Originally Posted by 7.3 AMG

I've sized them down for you.

-Bruce

Originally Posted by BMW_Dude

I'd love to speak to Chris Bangle one day, I can imagine it would be an amazing conversation!

So are all BMWs designs liked to things?

Wonder what they were thinking about when designing the X3!

Originally Posted by EnI

Here is one interesting "lecture" by Chris (Bangle) - quite old one (from 2002) but still very interesting:

- ONLY REGISTERED AND ACTIVATED USERS CAN SEE ALL LINKS - CLICK HERE TO REGISTER (video)

Originally Posted by BMW_Dude

That was a very interesting video!

Well worth a watch guys!

Originally Posted by Ralfd

I can't wait to see how the design elements of the CS translate into the upcoming X6 and F01 /02 .
BMW raised the bar for my expectations considerably now....I am very excited, because I can easily envision a lot of elements of the new F01 here.
And as Scott and Eni said earlier, probably the X6 will get a back like the CS

I think BMW will have a killer portfolio in the not too distant future.

Originally Posted by EnI

I find the following Bangle's quote most interesting:


Quote: Chris Bangle

"The designers were asked to capture a feeling summoned by a scene in a James Bond film. You know the moment when Caterina Murino, the actress in ‘Casino Royale,’ gets into the Aston Martin? She does that with such assured fluidity. That is what we were shooting for.”

I just love the way Bangle communicates with his designers. He said once designers (the ones in BMW design department) created some sort of special language. It was necessary since design department is very international & multilingual. So the best way to describe the design is to compare it to some situations & phenomena - therefore notorious Bangle's "swoooosh", "zweeeeez" , "klink" etc onomatopoetic terms. And legendary hand talk & gestures.

I'm amused how with 3er copue they tried to catch some specific soft curves, sexiness yet strong & confident determination from some specific photo of Monica Bellucci posing, while this time the task was to recreate the fluidity of Caterina Murino's climbing into AM DB5.

Brilliant!

Originally Posted by EnI

Rob: These "inspirations" are intriguing, but they are clearly initial motivational flashes from which the tone of the project can be set -- rather than anything able to be directly interpreted.

Sure. I was not implying those women were direct models for the cars. I was talking about communication, about language - how Bangle explains what he wants from the vehicle design: with such intriguing examples. Recapturing a particular information, not design detail.

Bangle can go very abstract & philosophical sometimes - he is a designer after all , and I guess such metaphorical language is used to "explain" the abstraction. Even among the designers.

We should agree design is very difficult to explain. Design is not universal. It is very culturally (incl ideologically & religiously) and even personally dependent.

Design is a kind a semi-language - its a tool to express thoughts & feelings & ideas etc. Why semi-language? Because language is a system - with known rules & codes / symbols. While design can carry a message without any particular known rules & codes. Therefore sometimes some designs are difficult to understand - because we do not know the rules & codes behind - so we can not "read" the information properly. Therefore the creator / designer have to explain the design with a language we understand - so the recipient / observer is able to understand the message / information of the design.

Designers are often creating new languages with designs. Yet the rules & codes are know only to designers themselves. So other recipients / observers need a translation of the design - an explanation told in a language we understand. And with such codes & rules used the original message of design is skewed as little as possible during such translation.

Design is always particular - while sometimes it is just percieved as abstract because we do not understand the "language" behind the message of the design.

So ...

This time BMW are determined not to make the same mistake as they did with Z9 / E65 7er & xCoupe /Z4 - when designs were not explained. So people just saw the medium (a car with specific design elements), but didn't understand the message behind.

With new design everything will change. New designs will be explained - the message, and the codes & rules.

It would be fine BMW creating special booklets (design dictionaries) for every new vehicle - explaining its design. It would help people to understand the design better, and would offer a new dimension to the marketing (adding a new value to the car): offering a true mobile communication statement (the one which is understandable to the general public).

