What I Hate About The Look of the Front of an F30

My apologies to the E90 fanboys, I never liked the car for a lot of reasons, including the looks. The F30 is an improvement in just about every aspect of the car. All iterations of the F30 look better than any E90, and the F30 M Sport FTW. "Different strokes for different folks."

.

funny, i think the f30 only really looks good from the front, straight on. From the back it just looks like a cheap 5. From the sides it reminds me of this

Originally Posted by chris328

funny, i think the f30 only really looks good from the front, straight on. From the back it just looks like a cheap 5. From the sides it reminds me of this

So what is your purpose in the F30 forum?

BJ

because i am in the market for an f32 and i am afraid that i might not like it

Originally Posted by boltjaM3s

...and what would a good conversation between F30 owners be without an intrusion from our resident E90 troll.

The F30 is a great-looking car, you can try to slam it all you want, isn't going to work. See, we all owned E90's. Jedi Mind Tricks don't work on us.

BJ

Just tried to point out the fact, some of the front features you found so strikingly beautiful, are not designed for the look, rather for safety of the pedestrian, i.e. for function, not meant for aesthetics. The fact you find them a beauty statement is of course a great thing.

A mother can see every part of her child a beauty statement, even if some of the parts are just for necessity. Are you saying those who are not yet mothers cannot make some observations of how the kid really looks?

fwiw i must say i have to agree about the f30 msport vs the f30 non-msport. the f30 msport is basically just the f30 with a tacked on front bumper from the e90/e92 msport and doesnt really look better than the non-msport, in fact it does look somewhat less aggressive.

this is a total flip-flop from the e92 LCI, whose front-end is absolutely hideous without msport. in fact that is the reason i was forced to get an msport for my 335. i always considered the msport kind of a poseur M so i was not too happy about it, but it was still better than the heinous non-msport e92 LCI.

funny to see all these kids now who hopped all over the msport f30 thinking it was the next cool thing and it just looks worse.

Originally Posted by gweeta

Wow. It's really clear to me I'm out of my league at bimmerfest. I couldn't see the differences until I read the text. DOH!

LOL
I kinda feel out of my league too but for different reasons.. when I think I used to drive this:



...back when I lived in Poland, about 20 years ago. Hehe, believe it or not this marvel had an engine that was generously rated at 24HP

There was so friggin' little room inside that if you were anything above average height your knees were almost touching your chin when driving. There was a row of seats in the back although it was almost impossible to fit anything in there except a grocery bag or an infant. The advantage was you could do most of the service and repairs yourself. No rocket science in this project!

And now I am discussing the nuances of the latest bmw 3 series that I am about to own in a few short months. Sorry for sidetracking the thread but it's nice to put things into perspective for yourself every once in a while

nice fix OP, you pretty much addressed all the glaring issues of the front fascia. now send that over to BMW and get them to hire you!

Originally Posted by davidm1975

lol
it's nice to put things into perspective for yourself every once in a while

+1

Originally Posted by chris328

fwiw i must say i have to agree about the f30 msport vs the f30 non-msport. the f30 msport is basically just the f30 with a tacked on front bumper from the e90/e92 msport and doesnt really look better than the non-msport, in fact it does look somewhat less aggressive.

this is a total flip-flop from the e92 LCI, whose front-end is absolutely hideous without msport. in fact that is the reason i was forced to get an msport for my 335. i always considered the msport kind of a poseur M so i was not too happy about it, but it was still better than the heinous non-msport e92 LCI.

funny to see all these kids now who hopped all over the msport f30 thinking it was the next cool thing and it just looks worse.

Based on what I have read, a lot more people liked the F30 m-sport look more than non m-sport. This is not to say you and BJ are wrong, look is highly subjective.

I don't find the look of the F30 front/hood a deal breaker, I just don't agree that some thinks BMW achieved a design masterpiece for the perfect look, when in fact those features were meant for pedestrian safety, not for the purpose of good looks.

i dont doubt that there any many people that prefer the look of the msport f30, but my guess is that it is probably the result of esotiril blue (msport exclusive paint) more than the front end and the sideskirts, as those look very similar to the e90/e92.

