follow ft86club on our blog, twitter or facebook. Interested in the FT-1? Check out FT1Club
FT86CLUB
Ft86Club
Touge Factory
Register Garage Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Scion FR-S Forum | Subaru BRZ Forum | Toyota 86 GT 86 Forum | AS1 Forum - FT86CLUB > FT86CLUB Shared Forum > FR-S / BRZ vs....

FR-S / BRZ vs.... Area to discuss the FR-S/BRZ against its competitors [NO STREET RACING]

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-13-2012, 11:16 AM   #23
ZDan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '71 240Z, '01 S2000, '94 RX-7 w/LS2
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,506
Thanks: 92
Thanked 588 Times in 363 Posts
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
It is WAY more relevant to real-world driving enjoyment than the modern uber-M3's excess. If your enthusiasm is all about numbers, sure, modern M3s are "better". But any number of BMWphiles would agree with my point: the original was more pure and more FUN.
ZDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 01:57 PM   #24
SVTSHC
(ノಥ益ಥ)ノ
 
SVTSHC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Drives: 2015 Series Blue BRZ
Location: Bronx
Posts: 1,217
Thanks: 662
Thanked 511 Times in 291 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan View Post
It is WAY more relevant to real-world driving enjoyment than the modern uber-M3's excess. If your enthusiasm is all about numbers, sure, modern M3s are "better". But any number of BMWphiles would agree with my point: the original was more pure and more FUN.
For the record I was joking before, just poking a little fun at your minimalist weight obsession :P.

But I'll add a little insight to this seeing as I've been working for the company for a while now. The current iteration of the BMW name/performance/driving feel, is that bread for competition. Sure minimalist vehicles are FUN but miata drivers, old school CRX owners, RX8 owners, and future FRS owners will tell you they don't produce the best all around numbers. Not to mention your perception of what is "pure and more fun" is highly subjective, most people just enjoy the feeling of being put back in their seat and then taking a corner at an ungodly speed; which regardless of how much they weigh, new BMW's are VERY capable of doing.

Also, you need to consider the demographic BMW's are marketed to and the competition that exists in that market demographic. Your typical M3 owner isn't your average joe making average joe money, that's just a fact; call them upper middle class at the very least. Now their reason for doing that is for the simple fact that luxury and prestige sell. Need an example? Take the Boss 302. It out performs the M3 in every sense of the word but what do you think impresses NON-Enthusiasts (the majority of the automotive market) more, actual performance or the Logo BMW and comperable performance that you can feel? Both cars will put you back in your seat, both cars corner extraodinarily well (albiet one a bit better than the the other), and both cars "in my opinion" look amazing. The big difference? Cost of ownership, Emblem, Luxury and prestige. Want proof, ask any random Man or Woman on the street "Are you a performance minded automotive enthusiast?" If they answer "what??" or "No, I don't know much about cars" or just simply "No" follow that question up with "BMW M3 or Ford Mustang Boss 302"; I can confidently say 4 out of 5 people will say BMW M3.

Now public image aside lets look at the M3's competitors, Audi RS4 / RS5, Mercedes C63 AMG, and the soon to be Cadillac ATS-V. All luxury sports coupe / sedans, all fairly costly, all not what you would call "minimalist". That's just the way things have turned out for the M3 and if they went back to the lightweight/moderate horsepower/maximum handling potential route, they would lose sales. Period. And the BMW M "cash cow" wouldn't be the BMW M cash cow anymore.

So like it or not, you're in the minority. Also, having driven many a e46/e92 M3 and a few e30's, I can confidently tell you they are PLENTY of fun and don't need to be as light as the e30 to stay that way.




Edit: Listen bro, I know it may seem this way but I have no personal vendetta against you or your ideals pertaining to cars. The only thing I'm saying is a world where manufacturers cater to enthusiasts with pre-existing platforms refusing to adapt to the needs/wants of present society is nothing short of fictitious. If they did, they'd all be belly up.

Last edited by SVTSHC; 02-13-2012 at 03:18 PM.
SVTSHC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 03:20 PM   #25
ZDan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '71 240Z, '01 S2000, '94 RX-7 w/LS2
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,506
Thanks: 92
Thanked 588 Times in 363 Posts
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTSHC View Post
But I'll add a little insight to this seeing as I've been working for the company for a while now. The current iteration of the BMW name/performance/driving feel, is that bread for competition.
"Bred" for competition? Not really. By and large they are luxury cars that put up stellar performance numbers, but they are further and further removed from being good track cars.

You can't even get a limited slip in a non-M BMW any more. Way back when you could get a clutch-type lsd in the lowliest 318i!

The E36 is really the last good BMW track car, IMO.

