ok i am getting to like the 5 series although i still think it would have been better as a 3 because the interior looks really cheap and the outside doesnt have a gracefull luxurious look, but then luxury wasnt the aim in BMW agenda. it is as it looks, performance sedan.
BUT, i still think the bangle's designs are more like attepts at art work than car designs.
the Z4 looks great with the combination of soft round body and hard lines almost scratched into the smooth round body.
the 7 looks good until you reach the unnecessarily complicated tail llghts with the trunk lid. the rear really does damage to an otherwise pretty good design.
this new 3 however, 2005, is far too complex, too complicated as if it was abstract art.
you need to look at it for a while but it does not result in an aquired taste such as the 5 or 7series. the body has raised lines in the body and indednted area below the door handles. it, like most bangle BMWs, has too many unnecessary lines in the body but also doesnt have a structured or smooth or even symetrical look.
an example of what i mean is the fact that thise edgy lined car has round mirrors which just throw things off due to the rest of the car being rectangular or edgy.
its just too com-plicated for an entry level car, you'd expect that from Pagani or a supercar maker or even other sports cars but not for a entry level car.
and the lights are really ugly by themselves, the rear especially but then again, besides the Z4, X5, there is no BMW with nice rear tail lights that round out the rear of the car.
IMO.
and sure it is not at bland as the C-class or A4's but it is not the way to design a car, IMO. his designs are off, too radical and complicated, but his aim or intention of separating the BMW lineup and making them look different was achieved.
the old BMWs did look too similar and bland but no need to go far out and extreme to make a different looking car.
