Is BMW "THE" premium small sedan. [Archive] - Ultimatecarpage.com forums

Ferrer

08-04-2008, 11:29 AM

BMW has been the benchmark in this segment ever since the 3-Series grew out of the wonderful 1800 and 2002 models of the 60s and 70s. While the US manufacturers can’t seem to make a dime on small cars, why?! i have no idea, they don’t make anything that can justify the price. The Germans, on the other hand, know this market intimately.
Well I guess it's in their blood. BMW has always been the benchmark when it comes to sports saloons and despite dubious styling they still are. Even their german rivlas, no matter how hard they try, aren't match for BMW in their own terrain.

Three series aren't small cars.
It is the smallest BMW saloon and one of the smallest (if not the smallest) in its segment.

henk4

08-04-2008, 11:58 AM

Well I guess it's in their blood. BMW has always been the benchmark when it comes to sports saloons and despite dubious styling they still are.

when the 1500 was introduced the benchmark was called Giulietta and later Giulia....

Ferrer

08-04-2008, 12:06 PM

when the 1500 was introduced the benchmark was called Giulietta and later Giulia....
Since then though...

And it pains me to say it, but look where Alfa is now...

Zytek_Fan

08-04-2008, 12:09 PM

It is the smallest BMW saloon and one of the smallest (if not the smallest) in its segment.

Yeah, I can sit in the back of an Audi A4 fine, but the 3 series is a little cramped for me. :o

henk4

08-04-2008, 12:09 PM

Since then though...

And it pains me to say it, but look where Alfa is now...

I was raking note of the use of the word "always" in your earlier post. (and I think I would prefer an 8C over an X6.....)

Kooper

08-04-2008, 12:25 PM

I'd say they got the formula just right (except for the styling). RWD, more-or-less 50/50 weight distribution and sweet in-line 6 cylinders seems to be a winning combination.

Now, if they can just make them a bit lighter and better looking, they'll be assured of leading the market for quite a while still.

Ferrer

08-04-2008, 01:03 PM

I was raking note of the use of the word "always" in your earlier post. (and I think I would prefer an 8C over an X6.....)
Always since they began making them that is... :p

And I don't think I need to say anything about the 8C and X6, do I?

Ingolstadt

08-04-2008, 01:07 PM

comparing the 8C to an X6 is not exactly a fair play i would say. 159 over a 3 series? I'd take the Brera over an M6 thou :D

By the way, since we're on the topic of BMWs, here's a complete guide to all BMW models since 1928 (Ferrer! 1928! loads of your favs right?)

Wheels Weekly: Complete BMW Model Guide since 1928 (http://wheelsweekly.blogspot.com/2008/08/complete-bmw-model-guide-since-1928.html)

henk4

08-04-2008, 01:12 PM

comparing the 8C to an X6 is not exactly a fair play i would say.
the question was where Alfa is now, and I wanted to add some perspective to where BMW is now...

Ferrer

08-04-2008, 01:15 PM

the question was where Alfa is now, and I wanted to add some perspective to where BMW is now...
Let's not compare a Brera V6 to a Z4 3.0si.

Let's not even compare a Brera V6 to the old GTV V6.

Don't get me wrong I love Alfas, but their current cars are far from their best.

henk4

08-04-2008, 01:21 PM

Let's not compare a Brera V6 to a Z4 3.0si.

Let's not even compare a Brera V6 to the old GTV V6.

Don't get me wrong I love Alfas, but their current cars are far from their best.

how would you compare 2002Tii to a curent three series (330CI or something?)

Ferrer

08-04-2008, 02:40 PM

how would you compare 2002Tii to a curent three series (330CI or something?)
Of course not. In fact the 1er Coupe is probably closer actually the old '02 series.