Quote:
Sure minimalist vehicles are FUN but miata drivers, old school CRX owners, RX8 owners, and future FRS owners will tell you they don't produce the best all around numbers. Not to mention your perception of what is "pure and more fun" is highly subjective, most people just enjoy the feeling of being put back into their seat and then taking a corner at an ungodly speed; which regardless of how much they way, new BMW's are VERY capable of doing.
Yeah, they put up good numbers. But 99% of the time on the street (unless your an ass), you're not going to be driving in any kind of way where you can appreciate the ultimate performance capability. Smaller lighter-weight cars just feel more fun *all* the time.

Quote:
Also, you need to consider the demographic BMW's are marketed to, and the competition that exists in that market demographic. Your typical M3 owner isn't your average joe making average joe money, that's just a fact; call them upper middle class at the very least. Now their reason for doing that is for the simple fact that luxury and prestige sell.
Not as much as economy/practicality does. Unfortunately BMW doesn't have the guts to do another 2002 type car.

IMO they could expand their market quite a bit if they'd simply do a car like the Mini, but rwd. Simple, small, lightweight, affordable, FUN. They've grown far too comfortable building high-$$$ luxury sedans and SUVs. Even the 1-series is a 3300 lb. boat!

Quote:
Now public image aside lets look at the M3's competitors, Audi RS4 / RS5, Mercedes C63 AMG, and the soon to be Cadillac ATS-V. All luxury sports coupe / sedans, all fairly costly, all not what you would call "minimalist". That's just the way things have turned out for the M3 and if they went back to the lightweight/moderate horsepower/maximum handling potential route, they would lose sales. Period. And BMW M "cash cow" wouldn't be their M cash cow anymore.
I don't think that they'd necessarily lose sales by doing something similar to the E30 M3 or FR-S/BRZ. It was not NECESSARY for the M3 to evolve the way it did, it could have continued to add performance without adding so much weight, power, and cost. They *chose* to evolve it in the superluxocar direction.
It is entirely possible that they *could* be selling a lot more smaller/lighter/cheaper cars than they are selling 3700 lb. 414hp M3s. They simply chose to go the maximalist luxoboat route.

Quote:
So like it or not, you're in the minority. Also, having driven many a e46/e92 M3 and a few e30's, I can confidently tell you they are PLENTY of fun and don't need to be as light as the e30 to stay that way.
I've driven my share, too. The bigger/heavier cars *always* feel bigger and heavier, and not at all like the E30.

Quote:
The only thing I'm saying is a world where manufacturers cater to enthusiasts with pre-existing platforms refusing to adapt to the needs/wants of present society is nothing short of fictitious. If they did, they'd all be belly up.
Of course manufacturers must do their best to serve up what the public wants. But the smaller/lighter-weight performance segment has been all but ignored save for the Miata, and I think that a LOT of opportunites to sell cars have been MISSED.

BMW *could* have built a much smaller, lighter-weight car with the same power/weight as the current M3. Such a car would have given the same real-world and track performance with a smaller, less powerful engine, smaller tires, smaller wheels, smaller brakes. I would be *cheaper*, and they would most likely sell a ton of them.

Here's hoping the FR-S/BRZ sell a ton and wake BMW and other manufacturers up to the idea of performance and driving enjoyment through minimalism rather than always "more more more".
ZDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 04:24 PM   #26
SVTSHC
(ノಥ益ಥ)ノ
 
SVTSHC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Drives: 2015 Series Blue BRZ
Location: Bronx
Posts: 1,217
Thanks: 662
Thanked 511 Times in 291 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan View Post
"Bred" for competition? Not really. By and large they are luxury cars that put up stellar performance numbers, but they are further and further removed from being good track cars.
BMW are excellent track cars, you just don't consider them as such. All the numbers and proof are there to support that claim. What makes them even better is they're excellent cars that perform well, allow the driver to feel nothing short of confident going into or exiting a corner / driving at high speeds and they offer a comfortable amount of luxury. You can't sit there and tell me that you can put the words luxury, lightweight, and class leading five star safety in the same sentence. Go ahead, I dare you.

Quote:
You can't even get a limited slip in a non-M BMW any more. Way back when you could get a clutch-type lsd in the lowliest 318i!
Why would you need one in the non-M models when they aren't tailored towards a harsher riding sporty driving feel.

Quote:
The E36 is really the last good BMW track car, IMO.
You're out of your mind. Period.

Quote:
Yeah, they put up good numbers. But 99% of the time on the street (unless your an ass), you're not going to be driving in any kind of way where you can appreciate the ultimate performance capability. Smaller lighter-weight cars just feel more fun *all* the time.
You're playing two arguements now. So you're saying the current M3's aren't good track cars but they put up good numbers on the track . Smalelr light-weight cars aren't luxurious, which is what the BMW name stands for. Luxury, Performance, and Prestige.

Quote:
Not as much as economy/practicality does. Unfortunately BMW doesn't have the guts to do another 2002 type car.

