Is Former BMW Superstar Designer Chris Bangle's Opinion On The Lexus Design Language STILL True?

You should be well aware that he personally did not design any of those cars. The difference is that he didn't have an overseeing research and development director interfering with the final sign-off in Dr. Wolfgang Reitzle, who left BMW a few weeks after the E65 design freeze in January 1999.

From 1990 to 1998, Dr. Reitzel micromanaged BMW design, even before Bangle came on board in October 1992. Reitzle finished the E38 and with the help of formerly imprisoned Claus Luthe, he quickly finished the Z3 & E39 body shapes weeks before Bangle moved to Munich in September 1992. Joji Nagashima was the primary designer.

Many people fail to recognize that truth and realize there was somebody behind Bangle through much of the 90s in BMW Design Studios. E46 to Z8 had restraints because during 1993 to 1996, those very vehicles were designed and forced to be principled by the good doctor.

It was only because of Herbert Quandt's brats, the board in 1998 chose to go with the outrageous E65 design by Adrian Van hooydonk that Chris Bangle favored over other designers' submissions and they ignored Dr. Reitzle's objections, to punish him for the battle he was having with the BMW CEO and chairman over British Rover losses (Reitzle hated Rover).

Cars like the E38, E39, and E46 were hated upon their respective unveilings in 1994, 1995, and 1997-98 as "stale". The stupid press got what they wanted in BMW becoming "revolutionary", as they lit the fire that burned BMW design.

Bangle was able to get away with the fact that the motoring press hated the new 90s cars and wanted revolution. Plus the Orient and Soviet Bloc love affair with the W140. Svelte was out, bulbous and blocky was in.

The incumbent design director of BMW Group in Adrian Van hooydonk and head of BMW Brand Design from 2004 to 2009 was responsible for all those weird looking cars of the early 2000s.

Chris Bangle simply had a party from 1999 to late 2001 where he could approve any outrageous looking design & sign it off for production. By the time the e65 debuted in late 2001, BMW Board of management started toning down upcoming new vehicles for 2005 and face lifts for 2004, which were being designed in late 2001 and early 2002.

It explains why some later cars were more conservative under Bangle's tenure. By 2004 he was purposely promoted to keep him away from day-to-day operations of BMW design and allowing wild proposals to make it through.

His description of Lexus has nothing to do with that of an insider's perspective. Lexus is fractured by the visions of different people within the same organization. The key person regarding the spindle Grille aesthetic is actually Akio Toyoda and his family's past business heritage which used spindle for looms.

Sir your comments are longer than the article, wrap it up already LMAO

ok, it's clear that Lexus designs are ruled by Lexus/Toyota committees. They make painfully, calculated design updates & changes to either continue existing designs or to produce revolutionary changes on the micro-level. So not only does the Lexus designs last long, their appeal in the upscale & luxury market hasn't decreased much.

My comments are longer than the article because what's in the article misconstrues the real narrative of BMW's past and slightly tells a different story, which is inaccurate.

Why don't you provide some context yourself my dear, instead of judging my own commentary with snark? I have never once used that against you when you go on your long social justice rants so let's be fair here. I'm all about intelligent discussion and not gutter talk, as that's for peanut galleries.

Agent 001 does a good job with reporting on this site and is the best here, but we all have our blind spots in terms of knowledge.

Chris Bangle gets way too much credit, when the very person responsible for some of the those lambasted designs is head of BMW Group design today.

Using his commentary regarding Lexus and comparing it against past designs he only selected and did not create himself, doesn't even tell the full picture.

My intent was to debunk for once and for all, the myth that Chris Bangle personally designed every questionable BMW until he left.

He had a perfectionist overseer early on and when they left, Bangle had free reign to approve and reject anything he wanted, until the media caught wind of what he was doing in 2001 and BMW tightened their leash on him for future designs not yet finished.

Because they rejected his ideas for i sub-brand cars, against his subordinate in 2009, he quit in a fit.

It is no wonder why the second generation X5 wasn't as grotesque as it could have been. BMW quietly responded to the backlash and wouldn't let him approve crazy stuff anymore.

I'll continue writing books as comments as I wish, to correct myths. The rest of you can "do you". I'm not here for simple banter, when it concerns false information.

Any relation to TomM?

Yes that's true Agent 001. They've tried to reduce that over the years, especially under Akio Toyoda. However he doesn't have unlimited influence and is kind of looked at as an executive playboy by senior JPN staff at Toyota.

One true story about Toyota is, even if one person is responsible for a final design, they deliberately mix in cues from competing proposals.

It explains why some cars look like a mismash.

In example: let's say that today Toyota was working on choosing a final design for a 2024 LS. Yoshiro is Proposal A (starkly conservative aesthetic), Yamaha is Proposal B (avantgarde), and Hiro is Proposal C (tastefully modern & reserved).

What would end up happening is if they choose Proposal C, the chief designer would try and combine cues from all 3 or at least 2 of them.

It is why on design patent applications for Japanese automobiles, you will see more than one designer in many cases. While for the European automaker, only one exterior designer will be credited.

I've made his observation from talking to people in the design departments at Japanese companies and reading up on development processes for nearly every Japanese model program dating back to the 80s.

They value teamwork and not making anyone feel left out, over singular cohesion via one hand which is more typical of European automaker.

Teams do work on complete design of cars in all cases, but it is a very bad idea to have more than one exterior designer on one vehicle. Having multiple exterior designers makes for conflicted vision.

