The Great Design Discussion and debate

[Zafiro]

Too much focus on CLS. Its a ugly car, what is there to discuss about it Both 6-series and A7 crushes the CLS in looks department.

 

[HighestOfHigh]

Too much focus on CLS. Its a ugly car, what is there to discuss about it Both 6-series and A7 crushes the CLS in looks department.

WTF?...Or are you playing games again trying to drive up my blood pressure?

 

[K-A]

Latest MB dropping line incarnation from the Aesthetics S:

This dropping line looks a little better than the CLS's, but IMO still not "there yet". It looks a bit more relaxed and not as fussy/force-fed as the CLS's line, due to a more relaxed overall demeanor of the car, and a seemingly straighter (less wedgy) profile, however, still looks a little too much like a "random scar". The way it crashes into a random point in the wheel well just doesn't work IMO. It would be cool if they tied it AROUND the wheel well, i.e maybe spun it into the wheels upper circle, like how they did with the character line in the front of the gen 1 CLS.

On a personal level, I'm a big fan of symmetry, however, I think a good car design NEEDS to look tied together, resolved, with elements working together in harmony to make it look like a one-piece "jewel" of a vehicle, per-se, or else it just doesn't look thought out.

 

[Zafiro]

WTF?...Or are you playing games again trying to drive up my blood pressure?

Sorry, I meant an ugly car. English isn't my first language

 

[Gianclaudio]

^Hahahahaha!!!!!

I agrre with Wolfgang, a longer line, that meets the rear lights (and thus, having less angle) will look so much better. Thos halfway lines look like their where designing a hatch that latter was converted to a 3 volume sedan

Regards!

 

[SBS7511Y]

The lines look okay on small sporty cars:

However, placing them on large luxury cars can have disastrous consequences:

See how unresolved the CLS looks with that huge front and that drooping line touching the ponton (if it's actually one). Its side profile looks like a ghastly mess imo. The front door looks too flimsy with that line shaving off so much "material". The rear is waayyyy overstyled too...

I'm not some artistic designer, just a normal nobody

 

[GTA45E]

Couldn't put it better!!! Glad you mention the ramdon location of the door handles too. The roof line, the imaginary door handles line and the dropping lines have totally different curves and angles. Is terrible.

lOl, the E-Class also has rear door handles that are slightly pushed foward, (like it sister the CLS)
This is a trick design scheme to give the car a tighter feel. It is designed to cut down on mass.

The overall angle of the nose... and slight tilt of the boot also area cuts down on the mass of the wedge design.

I have not been around to post because I have been hit with overtime HRS for the past 8-days on my second job.
I`ll be back to respond to KA when I can.

 

[K-A]

lOl, the E-Class also has rear door handles that are slightly pushed foward, (like it sister the CLS)
This is a trick design scheme to give the car a tighter feel. It is designed to cut down on mass.

The overall angle of the nose... and slight tilt of the boot also area cuts down on the mass of the wedge design.

I have not been around to post because I have been hit with overtime HRS for the past 8-days on my second job.
I`ll be back to respond to KA when I can.

?? The door handles are placed directly on the lines of the E. The rears are pushed up a smidge, but it's still on the line. The problem with the discordant-ness of the CLS are the "imaginary lines" everywhere, like Gian said. The dropping line moves in a dramatic fashion, and not only are the door handles not placed anywhere near them, but the door handles don't even follow their dropping angle, the handles drop in a whole different "imaginary angle".

IMO door handles being tied into the lines of a design is a very important way to give the car a tied-together and solid look.

 

[GTA45E]

?? The door handles are placed directly on the lines of the E. The rears are pushed up a smidge, but it's still on the line

That is not what I was talking about. I swear, you always miss these little design details and schemes.
Then you wonder why we get into these little debates because you missed it. I have to explain everything and put it on paper, even that doesn`t come clear to you and some other members.

Ok, see these red highlights? Notice how the rear door handles are pushed slightly foward from the actual door cut-outs, compared to the front. This is the design scheme I was talking about, which makes the car look more compact. If the rear door handles were pushed back as far as the front. The E would no doubt, look larger.

 

[K-A]

That is not what I was talking about. I swear, you always miss these little design details and schemes.
Then you wonder why we get into these little debates because you missed it. I have to explain everything and put it on paper, even that doesn`t come clear to you and some other members.

Ok, see these red highlights? Notice how the rear door handles are pushed slightly foward from the actual door cut-outs, compared to the front. This is the design scheme I was talking about, which makes the car look more compact. If the rear door handles were pushed back as far as the front. The E would no doubt, look larger.

And what does that have to do with the CLS's door handles? You're making up/pointing out "details" which have nothing to do with the CLS, to try and pass off some method to the CLS's design mayhem.

With the CLS I'm simply talking about how the door handles, like about every other thing on that car, moves in its own direction, completely discordant, unattached completely from the character line. It has no resemblance to how the E's door handles are positioned.

