German Car Forum

^ have you guys ever heard the maxim "God is in the details" ?

Audi design is full of very clever and well resolved details. -- but you have to take more than just a superficial glance to appreciate them.

No, Martin.

My point is that BMW didn't come up with this idea. This notion about Mercedes seeing BMW come to market with idrive in 2002 and then rushing to copy it....is what I'm saying is BS. Mercedes-Benz clearly presented the idea years earlier, and it clearly wasn't "vague" either. It is right there in black and white what type of controller they were thinking about. I know you know that Mercedes' concepts are nothing more than a think tank for future ideas. The intent is to see where this technology can go, if it can be produced. That is the whole point of debuting such (often time ugly) concepts. I know you know this Martin. Mercedes doesn't debut those type of concepts just to put all that stuff on the shelf. A single knob interface for telematic isn't nearly as dreamy a technology as you try to make it sound.

No one here is saying that BMW didn't get it to market first of course we all know they did. What we're saying is that BMW didn't come up with this on their own and they surely didn't invent such a concept. That is my point Martin.

All this about who brought it to market first isn't what is being disputed. The notion that BMW came up with this idea first is what is being proven wrong here.

No one said that Mercedes had an competitive edge either because they introduced it first, again not what is being disputed.

Yes the rest did follow BMW by bringing it to market, but since you can speculate that Mercedes somehow stalled or shelved the idea, then we can also speculate that BMW saw Mercedes' concept car in 1995 and started work on their own version and rushed it to market with dubious results. The poor initial result on the market part is fact, the rest speculation...just as much so as saying Mercedes cooled on the idea. They could have been developing to make they didn't have the mess BMW did with their 2002 7-Series.

Fact is BMW brought it to market first.

Fact is Mercedes-Benz opened the door and presented the original concept as far as BMW and Mercedes-Benz go.


M

Speaking of technology, I just found out that Distronic was actually to be introduced in the W140!! Imagine if that actually happened. May I remind everyone that the W140 was introduced in the early '90's.

http://mbwde.cup.hl-users.com/Medien...tion/index.htm




Here's the link to the site:
Alles ber die Mercedes-Benz S-Klasse der Baureihe W140

For the W140 lovers only!

^No one in there right mind is going to argue about MB being a technology leader, they always been and will probably continue to be, after all they invented the car . It is design that is been it's Achilles heels in recent times (IMO).

That is exactly how I feel too Sunny

It's still hilarious.

I know

You know what? I unfortunately have to say that I agree with you here. I love some of the recent MB designs such as the C-Class, the CL-Class, but I must admit that they are still looking for their own look (I think they found it with the C-Class, but I'm no great fan of the GLK).

However the details you mention are undoubtedly showing that they somehow lost their way as design leader. I hope they will adress it quickly.

Peter Pfeiffer \Gorden Wagener and me

5372db2d44bf8a00c9dfe.jpg

5372db2d44bf8a1042180.jpg

5372db2d44bf89f4031d4.jpg


牛眼看车展——和设计师的对è¯� _牛眼看车_新浪å�šå®¢

You work for MB yzbenz?

I tried to very briefly explain my personal appreciation for Audi design HERE

I think that the glk is very good looking suv ...is very enginerred and designed very well and look very massive ans solid...u have to get used to and u all will relize it ...it's a really beauty merc...reminds the roots of the merc 80's...and i'm serious ....o the road its gergouse and it's will be the e-class point of design very beutifull lines I OVE love it real original mercedes . my opinion mercedes is going back for the leadership in design in a 2 years...while bmw is goinf backward with thier last design 3 series and 7er from thier spy pics






[url=http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=364&i=63963911451805412721608dk3.jpg][IMG]





[url=http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=408&i=64233211501334992332808mn1.jpg][IMG]


[url=http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=408&i=64079111474674134271708fe5.jpg][IMG]

^ Yawn.

"Canyonero"





Actually, the black one looks very sleek.

I don't see MB as a present design leader ...


Why?

Going neo-retro (with rectangular & boxy elements from the Sacco era) is hardly a leading & pioneering matter.

While the latest design study - the ODC - is full of "flame surfacing" which is also more a matter of following than leading.