Relax bud...count to 10 and just learn how to condense your comments or summarize, because the essays ain’t it chief...

And to make it clearer:

Dr. Wolfgang Reitzle should have become the CEO of BMW in 1999, but when he was denied that position a second time by the pissy Quandt brats, he angrily left BMW on February
5, 1999 and ran to Ford to lead their luxury conquests, only for Nick Sheele to ruin everything over there by 2002 thanks to Nasser being dropped.

Land Rover still coasts on the foundation he laid out for them.

He made BMW a force to be reckoned with in the 80s and 90s, into the early 2000s. A sheer genius and plainly a prodigy. Plus had a great big ego to boot as an arrogant workaholic.

He was the reason that although Chris Bangle was the chief designer, he wasn't allowed to approve ugly-looking designs during most of the 90s.

The BMW E38 7 Series of 1994 was the only design approved without a design director present in 1990-1991, since the outgoing design director went to prison in 1990 before it got finalized in the studio. Chris Bangle was his replacement 2 and 1/2 years later and wasn't allowed to party until 1999 when his boss quit. Back when BMW elevated research and development directors over design directors.

If Dr Reitzle became CEO, he mentioned that his intention had been at the time in 1999 to reverse the course of the E65 and delay it into 2002 to redo the final design.

The late spring 1998 design proposal was too complex to manufacture and resulted in ungainly shapes by 1999 freeze.

Bangle should be the last person talking about design, considering he approved an unfeasible to manufacture design against more resolved proposals. He didn't sketch them, but he skipped over quality designs in favor of shitty ones.

^^^
Carmaker -are you a designer/insider by chance or just a serious gear head?

@qwertyfla1 Carmaker has said here that he works for JLR, Lexus, and Ford among others as a deep insider

Both. I'm an engineer by training qwerty, but a student of automotive history as well in free time. I did not study Industrial Design, but it concerns my work on the engineering side. Aerodynamics, feasibility, safety, regulatory compliance, and etc.

Never have worked for Lexus brand, so ignore the below. I know a lot of people at Toyota in both UK and USA (as well as Africa), but never a long term employee beyond a brief internship during recall crisis. Provided it is not too sensitive, all of us to share info with each other regularly. Especially those working for suppliers, who are more guilty of passing information that they shouldn't. Not to mention industry access only databases and subscriptions.

It's all about making connections and reaching out to others with relevant knowledge and experience. This is typical of anyone with ambition (in response to other comment) in a competitive environment.

It has been my outlook to know the past, present, and future product planning methodologies of every automaker and vehicle they manufacture.

Having that knowledge and more, makes you very competitive, if you move from one company to the other and know how things work inside out in terms of corporate culture.

Not to mention, keep people informed on what the media doesn't tell them in the automotive segment. It's all about being right first and foremost anyway.

I never studied journalism nor car design, because like many immigrants, I was forced to by my professional parents.

I could only hope that those who did study journalism, exercise due diligence when reporting the facts and automotive historical context.

Otherwise I would have nothing negative to comment on in terms of articles.

Too many media sources provide an opinionated perspective on automotive history instead of simply reporting the facts without tainting information/narrative with fallacies or untruths.

If you move from one company to the next, you're likely incompetent.

I actually like the look of Lexus and have a RX350 Sport which looks unlike anything else. Not everyones cup of tea but style is subjective. I considered a Cayenne but I drive 50K/year and value reliability and hold my cars long term so that eliminates any German cars unless I want to go broke with repairs esp after warranty runs out.

Too many brands suffer from the "same sausage -different length" syndrome and at least Lexus takes some chances with the design. Don't like it? -simple don't buy the product. Visual exterior styling is only a fraction of my buying decision and at this point in my life I don't have to impress anyone.

Superstar? Hardly! Bangle got his ass kicked to the curb due to a firestorm of criticism over his ugly-assed designs.

Toyota's Calty Design Research deserves compliment for that

Both. I'm an engineer by training qwerty, but a student of automotive history as well in free time. I did not study Industrial Design, but it concerns my work on the engineering side. Aerodynamics, feasibility, safety, regulatory compliance, and etc.

Never have worked for Lexus brand, so ignore the below. I know a lot of people at Toyota in both UK and USA (as well as Africa), but never a long term employee beyond a brief internship during recall crisis. Provided it is not too sensitive, all of us to share info with each other regularly. Especially those working for suppliers, who are more guilty of passing information that they shouldn't. Not to mention industry access only databases and subscriptions.

It's all about making connections and reaching out to others with relevant knowledge and experience. This is typical of anyone with ambition (in response to other comment) in a competitive environment.

It has been my outlook to know the past, present, and future product planning methodologies of every automaker and vehicle they manufacture.

Having that knowledge and more, makes you very competitive, if you move from one company to the other and know how things work inside out in terms of corporate culture.

Not to mention, keep people informed on what the media doesn't tell them in the automotive segment. It's all about being right first and foremost anyway.

I never studied journalism nor car design, because like many immigrants, I was forced to by my professional parents.

I could only hope that those who did study journalism, exercise due diligence when reporting the facts and automotive historical context.

Otherwise I would have nothing negative to comment on in terms of articles.

Too many media sources provide an opinionated perspective on automotive history instead of simply reporting the facts without tainting information/narrative with fallacies or untruths.

If you move from one company to the next, you're likely incompetent.
------------------------------------------------------------------
That is 1970s thinking. In this century, good people get recruited all the time and move on to even better opportunities when they present themselves.