BMW Does Retro: The 2006 Mille Miglia Concept

  • Thread starter Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 49 comments
  • 1,754 views
On the Beetle... it did quite well when it started, but after a few years, people started looking at the content they were getting for the price they were paying... now sales are... meh. The Cooper ought to keep on going strong, because it does have quite a bit of content to go with that retro-theme.

I agree with Toronado... while retro might sell a number of vehicles initially, unless the car has other redeeming qualities, the demand for it will fade over time (hence the SSR and the "new" Thunderbird).
 
So, is this a "we made it because we could." project?
 
I could agree with what Niky said about the Beetle. My Grandmother "had to have one" when they came out in '98, and although she did get a '99, the novelty of the car quickly wore off when more were on the roads, and small repairs became more frequent on the brand-new car.

As a VW guy, I still love the car, but not in the same way that I did back in 1998. You could only convince me to buy a Turbo Beetle, or a Turbo S, as the car was otherwise pretty boring to drive. Nowadays, the car isn't seen nearly as often as what it once was, and I'm tempted to replace my Jetta with one in the next year or so (depends on how my finances work out...).

I think we might be seeing an end to the retro fad in general, but I think there are still plenty more reto-themed models to come, kinda in the way the Camaro was done earlier this year. Designs will be influenced by the past, but it won't be a carbon copy like the Mustang or the Thunderbird.

But, this all poses a great challenge to designers in the future... How do you create follow-up models to cars like the Mustang, PT Cruiser, New Beetle, etc. with designs that are allready so classic to begin with? Do you evolve the design to more modern terms, or do you slightly adjust the models to fit the new standards?
 
YSSMAN
I could agree with what Niky said about the Beetle. My Grandmother "had to have one" when they came out in '98, and although she did get a '99, the novelty of the car quickly wore off when more were on the roads, and small repairs became more frequent on the brand-new car.

As a VW guy, I still love the car, but not in the same way that I did back in 1998. You could only convince me to buy a Turbo Beetle, or a Turbo S, as the car was otherwise pretty boring to drive. Nowadays, the car isn't seen nearly as often as what it once was, and I'm tempted to replace my Jetta with one in the next year or so (depends on how my finances work out...).

I think we might be seeing an end to the retro fad in general, but I think there are still plenty more reto-themed models to come, kinda in the way the Camaro was done earlier this year. Designs will be influenced by the past, but it won't be a carbon copy like the Mustang or the Thunderbird.

But, this all poses a great challenge to designers in the future... How do you create follow-up models to cars like the Mustang, PT Cruiser, New Beetle, etc. with designs that are allready so classic to begin with? Do you evolve the design to more modern terms, or do you slightly adjust the models to fit the new standards?
Click to expand...

Thats the thing I've been thinking about for a long time. How will Ford, GM, Chrysler and other makers draw their heritage from if the current model is a copy of the model in the '60s?
 
That is an amazing looking car, even better if the headlights were different. I know it needs them to be like the old car, but some more aggressive shaped ones would've helped a lot.

I love the double-breasted suit whacko look at the rear. First time I've seen assymmetry work well in a car. Very interesting indeed.
 
The New Beetle should've been built on a downsized, cheapened 911 Platform.

or, even better, update the original so that it looks and performs like a new car. 2.0l Boxxer 4 behind the rear wheels, where it was meant to be.

On the other hand, the Beetle RSi and Cup are great cars.
 
GT4_Rule
Thats the thing I've been thinking about for a long time. How will Ford, GM, Chrysler and other makers draw their heritage from if the current model is a copy of the model in the '60s?
Click to expand...

Ive been saying the same thing for a long time as well.

What is the Mustang in for down the road? A bastardized replica of the Fox body? Pffftt.

As far as the whole design of the BMW, I would say it is deffinately "we built it because we can"
 
GT4_Rule
Thats the thing I've been thinking about for a long time. How will Ford, GM, Chrysler and other makers draw their heritage from if the current model is a copy of the model in the '60s?
Click to expand...

Well, atleast with GM and the Camaro, after a re-design is called for 6-8 years after the introduction of the 5th Gen, they could style the 6th Gen model similarly to the well-accepted 2nd Gen. Thats the great thing about the Camaro, it really was a good looking car for the majority of it's life, so they could copy and reformat the design over, and over, and over again.

As for the Mustang, there have been good times and bad times, but I would really only call the '65-'70 models "good looking," and then the later fox-body Mustangs "good looking" but only in the context of the era.
 
James2097
That is an amazing looking car, even better if the headlights were different. I know it needs them to be like the old car, but some more aggressive shaped ones would've helped a lot.

I love the double-breasted suit whacko look at the rear. First time I've seen assymmetry work well in a car. Very interesting indeed.
Click to expand...

Psychologists agree; symmetry is a "comfort". That is to say, symmetry is a calming quality because the eye isn't trying to compensate or "fix" whatever it's looking at. As nature has shown, balance (2 hands, 2 feet, 2 eyes ears etc) is what goes. This is also the reason certain women have a "quality" to them, their eyes or eye brows may be slightly more symmetrical or just a little bit better shaped than another person's. Asymmetry, as Bangle knows (and apparently the designer of the new Murcielago, too), is very eye-catching, and pleasantly disturbing. This was a bit of a ramble . . .
 
The Nissan Cube had problems... :lol:

However, a lot of man-made objects aren't perfectly symmetrical, yet we still find them very beautiful. Like my Fender Stratocaster. Certainly better than Tom Cruise's face, which is apparently one of the most symmetrical in the world. I'm not thinking anyone would be calmed by the symmetry there... :lol:

We've just woken up to the fact that the automobile design doesn't have to be a strictly symmetrical, as long visual balance in the viewer's mind is retained (by use of careful highlights etc). The problem with the Cube was that there wasn't any additional interesting elements to balance the visual impact of the car, which just looked awful in too many ways to count.