IMO they could expand their market quite a bit if they'd simply do a car like the Mini, but rwd. Simple, small, lightweight, affordable, FUN. They've grown far too comfortable building high-$$$ luxury sedans and SUVs. Even the 1-series is a 3300 lb. boat!
Guts =/= Intelligence. Maybe you forgot that Mini = BMW. Maybe you also forgot BMW is a highline auto, they don't DO simple. A simple car with a BMW logo on the front would hurt the brand name. It doesn't have a thing to do with guts but rather public perception. In what universe did 3300lb's become considered "boat" worthy? IMO 3300lbs that includes luxury, safety, enough computers to make a man from the 70's weep tears of blood, AND superb handling with more than reasonable horsepower is MORE than a compromise.

Quote:
I don't think that they'd necessarily lose sales by doing something similar to the E30 M3 or FR-S/BRZ. It was not NECESSARY for the M3 to evolve the way it did, it could have continued to add performance without adding so much weight, power, and cost. They *chose* to evolve it in the superluxocar direction.
It is entirely possible that they *could* be selling a lot more smaller/lighter/cheaper cars than they are selling 3700 lb. 414hp M3s. They simply chose to go the maximalist luxoboat route.
This is why you don't work in sales. You've such a narrow perception of what the automotive world should be like that were you ever to run the R&D side of an automotive company you'd be selling about as much cars as Lotus. You're mentality is more suited for niche brand marketing, and niche brand franchises are often owned by larger general companies because they don't offer enough to stand on their own two feet.
It was VERY NECESSARY for the M3 to evolve the way it did. People that drive BMW's like to feel comfortable in their cars, people that drive BMW's like to have storage space in their cars, people in BMW's want cars with seats that grab you with lumbar support that turns with you and allows a hightened sense of confidence while cornering, people that drive BMW's like their I-Drive knob and central display, people that drive BMW's like their steering wheels heated and their backs massaged while they drive, people that drive BMW's like their dashboards NOT made of plastic, THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT PURCHASE/LEASE BMW'S LIKE LUXURY AND YOU CAN'T FIT LUXURY AND LIGHTWEIGHT IN THE SAME SENTENCE. Actually, yes you can; you'll just be paying an arm and a soul for a car made entirely of carbon fibre.

Quote:
I've driven my share, too. The bigger/heavier cars *always* feel bigger and heavier, and not at all like the E30.
And looks at the specs for the e30, now look at the specs for the e92 or the e46. Clearly the added weight isn't negatively effecting the vehicles. If you want to play the "time period doesn't matter" game, then we'll play. An e92 would smack an e30 all around a track regardless of how an e30 feels. See how stupid that was? Now tell me how the size and weight of a vehicle produce two decades ago is supposed to have any bearing on a vehicle produced in the present. Must be all those computers and safety equipment that they chose not to put in back in the late 80's (/sarcasm).


Quote:
Of course manufacturers must do their best to serve up what the public wants. But the smaller/lighter-weight performance segment has been all but ignored save for the Miata, and I think that a LOT of opportunites to sell cars have been MISSED.
BMW brought back Mini. How much more recognition do you need? They AREN'T going to put their emblem on a minimalist vehicle. The $$$ that goes into the R&D for a niche performance vehicle that won't sell a large number of units per year would do nothing but create an intentional fiscal hemorrhage. Why would anyone with even half a brain do that to their own company?

Quote:
BMW *could* have built a much smaller, lighter-weight car with the same power/weight as the current M3. Such a car would have given the same real-world and track performance with a smaller, less powerful engine, smaller tires, smaller wheels, smaller brakes. I would be *cheaper*, and they would most likely sell a ton of them.
Cheap isn't BMW's concern, that's why they're a highline auto and Toyota isn't. That's what toyota has Lexus for, and you let me know when Toyota creates a Lexus version of the FRS for an "affordable" price.

Quote:
Here's hoping the FR-S/BRZ sell a ton and wake BMW and other manufacturers up to the idea of performance and driving enjoyment through minimalism rather than always "more more more".
"Here's hoping a blue collar minimalist sports car has any bearing on highline auto manufactuers whose main concern is luxury/performance not simplistic low cost performance."
You're asking for 90 degree weather with a bit of snow.
SVTSHC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 07:51 PM   #27
ZDan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '71 240Z, '01 S2000, '94 RX-7 w/LS2
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,506
Thanks: 92
Thanked 588 Times in 363 Posts
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTSHC View Post
"Here's hoping a blue collar minimalist sports car has any bearing on highline auto manufactuers whose main concern is luxury/performance not simplistic low cost performance."
You're asking for 90 degree weather with a bit of snow.
Do not invent quotes and attribute them to me.

