1. A Tale of
GM
Truth be told, if it came down to looks alone, employing elements that are dynamically Both cars demonstrate great pro-
I would probably be driving a Cadillac by independent yet subliminally related using portion and strong wheel oriented designs. In
now— or most definitely have a CTS Coupe softer rounder shapes accented by sharp side view both cars A-pillars point towards
on order. I can’t think of a new car that has crease lines. The CTS furthers Cadillac’s Art the front wheel center, which helps the eye
excited my optic nerves as much as the above & Science philosophy presenting a more balance the vehicle on the front wheels.
pictured coupe. It is clean, sophisticated, formal design relationship of arched surfaces However, the fast rooflines in the rear, with
utterly unique and ,I think, timeless. But and hard-edged, beveled shapes accented the CTS being more of a true fastback de-
that’s just me. So I turned to long time club with vertically oriented details. Looking sign, plant themselves over the rear wheels
member and automotive designer, Glen Dur- more like a solid piece of marble versus the very differently. BMW uses the Hofemeister
misevich for an expert opinion. It struck me BMW’s lighter airier appearance. kink to, as they say “to subtly highlight the
that the new CTS Coupe serves very much rear wheel drive” by turning the flow of the
the same purpose as the 6 Series does— Exterior: roof line to aim it towards the rear wheel,
they’re both style leaders for their respective The BMW has a lineage to uphold, while the CTS, with its triangular sail panel,
brands. And while the BMW is much more with the original 6 series standing as a mod- aims past the rear wheel providing a more
expensive, they are roughly the same size and ern classic design, often copied but never dynamic look relying on the strong body
can be had with similar equipment (including equaled. The new 6 actually breaks from the shape around the rear wheel bringing the eye
500 plus horsepower drivetrains in top original where the Caddy picks it up. back to plant the vehicle.
form).— ed. Whereas the BMW emphasizes its length (see images, below, pgs 10 & 11)
with the belt line flowing front to rear creat-
ing a distinct lower shape with the upper and On the Caddy the muscular wheel
Words// Glen Durmisevich trunk sitting upon it, the CTS coupe is, what flares grow from a simple arched body sec-
is referred to as a monocoque design, where tion forming the very clean body-side design
Photos// GM & BMW NA emphasizing the wheels and very short front
the entire body side is more of a single shape
with the windows carved out. More akin to and rear overhangs. For this design the eye
the original 6 than the new Bimmer or any
With Cadillac’s introduction of the previous Cadillac design. (Continued on page 11)
CTS Coupe, it now becomes a viable alterna-
tive to the BMW 6 Series Coupe, especially
when you consider that Cadillac will offer a
V-series Coupe, and remember the CTS-V
sedan set the lap record at the Nurburgring
Nordschleife for a production sedan. As a
designer, I offer my perspective of the two
coupes, which hopefully provides some in-
sight into the reason they look the way they
do. The two cars are approximately the same
size and are positioned as high-end sporty
luxury coupes yet their styling takes two very
different approaches. The BMW represents
Chris Bangle’s informal approach to design BMW NA
10 www.motorcitybmwcca.org MotorCityCourier March 2010
2. Two Coupes
BMW NA
(Continued from page 10) Bangle trunk. Speaking of the Bangle rear rather unconventional location. The head-
end, the 6 series is perhaps the best looking lamps have their own distinct yet unrelated
responds to the reflections and highlights example. The body side has more of a barrel shape with the hood and fascia cutlines inter-
caused by the shapes rather than the elements section accented with the creased undercut estingly defining and dissecting the parking
themselves. The rising crease line, initiated between the soft wheel flares. The overhangs lamp from the headlamp in a Mondrian sort
on the Cadillac Evoq concept vehicle and are longer on the BMW so the designers have of way.
copied by many other carmakers, is now chosen to round them off in shape and plan
worked in more subtly as part of the chiseled view which hides their length in certain The CTS presents the Cadillac
in window graphics and emerges from an views; makes them part of the front or rear shield shaped grille proudly with a variation
accent vent in the front fender and ends just view rather than the side. The roof placement on the Cadillac Sixteen Concept’s egg-crate
into the sail panel. This rear ending actually and the rounded lower rear profile visually texture. It is carried down below the bumper
enables the stamping of one of the sharpest shorten the rear giving the car a classic long to extend the height and overall size of the
corners in the lower rear of the quarter win- hood short deck appearance with the layered opening in effect visually lowering the front
dow and was not in the original concept vehi- trunk shape accentuating this and giving the of the vehicle. The blocky crystalline head-
cle. The front and rear corners are capped side view more direction. Kind of like Super- lamps on the Caddy reinforces the vertical
with the vertical lighting units defining the brand theme, highlighting the projector
man’s cape flowing in the wind.