Originally Posted by Shonguiz

Eni a good design dosn't need any explanation.

Originally Posted by EnI

Design is art. An applied art.

So by your definition every design / art you do not understand (is not compatible with your mindset frame) is automatically a bad design (eg. some designs from different culture, or eg. a design made by mentally handicapped person)?

I deeply disagree with you. Like I said: design (language) is not universal - and therefore sometimes it needs an explanation. So presence or absence of need for an explanation does not make design good or bad.

Even the design you can easily understand can be "bad". Or it is "bad" because you understand it incorrectly? Or perhaps it is not usable / applicable in any possible (physical) way - then design can be described as "bad": when it has no applicable purpose. And even in such case it is usually recategorized as ART, and not labeled as "bad design".

Eg.: a spoon with a whole, or a cup without bottom. A bad design? Absolutely not! But an art!

There is no such thing as bad design. It can be faulty (not offering what it promises) but definitely not bad.

But ... we can talk about aesthetics. Then we can call something beautiful or ugly. Since taste is a completely subjective matter (based on cultural grounds).

Originally Posted by Ralfd

Here is the X6 back as designed by Hussein a while back. This represents exactly how I would envision the back of the upcoming X6 ... just brutally beautiful..

As you can see, the back of the CS is not too far off ..
The deep cut character line morphes into the back light cluster


Hussein, did they offer you a job at our friends in Munich, when you visited the design center ? They can't let you fall in the hands of the competion ;-)

In your various designs you capture very good the spirit of BMW ...just great work . Congratulation !!

Any comments from Eni or Scott on this one ??

Originally Posted by Maserati

Hated the last part. "It's just a concept - for now"

COME ON ! PRODUCE IT BMW.

Ok am a little biased. But this car is soooo perfect for me, reasons:

[1] I like Astons but can't really trust their reliability + its not in my price range. The BMW CS concept is clearly inspired by Astons design
[2] I like the CLS but not how it drives + the rear is not that great, however I like its coupe-ish design which is greatly interpreted in this concept
[3] The Quattroporte is one of my dream cars for its shape and driving dynamic, bearing in mind has been testing those QPs as a benchmark, I can almost guarantee it will deliver similar driving pleasure.
[4] Space, High end technology + Safety !

Which car is possibly going to have all these ?

The BMW CS concept if it came to production.
OK now I've seen the RL pics, my thoughts:
[1] The front: Although many here hated it but it is an exciting mix of retroness + futuristic styling. Retroness because how the grill looks a little bit tilted backwards like old beemers and futuristics for the rest of the grill desging (3D effects, Headlights design ..etc)
[2] The shoulder line & profile: Although reminds us alot of Aston's, but it compliments the Hofmeister kink greatly, I mean from my POV, the front 3/4 view was the weakest angle of all beemers due to the kink, now it is one of the most beautiful angles.
[3] Trunk & Rear: the perfect interpretation of the bangle butt (although this design was used by some other manufacturers earlier).

As many said, the design is not 100% original, but it indicates the return of "iconic" BMWs not only in driving pleasure, but design passion also.

Originally Posted by hu§eindesign

Vabboud: 2 lebanese on the team?! by God we have conquered BMW!

When I was at BMW in Munich Mr.van Hoodonk told me that they have a designer from Lybia and that his name was Karim Habib. We were talking about what languages I can speak and he told me this info when he knew that I can speak Arabic.
I thought it was a wierd name for a Lybian guy. now it makes sence that he must have confused Lybia with Lebanon

Where are the door handles? I wanna get in..

Look closely at the chrome strip right beneath the windows

You know what guy? it seems like it's a crime not following the forum for 2 days! you made more than ten pages where it's impossible to read everything

Anyway.. So this is the new Design direction BMW are going. I'm happy that it's an evolution from the flame suface theme. It's sleek and more muscular than the currrent desgign language. I like that.