The only interesting study is the F700, whose disadvantage is that it is not a design study per se, but a F-concept - displaying only some possible future design details, yet not the whole design.

Of course the MB is still very much a tech / innovation leader - although BMW & Audi are not lagging behind at all. Every brand is introducing innovations specific to brand values. Eg. I hardly believe BMW would first introduce a PRE-SCAN system which helps to enhance the ride comfort - since this is more MB's domain.


****

Just like BMW Audi are also talking about "Zen-inspired design" recently although their designs are more & more expressive lately (wait to see A5 Sportback). Yet due to trying to increase better brand image & recognition they are still on the stage of unified design - something eg. BMW & MB had done in the past, and now they are already beyond that. Audi will evolve to the new stage soon, I guess.

It's interesting while BMW & Audi are talking about future trends are leaning towards "less design" aka "Zen-like design", MB are presenting vehicles with numerous strong design details - kind decorating the cars with as much strong (eg. boxy & rectangular, or "swollen" ) details lately. Kind a completely different pole from "Zen design". Kind a strange.

****

BMW are still the design leaders: not that they invented something revolutionary (eg. clam shell boot lids, eyebrows, convex/concave shifts with sharp creases etc are not completely new design elements) but the Board of Management had guts to take the design risk - and to bring into production some design elements traditionally strange to BMW brand, and finally make BMW models more individual & different.

They started a trend - which make them design leaders. That's the definition of leader: starting a trend, and leading others to follow you.

Not necessary the leading designs are the best, or utterly beautiful - that's not the point when talking about leading - design leader is someone who starts a new trend, someone who stirs the conventions, someone who is "the talk of the town", someone who is followed. And this is what BMW currently BMW exactly is.


****

Of course things can change pretty quickly - it depends how innovative the design & marketing teams are, and even more important: how brave & daring the Board of Management is (and the investors - who support the plans via Supervisory Board). Of course a company also has to have enormous resources available to be able to be leader.

Decision to be a leader involves a great risks - sometimes you succeed, sometimes you fail badly. Therefore the risks are not taken very often.

I hope BMW stay design leaders as long as possible - I guess in the recent past they earned an image of design leading brand + design culture within the company is ranking very high lately, so they have great foundation to remain design leaders in the future as well.

Although - from marketing & financial reasons - it's naive to expect design shifts & revolution to happen with every new generation (in 7 years). Amortization of eg. tooling etc takes some time to be accomplished. And after that ... if there is a will to take another risk - a new revolution & another design leadership can begin.

Umm... err... my 2p: At d mo i'd hardly call MB a design leader, much as i generally am a fan. For 1 i dont even think they exactly have a coherent design language. Their designs (and design cues) seem to be 'all over the place' sometimes. They seem to increasingly go with what the trend is, rather than set it. The problem with this is that when that trend changes, you get left behind. Barring the CLS (some 5 years ago), I've not seen anything distinctly futuristic/forward looking from MB.
The interiors i have to say too leave A LOT to be desired. Quality, materials n finish wise very solid, but in terms of 'design' i have been quite disappointed with a lot of recent Mercs. And when u think dat this is 08, well...
Let me jus express a small [very personal] opinion as well: I think MB does some of the worst rear ends in the bizness. I mean u only have to look at d GL, whats dat about??? Some other models too jus look worse off from the back.
I think MB designs are getting too 'complex' too, and seem to be like many different design themes forced to exist together in 1 vehicle, rather than a single coherent design flow front to back, top to bottom. F/L SL, S class anyone....?

Having said all that, i would hardly call BMW a design leader too. But dats another story. For 'direction', however 'boring' and 'monotonous' they may seem, i'd have to look towards Audi at d mo.
Jus my nickel

^ BMW definately has been a style leader ....but styling is not the same as design.



BIONIC DESIGN

Mercedes has actually been very in-tune with a very important movement in contemporary design -- bioform design or bionic design.



Bionics encompasses far more than just appearance -- it is about transferring the knowledge learned from nature into engineering. This is not just a fashion trend but a major scientific revolution happening at the highest levels of industrial design.