How BMW got away with making virtually no aesthetic change to the msport front end on what is supposed to be a "next generation" chassis, I am at a loss, but if I had to guess, I would say that the person who was responsible for it either left BMW or changed responsibilities, and they just used the old aesthetic with very minor chages, or just had some intern doing it until they found someone else

To my eye, extending the headlights in to the kidney grill looks slightly odd, but no big deal. I also agree that the front edge of the hood should move forward to the grill, or like the E46, simply include the grill.

My big gripe with the F30 front end is the bumper and below. The normal front end has a massive, featureless blob of a bumper below the grill. It seems like the rare case where you're better off if you live in a state that requires a front license plate. The front spoiler/air dam below the grill really says "Kia Optima" to me; and while we can expect Kia to follow BMW's styling cues, I don't find the opposite very attractive.

And so I ordered the M-Sport. Does it look like an E90 LCI or M3? Yes. Is that look "tired"? I prefer "classic", but I see your point.

Originally Posted by beden1

Now, please start working on changing the GPS screen that is just stuck there like it was an afterthought.

I've been saying that since the F30 was introduced, "afterthought ". Its horrible but after awhile it grows on you some what. As far as the rest of the design I like it.
cheers
vern

Originally Posted by chris328

i dont doubt that there any many people that prefer the look of the msport f30, but my guess is that it is probably the result of esotiril blue (msport exclusive paint) more than the front end and the sideskirts, as those look very similar to the e90/e92.

How BMW got away with making virtually no aesthetic change to the msport front end on what is supposed to be a "next generation" chassis, I am at a loss, but if I had to guess, I would say that the person who was responsible for it either left BMW or changed responsibilities, and they just used the old aesthetic with very minor chages, or just had some intern doing it until they found someone else

Some styles are timeless, as long as done tastefully. No body complains about Porsche for keeping its design cue for generations to come. The F30 m-sport front style has changes, although subtle, are more inline with the M badge than the E90 m-sport. To me E90 m-sport was a half hearted attempt at the M look. The E90 335is on the other hand was more of a true M look, so is the F30 m-sport.

Notice I am not even arguing which of the above is really better looking, just how they compared to the latest true M models.

Originally Posted by dtc100

Just tried to point out the fact, some of the front features you found so strikingly beautiful, are not designed for the look, rather for safety of the pedestrian, i.e. for function, not meant for aesthetics. The fact you find them a beauty statement is of course a great thing.

A mother can see every part of her child a beauty statement, even if some of the parts are just for necessity. Are you saying those who are not yet mothers cannot make some observations of how the kid really looks?

I'm certain that every BMW made in the past 30 years has had a nod or two towards safety.

Was the E36 ugly because of mandated bumper standards? The E46 bloated because of airbag regulations? The E90 bulbous because of crumple-zone laws?

I say "the F30 is a beautiful car, a work of art."

You say "it's too bad you like it because it shouldn't be that way, BMW was forced to do it."

Your strategy to get BMW to notice you and stop production to build a smaller/lighter 3 Series isn't going to happen. You can stop the nonsense now. Take your campaign of hate to the E9X forum. They eat that stuff up there.

BJ

Originally Posted by chris328

fwiw i must say i have to agree about the f30 msport vs the f30 non-msport. the f30 msport is basically just the f30 with a tacked on front bumper from the e90/e92 msport and doesnt really look better than the non-msport, in fact it does look somewhat less aggressive.

this is a total flip-flop from the e92 LCI, whose front-end is absolutely hideous without msport. in fact that is the reason i was forced to get an msport for my 335. i always considered the msport kind of a poseur M so i was not too happy about it, but it was still better than the heinous non-msport e92 LCI.

funny to see all these kids now who hopped all over the msport f30 thinking it was the next cool thing and it just looks worse.

Well what do you know, we agree on something.

My E90 had to be an M-Sport because it looked so feminine and plain-Jane without it. But my F30 felt the opposite to me, felt like BMW took the E90 LCI droop-jaw and married it to the E90 M-Sport fascia and created something unaggressive in the F30 M-Sport. Don't care for the rear either (though few actually talk about that). The Standard F30 has a menacing look, no "open-mouth smile" to it.

Let's go get a beer.

