Interesting observation indeed.

But you could argue it the other way round too.

BMW had spent the '50s making a bizarre mix of V8 saloons, coupés and roadsters, 2-cylinder rear-engined 700s and the Isetta bubble car. It was a strategy, if you can call it that, that lead to them nearly going bust or being bought out by Daimler Benz. So come the '60s, their engineers tried to come up with a more consistent approach and looked to Bauhaus and their ilk and that gave birth to the "Neue Klasse" cars, with prototypes being shown in 1961, ahead of the unveiling of the Autavia.

Since then they have (usually) had a coherent design language where you can see commonality between the whole and in detail. Even in a more "out there" car like the Z1, if you knew where to look, you would see common pieces from other cars - it's sheer practicality on the part of any car maker to share components across the range. Some do it with more style than others. Both BMW and Audi are sometimes accused of "same design, different size" approaches - personally, I think Audi are much more guilty of it, I can always make the distinction between 3 and 5, A4 to A6 is often trickier.

The reality of it is that a number of companies took similar approaches at the same time. Form following function made sense, especially in engineering-led companies such as BMW and Heuer. BMW seems to have come through the Bangle phase of sometimes over-elaborating form now under (Heuer Calculator-wearing) design director Adrian van Hooydonk, TAG Heuer seem at times still to be caught out by it. I for one hope the new 1969 movement gives them occasion to look back at what made the original Carrera such a success, exercise restraint in both form and size and reap the rewards of their own "Neue Klasse".