Comments on: 2009-2010 BMW X1 – Bullishly fresh

By: Your Mother

Your Mother — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 23:36:52 +0000

Still, I believe they will sell both simultaneously here in the U.S. Will they in that case phase out the X3?
One thing the SLR has in it’s favor is the exaggerated proportions (long hood, low stance, huge dash to axle, low greenhouse, and overall sports car proportions). The X1 is not nearly as fortunate as the SLR in that regard so it does not have the extreme proportions to use as a crutch for clumsy lines and busy surfaces.

By: AutoCritical

AutoCritical — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 23:32:11 +0000

Yeah, I don’t remember where I heard this, but someone mentioned, as you did, there is little dimensional difference between the X3 and X1… Maybe BMW are trying to kill it off, because there have been too many negative connotations associated with it? No better way to replace something that has a bad name then to rename it!

There are many many lines! Similarly with my opinion on the McLaren SLR – but when I saw that on the road, wow, that is striking! (OK, so I didn’t choose the best example)

By: Your Mother

Your Mother — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 20:09:07 +0000

I am confused by this vehicle. I know that there is a difference between the segment that the X3 is in and the one this X1 is intended for, I just don’t know what that is. How will there be separation between those models when their size and functionality seem identical? Overall I believe the design fails due to overuse of lines and detail and not enough focus on proportion and simplification. There are conflicting themes on the body side, and way too many lines on the rear and front fascia. Not to mention the blocky front end and lack of cohesion in the lines. Look at that first 3/4, lines going everywhere, wheels look inset, sloppy graphics. How will it look on the road though?

By: AutoCritical

AutoCritical — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:28:49 +0000

Ahhh, perhaps, the reason they want to hold onto these ‘designs’ is that they are trying to become like Porsche? Having such a strong corporate ‘face’ on their cars? Ok, so perhaps that would be more related to Acura but in their case they are not anything like Porsche, and maybe just too timid to venture out from that design…

For BMW on the other hand, I’m not sure. I’ve seen many concept cars both from BMW and students/folio website who have managed to capture the BMW corporate ‘face’ to the point at which there is no doubt it is a BMW. Why BMW do not go down a similar path is anybody’s guess. (Design directors that are not bold enough?)

If only we were able to see the designs that did not make the ‘cut’.

What are your opinions on the Old vs New Z4? I wrote up about it in another post http://www.autocritical.com/blog/2009/05/2009-bmw-z4-roadster/

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:53:55 +0000

Interesting point about Porsche, perhaps they are the exception to the rule. Though it was in their break with tradition that their best seller Cayenne SUV came into existence.

Once again the curiosity is that if we are both disappointed with the front fascia and the design elements that BMW chooses to hold on to. Why are they not disappointed? The questioned turns my thinking to Acura whose design team seems to have come up with a universally disdained front fascia that they cling to with dear life. Where does the disconnect occur?

By: AutoCritical

AutoCritical — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 02:07:08 +0000

Interesting perspective. Would you consider an example of incremental/evolution design in an automotive sense, Porsche? I can see it from the Apple view of revolutionary design. From those colored macs to the clean flat lines of today. For sure, that is revolution.

I can see what you mean with the X1, I have been more ‘dissapointed’ with the front fascia’s of the models of recent time. You are correct, as mentioned in the write up, I do like the body side, but it still fits in the ‘theme’ of the models of 2002. At the same time, I think there is just enough there in the X1 to be called ‘different’ and a ‘good different’ at that.

Thanks for the comment!

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:06:33 +0000

I go back to an old quote by Chris Bangle talking about the dead end that ultimately awaits any company that relies only on incremental or evolutionary design. Frankly, I think Apple Computers is a much better example of the opportunity inherent in revolutionary design then the BMW 7 series at that time.
So, when I look at the X1 or almost any of the other BMW products including their “spiritual successors” to the 2002 I see nothing other then discarded bits from some 3 series parts bin and tepid variations on a theme that have become both tepid and predictable.

By: AutoCritical

AutoCritical — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 05:03:44 +0000

Not sure if they would do it just because other companies keep ripping them off, I’m sure they have their own timing and agenda… Not sure about which cars specifically you’re referring to that look similar to the BMW, but it is an interesting perspective none the less! BMW are always keeping their ideas ‘fresh’.

By: kambuib

kambuib — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:01:10 +0000

It’s said that BMW has to constently update their design because Lexus and Infiniti keep ripping them off.