SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
A few years ago...

By BMW.



I only just saw one in the real life a few days ago and noticed a striking similar design ideas.



It reinforces something that I thought I had noticed about Volvo's SPA design language so far.. that although as a brand they are taking aim squarely at Audi, body shape and design wise they are slanting more towards BMW.

Not saying it is a good or a bad thing. Just that it is a thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,289 Posts
Good thing! Side lines are good to be similar with BMW. But the front is wayyy better. Rear light is good too. Trunk lid is not bad either. So overall exterior is great!
Audi exterior is no good anyway. :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
This is just the zeitgeist of today.

Times are over when carmakers were looking out for that "niche" (like Volvos were always in between the German car classes). Probably it appears more lucrative (profit is what counts today) to compete against something already existing. Look at Jaguar: Their classic XJ was in its own class, people loved it for being different and extremely elegant - but there were not many people who actually bought it. Today they compete 1:1 with BMW. Another reason might be that developing cars is such costly and restricted by regulations that any carmaker probably ends up with more or less the same.

To me it always appears like camera manufacturers (Canon, Nikon, Sony etc.): Their products do all look the same (black with a white font logo on it) and they are all more or less equal in quality, only with slight differences in technological emphasis. Same goes for Mercedes, BMW and Audi: They share an almost identical lineup, they all have a performance line and four-wheel-drive option, and all their cars are set-up sporty-comfortable with slight differences. Even their advertisings are completely exchangeable: Best of the best, innovative, technology. Now think how Mercedes, BMW and Audi were in the Eighties...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,418 Posts
This is just the zeitgeist of today.

Times are over when carmakers were looking out for that "niche" (like Volvos were always in between the German car classes). Probably it appears more lucrative (profit is what counts today) to compete against something already existing. Look at Jaguar: Their classic XJ was in its own class, people loved it for being different and extremely elegant - but there were not many people who actually bought it. Today they compete 1:1 with BMW. Another reason might be that developing cars is such costly and restricted by regulations that any carmaker probably ends up with more or less the same.

To me it always appears like camera manufacturers (Canon, Nikon, Sony etc.): Their products do all look the same (black with a white font logo on it) and they are all more or less equal in quality, only with slight differences in technological emphasis. Same goes for Mercedes, BMW and Audi: They share an almost identical lineup, they all have a performance line and four-wheel-drive option, and all their cars are set-up sporty-comfortable with slight differences. Even their advertisings are completely exchangeable: Best of the best, innovative, technology. Now think how Mercedes, BMW and Audi were in the Eighties...
I agree with that assessment. I'll add that MB/BMW also have to compete with Japanese and U.S. automakers shoving themselves to the front of the "we're like them too" queue.

80s/90s the luxury class cars were in just that, in their own class. If you wanted that look/feel, you had little choice other than Cadillac for the feel aspect. Late 90s saw the encroachment of luxury aspects for everybody in every car and I don't know when that wave will end.

That wave is tried and true as consumers respond. As Volvo has shown, it takes a huge investment to overhaul the design/production process. I don't think many car makers are going to bet the farm on distinctive designs which win design awards but not many sales.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,201 Posts
The two look literally nothing alike except for the fact that they're a similar shade of brown and wagons. The BMW doesn't have anything like similar lines or proportions... The Concept Estate is around the same length of a 1-series, the only reason the 5-series manages to look anywhere near as sleek (at least until you look at it from a 3/4 view) is because it's way, way, waaaayyyyy longer. In reality all 5-series look awkwardly tall and stubby because, well, they are....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,416 Posts
The 5-Series has a 117 inch wheelbase, like the new XC90, and probably the S90/V90. But the S90 certainly looks more like the Audi A7, but with higher flatter ends, which make it look even longer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
Late 90s saw the encroachment of luxury aspects for everybody in every car and I don't know when that wave will end.
This is so true. My workmate just bought a Mazda CX-5 and it's just full of luxury. All those sensor gimmicks for comfort and safety. Even ride quality is great (couldn't try it on longer distances though). It only comes short on innovation: There is nothing in it you couldn't get elsewhere (the latest Volvos have some more sensors, even better safety and a far better design and image). I think that just the time to "catch up" has become shorter. After the competition releases their facelift model, the technological advantage is gone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
The two look literally nothing alike except for the fact that they're a similar shade of brown and wagons. The BMW doesn't have anything like similar lines or proportions... The Concept Estate is around the same length of a 1-series, the only reason the 5-series manages to look anywhere near as sleek (at least until you look at it from a 3/4 view) is because it's way, way, waaaayyyyy longer. In reality all 5-series look awkwardly tall and stubby because, well, they are....
I respectfully disagree. I saw a 5 series wagon in the wild the other day and it looked very sharp and sleek. And I'm not generally a fan of BMW. Yes clearly size is different, but the SPA V90 will be a similar size to the beemer wagon - hence the interest from my end. Judging from the concept and the beemer the V90 will look great. It will have some distintive features such as the lights. But in general I think it will look more like the 5-series wagon than the Audi A6 Avant or the current V70. Time will tell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,418 Posts
one big glaring difference (which I didn't see until just now :D) is the lack of a third/C pillar on the Estate where as the BMW has one above the rear wheels.