I believe this BMW creates a balance of visual interest, creating a kind of mental symmetry although the form is asymmetrical. The highlights are put in just the right places (the red slash) to compensate nicely. The car still sits comfortably on the ground, it doesn't appear unsteady. This is how the asymmetry still feels balanced IMO.

Being too symmetrical can be a curse, it can simply make something appear bland, which was the problem Cruise was having before he decided to go insane to compensate for the symmetry.

Sorry, didn't mean to go too off-topic.
 
Hmm...if asymmetry is so cool, maybe I shouldn't fix my broken foglight and put it back on the car, and continue to drive around with only one. :sly: :lol:

( :lol: @ James' Tom Cruise comments)
 
Denzehl Washington is the one they often use to point out near perfect symmetry... but then, he isn't as wacko as Loose Screws Cruise... :lol:

Nice line there by YSSMAN and GT_Rule... it would be interesting to see what's beyond retro. I think Bangle's line of reasoning in trying to shake up the establishment with challenging shapes and disjointed lines was spot on... there has to be someone to break the ice and look for the new... errh... design gestalt.

There are, to be honest, a lot of features and design cues on modern cars we take for granted that aren't exactly that great from a design perspective, but we accept them anyway because we're conditioned to. Then something new comes along and shakes things up... after a while, it becomes the norm... like short overhangs, for example, or window mounted mirrors (why do we find the chassis mounted mirrors on the new Civic so uncomfortable, hmmm?)... or low profile tires.

Bangle's group challenged these design traditions and came up with something unique, in a way, despite it being traditional in others. Now, others are following....

What do you think? Will "Bangle-ized" trunks become the norm? will flame-surfacing replace the straight character lines and two dimensional curves of current car flanks? Will all new cars have eyelashes? Do compacts really have to look like stubbies, or can they have a proper nose (BMW 1-series) ?

Audi's current theme may be eye-catching, with it's uber-mechanical gaping maw... but it's decidedly retro... BMW's is just out there.

And even when they do retro (despite it being a design concept for design's sake), they don't do it slavishly... they go their own way. Sorry for rambling... where's the time gone? :lol:
 
I give BMW credit for doing something different because they can, but the products in the end often arent as good as they should be (6-series, early 7-series, etc.). Dont get me wrong, I still love the 3-series and I'm still warming up to the 5-series, but generally speaking, they do it right when they build cars. The Europeans allways seem to be on the forefront of design, esp. when compared to the American designers, and what we are seeing with Bangle may be the new thing. Do I completely like it? No, but I dont completely hate it either. If I was going to pick the best looking cars from Europe as a whole company, that title would go to Alfa Romeo, but the BMW folks wouldnt be too far behind...

The notions about the ways a car should be built are going to greatly depend on where that car is comming from. I think that in Europe we are going to see a shift twards the way BMW does it's designs, a little more unique, yet still purposeful in most situations.

In Japan, it still seems like anything goes. I really do not like the way design is working itself out in the land of the rising sun, it has become too extroverted, too outrageous in some cases. Sure, quirky cars sell well, but most people dont want to be driving a cartoon character down the street. The new Civic is a good example of design gone mad, same with the Camry, the entire Lexus lineup, etc... If they want to capture sales, they need to be building cars that people want to drive, or atleast CAN drive, and maybe more folks like me would be tempted by a Honda or Toyota.

The Americans on the other hand are going to be going two different directions. On the one hand, we are going to see a continuation of the reto-futuristic design themes with classic models like the Camaro, Mustang, Challenger, Charger, 300C, etc. Because of America's obsurdly rich automotive past, there really is a limitless supply of classic designs that could be translated to modern terms for many different models. On the opposite side of the field, I can see many of our designs maintaining their otherwise American looks through a filter of either European design, or Australian design. Tight and restrained looks are great, and they have worked well for cars like the Solstice, Sky, Fivehundred, Fusion, etc.
 
In the future, I imagine we'll look at any flame-surfaced or Bangle-butted car and think "oh man, that is such a 00's car!" :lol:

I also expect Europe to follow BMW's lead, as YSSMAN, and I also think that Japan will just get weirder and weirder...as for america, well, I think they'll just keep on building conservatively-styled cars that look like they're made of soft, droopy plastic and only marginally conform to match the current design trends of the world. :indiff:
 
Well, most of the American cars will probably stay that way. Of all of the big three, GM seems to be the most adventurous when it comes to design, and they keep saying over and over again that they are going to match or supass the best cars in the world for design once again. With the Camaro, 2008 Malibu, Impala, Monte Carlo, El Camino (?), Grand Prix, GTO, Invicta, Saab Kappa, etc. they are going to be building striking models that sell more to the general public than other specialty companies.

Distinctive products are what sell cars, and I think GM learned that from the 300C/Charger and Mustang, and they are looking to make the same mistake again...
 
Distinctive, but not ugly... I'd say... but I'm starting to see quite a bit of BMW 1-series driving around... so I'd say either distinctive and not ugly, or distinctive and cheap. :lol:
 
Well, if you look at the American automobile industry as a whole in terms of design, the light really didnt seem to come on until the early-mid 1950s with cars like the Chevrolet Bel-Air, Chrysler 300, Plymouth Fury, etc. They were icons of the era, and the designs are still good looking to this day.

The problem with cars from the '30s and subsequently what was made in the '40s are just too big and round by todays standards. Could they redo an old DeSoto or a Pontiac? Sure they could... But it would look awkward, as design standards then dont match the standards of the younger generations that will eventually control the market, as well as the baby-boomer generation that controls the market now.
 

Latest Posts

Back