Bone chair by Joris Laarman, 2008


Staircase by Ross Lovegrove


Peter Pfeiffer, Mercedez Benz Design, Bionic Car




Mazda Taiki Concept, 2007

^Yeah, MB has all this interesting stuff going on in their design studio ....some really clever people doing some very interesting stuff ...but the production models are not as progressive.

BMW have Advanced Design Studio as well, and some very important & interesting stuff are going there as well. Yet BMW do not present any concepts. In that respect MB are few steps ahead.

no i 'm a MB fan.

I don't see much zen quality in Audi or BMW design. Audi is increasingly adopting bolder creases, cut lines and countours on their vehicle and have somewhat of a fetish for glitzy lighting details front and back. The purity is being diluted for the sake of global market appeal.

I suppose if wind the clock back slightly conservatism is being sold of as Zen (marketing BS if you ask me) then BMW is the most convincing case.

This "Zen" design BMW talks about is difficult to define. I guess it is about harmony and balance.

I think Mercedes did a great job with the interior of the F 700. I possibly would describe this as a "High-tech Zen interior" ......it is very definitive of contemporary luxury I think.







some parallels (off the top of my head)

Lol is that sushi in the rear seat divider??

Guys - chill. Each to their own opinion on this. No one's right and no one's wrong. We just have differing point of views. The purpose of this is to recognise the debate and take into account other's perspectives.

Let's not get into mud-slinging.

Marcus, I respect your insight and views on this particular topic - and I've certainly learnt from this discussion. I furthermore, have always recognised MB's pioneering efforts and achievements - they truly do bring great technology to the market constantly. Nevertheless, I remain of the opinion that it was BMW who pioneered the single-controller multi-media function interface - probably inspired by an idea that MB presented.

What must be remembered is that Mercedes' idea was presented in 1995. Back then computing technology wasn't at the requisite level of sophistication (in such compact hardware) to perform the functionality required. The technology simply wasn't there...

Anyone could've presented a PC that would run a windows graphic user environment back in 1980. The successful execution, however, of the operating systems, hardware and application software is wherein the actual idea is brought to reality.

I believe that BMW must get credit where credit is due; they were the first to successfully develop, test and implement the I-Drive controller interface in a usable, consumer ready product. Sure the software got "cleaned up" a little and improved - the same can be said of automatic gearbox software - software gets improved all the time.

Mercedes Benz presented an ergonomic concept - nothing more. Back in 1995 (remember the Nokia 2110 cell phone - considered so sophisticated at the time yet today is archaic) they simply did not have the technological wherewithal to present any solution beyond the most basic of functional concepts.

BMW has to be recognised for integrating the 3: software (most importantly), hardware (the controller and screen) and automobile environment into a single, cohesive product.

Martin I think we should agree to disagree.

You're still dismissing the fact that Mercedes-Benz had the initial idea all the while giving BMW the credit for developing it. My whole point here was the Mercedes-Benz came up with the idea, not BMW and that Mercedes didn't copy BMW at anything.

Now which is more significant, who debuted the idea or who put it into production? I really don't care honestly, I'm not arguing or disputing anything that BMW did with the concept. I was here to see that Mercedes gets the credit for coming up with the idea in the first place.

If the tech wasn't there then that explains why Mercedes took so long to debut it. Obviously it wouldn't have been ready in 1998 when the W220 debuted and thus the S-Class being the technical lead car for MB it had to wait until the W221.

I at no time didn't give BMW credit, only that MB deserves credit too for (by your own words) probably inspiring BMW to develop the idea further.

If BMW "has to be recognized" for intergration then Mercedes-Benz has to recognized for brainstorming the initial concept in the first place.

BMW put it into consumers hands, after Mercedes-Benz laid down the blueprint for the concept in the first place IMO.


M

No problem Marcus - we've been going down this road already in any event.

I'm not dismissing the fact that Mercedes Benz had "an" idea. What I am saying is this:

1. Too much value is being placed on the 1995 idea itself.
2. Technology at the time was not capable of enabling the execution of such an idea in an automobile environment.
3. The holistic concept (vs. the idea) is as much software-centric as it is hardware-centric.
3. It's not like Mercedes Benz did the world a favour and gave BMW a leg up.

This is merely my analysis and point-of-view.