However compare the old Giulia to the 159 family and the diffence is far more painful.

mdok

08-04-2008, 02:57 PM

I have an e30 and an e36 m3. I was driving when the 2002/1602 were current. Never liked the old ones, I think the rear suspension is garbage (as is my e30's). Steering didn't impress either. Rear traction, particularly on wet or loose surfaces sucks. Limited slips are essential in these cars, in my book. The newer cars, while good in many ways, have become obese. BMW is surely capable of making a reasonably sized saloon that weighs an absolute max of 3000lbs. When they weigh less, it goes without saying, less engine power (and mass) is needed. I'd like 330bhp in a 2600lb 2dr. saloon.

Starting with the e30s, BMW started to get their balance right, and the steering became good as well, though a bit slow. With the e36 came a workable rear suspension.

Having said that, the 330Ci is a pretty nice ride. Just a bit big for me. The 2002 was a good car in its day as well. I'd say they are comparable, cars have come a long way.

NSXType-R

08-04-2008, 03:02 PM

Yeah, I guess you could say that BMW is the premium small sedan maker. But now the segment's gotten crowded, from the likes of Lexus, Infiniti, (Acura does not count, it's FWD although some Brera models are as well) Audi, Cadillac, and Mercedes Benz of course. Eventually I see Hyundai downsizing the Genesis as well and giving the Germans, Americans and Japanese a run for their money on the cheap. Any other car makers that I missed?

In the long run, competition is good. We get better products.

mdok

08-04-2008, 03:06 PM

We do indeed.

You mean the "3 series" Lexus? Appears to be designed by Chris Bangle...

togos452

08-04-2008, 03:16 PM

The 2008 Cadillac CTS is a nice car. It can be had with direct fuel injection.

Ferrer

08-04-2008, 03:37 PM

The 2008 Cadillac CTS is a nice car. It can be had with direct fuel injection.
It is much too big and heavy to be considered a sports saloon.

clutch-monkey

08-04-2008, 04:42 PM

mdok

08-04-2008, 04:58 PM

Lucky aussies, and V8 Supercars, too. Some of the best racing on the planet

coolieman1220

08-04-2008, 07:31 PM

my Infiniti G35 eats BMW 3 series for breakfast!!!!!!!!

that being said, i still love the 3 series but they're small and expensive but you get an amazing product. i raced a TL the other day and it did beat me but only in driving skill, i clearly had the faster car. RWD is king

xavito

08-04-2008, 07:37 PM

Hi, paws.
Anyboy owns a BMW Series 1 Coupe, is it a good car ?
I'm thinking of buying one.
Currently I own an Audi.
Thanks a lot.
BR,

Francisco J.

QuattroMan

08-04-2008, 08:18 PM

Hi, paws.
Anyboy owns a BMW Series 1 Coupe, is it a good car ?
I'm thinking of buying one.
Currently I own an Audi.
Thanks a lot.
BR,

Francisco J.

any pictures of your Audi and more info...A4,S4 you know all thr good stuff..

Ferrer

08-05-2008, 01:34 AM

Clivey

08-05-2008, 02:35 AM

If I were paying £20-£30k for a saloon, I'd demand RWD.

Why?

- The only advantage of FWD is cost, and all it gives you in return is understeer, which is my pet hate in car handling.

- AWD makes cars like the Audi A4 boring to drive compared to their RWD rivals (i.e. 3-series) because unless you're very aggressive, they behave just like an FWD car. The only exception being where AWD systems send over 70% of the power to the rear.

IMO the best choice for a "sports saloon" therefore is RWD. In the UK market, that means either:

- BMW 3-Series
- Lexus IS
- Mercedes C-Class

And from reading every review I can find, looking at the performance figures etc. It's clear even before you take a drive in any of those that the BMW is the most sporting saloon.

Wouter Melissen

08-05-2008, 02:39 AM

- The only advantage of FWD is cost, and all it gives you in return is understeer, which is my pet hate in car handling.

No the advantage is space. Front engined, rear wheel drive cars require a transmission tunnel, which takes away interior space. The rear differential is detrimental to the boot space. For a practical car, front wheel drive is the way to go.

