2009 Audi S5: Shoulda Been a Hardtop

as an egineer, I dont. to me it looks liek a roof about to fall down.

on a convertable, yes. on a hard top, I rarely get why people get so bent out of shape over this small piece.

no doubt about it just look at the MB CL550

The car is already one of the sickest on the road. You just elevated it to an epidemic level.

I don't care for it, it looks too weak structurally because the roofline is far too delicate visually to pull off a B-pillarless look. I would like to see the sunroof gone on the S5., though, or at the very least replaced with a conventional unit that actually slides open.

How much more weight would be added to keep the rigidity? My guess is quite a lot.

no.

somehow you've just made it look like an American car.

what have you got against B-pillars?

Combine that will rear wheel drive, and it's a nicer car for sure.

that's wonderful to hear how it "should" be.

perhaps you should tell that to the govt. regulators who make the roof crush-weight standards and also promise not to complain about the insanely huge, blind spot-producing A pillars...

or not complain about the extra cost involved in engineering the roof without the B pillars. seriously, this isn't changing the wheels or tail light design. what's the point of saying they "should" get rid of a major structural piece?

Looks much better IMO. I'd still accept the car in its current state, but pillar-less is nice.

Well, the B-Pillar is there for safety measures (i'm assuming), and an unsafe Audi is an oxymoron.

It's like some of you people have never heard of a dome.

Given the thickness of the A and C pillars, the B pillar probably doesn't do much. You could take the metal out of those and add it to the arc running from A-C and get most of your rigidity back.

I like...

I also prefer the tweaked photo. I love B-pillarless cars, but it is immensely expensive to design and construct a safe car that way. It is for that reason that they are so rare and so expensive. Most automakers just aren't willing to spend the money on R&D to accomplish the feat.

@opfreakx-
I too am an engineer and have the exact opposite impulse. When I see a B-pillarless car it really excites me. I start thinking about everything that went into make it a reality.

It might be safe enough. Mercedes-Benz built quite a few very nice, very safe pillarless coupes, including the wonderful 560SEC from the late '80s.

definitely better as the coupe it already is.

Looks MUCH better with the b pillar.

I think it goes from a 9 to a 9.0001.

+/- .00005

Looks nice without the pillar but if it takes ANY rigidity then I would keep the pillar because looks go far but taking high speed turns will go farther.

Definitely love a pillarless coupe. I can't wait until my E550 coupe arrives...

Interesting look without the B pillar, but no thanks. That version would loose much chassis rigidity needed for safety and precision handling.

Keep the pillar.

umm... no. Scott you fail.

okay - so what is it with you and wanting to remove things from cars?? The Evo's wing, engine covers, B -pillars. What's next? Hoods and trunk lids?

thats what i used to love about the Merc SECs in the 80s and the 8 series BMW coupes in the 90s.

What it really needs are some tailfins and a giant chrome hood ornament of a sloth fighting a giraffe.

Looks better as is. I don't like the B-pillarless design. The only car that can pull it off is the MB CL. The new CLK, opps- I mean C class coupe that's supposed to be an E class coupe even though it's really a C class coupe, doesn't look right because it's way to small to make the design work.

I don't care one way or another. I can't get past this picture of the car....it completely hides all the lovely lines that make the S5 gorgeous.

chavis10, what do you mean really a c-class coupe? It shares the platform and drivetrain of the E? Yes, I know that the previous CLK was a wannaby E-class but this time it really is an E class.

You took a great looking car and made it look even better. I can't stop staring at these cars when I see them on the road as is, so I'd get in a wreck if they looked like your photochop.

It almost looks like a hatchback with the rear glass so steeply raked. The lack of B-pillar looks sort of awkward to me.

This might seem like a dumb comment, but tinted windows help give it that effect, making the B-pillar blend in.

It looks better but that is not saying much....looks pretty dumpy to me.....but most new cars with the way too tall slab sides and short greenhouse look that way. The new Camero is one of the worst in that regard, it looks like Dick Tracy's car if he had one.

+bodyblue
The fender line and beltline are too high. The amount of sheet metal makes the tires, huge in reality, still look like roller skates, and the expanse of sheet metal above the wheel arches and on the doors is out of proportion to the height of the car. Removing the B pillar emphasizes the slittyness of the glass opening even more.

I really dislike the modern fetish for cars with no glass. It is impractical and unsafe, for one thing, and looks stupid anyway. Cars are about freedom and the open road. Why do you want to make me think I'm in an airplane or a tank? Give me back my greenhouse.

For a good counterexample, kudos to Suzuki, of all companies, on the SX4. Tiny car, huge greenhouse, good proportions. OK, the designer apparently was sleeping with the chrome trim supplier, but aside from that the bones are good.

@Cheslin -

Sorry, the E550 coupe is not a true pilarless coupe. I still think you'll get some enjoyment out of it though...