ROAD_DOGG33J
Premium
- 14,219
- IL, USA
- holyc0w1
- holyc0w
M4 has the more cohesive design. That blue one actually looks kind of alright. Wonder if it's better or worse in person.
BMW 3-Series (G20) / M3 (G80) / 4-Series / M4
- Thread starter ProjectWHaT
- 643 comments
- 67,446 views
McLaren
Premium
- 45,418
- Texas
In person, that grille is obscenely large so dark colors imo, are always going to look better at minimizing its impact.
- 23,921
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
Keef
Premium
- 25,025
- Dayton, OH
- GTP_KeefRacer
- GTP Keef
Speaking of G80, let's talk about how BMW stuck with E-numbers for decades, maybe 30 years, and then suddenly blazed through the next couple letters without reason. Perhaps they had to skip all the Fs due to the US Air Force's use of the monikers? I'm not sure those are trademarked.
Last edited:
- 17,849
- Florida
- GranTurismo0517
- RandomCarGuy17
Random question from you guys: With the styling choices designers made for the new M3 and M4, would you say they're worse looking than the bangle designed BMWs?
EDIT: I actually like the bangle designs at some angles.
EDIT: I actually like the bangle designs at some angles.
Last edited:
- 552
- Vilnius
- Justuxable
- Justuxable
Most of current day BMW design makes the Bangle era cars look like art pieces, bar the prefacelift 7 series which is always gonna be ugly as hell to me no matter what.
I don’t even understand the hate for some of the Bangle era cars, I think the 5 series and 6 series from him are downright gorgeous cars, especially the M versions.
I don’t even understand the hate for some of the Bangle era cars, I think the 5 series and 6 series from him are downright gorgeous cars, especially the M versions.
- 1,397
- Poland
- J_Chmielinski
Depends on the car. I think the modern BMW SUVs look better than Bangle-era ones (excpet the X6 and iX), while with regular cars Bangle seemed to be much more in his element. Only the pre-facelift 7 is an ugly car, while the rest all still look great IMO. Out of modern non-SUV BMWs I only like the 2, 3, 5 and 8, but I’d probably still take their Bangle-era equivalents over the modern ones.Random question from you guys: With the styling choices designers made for the new M3 and M4, would you say they're worse looking than the bangle designed BMWs?
EDIT: I actually like the bangle designs at some angles.
Last edited:
- 17,849
- Florida
- GranTurismo0517
- RandomCarGuy17
- 23,921
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
The early Bangle-era stuff was jarring at the time, but as that leaded BMWs design direction for the future, they now look 'normal' BMW. I have a feeling the styling of the M3/M4, and lets face it, it's really just that grill we're talking about, will just become the future normal and in 20 years we won't see it as quite so jarring.
- 11,805
- Marin County
I never really minded the bangle stuff. I actually don't mind the front of the new 4 series as much as I mind the side of it...which looks like a flabby Mustang. Look at that lump of metal behind the door, it just looks pathetic. The 4 series is like an old Olympiad aging ungracefully, trying to still look hot with obvious plastic surgery.
I actually think the base 3 series is the best looking 3 series since the E46 - they even managed to get the hoot shut line to look...like...intentional!
It's not even that busy. Every time I see one, I think...that's actually kind of good looking. It looks more like a 5 series to me though.
The non-M 4 series is easily, IMO the ugliest BMW of all time. It just looks so stupid in a way that at least the M cars somehow manage to avoid with the bigger wheels and generally puffed up body.
I mean that just looks ****ing dumb, BMW. It's like a bad photoshop of an already ugly car.
I actually think the base 3 series is the best looking 3 series since the E46 - they even managed to get the hoot shut line to look...like...intentional!
It's not even that busy. Every time I see one, I think...that's actually kind of good looking. It looks more like a 5 series to me though.
The non-M 4 series is easily, IMO the ugliest BMW of all time. It just looks so stupid in a way that at least the M cars somehow manage to avoid with the bigger wheels and generally puffed up body.
I mean that just looks ****ing dumb, BMW. It's like a bad photoshop of an already ugly car.
- 11,805
- Marin County
- 7,943
- Wreckage, Turn 1
- PrecisionXCIV
Even more so with the annoucement of the xDrive Variants:
While these have a claimed 0-60 time of 3.5s, BMW is known for underrating performance figures. I wouldn't be surprised to see real-world times be closer to 3 seconds dead!
- 11,805
- Marin County
I still can't believe they didn't give the M3 a unique rear door skin to actually work with the wider bodywork. 
It seems like the E36, E90, and F80 also had standard rear doors, but the rear wheels were a bit further away from the arch so it wasn't as noticeable.
It seems like the E36, E90, and F80 also had standard rear doors, but the rear wheels were a bit further away from the arch so it wasn't as noticeable.
Keef
Premium
- 25,025
- Dayton, OH
- GTP_KeefRacer
- GTP Keef
It comes pre-crashed!I still can't believe they didn't give the M3 a unique rear door skin to actually work with the wider bodywork.
It seems like the E36, E90, and F80 also had standard rear doors, but the rear wheels were a bit further away from the arch so it wasn't as noticeable.
They took the time and cost to redesign the fender panel (a part of the unibody) to make it fit with the door, but didn't bother to do it the other way around. Apparently BMW can only afford to redesign one body panel at a time?
Last edited:
- 3,727
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
I'm sorry, but the M cars really lose their lustre when they all have almost the same 0-60 times. M2, M3, M4, M5, M8, X3/X4 M, X5/X6 M can all do 0-60 under four seconds, most of which have times between 3.2-3.8 seconds.