Clivey

08-05-2008, 02:58 AM

No the advantage is space. Front engined, rear wheel drive cars require a transmission tunnel, which takes away interior space. The rear differential is detrimental to the boot space. For a practical car, front wheel drive is the way to go.

Almost all FWD cars still have a tunnel down the centre of the cabin anyway, so it makes little difference in that respect. Regarding practicality: Saloon's aren't "the way to go" to start with because they just aren't as versatile as a hatchback (compare sales of the Mondeo/Vectra hatchbacks to their saloon counterparts; the reason for the difference is purely to do with load space). Therefore in talking about "sports saloons", we're pretty much disregarding practicality anyway. I'd gladly sacrifice a few litres of boot volume for RWD and judging by the popularity of the 3-Series, I think a lot of buyers agree.

IBrake4Rainbows

08-05-2008, 03:41 AM

Not every FWD vehicle has a transmission tunnel. Look at vehicles like the Honda Jazz for instance.

for example (http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=95460&d=1109997959)

Kitdy

08-05-2008, 03:46 AM

judging by the popularity of the 3-Series, I think a lot of buyers agree.

Judging by the popularity of the 3-Series, there are a lot of middle class wanna be upper class people that are not enthusiasts and perceive the BMW as being high quality and will pay a premium for the name plate and performance even though they don't really need it or care.

That's how I see it.

Clivey

08-05-2008, 04:18 AM

Not every FWD vehicle has a transmission tunnel. Look at vehicles like the Honda Jazz for instance.

for example (http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=95460&d=1109997959)

That's why I used the words "almost all" ;)

I have noticed that it tends to be the "upright" shape vehicles that don't have a tunnel, probably because it's just that the floor is above it, rather than there simply not being one.

Judging by the popularity of the 3-Series, there are a lot of middle class wanna be upper class people that are not enthusiasts and perceive the BMW as being high quality and will pay a premium for the name plate and performance even though they don't really need it or care.

That's how I see it.

You're right, but there are still the genuine enthusiasts that buy them for the "right" reasons. As I've said before, I want a 1-series 3-door/3-series coupé but don't want the image that goes with them. I coudn't care less about what badge is on it. It could be a Ford and I'd still want it because they are very good cars.

henk4

08-05-2008, 04:22 AM

That's why I used the words "almost all" ;)

I have noticed that it tends to be the "upright" shape vehicles that don't have a tunnel, probably because it's just that the floor is above it, rather than there simply not being one.

You're right, but there are still the genuine enthusiasts that buy them for the "right" reasons. As I've said before, I want a 1-series 3-door/3-series coupé but don't want the image that goes with them. I coudn't care less about what badge is on it. It could be a Ford and I'd still want it because they are very good cars.
I think what you call a tunnel would be called a "console" by others. The "tunnel" in my C5 miraculously stops with the front seat, leaving a flat rear passenger floor.....

Kitdy

08-05-2008, 04:26 AM

You're right, but there are still the genuine enthusiasts that buy them for the "right" reasons. As I've said before, I want a 1-series 3-door/3-series coupé but don't want the image that goes with them. I coudn't care less about what badge is on it. It could be a Ford and I'd still want it because they are very good cars.

Well, you are one of the enlightened few that understand - I think I'm the same way as well.

As for this tunnel business, I think our Mark IV Golf has a bump in the rear middle seat.

I don't know for sure as I am rarely there.

Clivey

08-05-2008, 04:30 AM

I think what you call a tunnel would be called a "console" by others. The "tunnel" in my C5 miraculously stops with the front seat, leaving a flat rear passenger floor.....

You mean the area where the gearstick comes out of? It depends. On some cars, like mine, it is part of the tunnel that extends behind the front seats. if this is the case, I call it the "tunnel". In your car, yes, I would call it the "console". Hope that makes sense!!!:D

But back to the point: Cars like mine still have the "tunnel" running down the centre of the car and dividing the footwells in both the front and rear, even though they aren't RWD. Therefore FWD does not automatically have the advantage of not having to have this tunnel.

clutch-monkey

08-05-2008, 04:48 AM

Well if you don't have rear wheel drive in your sports saloon, what's the point?