Now to talk about the design elements: I like everything about it except for the front. I always like the idea of a large front grill, because I believe that large grills are the key for a undeniable presence. best example for that is Rolls Roys and old Benzes. But I hoped for a more V-shaped grill, than this rectangular out line. The lights are.. well.. not what I would do. I hink slimmer lights would do it much better. But anyway.. this is a concept and designer like to play with shaped and elements to messure the public reaction.
Actually although I don't like the front very much, it was the direction I was expecting BMW to go to in the future. Those of you who say one of my interpritations of the X6 would know what I'm talking about.

The side design is great, what I don't like is the -for BMW standards- long front overhang. Otherwise it's brilliant. The shoulder line is really cool and was expected from BMW for some future model.. I thought maybe the Z8 or Z4 successor would get a similar thing.
IMHO the Hofmeister Kink ruins the coupé-like roofline. For a so-called 4-door coupé a flowing roof line into the rear is a must, to emphasize the characteristics of a coupé, but I'm aware that this couldn't work with BMW as the H-Knik is a main design element for a BMW just like the kidney grill.
Though I think they could have left the upper line of the side windows chrome-less. this was the roof line won't be very influencd by the sape of the windows. What I mean is an L-shaped chrome strip that starts from the point where the upper window outline meets H-Kink, runs underlining the windows and ends right under the side mirrors.

Now coming to the best part: the ass.. i mean the rear!
It couldn't look better IMO.. it's just perfect. i like the fact that BMW are returning to the L-shaped rear lights as a main design element. Very strong and beautifully modelled rear design. It also has the hight I miss in the front.

The interior is really nice. What I like the most is that it will ende the era of the angular ugly interiors BMW are offering now.. I could never like them or classify them as luxury or even sporty interiors!

Final score 8/10

Originally Posted by EnI

Hmmmm ...

Yeeh, but ... No, but ...

So ...

Functionality and design. Yes, like I said - design is an applied art. It has to be functional & have a purpose. Otherwise it is "just" art - a creation without functional value (but still have huge emotional value).

We have gone beyond optimal functionality with design: eg. contemporary architecture, couture, jewelery, interior design, electrical appliances.

Forms steps forward. Function lags behind.

Form over function.

This is the world we live in. Form prevails (and co-exists with acceptable function).

After all - what is a perfect functionality? This is a very subjective matter. Something that is very functional to me can be very nonfunctional to you. Personal preferences, personal abilities, cultural preferences etc - factors that influence functionality.

So ... Many years ago form prevailed over function. In some field earlier, in some later. Form became additional value - an emotional component to the rational one (=function).

So it's nothing wrong with a bit more artistic ("overdesigned") objects.

But ... cars are a very specific item. They almost have status of a pat.
And their general shape haven't changed for decades!

I can see Bangle pushing envelope further. Making cars a bit emotional & "nonfunctional" again. And I still remember his claim he wants to shift a paradigm in a car design - to reconstruct a car design paradigm completely. I'm eager to see what is going on in his head.

Originally Posted by vabboud

this is what we can bet with the F01's successor Eni, i am lead to believe, the revolution revolution that will ensure later on will see some very controversial creativity!

Originally Posted by Rob

So essentially the role of the designer has been reduced to making objects instantly desirable to the insatiable appetite of the consumer market ...constantly looking for the next thing to acquire, the next fad to try -- that is a very sad state of affairs in a world of finite resources and serious environmental issues.

It seems we human beings are becoming less and less interesting as time passes -- many people now almost entirely identify and express themselves through the things they buy -- who needs a personality when you can afford to wear Prada and drive a BMW? ...and everyone talks about "Lifestyle" these days -- what ever happened to living a real life?

Originally Posted by Imhotep Evil

To the future thru the past.

4 door cabrio, gills, z-line/hip, the guages on the dashboard, all elements of 1930s, 1940s and 1950s MB and BMW cars.

Not radical but reinterpreted.