Thanks.
ZDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 02:53 AM   #28
zoomzoomers
Senior Member
 
zoomzoomers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Drives: 2013 Subaru SWP BRZ Limited 6AT
Location: Darkside
Posts: 1,870
Thanks: 523
Thanked 301 Times in 204 Posts
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeepGuessing View Post
Just curious as to where you're located that you're getting shafted so bad on Bayerische prices?
I'm in LA.
__________________
Man Law#17:A man in the company of a hot, seductively dressed, woman MUST remain sober enough to fight!

MODS: AVO tubes + filter, Cusco (F) strut brace w/ MC brace, Perrin CBE, Subaru OEM trunk tray, Grimmspeed front license re-locator & hood struts and Beatsonic rear cam.
zoomzoomers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 06:09 AM   #29
KeepGuessing
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Drives: e30 150 deville etc etc
Location: Arizona
Posts: 79
Thanks: 0
Thanked 14 Times in 9 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZDan View Post
blahblah
You're missing a gigantic chunk of crucial information here.

1. Performance drivers/automotive enthusiasts = Car Shopping Minority
2. BMW has always been a Luxury car designer, the bmw E30 was a Luxury sedan first and foremost
3. Demand determines the product. People don't go to BMW lots to buy a 2400lb SEAT, it doesn't happen. The majority of BMW consumers are looking for things BMW has offered in their lineup for well over 50 years, COMBINED with the current trends.
4. BMW currently manages to produce a 5 seater sedan, making in excess of 400 horsepower with all the luxury to go tit for tat with Mercedes benz class entry top tier vehicle, yet still has the underpinnings (read: Everything you feel BMW has forgot, such as a highly developed chassis, motorsport derived suspension etc etc) to outlap cars producing well over it's own power.

COULD bmw produce a M3 that weighted, 1000lbs less with much less power...yea they could...but why would someone want to go out and spend 60,000 dollars on a car they produced already that brings nothing new to the table except for iDrive. OR are we assuming most M buyers, are late 20 early 30 year olds who are on automotive forums that feel their life would be made better by POWER:WEIGHT

SVT is right, you're asking for 90 degree's and snow here.

What's next? are Fiat's just too small? If Fiat's would just increase their wheelbase and put a slightly larger engine more centrally located it would be a much better car..

I mean fiat's used to be so prolific in motorsports, but now now they're just fat, and with technology today there's no reason the FIAT 500 can't be a lightweight RWD coupe with leather head to toe maybe with a carbon fiber substructure too..
KeepGuessing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 10:00 AM   #30
SUB-FT86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Drives: 06 G35 Coupe Sport
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 2,606
Thanks: 43
Thanked 190 Times in 117 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
The only way BMW would create a car to Zdan's liking is if they made a Z1 with more cheaper materials inside similar to the 1 series interior. I think a Z1 could weigh at the least 3100 lbs but that would still be too heavy for him. If anything BMW will eventually make a RWD, MINI and that will suit him perfectly.
SUB-FT86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 10:39 AM   #31
SVTSHC
(ノಥ益ಥ)ノ
 
SVTSHC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Drives: 2015 Series Blue BRZ
Location: Bronx
Posts: 1,217
Thanks: 662
Thanked 511 Times in 291 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeepGuessing View Post
You're missing a gigantic chunk of crucial information here.

1. Performance drivers/automotive enthusiasts = Car Shopping Minority
2. BMW has always been a Luxury car designer, the bmw E30 was a Luxury sedan first and foremost
3. Demand determines the product. People don't go to BMW lots to buy a 2400lb SEAT, it doesn't happen. The majority of BMW consumers are looking for things BMW has offered in their lineup for well over 50 years, COMBINED with the current trends.
4. BMW currently manages to produce a 5 seater sedan, making in excess of 400 horsepower with all the luxury to go tit for tat with Mercedes benz class entry top tier vehicle, yet still has the underpinnings (read: Everything you feel BMW has forgot, such as a highly developed chassis, motorsport derived suspension etc etc) to outlap cars producing well over it's own power.

COULD bmw produce a M3 that weighted, 1000lbs less with much less power...yea they could...but why would someone want to go out and spend 60,000 dollars on a car they produced already that brings nothing new to the table except for iDrive. OR are we assuming most M buyers, are late 20 early 30 year olds who are on automotive forums that feel their life would be made better by POWER:WEIGHT

SVT is right, you're asking for 90 degree's and snow here.

What's next? are Fiat's just too small? If Fiat's would just increase their wheelbase and put a slightly larger engine more centrally located it would be a much better car..

I mean fiat's used to be so prolific in motorsports, but now now they're just fat, and with technology today there's no reason the FIAT 500 can't be a lightweight RWD coupe with leather head to toe maybe with a carbon fiber substructure too..
. Exactly what I was saying. Zdan can't seem to grasp that it's a bonehead move for a manufacturer to tailor products toward a small percentage of it's consumer base.


