I ran into this just this afternoon, and it makes a serendipitous follow-up to the earlier T-Bird with its continental spare tire. This is a bit more practical and a lot less affected.
Now if only I’d had the presence of mind to look at them to see if they were Continental tires.
Maybe some of you will be able to identify them from the tread pattern. Uh oh; looks like at least these two aren’t matching.
Rear suspension looks a bit overtaxed.
“Flame Surfacing” has aged quite well, I find this generation of 5-series to still be eye-catching when passing by and visually extremely interesting. 5’s have generally always been attractive, but this is one of the few generations that actually stands out in a good way in a crowd of other cars.
Funny, isn’t it? I remember this style being a bit controversial on launch, but I’ve come to really appreciate it. Partly because the current 5 looks like a bar of soap and other manufacturers have since gone full-bore bonkers.
That 4Runner is another vehicle that aged well, I wish mine looked like that.
i think it was the 7 series that was controversial back in 2002. i still don’t like that 745. but i do like this generation of 5 tho. the 2001 740 looks better today than it did back then i think. the 01 aged better i think.
but the electrics on these cars scare collectors.
Oh, yes, I’d forgotten about the 7. That one was badly Bangled. Shame about the electronics on the 5; there are still enough unmolested 530is with manual transmissions out there to be tempting.
To me, this 5-Series generation has “aged well” in the sense that I find it just as weird today as when it was launched. I can’t say I hate this design, but I don’t find it attractive, either. At least the E60 had excellent driving dynamics, unlike its successor. This one being a 530i, it avoids the horribly unreliable V8 and the finicky N54 twin-turbo I6.
The E90 3-Series (in any body style) has aged well in a good way.
I agree. The flame surfacing is just as hideous today as when it came out.
That’s well-put, MT. I too didn’t hate them then, despite some odd bits (like the pinched/overly narrowed effect at the back of these 5’s), but didn’t warm to them either, and it’s still just so.
And if their liked/disliked appeal hasn’t been altered by time, it probably means they’re a fairly effective piece of design.
Makes sense. Now that cars are returning to the 1920’s two-box, we’re returning to external trunk racks behind the body.
I would hope this nitwit doesn’t encounter any steep driveways.
Is this how you bring your race tires to track day without soiling your fine German leather interior?
Why yes the bottom one is a DWS 06 with more than 6/32″ of tread and still good for snow, while the top one is a DWS with less than 6/32″ but more than 4/32″ so still suitable for driving in wet conditions.
The top is a Purecontact.
That’s one way to fix the bangle butt.
Over here in Europe this driver would risk getting a ticket because his rear license plate isn’t visible, which is mandatory. He would be obliged to put an extra plate (and probably also a rear lights and indicators unit) at the back end of the rack. Apparently, American laws are less strict in this respect?
No less strict on paper, but poorly enforced in some juristictions.
The re-treading (sorry) of an old idea, only done twice as well.
More this (sans flamethrower surfacing or whatever it was)
Given that these famously came with run-flats, it seems a little over-cautious, surely?