BJ

Originally Posted by vern

I've been saying that since the F30 was introduced, "afterthought ". Its horrible but after awhile it grows on you some what. As far as the rest of the design I like it.
cheers
vern

In using the LCD as much as we do, it would be quite annoying for us to have to wait for it to mechanically pop-up if they were inclined to design it that way. Right now the boot-up time of 10-15 seconds feels like an eternity, can't imagine hearing the grind of a motor and additional delay

And, most importantly, surrounding the LCD with a huge plastic shroud is very 2005. We live in a smartphone and tablet world. The F30 looks current.

BJ

Originally Posted by dtc100

Some styles are timeless, as long as done tastefully. No body complains about Porsche for keeping its design cue for generations to come. The F30 m-sport front style has changes, although subtle, are more inline with the M badge than the E90 m-sport. To me E90 m-sport was a half hearted attempt at the M look. The E90 335is on the other hand was more of a true M look, so is the F30 m-sport.

Notice I am not even arguing which of the above is really better looking, just how they compared to the latest true M models.

Post a photo of your current car please. 2011 328i. Let's see what you're driving, chief.

BJ

Originally Posted by boltjaM3s

I'm certain that every BMW made in the past 30 years has had a nod or two towards safety.

Was the E36 ugly because of mandated bumper standards? The E46 bloated because of airbag regulations? The E90 bulbous because of crumple-zone laws?

I say "the F30 is a beautiful car, a work of art."

You say "it's too bad you like it because it shouldn't be that way, BMW was forced to do it."

Your strategy to get BMW to notice you and stop production to build a smaller/lighter 3 Series isn't going to happen. You can stop the nonsense now. Take your campaign of hate to the E9X forum. They eat that stuff up there.

BJ

Just understand others may have different opinions. I never expected BMW to listen to me, that is not to say we must all shut up and only let you talk. When you complained about the excessive body roll in your L328i, did you try to get BMW to change that?

When you complained about the auto stop and start, did you expect BMW to do something about it? But they did, so what is your point? That only you have the power to change BMW's mind?

If I post a picture of my car, and tell you it is ten times better looking than yours, woud that change your mind?

Originally Posted by dtc100

Just understand others may have different opinions. I never expected BMW to listen to me, that is not to say we must all shut up and only let you talk. When you complained about the excessive body roll in your L328i, did you try to get BMW to change that?

When you complained about the auto stop and start, did you expect BMW to do something about it? But they did, so what is your point? That only you have the power to change BMW's mind?

If I post a picture of my car, and tell you it is ten times better looking than yours, woud that change your mind?

No, because he is blinded by the bright lights of fanboyism.

Here's an interesting article describing fanboyism: http://techreport.com/blog/21294/the...e-of-fanboyism

The science of fanboyism

by Cyril Kowaliski - 9:35 PM on July 14, 2011

We've all encountered them. They lurk in Internet message boards, comment threads, and chatrooms. Addressing anyone and everyone, they type up lengthy tirades with Cheeto-stained fingers, extolling the virtues of their product or brand of choice. They angrily accuse even the most impartial reviewers of taking handouts from reviled competitors of a beloved company, and they casually and systematically dismiss any evidence that might conflict with their worldview.

They're known in our parlance as fanboys.

For years, I've quietly wondered about what drives them. What on Earth pushes sane, otherwise intelligent people to develop an irrational bias toward a given brand or product? Most of the time, the products in question are entirely unworthy of emotional attachment-most of the fanboys here at TR have fallen in love with graphics cards, microprocessors, cell phones, and laptops. Those folks are usually notorious and often ridiculed, but never ignored, for their angry critiques and smug self-affirmations draw crowds of others-sometimes fanboys from rival clans-determined to make them see reason. It never works.

Are we seeing the manifestation of a rational process, whereby people attempt to validate and elevate themselves by loudly trumpeting the superiority of their choices? Or is something else at play?

As it turns out, evidence suggests that fanboys aren't just raving fools. I'm not talking about anecdotal evidence, either. Various scientific studies have pointed to the existence of a basal process that, when one chooses between two roughly equally desirable items, causes the brain's perception of the two items to change significantly. The rejected item appears less desirable than it did before, while the chosen item is suddenly viewed as more desirable.