I drive a base diesel bimmer and trust me you can tell the difference.

that's exactly the issue. 3 series aren't really sporty at all across most of the range, so why bother with RWD at all?

Clivey

08-05-2008, 04:56 AM

that's exactly the issue. 3 series aren't really sporty at all across most of the range, so why bother with RWD at all?

Compared to what's available in Australia, maybe...but compared to what else is available in Europe, the 3-Series IS a sporty saloon at the forefront of championing the RWD advantage.

What I'd like in Europe is a greater selection of "normal" RWD cars (rivals to BMWs), which is why I can't wait for the Infiniti brand to be launched here. Evo reviewed the G37S ( Infiniti G37S | evo Car Reviews | Car Reviews | evo (http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/214740/infiniti_g37s.html) ) and seemed to like it.

Also, I've repeatedly said this, but Alfa's rumoured RWD 159 successor sounds extremely promising.

Ferrer

08-05-2008, 05:21 AM

No the advantage is space. Front engined, rear wheel drive cars require a transmission tunnel, which takes away interior space. The rear differential is detrimental to the boot space. For a practical car, front wheel drive is the way to go.
What if you like to drive but you need practicality and can only afford one car?

that's exactly the issue. 3 series aren't really sporty at all across most of the range, so why bother with RWD at all?
Even the most basic 318i offers a driving experience that all of their front or four wheel drive rivals can't really match. It's not about the speed, it's about the feel. In my opinion that qualifies it as a sports saloon.

IBrake4Rainbows

08-05-2008, 05:32 AM

By just being RWD does not make it a sports car.

Just ask Smart.

Clivey

08-05-2008, 05:38 AM

By just being RWD does not make it a sports car.

Just ask Smart.

I'm of the same opinion as Albert, and trust me: We know this. What we're meaning is just that the average BMW is much more of a driving enthusiasts' car than many of its' rivals.

For example: Compare the 3-series with the Jaguar X-Type. Enough said.

IBrake4Rainbows

08-05-2008, 05:52 AM

I'm not saying the 3 series isn't sporty. God, I used to own one and my parents currently do, I do know this.

I just think it's a faulty premise to say that a RWD car will do a better job of being a sportscar than another iteration.

BMW prides itself on this "enthusiast" branding - and more power to them if they sell more vehicles to the Sheeple who are never going to use the sporting prowess of their vehicle but can if they want to.

But comparisons between the Audi RS4 & the BMW M3, for instance, have generally given the nod to the RS4.

And yes, I am aware that the 4WD system on the Audi is rear-wheel biased :)

Clivey

08-05-2008, 06:12 AM

I
But comparisons between the Audi RS4 & the BMW M3, for instance, have generally given the nod to the RS4.

Really? What've you been reading/watching? TBH I'd been given a different impression.

Wait: Which M3 are we talking about here: E46 or E92?

NSXType-R

08-05-2008, 06:14 AM

i don't really think BMW has it all their own way, on paper at least (where badge doesn't come into play..).
any 3 series apart from the 330 - M3 is pretty much out done by a honda accord euro (TSX?), subaru liberty, etc etc. sure, you don't get RWD in those, but it's not exactly a deal breaker over a base 3 series..
1 series is intriguing but not the best looking, like every other BMW series lol.
as for the 5 series - well, i'll just save the money and get a commodore SS honestly. hell, or a HSV/FPV and i'd still have change.

I forgot about the Australians and Subaru. Yeah, they count too. I'm not so sure about the TSX, because it really has no powerful engine choices. The new TL Type S is supposed to have SH-AWD, but we'll see how that comes out in the future.

my Infiniti G35 eats BMW 3 series for breakfast!!!!!!!!

that being said, i still love the 3 series but they're small and expensive but you get an amazing product. i raced a TL the other day and it did beat me but only in driving skill, i clearly had the faster car. RWD is king

You sure it's your car?