 

[GTA45E]

And what does that have to do with the CLS's door handles? You're making up/pointing out "details" which have nothing to do with the CLS, to try and pass off some method to the CLS's design mayhem.

Because the CLS uses the same design method to cut down on mass.

With the CLS I'm simply talking about how the door handles, like about every other thing on that car, moves in its own direction, completely discordant, unattached completely from the character line. It has no resemblance to how the E's door handles are positioned.

and how many time are you going to discuss this issue. You are pretty much an expert rehasher.
Remember, this thread is not only about the CLS. It`s about design as a whole with all German cars.

 

[Hofmeister]

Remember, this thread is not only about the CLS. It`s about design as a whole with all German cars.

Are you sure???

 

[Wolfgang]

Interesting how the door handles line up in the pic below.
Looks more sophisticated and sleeker than a mere lineup with the somehwat stubbier dropping line.
Might this be one of the tools MB designers use to create the light-weight appearance?
The slight forward rear door handle position may be contributing as well.

 

[klier]

That is not what I was talking about. I swear, you always miss these little design details and schemes.
Then you wonder why we get into these little debates because you missed it. I have to explain everything and put it on paper, even that doesn`t come clear to you and some other members.

If there is one who doesn't have it clear, it's certainly not K-A...
GTA fantasy land is too far for me to visit...whish I could go one day though.

 

[K-A]

Interesting how the door handles line up in the pic below.
Looks more sophisticated and sleeker than a mere lineup with the somehwat stubbier dropping line.
Might this be one of the tools MB designers use to create the light-weight appearance?
The slight forward rear door handle position may be contributing as well.

At least with this car, the handles follow an ACTUAL line, not an "imaginary line". However, the big flaw with the A-Classes side, is how the dropping line is so harsh, then the door handles actually move in a wedge direction. Not to mention, that nasty "jaw bone" right underneath it. There are so many wayward motions that are unattached to each other on the A's side profile, it's absolutely absurd, IMO. At least it's a funkier "cuter" car that can get away with more liberal and frantic/funky/"non symmetry forms scribbled everywhere to be shouty" type of style than M-B's more "serious" cars.

 

[GTA45E]

ok, I`m going to make this response to KA as short as possible.

Firstly, your drawing shows that I am exactly right. The car is STILL a wedge shape, though at best, almost "straight profile". It goes downward toward the front, i.e "wedge". "Wedge" is a simple term, you're really overcomplicating and recreating it to try and pass off your statements on the CLS.

Why, I already stated that the design of the new CLS starts out as a wedge shape. (from the hood to the A-Pillar.) It`s the height of the A-pillar on the CLS, where things start to change. What I high-lighted in your second sentence is where the anti-wedge shape is ultimately determined and what I have been trying to point out to you all along. It’s the nearly straight window-line position and nearly upright profile compared to the E-Class, This is what Mercedes designers call anti-wedge, Quit simple.

Secondly, the trunk dip does that on all M-B's, including the W212, so is the W212 "anti-wedge" too? It's all about where the trunk starts at the top that gives a wedge impression, that's where the profile truly starts. Saying otherwise is making an excuse.

That is your personal theory and it is incorrect. I will admit, I have taken up short, private classes in Automotive design schemes and abstract forms as an enthusiast. The students would laugh at you for coming up with such a theory simply because it does not include the effect of the rear fender and how it is concluded all the way to the boot. Go back and read my post again, the rear fender going to the boot is the end of the wedge, anti-wedge, reverse-wedge or any other vehicle profile design scheme. Not the top of the trunk, or the end of the C-Pillar, If that is what you are talking about. That is considered a “greenhouse design effect”. You can have a slightly raised boot lid or trunk area, where the C-Post ends yet still not possess a wedge profile. The SLS coupe & roadster is the perfect example of this, yet it is not a text-book wedge design.

Your supposed conclusion of wedge, incorrect and incomplete.

Text book conclusion

And what the hell is "anti-wedge"? That in fact implies reverse wedge. The fact that the CLS is wedge profiled yet you somehow call it "anti-wedge" because Wagener made it up (marketing at its finest), is just completely off the mark. You just took a term that he said and are acting like you know what it means, as if it actually has a definition, it's completely made up.

lOl, just like I didn`t know what the eyebrows ment before we saw Wagener`s video months before. The anti-wedge is the heightened arching profile with a flatter, nearly level window line that doesn`t end at the top of the C-Posts` rear window. (that is an uneducated excuse to gets ones opinion across) it goes all the way to the boot and ends at the boot.

As for my reasons for finding flaws, here's one of many excerpts:

The reverse-wedge line IMO is a cheap way to try and pass the car off as "anti-wedge". It's so dramatically angled it has absolutely NO relationship with the rest of the car. I don't want a Designers-Dictionary to understand it, I want my eyes to. The line is very fussily starting at the front fender, cluttering things up there (look at the original CLS, gorgeous

implementation of the character line from the wheel well, it literally creates the character line itself.... the new CLS just looks forced, too much going on, on the fender). Then, it dramatically and harshly slashes down in a way that coincides with nothing on the car. Then it literally crashes into a *random* point in the rear fender hump. Now after that, you have a big rear fender swell (which I like in itself).