Quote:
The only way BMW would create a car to Zdan's liking is if they made a Z1 with more cheaper materials inside similar to the 1 series interior. I think a Z1 could weigh at the least 3100 lbs but that would still be too heavy for him. If anything BMW will eventually make a RWD, MINI and that will suit him perfectly.
Exactly, even if a Z1 were created the simple fact that it would be a small luxury roadster. Despite it's size, with todays stringent saftey standards and the simple fact that it's a luxury roadster means there's no chance it would weigh less than 3k. Which seems to be the only type of vehicle that in his opinion is capable of producing an enjoyable driving experience; ludacris.
SVTSHC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 11:02 AM   #32
SUB-FT86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Drives: 06 G35 Coupe Sport
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 2,606
Thanks: 43
Thanked 190 Times in 117 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
I look at it like this. Some enthusiast like:

Super Small( Mx5/Elise/500 abarth)generally under 2600 lbs

Small( FR-S/S2K)generally between 2600-2850 lbs

Medium(GC/M3/G35/350Z) generally 3000-3600 lbs

Large(Challenger/M6/Camaro) generally well over 3600 lbs to infinity!!!!


Out of those four I like only three(except Large). Zdan likes only 2 of them(obviously) and it's his preference. All enthusiast aren't equal. I have never driven a fun large sporty car before but the others I have all driven and loved.
SUB-FT86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 11:07 AM   #33
SVTSHC
(ノಥ益ಥ)ノ
 
SVTSHC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Drives: 2015 Series Blue BRZ
Location: Bronx
Posts: 1,217
Thanks: 662
Thanked 511 Times in 291 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUB-FT86 View Post
I look at it like this. Some enthusiast like:

Super Small( Mx5/Elise/500 abarth)generally under 2600 lbs

Small( FR-S/S2K)generally between 2600-2850 lbs

Medium(GC/M3/G35/350Z) generally 3000-3600 lbs

Large(Challenger/M6/Camaro) generally well over 3600 lbs to infinity!!!!


Out of those four I like only three(except Large). Zdan likes only 2 of them(obviously) and it's his preference. All enthusiast aren't equal.
True enough, I guess I'd be pretty general myself because I like all four. I mean, I prefer the first three but I've no problem with a well performing land yacht; mostly because they make up for having to throw all that weight into a corner with tech and brute HP. You know, like the ZL1 magnetic suspension.
SVTSHC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 11:28 AM   #34
SUB-FT86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Drives: 06 G35 Coupe Sport
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 2,606
Thanks: 43
Thanked 190 Times in 117 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTSHC View Post
True enough, I guess I'd be pretty general myself because I like all four. I mean, I prefer the first three but I've no problem with a well performing land yacht; mostly because they make up for having to throw all that weight into a corner with tech and brute HP. You know, like the ZL1 magnetic suspension.
And I have yet to drive one of that size but you are so right about the technology in them. I would love to test a M6 or 650i with Sport package. The Challenger looks like it won't be fun to drive though/
SUB-FT86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 05:44 PM   #35
ZDan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '71 240Z, '01 S2000, '94 RX-7 w/LS2
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,506
Thanks: 92
Thanked 588 Times in 363 Posts
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTSHC View Post
BMW are excellent track cars, you just don't consider them as such.
Yes, the 1- and 3-series are good track cars. But 95% of BMW trackaholics would recommend an E36 over an E46 or E90/E92 for a track car. Lighter-weight, more reliable, much cheaper to operate.

Quote:
You can't sit there and tell me that you can put the words luxury, lightweight, and class leading five star safety in the same sentence. Go ahead, I dare you.
Not saying that at all. I'm suggesting that it would be GREAT if they would produce a smaller, lighter-weight, *less* luxury oriented line. The 1-series is way too close to the 3 in terms of size/weight/price. And *in my opinion* the 3 has gained far too much in terms of size/weight already.

Quote:
Why would you need one in the non-M models when they aren't tailored towards a harsher riding sporty driving feel.
My point was that they used to cater more to true enthusiasts, offering lsd in every model. Few can afford M-cars, it'd be great if you could buy a 128i with lsd.


Quote:
Quote:
[my quote]The E36 is really the last good BMW track car, IMO.
You're out of your mind. Period.
OK, overstatement on my part. But like I mentioned above, the E36 is greatly preferred by most reasonable BMW trackhounds over later models for a track car.

Quote:
You're playing two arguements now. So you're saying the current M3's aren't good track cars but they put up good numbers on the track .
Do you track your car(s) often? At all?
That might explain why you wouldn't understand how a Miata makes for a FANTASTIC track car, but a MUCH faster E90/E92, not so much...

Even the RICH BMW guys (18-wheeler shows up with car) I know prefer the E36 over later models for a track car.

Quote:
Smalelr light-weight cars aren't luxurious, which is what the BMW name stands for. Luxury, Performance, and Prestige.
They've build smaller more spartan cars before. A modern 2002 would be a brilliant thing, IMO.