IBrake4Rainbows

08-05-2008, 06:30 AM

Really? What've you been reading/watching? TBH I'd been given a different impression.

Wait: Which M3 are we talking about here: E46 or E92?

Many Current Comparisons between vehicles (which, I assume, would be the E92 or indeed E90 variant) give it to the Audi because while the BMW may have the slightly more pure driving experience, something has been lost in translation from screamer Straight 6 to what has been described as an engine not entirely suited to the character of the vehicle.

And by that I presume they mean it can actually cruise in relative comfort. either way, not a horrible thing :)

The Audi gives the assured road holding that many consumers demand, still performs 9/10ths of the driving fun, and isn't lugged with having to carry around the stigma of the M badge - both a blessing & a curse.

Ferrer

08-05-2008, 10:26 AM

Many Current Comparisons between vehicles (which, I assume, would be the E92 or indeed E90 variant) give it to the Audi because while the BMW may have the slightly more pure driving experience, something has been lost in translation from screamer Straight 6 to what has been described as an engine not entirely suited to the character of the vehicle.

And by that I presume they mean it can actually cruise in relative comfort. either way, not a horrible thing :)

The Audi gives the assured road holding that many consumers demand, still performs 9/10ths of the driving fun, and isn't lugged with having to carry around the stigma of the M badge - both a blessing & a curse.
I've driven the current M3 saloon and I can tell you that it is a brilliant car. The engine particularly is a masterpiece and the sound track amazing. It maybe is the ultimate sports saloon.

I have driven too a Z4M Coupé and I'll tell you that personally despite being less powerful I prefer the straight six powerplant. It feels so BMW if you know what I mean.

I know that rear wheel drive doesn't necessarily make for a good car and that there are some front wheel drive cars that are very good drivers cars. I know, I used to drive one and still absolutely love it.

However a good, properly set rear whel drive car, and since you have experience with BMWs you know they are such cars, has that little something that makes it feel so much better than the best of the front drivers. It feels connected, it feels right. Somewhat you know that every little part is working to ensure the handling is brilliant.

So if you are really serious about making a proper drivers car rear wheel drive is the only way to go. No matter how much work it's put through a front or a four wheel drive car it will still be fundamentally flawed. And this can be experienced wheter you buy the 318i or the M3.

Kooper

08-05-2008, 01:00 PM

From what I've read, it sounds like the RS4 outruns the M3 to 100 by a couple of tenths and does the kilometer sprint a bit quicker too. SA Car actually went as far as taking the M3 to a drag strip (I think) where the M3 managed a time a bit closer to the RS4, could've beaten in by one or two hundredths, can't remember.
The M3 however turned out a little faster around both Kyalami and Killarney, but that could be put down to driver ability.

It sounds like the Audi will give you most of the spills of the M3, but not quite the smile factor you can get in the M3. In the end, most of the journos were divided between the M3 being the more focused car (and therefore their choice), or being too focused and too tiring (and therefore not their choice).

Speaking of the M3, I do think BMW fumbled the ball just a bit. They could've and should've made it better than it is. Don't get me wrong, the engine is impressive as is, but where is the direct fuel injection? Dry sump lubrication? I think they should've at least extracted 335kW from it in standard guise to really grab attention. And why wasn't the DCT introduced when the E92 M3 was introduced?
And the looks, sure it's understated. But should an M3 be that understated? I remember when the E36 M3 came out, a lot of people were complaining that it didn't look special enough, which BMW tried to rectify with the E46 (mostly successfully in my opinion). Then they brought out E90/ 92, and if someone didn't point out I was walking right past one the other day I would've mistook it for a dead-standard 325Ci...
Look at the RS4 by comparison. No one can mistake that for a 1.8, or even a 3.2 quattro.

