[mbanck]

Originally Posted by Chihuahua

E60 overall length: 4843mm
G60 overall length: 5060mm

5060mm minus 4843mm equals 217mm. She's a big gal.

Mea culpa, I must've entered 5006mm into my calculator instead of 5060mm - kids these days don't know arithmetics :-/

Nevertheless, my second point still stands: every 5er generation was longer than the one before and the trend is not accelerating.

Also, I guess one can say a 3er/5er/7er of the current generation is roughly as long as the class above 2-3 generations before and that is probably also going back to the 70s/80s.

[NWMoss]

[QUOTE=mbanck;30179965]Wow, it's crazy how this happened over the last 10-15 years, and cars did not get any bigger in the 10-15 years before that! Or wait, maybe that's always been the case?

1. The E60 seems to be 4841-4855 mm in length according to Wikipedia, so rather 150-165mm shorter and not "a full 200mm".

2. If you go back another three 5er generations you end up at the E28 which had a length of 4620mm. So the difference between the E28 and the E60 is even larger (220mm) than between the E60 and the G60!

Now we need a 4-way mock-up!

[Year's_End]

Originally Posted by Blue Angel

Taller front belt line and 60mm more front overhang. This explains why it looks so awkward. One more step in this direction and it will look like a FWD car. Ugh.

Bang on. The biggest problem is that it really translates into the hyperinflated hood. It's so tall, and in combination with the stretched headlights that rise up to the hood's shutlines, and the increased overhang, it almost reduces the visual dash-to-axle "good looks" that RWD architecture typically creates.

Like you said, it's slowly creeping into that economy-car tinged, FWD look. Major design regression.