Perhaps the oldest study on the subject was conducted by Jack Brehm at the University of Minnesota in the 1950s. Brehm set out to examine the relationship between personal choice and cognitive dissonance-the state of having conflicting ideas kicking around in your head. Brehm gathered 225 female students from the University and asked them to rate eight common objects (things like toasters, coffee makers, art books, and stopwatches) on an eight-point scale from least to most desirable.

As part of the study, Brehm selected two objects a given participant had rated within 0.5-1.5 points of each other, and he told that participant she could take one of the objects home. After the participant had made her choice, she was asked to indulge in some filler activities, then made to rate the items again. Here are the changes in ratings Brehm measured (and subsequently corrected for regression):

Source: Jack W. Brehm. "Post-decision changes in desirability of alternatives" (1956)

The data are pretty clear: after making their selection, respondents ended up holding their chosen item in higher regard and thinking less of the item they left behind. Brehm measured similar results with a group of participants who, before rating items a second time, were given information cards listing both positive and negative details about their chosen and rejected items. Interestingly, he detected no significant rating shift when participants were randomly given one of the items. In other words, you're more likely to look objectively at the competition if your product was a gift than if you picked it yourself.

The results are pretty well known, and if you're introspective enough, you've probably noticed yourself behaving that way.

Now, here's where things get really interesting. A few years ago, several researchers at Harvard University (Matthew Lieberman, Kevin Ochsner, Daniel Gilbert, and Daniel Schacter) conducted a similar study on two groups of participants: one comprised of normal, healthy people, and another comprised of people suffering from anterograde amnesia-an inability to create new memories. If you've seen the movie Memento, you should be familiar with the condition. If not, well, you should probably watch it anyway. It's a good movie.

The Harvard researchers made participants rank pairs of art prints and choose one pair to take home. They also tested the participants' memories by asking them which pairs of prints they had selected and rejected. As you might expect, the amnesic participants couldn't remember which prints they had picked. But guess what happened when the participants were asked to re-rate the pairs? The amnesic subjects showed roughly the same level of bias toward their chosen pairs even though they had no memory of choosing them:

Source: Matthew D. Lieberman, Kevin N. Ochsner, Daniel T. Gilbert, and Daniel L. Schacter

"Do amnesics exhibit cognitive dissonance reduction?" (2001)

That must mean the change in perception happens at a much lower level than it might seem. Here's what the researchers concluded:

People tend to look unfavorably on individuals who change their attitudes to justify their behaviors because these individuals should be able to see that they are "just rationalizing" and thus realize that their new attitudes are glaringly inauthentic. Our results suggest, however, that the behavior-induced attitude-change process may not be consciously experienced. Because the results of automatic attitude processes are often experienced as a given by the environment rather than constructed by the mind, what looks like disingenuous rationalization from without may feel genuine from within (Bargh, 1989).

Are you starting to feel compassion for belligerent fanboys yet? Clearly, they can't help refusing to see reason. Their brains have automatically and unconsciously re-wired themselves to view their product of choice as markedly superior. Competition that might have seemed just as good before now appears clearly inferior to them. In their minds, everyone else is irrationally refusing to see the world as it is. Why wouldn't they get mad and write angry rants on message boards? To make matters worse, everyone seems to behave that way-yes, even you-albeit to varying degrees.

Still not ready to cut fanboys some slack? Another, more recent study gives us a glimpse of just how deep this attitude-change mechanism might run. Louisa Egan, Laurie Santos, and Paul Bloom of Yale University conducted a similar study on four-year-old children and capuchin monkeys. The children were asked to rate stickers in order of preference on a smiley-face scale. Based on those ratings, the researchers singled out three stickers with similar scores. They asked the kids to choose between the first two; once the kids had made a choice, the researchers made them choose between the sticker they'd rejected and the third sticker. A control group was randomly given one of the three stickers and asked to choose between the other two.

The capuchin monkeys were tested in a similar fashion, although instead of the smiley-face scale and stickers, researchers used different-colored M&Ms and determined preference by timing how long the monkeys took to retrieve each type of M&M. A system of cages and doors was used for the choosing phase, to make sure the monkeys didn't just grab both M&Ms on display and make a run for it. You can find out the exact methodology in the full paper, The Origins of Cognitive Dissonance (PDF).