Quote:
Guts =/= Intelligence. Maybe you forgot that Mini = BMW.
I didn't "forget" that at all, my reference to the Mini in a previous post was meant to emphasize the point that BMW *can* build small, lightweight cars, and that it wouldn't be a stretch for them to essentially do a rwd Mini.

Quote:
Maybe you also forgot BMW is a highline auto, they don't DO simple. A simple car with a BMW logo on the front would hurt the brand name.
No it would not. Not any more than the Bugatti Type 35 hurt the Royale. Or the 2002 hurt the 3.0 CS. Or the Cobalt hurt the Corvette.

Automakers too often fret about this, IMO overly so. I mean, the fantastic an beautiful 206 and 246 Dinos didn't get Ferrari badges, but they are LOVED by most Ferrari enthusiasts as much as or more than the bigger contemporary V12 cars.

There can be elegance in simplicity, and BMW is fully capable of doing it while *enhancing* rather than tarnishing its image.

Quote:
It doesn't have a thing to do with guts but rather public perception. In what universe did 3300lb's become considered "boat" worthy? IMO 3300lbs that includes luxury, safety, enough computers to make a man from the 70's weep tears of blood, AND superb handling with more than reasonable horsepower is MORE than a compromise.
The BMW enthusiasts *I* know would be THRILLED for them to produce something smaller, lighter, and way less luxury-oriented.

Quote:
This is why you don't work in sales. You've such a narrow perception of what the automotive world should be like
Not at all. Any automaker would do well to have a diverse range that appeals to a broad spectrum.

Quote:
that were you ever to run the R&D side of an automotive company you'd be selling about as much cars as Lotus.
You have no idea...

*ALL* I'm suggesting is that there *is* a market for smaller/lighter-weight rwd sports/sporty cars, and that, in my OPINION, it wouldn't be a bad idea for BMW to tap into it. They've been there before and done very well!

Quote:
It was VERY NECESSARY for the M3 to evolve the way it did.
I don't think it was. Many BMW enthusiasts agree.

Quote:
People that drive BMW's like to feel comfortable in their cars, people that drive BMW's like to have storage space in their cars, people in BMW's want cars with seats that grab you with lumbar support that turns with you and allows a hightened sense of confidence while cornering, people that drive BMW's like their I-Drive knob and central display, people that drive BMW's like their steering wheels heated and their backs massaged while they drive, people that drive BMW's like their dashboards NOT made of plastic, THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT PURCHASE/LEASE BMW'S LIKE LUXURY AND YOU CAN'T FIT LUXURY AND LIGHTWEIGHT IN THE SAME SENTENCE.
Of *course* "people that drive [current] BMW's" are pretty happy with what BMW's have become! Your argument is pretty much "people who like this kind of thing will find that this is the kind of thing they like."

That doesn't mean that there isn't a market for a modern 2002.

Quote:
Actually, yes you can; you'll just be paying an arm and a soul for a car made entirely of carbon fibre.
Trying to "add on" light weight after the fact is a costly and mostly futile effort. Much better to design it in from the get-go.

Quote:
And looks at the specs for the e30, now look at the specs for the e92 or the e46. Clearly the added weight isn't negatively effecting the vehicles.
Driving an E30 is a very different experience from driving an E92 or E46. There's more to driving enjoyment than "specs".

Quote:
If you want to play the "time period doesn't matter" game, then we'll play. An e92 would smack an e30 all around a track regardless of how an e30 feels. See how stupid that was?
There's a LOT more to driving enjoyment than track times. A 747 is a helluva lot faster than a Pitt's Special....

If one were going for track times, an E92 wouldn't be the best way to spend $62k+, anyway...


Quote:
Now tell me how the size and weight of a vehicle produce two decades ago is supposed to have any bearing on a vehicle produced in the present. Must be all those computers and safety equipment that they chose not to put in back in the late 80's (/sarcasm).
Utter b.s. Modern materials, analysis techniques, manufacturing techniques allow you to hold the line on weight while meeting more stringent safety requirements and adding in "all those computers" (which are not terribly heavy). *If the will is there*. For BMW, the will wasn't there, and the urge to build ever-larger more massive luxury vehicles was.

A modern Corvette weighs pretty much exactly what a Corvette from 1968, 1988, 1998, 2008 weighed. While being at pretty much exactly the same place in relative price and performance.

A 2012 FR-S/BRZ weighs pretty much exactly what a 1989-1991 S13 240SX weighs, likewise as the same relative price and performance points.

If they *wanted* to, BMW *could* build a modern rwd car in the 2800-3200 lb. range, at the same relative price points (or cheaper even) than the E30.

Quote:
BMW brought back Mini. How much more recognition do you need?
Wrong wheel drive..

