How I’d Make The New BMW You’re Cranky About  At Least Look More Like A BMW

“Ugly” is a dangerous word. Its meaning is often applied to things that fall outside the norm of what we expect something to be visually. The fact is that what is considered “normal” can change over time for some, but others are loath to accept it.

Recently, BMW released a new version of their bread-and-butter product, the 3 Series. After fifty years, this is not so much a “car” as it is a pure icon, so any updates are often met with resistance. And boy, is this thing meeting such resistance.

Some diehards seem to be having a hard time looking beyond the more unusual details on this new 3 and throwing the baby out with the not-even-that-dirty bath water; I dare say it’s a decent-looking car overall. I think if I give this thing some visual touchstones for the superfans to reach for, the ice might thaw a bit, so they can look at the overall product objectively. At least it’s worth a try.

Dear Autopian Author: Are You Blind?

Over the last few weeks, we’ve reported on the launch of the eighth-generation G50 3 Series, including posts by our Thomas Hundal and Adrian Clarke.

The nose and tail are a big departure from earlier Three. I knew it was going to be polarizing.

Despite that, I wasn’t prepared for the no-holds-barred response. You really let this thing have it!

Thomas was rather enthusiastic about the new car, but readers questioned his sanity and vision in droves.

Adrian’s piece dealt with proportions of the Three versus its electric sibling, but proportions appear to be the furthest thing from most Bimmerheads minds.

No, it’s the new nose and tail that are drawing the ire of the longtime faithful. What if, for better or worse, we gave The People what they wanted?

Ride! BMW, Ride!

Truth be told, I don’t really hate the new 3 Series front and rear designs, but I can’t pretend that I live in a world where people don’t expect certain traditions to be upheld. Also, I can’t ignore that the new Three exists among some brands that have spent decades trying to copy the Ultimate Driving Machine. Naturally, when BMW tries something “new” it will be seen not only as outside of the norm but also begs comparison to other cars, some of whom have copied the Munich firm over the years.

Comparisons have been made to the mid-2000s Lincoln MKZ for one.

Some thought it looked like a Mitsubishi.

Also, the late Pontiac brand came in for some comparison:

Is there a resemblance to a Sunfire? Maybe.

Overall, it’s disheartening to see BMW getting bashed for adding a face to their car that some say looks like a bad copy of a copy. It’s akin to the tribute band Like The Conchordes being more popular than the Flight Of The Conchordes duo they are emulating.

Sadly, it’s actually a nice enough design, but it doesn’t matter. Clearly, I need to do a Photochop on this thing to make the faithful happy and, more importantly, show them that the car itself just ain’t that bad.

Be Yourself, Unless You Can Be A BMW; Then Be A BMW

Nothing exists in a vacuum, and as hard a BMW might want to ignore that things like a ten-year-old Lincoln exist, they’ll have an even more difficult time making people forget fifty years of 3-Series that they’ve made. BMW’s most recent attempts to alter their grille design were met with scorn, and many fans yearn for the propeller-badged cars from two decades ago like the E90:

Even that car’s successor codenamed F30 was accepted as a “real” BMW:

There are few instantly recognizable faces in the automotive world that are built on a half century or more of tradition. Rolls Royce is certainly one, and the Jeep Wrangler another; you would have to put BMW’s signature four round (or at least roundish) headlights flanking a prominent nostril grille as another iconic face. I find it hard to believe that I’m sitting here typing this, but why would you try to violate such a standard? The new G50 Three is doing just that with its odd “strake” headlights and barely noticeable kidney grilles. In fact, it appears that the “grille” is an illuminated graphic pattern, so when the car is off, you don’t even see those. That’s a shame, since most of the time this BMW will be viewed while parked unless you constantly drive it and put hundreds of thousands of miles on it (I did just that and financially would not recommend it).

Let’s do a simple change: add some hexagonal or curved-sided rectangular headlights and make the kidneys more prominent with permanent trim (as opposed to a “light signature”). Why not add some low driving lights for nostalgia?

That’s a minor change but makes a huge difference. I also did a version where I changed the nose a bit more so that the logo area was a bit flatter and tried to reduce the “snub” look of the thing. The original has such little overhang that it appears to have made contact with a wall: I pushed it forward a bit, as on an old 6 Series coupe like the E24:

Here’s an animation to show the changes:

Surprisingly, even the back end of this New Three came in for criticism; people cited that the wide taillights “looked like an Alfa” or some other car and, once again. not a BMW.

They point to predecessors like the F30 as having the “proper” look.

Fine, you Bimmerheads. Here’s the thing with more E90 or F30 style lights:

Here’s an animation to show the difference:

Again, I didn’t really have a problem with the back of the car, but if those who read Roundel magazine cover to cover don’t want it, who am I to correct them? Are my changes “better”? No, but if they make more people want to buy the car, then that’s the most we can ask for.

And Don’t Change The Cracker Barrel Logo Either!

Look, at some point people have to accept change. The Bangle Era cars were despised by many despite the fact that the cars kept many of the original BMW touchstones like the Hofmeister kink and the round lights. This new G50 appears to have the opposite issue. As I hope I’ve proved by adding traditional elements, the overall shape is hardly ugly; it’s just a very subtle and pleasing update of the Three Series aesthetic.  Unfortunately, by introducing these new, rather foreign graphic elements in the front and back (or introducing them too soon) it’s killing the thing.

It would be ironic if BMW made a mid-cycle refresh that looked more like Bimmers of the past, when in fact if they’d started with such details, they might have been able to ease buyers into the new style at a later date. It’s also rather ironic that BMW would likely sue another company for making a car with a nose designed to look like a fifteen-year-old 3-Series, yet they aren’t sticking close to that convention at all on their own cars.

Maybe if you’re Jaguar introducing a high-end boutique car for a dying brand you can take chances, but updating the most popular version of the Ultimate Driving Machine? Be very careful with fifty years of success.

Top graphic image: BMW