And why oh why do they make the front bumpers on both the M3 and M6 look like it does at the moment? It looks like someone forgot to extend the splitters. And the back bumpers, what are the holes for? For heat extraction maybe? Can't be for downforce because there's nothing but exhaust directly behind it.

I don't know. BMW needs to do some work, they may still be in the lead with the 3, but if they continue to lose ground at the pace they are at the moment it won't be long now before they have to start catching up.

NSXType-R

08-05-2008, 02:57 PM

I actually think the M3 is pretty well styled. It could have been much gaudier like the M5, but they held back, which is amazing considering the rate at which the styling for BMWs have been nosediving.

But somehow, I tend to like the RS4 better. No idea why. Maybe it's the power.

I'm sure both are well performing cars. I just like the AWD-ness of it. It's a rich man's Subaru Impreza STI or Evolution X.

clutch-monkey

08-05-2008, 03:53 PM

Compared to what's available in Australia, maybe...but compared to what else is available in Europe, the 3-Series IS a sporty saloon at the forefront of championing the RWD advantage.

What I'd like in Europe is a greater selection of "normal" RWD cars (rivals to BMWs), which is why I can't wait for the Infiniti brand to be launched here. Evo reviewed the G37S ( Infiniti G37S | evo Car Reviews | Car Reviews | evo (http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/214740/infiniti_g37s.html) ) and seemed to like it.

Also, I've repeatedly said this, but Alfa's rumoured RWD 159 successor sounds extremely promising.

What if you like to drive but you need practicality and can only afford one car?

Even the most basic 318i offers a driving experience that all of their front or four wheel drive rivals can't really match. It's not about the speed, it's about the feel. In my opinion that qualifies it as a sports saloon.
that's what i mean. i think stuff like RWD diesels are a good idea because of the torque, but my point is: people who actually care about RWD and sporting pretensions wouldn't be getting a 318i (or that older 316ti ? lol) in a lot of cases.
they'd be saving up for a sportier model, or buy a better model second hand, in general terms. the majority of people who buy 318's don't care about and are probably unaware of what RWD is.
in which case, given the limitations of theese basic 3 series models, a top model subaru liberty or something similar would give a better drive, and makes a better case for itself than buying the 318 purely for the rwd feel, which is worth something, but with the 318's engine merely becomes poor packaging?
RWD just doesn't make or break the deal when cross shopping against the 3 series.

I actually think the M3 is pretty well styled. It could have been much gaudier like the M5, but they held back, which is amazing considering the rate at which the styling for BMWs have been nosediving. .
i agree, best looking bmw in quite a while.

Clivey

08-05-2008, 04:33 PM

that's what i mean. i think stuff like RWD diesels are a good idea because of the torque, but my point is: people who actually care about RWD and sporting pretensions wouldn't be getting a 318i (or that older 316ti ? lol) in a lot of cases.
they'd be saving up for a sportier model, or buy a better model second hand, in general terms. the majority of people who buy 318's don't care about and are probably unaware of what RWD is.
in which case, given the limitations of theese basic 3 series models, a top model subaru liberty or something similar would give a better drive, and makes a better case for itself than buying the 318 purely for the rwd feel, which is worth something, but with the 318's engine merely becomes poor packaging?
RWD just doesn't make or break the deal when cross shopping against the 3 series.

Things are obviously quite different in Australia...in Europe, fuel prices may dictate that an enthusiast can only afford to run one of the more fuel efficient models in the range. I know that'll be the case if I decide to buy one, and it's probably the reason why Albert has the 118d rather than a 130i.