Quote:
They AREN'T going to put their emblem on a minimalist vehicle.
I know they aren't. But they should...

Quote:
The $$$ that goes into the R&D for a niche performance vehicle that won't sell a large number of units per year would do nothing but create an intentional fiscal hemorrhage. Why would anyone with even half a brain do that to their own company?
Ask Toyota/Subaru.

Quote:
Cheap isn't BMW's concern, that's why they're a highline auto and Toyota isn't. That's what toyota has Lexus for, and you let me know when Toyota creates a Lexus version of the FRS for an "affordable" price.
Beside the point. Toyota builds the FRS (w/ Subaru), they also build the LFA.

It'd be fine w/ me if BMW made a "sub" brand, but I don't think they would need to or should to do a modern 2002 or E30.

Quote:
"Here's hoping a blue collar minimalist sports car has any bearing on highline auto manufactuers whose main concern is luxury/performance not simplistic low cost performance."
You're asking for 90 degree weather with a bit of snow.
Not at all. I just think it'd be pretty cool if BMW got back into the business of building cool small lightweight sporty rwd cars in addition to the fleet of barges.

That's all...

Last edited by ZDan; 02-14-2012 at 06:07 PM.
ZDan is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ZDan For This Useful Post:
amram (05-02-2014)
Old 02-15-2012, 10:39 AM   #36
LSxJunkie
Douchebag
 
LSxJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Drives: 2014 Mustang GT
Location: NY
Posts: 958
Thanks: 230
Thanked 341 Times in 184 Posts
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
BMW has no incentive to build another lightweight, modestly powered driver's car. They've built a brand image on balancing dynamic performance with luxury. 3ers, 5ers, and X5s practically sell themselves. The cost of developing a new car, tooling for manufacturing, marketing... not worth it when their other cars are carrying their weight in sales. Especially for such a small market. There is a big difference between people who say they will buy a car on the internet and people who will actually walk into a dealership to buy one.

Toyota is a brand whose image is boredom. That's not very compelling That is why the GT86 made sense in the home market. They sold, for the last 8 years, 12 different beige cars. Scion is a brand aimed directly at young car enthusiasts. That's why the FR-S makes sense here. Subaru has sold compelling, affordable, lightweight cars for years. That's why the BRZ makes sense.

A 2002? Where does that slot in? Under the 1er? BMW dealerships have an air of snobbery around them. That's part of what they sell. Exclusivity. They've carefully cultivated that image for the last 20 years. I can guarantee that most will dealers will cringe at the thought of putting a 28k 2002 next to a 90k 7er on the showroom floor. Even more so at the thought of having 22-25 year olds with mediocre credit coming into their store daily looking to finance the new affordable BMW.




Long story short, it makes absolutely no financial sense for BMW to do so, and BMW is first and foremost a business.
__________________
Here - 2014 Mustang GT Track Package/Recaros (Laguna Seca Struts/Shocks/Springs, Boss 302 Rear Sway Bar, Boss 302 Wheels, GT500 Quad Tip Axleback, Energy Suspension Shifter Bushing), 2014 IS350AWD
Gone - 2011 IS350AWD, 2010 RX350, 2008 IS250AWD, 2007 RX350, 2006 GTO, 2006 GTO, 2004 G35 6MT, 1992 SC400
LSxJunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2012, 01:04 PM   #37
Itgb
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Drives: 2003 BMW M3, 2006 Scion xB
Location: San Diego
Posts: 49
Thanks: 3
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
I own an E46 M3 convertible, and it is heavy. Coupes are lighter, but still heavy relative to E30 M3s. In order to please consumers who constantly want more power, more luxury, more technology, BMW has gone that route with all of their cars. The only good thing is that this has left a gaping hole at the bottom of their lineup to bring something smaller, lighter, RWD, and fun to drive to the masses.

A 128i starts at 3200lbs and $32k, so it's not far off the mark. Maybe the next generation 2-series coupe will bring us closer to the E30 weight and fun factor that we all wish for.
__________________
2003 BMW M3 | 2010 Audi A4 Avant | 2006 Scion xB | PAST - 1986 MB 190E 2.3-16, 2005 Volvo S60 2.5T
Itgb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2012, 01:09 PM   #38
SUB-FT86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Drives: 06 G35 Coupe Sport
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 2,606
Thanks: 43
Thanked 190 Times in 117 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
That is a ugly BMW right there.
SUB-FT86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2012, 01:30 PM   #39
7thgear
i'm sorry, what?
 