Anyhow, according to the results, children and monkeys alike developed a bias against the rejected item when faced with the second choice. When the researchers took the original rejection process out of the equation, however, they detected no bias in favor of the third option. Here are the data:

Source: Louisa C. Egan, Laurie R. Santos, and Paul Bloom

"The Origins of Cognitive Dissonance" (2007)

If monkeys and four-year-old kids both exhibit this behavior, then we must be looking at a fairly basal mechanism. I'd love to dig deeper into the underlying causes, but that'll have to wait for another blog post. I'm sure some evolutionary psychologists have come up with a neat explanation of why we and our primate cousins have all been selected for this behavior, though. Perhaps we're hard-wired to keep chasing the same prey even if we see spot another, equally tasty-looking animal on the way, since the initial prey is more likely to be exhausted from running and thus easier to catch.

I should reiterate, by the way, that the behavior we've discussed only manifests itself when subjects choose between similarly desirable options-like, say, a GeForce GTX 560 and a Radeon HD 6870. As Brehm showed in his research, people don't alter their perception significantly after choosing a clearly preferred item over a clearly disliked one. To go back to my hasty speculation, maybe you're better off going after clearly bigger and easier-to-catch game even if it means starting the hunt from scratch.

In any case, the truth seems to be that we're all born irrational fanboys-every single one of us. Not everyone is going to spend entire evenings in their mom's basement debating the merits of Captain Kirk over Picard (who, by the way, is clearly the more skilled commanding officer), but we all possess a natural propensity to engage in that kind of behavior. Luckily, as humans, we're blessed with the ability to tone down natural behaviors and use higher levels of thought to see and interact with the world more rationally. All it takes is admitting that you have a problem...

Originally Posted by dtc100

Just understand others may have different opinions. I never expected BMW to listen to me, that is not to say we must all shut up and only let you talk. When you complained about the excessive body roll in your L328i, did you try to get BMW to change that?

When you complained about the auto stop and start, did you expect BMW to do something about it? But they did, so what is your point? That only you have the power to change BMW's mind?

If I post a picture of my car, and tells you it is ten times better looking than yours, woud that change your mind?

When I mentioned body roll, it wasn't as a complaint but rather a question to other F30 owners to see if there was a way I could reduce it.

When I mentioned ASS, it was just as BMW was releasing the fix for 'remember last position' and I was learning how to go about getting the update.

This is very different than lobbying every owner in every thread on how "BMW let us down and we need to prove to them that we want a different car!" I'm not looking for BMW to change a thing. If I were, I'd simply have bought a different car. What I was looking for back then was a better understanding of the F30 and the helpful people here were great, very supportive.

You, on the other hand, have no interest in the F30, think it's not a worthy keeper of the 3 Series flame, and are just here to instigate. I know. I used to do it very well. Then I grew up and I stopped.

Post a pic of your car. I want to see what the Great F30 Critic is driving.

BJ

Holy crap....!

Originally Posted by beden1

No, because he is blinded by the bright lights of fanboyism.

Aren't you a little old for this?

BJ

Originally Posted by chris328

i dont doubt that there any many people that prefer the look of the msport f30, but my guess is that it is probably the result of esotiril blue (msport exclusive paint) more than the front end and the sideskirts, as those look very similar to the e90/e92.

How BMW got away with making virtually no aesthetic change to the msport front end on what is supposed to be a "next generation" chassis, I am at a loss, but if I had to guess, I would say that the person who was responsible for it either left BMW or changed responsibilities, and they just used the old aesthetic with very minor chages, or just had some intern doing it until they found someone else

I don't think I'd have gotten an f30 without m sport. Would a just waited for something else to come along. Now I did get estoril blue but I considered white as well. Not to mention had estoril blue been an option on normal sport I probably still would not have gone for it. F30 is a good looking car a lot better than an e90 LCI or not. But for me m sport just took it up another notch.

Originally Posted by boltjaM3s

Aren't you a little old for this?

BJ

Never too old!