Of course we'd all like to be driving around in gazillion-horsepower hotrods, but reality isn't quite like that. This is why the balance, handling and general feel of a well-judged RWD chassis makes all the difference to us: Even if we can't afford to run 6 or 8-cylinder cars, we can still enjoy driving that way!

clutch-monkey

08-05-2008, 04:40 PM

Things are obviously quite different in Australia...in Europe, fuel prices may dictate that an enthusiast can only afford to run one of the more fuel efficient models in the range.
yes, which is why any 1 series makes more sense than the 3 series; just by being smaller and lighter it makes more sense with the same range of engines. the requirements of a saloon are better fulfilled by an accord or something similar, possibly the diesel engined 3 series (or a decent sized hot hatch?). imo, anyway.
i do agree that absence of power lets you focus on chassis; but i (personally) don't feel that a car like the 318 or similar is able to make up for it's lack of sportiness in the engine department, with it's chassis, given the alternatives.

Ferrer

08-06-2008, 02:10 AM

yes, which is why any 1 series makes more sense than the 3 series; just by being smaller and lighter it makes more sense with the same range of engines. the requirements of a saloon are better fulfilled by an accord or something similar, possibly the diesel engined 3 series (or a decent sized hot hatch?). imo, anyway.
i do agree that absence of power lets you focus on chassis; but i (personally) don't feel that a car like the 318 or similar is able to make up for it's lack of sportiness in the engine department, with it's chassis, given the alternatives.
What if you have kids or something?

I agree that most of the 318is are bought because of the badge, especially those with stupid M Packs and M badges. Well probably most BMWs are bought for the badge.

But, if you are a car enthusiast you'll notice the difference between the 318i and any other similarly sized front wheel drive saloon. If I was in the market for such a car I'd buy the 318i before a similarly powered Accord or Laguna.

IBrake4Rainbows

08-06-2008, 02:15 AM

You'd hardly call a Laguna an enthusiasts vehicle though.

Perhaps a fairer comparison would be a Saab or Alfa Romeo.

Ferrer

08-06-2008, 02:27 AM

You'd hardly call a Laguna an enthusiasts vehicle though.

Perhaps a fairer comparison would be a Saab or Alfa Romeo.
Still as far as the driving experience is concerned the BMW will still trump them.

About time Alfa gets its act together and goes back to rear wheel drive.

clutch-monkey

08-06-2008, 02:29 AM

What if you have kids or something?

i prefer not to think about disastrous consequences :D but i do see your point on the BMW as an all rounder there.

edit: actually kids could fit in the back on an S15 or an integra type R, surely.. so all is not lost :D

IBrake4Rainbows

08-06-2008, 02:36 AM

Still as far as the driving experience is concerned the BMW will still trump them.

About time Alfa gets its act together and goes back to rear wheel drive.

For us dedicated driving enthusiasts, thats a big concern.

but Price, features and family can affect these things.

Clivey

08-06-2008, 02:37 AM

Still as far as the driving experience is concerned the BMW will still trump them.

About time Alfa gets its act together and goes back to rear wheel drive.

My thoughts exactly! Shame about this then!:PistonHeads Headlines (http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=18485)

That artists' impression doesn't even look as good as a 159 (which I think is a beautiful car), so if it isn't even RWD either, it's going to flop, surely!?:eek:

Have to say though Albert, you're on top-form with your comments in this thread. It's as if you're taking the words right out of my mouth!

Ferrer

08-06-2008, 02:40 AM

For us dedicated driving enthusiasts, thats a big concern.

but Price, features and family can affect these things.
You are right. But this is a car forum isn't it? ;)

IBrake4Rainbows

08-06-2008, 02:42 AM

Lol. very true.

Please remember I do currently drive a Volvo :p

Ferrer

08-06-2008, 02:45 AM

My thoughts exactly! Shame about this then!:PistonHeads Headlines (http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=18485)

That artists' impression doesn't even look as good as a 159 (which I think is a beautiful car), so if it isn't even RWD either, it's going to flop, surely!?:eek:

Have to say though Albert, you're on top-form with your comments in this thread. It's as if you're taking the words right out of my mouth!
Well the problem is that Alfa's sales don't generate enough of a volume to make a dedicated, bespoke rear wheel drive platform viable for the moment. Also bear in mind that despite not being quite as bad as they were 5 years ago, FGA are still pretty broke.

