Without the wrap-overs it'd be a stunner.
Without the wrap-overs it'd be a stunner.
Why?
The beauty of the original is its simplicity.
This is neither simple nor beautiful.
The original isn't exactly beautiful either, it's a bunch of aero add-ons tacked on to a graceful shell. We love it because it worked.
Ooof! The basic shape is appealing, and it has some nice throwback elements that make it a good tribute except...
WHAT THE berkeley HAPPENED TO THE FRONT FENDERS?
The front fender wrap-over is so ugly it kills everything nice about it dead in an instant. Looks like it slid under the bumper of a lifted bro-dozer on the way off the CAD screen and badly wrinkled the front sheet metal!
The wrap over fenders are a bit much and front end is a too . . . Stylized . . .
Everything else is good looking.
Rear looks 911ish
Only part I like
Did they call Nissan for design advice?
Too busy for me.
Ya'll are nuts, ill take one in that color and one in black and one in silver. Can't please everyone. 
It's as ugly as the original was hot
Toyman01 wrote: Did they call Nissan for design advice? Too busy for me.
Nissan and Porsche are fighting over ugliest cars and I guess BMW wants to join the pack. ( for porsche I was referring to the Panamera and Cayenne)
markwemple wrote: It's as ugly as the original was hot
I didn't know that rose colored glasses were available in that strong of a perscription. 
...unless you mean 'not very' by that. The more I look at it, the more I like what they did with this styling exercise.
I'd rock one....only if I could buy one with a Jagermiester livery straight from the factory.
Keith Tanner wrote: The original isn't exactly beautiful either, it's a bunch of aero add-ons tacked on to a graceful shell. We love it because it worked.
Yes, but the 3.0CS was a good looking car to start with.
I don't see a good looking car under all the trash on this new concept.
I really hope that's not the direction automotive styling is heading.
As the 3.0 CSL was all about function.. if you could prove to me that every detail on that homage was actually functional.. I would be all over it.
Just because design elements are stylized does not inherently make them non-functional. Take the polarizing front fender flares...What makes them any less functional than more conventionally styled flares? Note that BMW touring cars also have to extend the top of the flares up onto the upper fender/hood surface, which doesn't lend itself well to the box flares that some seem to consider the pinnacle of flare design.
Reminds me of some of the Alfa BAT concept cars.
Maybe Ford should come out with a Capri concept only make theirs attractive to really show up BMW.
pres589 wrote: Maybe Ford should come out with a Capri concept only make theirs attractive to really show up BMW.
So a Mustang with a bubble hatch back and box flares? Yes please! 
In reply to Junkyard_Dog:
Not even close. And I said Ford Capri. Try this;
Junkyard_Dog wrote:Keith Tanner wrote: The original isn't exactly beautiful either, it's a bunch of aero add-ons tacked on to a graceful shell. We love it because it worked.Yes, but the 3.0CS was a good looking car to start with.
The greenhouse on that concept has a grace that we haven't seen on a BMW since the last of the real 6-series. The tail flows as well. The nose...is a strong statement. But I think the fundamental shape does look good.
Those wrap over front fenders might actually do something aerodynamically. There's airflow under them. I don't know if a clever aerodynamicist could make use of that or not. Roof spoiler, rear wing, the airflow around the sides of the trunk - I can see how those could be quite functional. Everything behind the windshield base is pretty plausible.
Admittedly, the original looked better in race form which made the street version look like a toned down version.
The new one looks like a hot wheel car, even the color.
I'll take both please.
Homage. Er... no.
One was purposeful, designed by a need to race competitively, the other is a mess.
If BMW wanted an homage, they should win something with a sedan.
Otherwise... berkeley off.
rallymodeller wrote: Without the wrap-overs it'd be a stunner.
You took the words right out of my mouth.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: One was purposeful, designed by a need to race competitively
An apt description for the actual racecars...But aside from homologation requirements, those same design features realistically didn't result any more "purposeful" of street cars than this concept.
As a former 3.0 CS owner, I'm gonna puke.
You'll need to log in to post.