What this does is make the car look stubby. The W212 also looks stubby because of the "3 part" look, though the E at least has one cohesive motion: Wedge. M-B's don't look as long, graceful and slender due to these "3 part" designs. BMW 6 GC is one-volume, it's a once-piece look, all flows perfectly. The CLS doesn't look very Coupe-ish or sleek due to these broken up lines, if you consider how it would look it it were "one volume".

Finally, the door handles. M-B couldn't even implement them into the lines.... and not only that, BUT they don't even flow with anything ELSE on the car! So you have a multitude of angles and directions on the CLS, yet none of them perfectly match up with each other, no symmetry at all.

These “excerpts” are not even criticism on an academic level. This is nothing but a self-indulgent opinion of someone who believes that design must only flow the way he believes it should. it`s very arrogant, conceited, is lacking knowledge and basically would be totally impractical in a class setting because it does not leave room for the personal design developments of others, or abstract forms in automotive design. (even if those formation are not too extreme) - a whole number of reasons in fact. I have told you numerous times that design is an art and art is a sinless form. Sure there are principles but KA did not write them and cannot write them. This is done on an individual basis of a true designer (there is no right or wrong way to follow the DNA of a company design) the illusion is your opinion, and you act as if yours is the Holy-Truth and the only truth for all to see. It`s totally BS, you cannot expect one designer to completely follow the steps of the one before him in the same car company, especially if the newer designer is of another race, or background. The newer designer is going to develop his own individual interpretations and design schemes, especially in the 21st Century where art and design education has become more advanced than the 20th Century you are so familiar with and seem to be stuck in.

I find your opinions to be too rigid, outdated and all self-directed, as if you have the power to say who is right or wrong in design work. Don`t try to analyze an aspect of art and design your simply not familiar with. That’s like asking someone to grade algebra when he is not familiar the formula.

I take it you have little to no knowledge of abstract themes in vehicle designs… (not paint splatters as you indicated before, which is proof that you simply do not know.)

Better get some knowledge of it because this is where automotive design is headed in the very near future.

 

[K-A]

I don't have time to read your post yet except I caught the last part.

Once again, you're trying to pass off what I intelligently and clearly described as what I deem "design flaws", in an arrogant "well then you must not understand it" way.

I AM very well knowledged in GOOD and cohesive design. Period. All these things you make up regarding the CLS and arrogant verbage won't change that. You speak as of not liking the CLS means one doesn't understand abstract art. Untrue. The CLS is bad abstract art. I love abstract art.

And you're wrong in thinking that's it's where design is headed in the future. Everybody's making cohesive designs, save for M-B. Nobody's even copying M-B anymore. If anything, look to BMW and Audi for the future of design, which are much more resolved. A few years ago you'd probably be defending how M-B's "way of the future" is clean and cohesive design, now M-B gets messy, and you change courses right along with them. You try and "back up" what I spell out that I see as flaws in the classic "you just don't get it". Drawing up invisible lines and such to try and excuse the incoherency, quoting Wageners marketing babble.

Once again, when someone fails in backing up flawed art, they insult the intelligence of others. Please, with this "rigid" crap, and "abstract" nonsense. These are cars, we've seen a million of them. The new CLS breaks no grounds nor is it hard to understand. It's easy to understand! It's easy to nitpick the many flaws, as I have.

 

[Hofmeister]

I don't want to get involved in the CLS war, I just think that K-A and GTA8.5 should just agree to disagree, its obvious neither is going to change the others opinions

 

[HighestOfHigh]

My God that car is flawless....Had the honor of driving behind one on the highway for about 15 miles. Those LEDs are magnificent and the car is so sleek yet aggressively sporty.

Anyone who dislikes this car then oh well, but I think it's one of the greatest creations to come out of Benz next to the W221. Especially considering the depressing design times of the GLK and current E-class.

 

[GTA45E]

My God that car is flawless....Had the honor of driving behind one on the highway for about 15 miles. Those LEDs are magnificent and the car is so sleek yet aggressively sporty.

A lot of CLS (and V222 S-Class fans) fans might not be aware of what inspired the dropping shoulder line.
It was inspired by the Mercedes 540K of the 1930s

The flowing character line that runs down the side of the car sculpture (and drops as it meets up with the exaggerated fenders) calls to mind Benzes of the 1930s like the 540K. Wagener regards this era as one of the "most beautiful times" in Benz design history.

The rear fender treatments of the CLS is another story. Thay are not taken from the E-Class
Ponton treatment as some members believe.

Mercedes says the CLS is designed to have an athletic character with a muscular sports-car-like shoulder line above the rear axle and flared wheel arches that

"resemble the powerful thighs of a feline predator waiting to pounce!"