So I guess we'll have to put uo with another generation of very pretty (don't worry about the photoshop) but slightly flawed Alfa Romeos.

By the way the first "mainstream" rear wheel drive Alfa Romeo will be the 166 replacement. However it's been set back so many times that no one really knows when will they release it. But maybe in 2010.

clutch-monkey

08-06-2008, 03:08 AM

Lol. very true.

Please remember I do currently drive a Volvo :p

after your 318i i can see why..:p
suppose ballz has abandoned RWD too, trading the sil for the celica..

nota

08-06-2008, 04:17 AM

hairdresser coupes to the fore! :p

MRR

08-12-2008, 09:16 PM

maybe he means 1 series...

which aren't a sedan

MRR

08-12-2008, 09:23 PM

That's why I used the words "almost all" ;)

I have noticed that it tends to be the "upright" shape vehicles that don't have a tunnel, probably because it's just that the floor is above it, rather than there simply not being one.

You're right, but there are still the genuine enthusiasts that buy them for the "right" reasons. As I've said before, I want a 1-series 3-door/3-series coupé but don't want the image that goes with them. I coudn't care less about what badge is on it. It could be a Ford and I'd still want it because they are very good cars.

So the little teenage girls who get them as trinkets and/or fashion for their sweet 16s are getting them for the right reasons? Sorry I am thinking of the US market but for the UK perhaps

Ferrer

08-13-2008, 04:39 AM

So the little teenage girls who get them as trinkets and/or fashion for their sweet 16s are getting them for the right reasons? Sorry I am thinking of the US market but for the UK perhaps
Of course most BMWs (and in general most premium cars) are bought for the badge. That happens everywhere.

That doesn't mean that occasionally there's someone who buys it for the right reasons.

john14

08-16-2008, 12:27 AM

The problem is more people will buy a car for the exclusive badge rather than buying the car for the right reasons.

If I buy a new car or another used car in the future, I want to buy a car which is good to drive/fun to drive, comfortable, good fuel economy and let's be realistic, the physical appearance of the car is important. No Ssang Yong cars. :D

Also, I think recent BMWs have been very good smaller cars and medium sized cars. :) Some of the large BMWs like the X5 SUV is just too ugly and is driven by many people who don't really need an SUV.

Clivey

10-19-2008, 04:57 PM

Put it this way: IMO the styling of the new Audi A4 is nicer than the 3-series, so is it's interior...but the BMW still beats it with more powerful AND more efficient engines and a better, RWD chassis.

The Audi may be the "better" car for the driver that's not looking for sportiness, but if I bought one and then found myself on a country road, I'd kick myself for not buying the BMW instead.

I'll be purchasing a RWD car as soon as I can afford to - the only thing that's stopping me from trading the C4 in for a 1-series or E46 Coupé is the cost of the insurance, as I'm "only" 20 (UK insurance prices are horrific for those under 25).

Ferrer

10-20-2008, 12:16 AM

I'll be purchasing a RWD car as soon as I can afford to - the only thing that's stopping me from trading the C4 in for a 1-series or E46 Coupé is the cost of the insurance, as I'm "only" 20 (UK insurance prices are horrific for those under 25).
Why not go for something cheaper then?

Like an older BMW, an Alfa Romeo 75 or a Mazda MX-5.

Clivey

10-20-2008, 02:35 AM

Why not go for something cheaper then?

Like an older BMW, an Alfa Romeo 75 or a Mazda MX-5.

It's not the purchase price of an E46 that's the problem - it's the cost of insurance. £2,000 (€2,579 / $3,467 USD) anyone? A Mazda MX-5 or older BMW would still cost a stupid amount to insure, too!:(

Also, an older Alfa or BMW would be a big step down from what I'm driving now in terms of practicality, interior, safety etc.

http://www.euroncap.com//carimages/15.jpg

See what I mean (Euro Ncap gave it less than 2*)!?!?

I'll probably just wait until I'm a couple of years older; insurance prices will be much cheaper then.