteks.
#203 of 540 by regfootball
May 07, 2003 (10:15 pm)
Bangles worksomeone correct me if any of these are not Bangle designs
z8- awesome car, why are they killing it.
7 series- are you sure the guy that signed the execution papers didn't sign the wrong on
new 5 series- pretty nice exterior but I like the moving towards shorter hoods and decks and larger greenhouses
3 series- new one in the pipeline looks good too.
z4- aside from the LeSabre front end its excellent.
#204 of 540 by bmwguru
May 07, 2003 (11:27 pm)
The Z8 is not a Chris Bangle design. It is too clean and reflective of BMW's history. I also hate the fact the Z8 is ending production. It is also, in my humble opinion, one of the best designs to come out in a long, long time.#205 of 540 by ateixeira
May 08, 2003 (11:05 am)
6_speed: you really think so? BMW has been almost universally criticized for the "same sausage, different length" styling. That's probably why Chris Bangle is trying so hard.The 7 looks different, but once the 5 is out they'll still have similar styling, and probably the next 3 when that comes.
I can see that he's trying to add some character back (by the way, your 1990 5 gets an A+ from me in styling terms). Just lose the hunch backs, the cars look fat.
The A6 and A8 look a lot different, especially in person (they had both at the NY Auto Show). The A4 is similar to the A6, though.
-juice
#206 of 540 karmikan/ateixeira by 6_speed
May 08, 2003 (12:34 pm)
I guess that only time will tell if Bangle is setting a trend that will seem obvious in the future or if he is creating a family of Azteks.Please don't mention Azteks and BMWs in the same sentence
The Azteks are ugly from any and all angles. There is absolutely zero redeeming value, IMO. Wait, I take that back. If an Aztek rolls over, you can use it as a trash bin, so there... If not for the SUV craze, it would have sold exactly zero.
The new 7/5/Z4 might be controversial but hardly in the same league as the Azteks. IMO, the 7 has a avant garde presence. Much like the controversial new Lexus SC430 which I like. It has some American styling cues, slightly different from the strictly Teutonic in the previous. I think the 5 will go down the same path as the 7 and Z4 - controversial but a welcome change when compared to Audi and Mercedes.
BMW has been almost universally criticized for the "same sausage, different length" styling. That's probably why Chris Bangle is trying so hard.
Yes, that was the case and exactly my comments about Mercedes. Chris has a tough job. He could have easily gone down the 'safe' path like Mercedes did.
The A6 and A8 look a lot different, especially in person (they had both at the NY Auto Show). The A4 is similar to the A6, though.
I should add that I was looking at the current A4/6/8 from the front and front 3/4 and it is hard to tell which is which unless you're really up close. Mercedes is like that. BMW was like that. I think the new 5(from the photos) and 7 looks different enough.
Just lose the hunch backs, the cars look fat.
You mean the new 5 looks fat because of the hunchback? Looking at it independently from the rest of the car, yes it looks kinda fat (like the Camry). But overall and with a nice set of wheels/tires, it should look fine. In fact, if you compare the back of a 1990 5 vs 1997 5, you can say the same.
#207 of 540 by kirstie_h HOST
May 08, 2003 (12:44 pm)
Though I'm very appreciative of the most recent return to civil discussion, any further hostile conversation will cause at least the temporary closure of this thread. Reading endless posts with themes like "my car can beat up your car," and "ego challenge 2003" isn't of interest to most members (and most importantly, to me
). Cheers,
kirstie
#208 of 540 Too ugly for me by subie_wrx
May 08, 2003 (2:37 pm)
As a former 3er owner who is saving for a 540 wagon, I can definitely say it won't be an E60. It's true that car styles can grow on you, but some cars are aesthetically (and sometimes timelessly) appealing from the moment you first see them. For me the E46 and E39 fit that category. I have my WRX wagon for ugly - I don't need to spend BMW bucks for it.#209 of 540 by ateixeira
May 08, 2003 (7:05 pm)
I like the Z4, FWIW. There's a design that looks better in person, particularly the rear quarter view. I also like the logo/light on the sides. The front could be better, but I'll take it gladly over the 7 and the 5.None of them are Aztec ugly, I agree.
The "fat" one is the 7, that has the worst hunchback. But the 5 looks a little heavier too, the pillars look thicker, there's less glass it seems.
I prefer big green houses.
It may be a trend, though. Dodge showed the Magnum at NY (surprise, their stand drew HUGE crowds), and the Chrsyler 300C. Both also have really thick, beefy pillars. I'd be worried about blind spots, not sure I like that trend.
-juice
#210 of 540 6_speed - Aztek by karmikan
May 09, 2003 (5:49 pm)
I used the Aztek as a metaphor (pretty bad one though, it's in-a-league-of-its-own ugly). Actually, if you look up "ugly" in a dictionary it says "Aztek".Does anyone know where Bangle worked prior to joining BMW? Are there many examples of his previous projects on the road?
Advertisement
Most Popular in Forums
Search Forums
Enter Keyword(s):
Learn More, Do More
Edmunds Community
Advertisement