I love the panorama window in the back, much more elegant however I don't think its viable for roof strength. I certainly hope they can get it to work without it though, its very nice!

And I think that's where the premium/luxury niche' will play out, in the pursuit of opulent design via cutting edge engineering research.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
one big glaring difference (which I didn't see until just now :D) is the lack of a third/C pillar on the Estate where as the BMW has one above the rear wheels.

I love the panorama window in the back, much more elegant however I don't think its viable for roof strength. I certainly hope they can get it to work without it though, its very nice!

And I think that's where the premium/luxury niche' will play out, in the pursuit of opulent design via cutting edge engineering research.
This is simply because the Concept Estate is a 3-door shooting brake whereas the 5er is a 5-door wagon.

But do you really think Volvo would compromise safety for design? Never! Technically, it would be possible to make such a large sunroof because building cars WITHOUT a roof is also possible. It just needs additional structure bars in the interior. This would make such a car expensive and it would lead to a strange concept: A wagon with structure bars inside.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,665 Posts
But do you really think Volvo would compromise safety for design? Never! Technically, it would be possible to make such a large sunroof because building cars WITHOUT a roof is also possible. It just needs additional structure bars in the interior. This would make such a car expensive and it would lead to a strange concept: A wagon with structure bars inside.
Don't be so sure. It definitely is not a technical reason that the new XC90 has a WORSE side crash test rating than the older XC60. A design decision was made to not prioritize it.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
39,263 Posts
Don't be so sure. It definitely is not a technical reason that the new XC90 has a WORSE side crash test rating than the older XC60. A design decision was made to not prioritize it.
You are just repeating comments you read on the Internet...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,665 Posts
You are just repeating comments you read on the Internet...
The comment is all mine. The only thing I am repeating are the crash test results. You know there is an entire thread on this forum about it, so don't play coy. Are you disputing the facts or do you have a better explanation?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
39,263 Posts
The comment is all mine. The only thing I am repeating are the crash test results. You know there is an entire thread on this forum about it, so don't play coy. Are you disputing the facts or do you have a better explanation?
You are interpreting the results in the manner that suits you. The XC90, right now, has to lowest side deformation of any car.

Yes, I am aware of the thread and I suggest you go back and read some of the other, more intelligent, replies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,665 Posts
You are interpreting the results in the manner that suits you. The XC90, right now, has to lowest side deformation of any car.

Yes, I am aware of the thread and I suggest you go back and read some of the other, more intelligent, replies.
It's more like you interpreting the results in the manner that suits you. The numbers don't lie. No one, including you addressed why the XC90's numbers are worse than the older XC60 and the older XC90. You only compared it to the Audi. The side deformation test results fall into Acceptable category so I find it hard to believe that it's the lowest of any car, considering the XC60 is lower. Anytime someone questions anything Volvo, people on here get this defensive, elitist attitude that is really unnecessary.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
220 Posts
It's more like you interpreting the results in the manner that suits you. The numbers don't lie. No one, including you addressed why the XC90's numbers are worse than the older XC60 and the older XC90. You only compared it to the Audi. The side deformation test results fall into Acceptable category so I find it hard to believe that it's the lowest of any car, considering the XC60 is lower. Anytime someone questions anything Volvo, people on here get this defensive, elitist attitude that is really unnecessary.
Do wish we had the ability to like certain post.

I guess this will have to do. :thumbup:
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top