ends of the shape and reinforcing Cadillac’s lamps with vertical light pipes as running
vertical theme. The trapezoid window is The front of both vehicles holds lamps; a notable attention to the night light-
pierced out of the overall shape and gives the their true brand identity. The BMW has its ing effect to support the brand look and dis-
vehicle a more solid look and more private twin grilles, which over the years have tinctive from BMW’s owl eyes approach.
evolved from vertical to more horizontal
appearance over the BMW. The rear of the CTS carries on the
shapes. These particular grilles have a round-
The 6 series uses design elements to empha- ness to them that reduces their relationship to angular, chiseled theme with a strong crease
size its length. The belt-line that flows front each other. The hood is accented by taught down the centerline. The vertical LED tail-
to rear, the crease line between the wheels, stretched surfaces spanning styled crease lights provide the heritage and again the
the roofline with blacked out B-pillar and the lines, which emerge from the grilles in a vertical light pipes providing that unmistak-
able nighttime Cadillac appearance. The deck
lid is capped at top with a separate CHMSL
element that acts as a spoiler and the bottom
is focused on the integrated center exhaust,
which is replaced with real and aggressive
exhaust tips on the V-series.
As for the BMW rear, I have a hard
time describing it in design terms. In side
view the rear form on the quarter panel drops
off in defiance to the current wedge design
idiom. The layered Bangle trunk helps visu-
ally level the rear, but does so as an add-on
shape. There is some good organization to
GM (Continued on page 17)
March 2010 MotorCityCourier www.motorcitybmwcca.org 11
3. (Continued from page 11) other high-end marques. The BMW takes the is arbitrarily placed in the passenger side.
more sculptural approach, but again with The CTS carries Cadillac’s V’d theme into
the taillights and rear reflector/backup/fog separate almost unrelated design elements, the seats design adding to the brand continu-
lights and the concave shape on the rear of while the CTS continues its vertical hard- ity. Overall each interior has a very business
the deck lid is actually quite nice and very edged theme with the appropriate amount of like and sporty feel.
well surfaced. It acts as a contrast to the rest softness. The trim at the base of the 6 series
of the vehicles shapes but also is in contra- windshield flows cleanly into the doors offer- All in all two exciting coupes with
diction. The real disconcerting part is the ing a sportier wraparound feel and sculptural two different design approaches. I actually
way the trunk is layered on top of the rest of shape to the doors. Both have a driver- like both for different reasons. The CTS de-
the rear. It’s the Bangle butt again only some focused binnacle with functional gauges, sign is clearly defined with the hard edges
lines try to flow through but overall the shape however the BMW’s center brow, over the and beveled shapes accented with subtle
comes off arbitrary and contrite. The tail- navigation screen, fights for attention with exciting shapes that are read visually through
lights have a contemporary array of LEDs, the cluster brow while the CTS incorporated its highlights and reflections. Whereas the
but lack any real brand identity, which the a deployable Nav screen so when not in use BMW’s design is reflected in its interrela-
Caddy has in spades. The large exhaust tips the design can flow through. Each has a tionship of various separate and unique de-
help accentuate the sporty nature of the car, strong center stack flowing into the console. sign elements relying on the human eye to
but the cutouts in the rear fascia could have The BMW center stack design lacks the so- visually connect them in the brain. From
phistication in form and material break up purely a design stand point the CTS is the
been more purposefully executed.
the CTS appears to have. The 6 series contin- more successful design highlighting more
Interior: ues its sculptural approach with a criss- unique overall proportions with a clean yet
crossing design element in the center console sophisticated shape. I believe it will endure
Both interiors offer a contemporary longer than the BMW and may perhaps take
functional design. The CTS interior has defining the driver’s functional area versus
the passenger side, although the iDrive knob on the role the original 6 left behind.
brought Cadillac into league with BMW and
March 2010 MotorCityCourier www.motorcitybmwcca.org 17