7thgear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Drives: Canada
Location: I rock a beat harder than you can beat it with rocks
Posts: 4,024
Thanks: 323
Thanked 2,224 Times in 1,126 Posts
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
actually i was driving next to a 128i for 20 minutes the other day, stuck in traffic. It was nice and clean, but i just couldn't fall in love with it. Also if it's indeed 3200 pounds then by gosh it either has a ridiculously thick carcass or it has every known creature comfort and airbag known to man, cuz that car is small.
__________________
don't you think if I was wrong, I'd know it?
7thgear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2012, 01:52 PM   #40
LSxJunkie
Douchebag
 
LSxJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Drives: 2014 Mustang GT
Location: NY
Posts: 958
Thanks: 230
Thanked 341 Times in 184 Posts
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7thgear View Post
actually i was driving next to a 128i for 20 minutes the other day, stuck in traffic. It was nice and clean, but i just couldn't fall in love with it. Also if it's indeed 3200 pounds then by gosh it either has a ridiculously thick carcass or it has every known creature comfort and airbag known to man, cuz that car is small.

Side impact reinforcement, crash beams, front, side curtain, side impact airbags, and sound deadening.

The C6 weighs 3100-3300 lbs. Certainly doesn't drive like it's "too heavy."
__________________
Here - 2014 Mustang GT Track Package/Recaros (Laguna Seca Struts/Shocks/Springs, Boss 302 Rear Sway Bar, Boss 302 Wheels, GT500 Quad Tip Axleback, Energy Suspension Shifter Bushing), 2014 IS350AWD
Gone - 2011 IS350AWD, 2010 RX350, 2008 IS250AWD, 2007 RX350, 2006 GTO, 2006 GTO, 2004 G35 6MT, 1992 SC400
LSxJunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2012, 02:18 PM   #41
7thgear
i'm sorry, what?
 
7thgear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Drives: Canada
Location: I rock a beat harder than you can beat it with rocks
Posts: 4,024
Thanks: 323
Thanked 2,224 Times in 1,126 Posts
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LSxJunkie View Post
Side impact reinforcement, crash beams, front, side curtain, side impact airbags, and sound deadening.

The C6 weighs 3100-3300 lbs. Certainly doesn't drive like it's "too heavy."

heavy is relative

i have driven shotgun in a C6 at mosport international raceway and yes.. the car is freakishly fast, there is no denying.

i have also had the privilege of driving a Lotus Elise around the track (and spinning out twice!).

if you ever get a chance to drive something like an Elise then even miatas will feel like pigs to you. It's hard to explain.

With light weight comes the need for bigger balls going into corners at a faster speed. Heavier cars with gobs of power can mask a persons fear of going into a corner 100%. They will brake a little longer, coast a little more, and when they step on the gas there is little chance of them losing it because the car already slowed down to a safe level.

but since you got like 400 HP pushing you then that difference in time will be eliminated rather quickly

a lighter car needs to keep momentum, and momentum is scary, esp if weight goes down and tire grip goes up.
__________________
don't you think if I was wrong, I'd know it?
7thgear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2012, 03:00 PM   #42
LSxJunkie
Douchebag
 
LSxJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Drives: 2014 Mustang GT
Location: NY
Posts: 958
Thanks: 230
Thanked 341 Times in 184 Posts
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7thgear View Post
heavy is relative

i have driven shotgun in a C6 at mosport international raceway and yes.. the car is freakishly fast, there is no denying.

i have also had the privilege of driving a Lotus Elise around the track (and spinning out twice!).

if you ever get a chance to drive something like an Elise then even miatas will feel like pigs to you. It's hard to explain.

With light weight comes the need for bigger balls going into corners at a faster speed. Heavier cars with gobs of power can mask a persons fear of going into a corner 100%. They will brake a little longer, coast a little more, and when they step on the gas there is little chance of them losing it because the car already slowed down to a safe level.

but since you got like 400 HP pushing you then that difference in time will be eliminated rather quickly

a lighter car needs to keep momentum, and momentum is scary, esp if weight goes down and tire grip goes up.
Agreed on all points except one. There is most certainly a chance of losing it when you get back to the gas. You've got to be smooth with gobs of torque.

And with C6s, Vipers, most of those mid-sized sports cars, the thresholds are just higher. You've got more grip, more brake, more power, and everything happens faster. 9/10ths is 9/10ths, no matter what kind of car you're in. You just lose it in a bigger way when you do lose it.
__________________
Here - 2014 Mustang GT Track Package/Recaros (Laguna Seca Struts/Shocks/Springs, Boss 302 Rear Sway Bar, Boss 302 Wheels, GT500 Quad Tip Axleback, Energy Suspension Shifter Bushing), 2014 IS350AWD
Gone - 2011 IS350AWD, 2010 RX350, 2008 IS250AWD, 2007 RX350, 2006 GTO, 2006 GTO, 2004 G35 6MT, 1992 SC400
LSxJunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2012, 04:45 PM   #43
ZDan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '71 240Z, '01 S2000, '94 RX-7 w/LS2
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,506
Thanks: 92
Thanked 588 Times in 363 Posts
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7thgear View Post
Also if it's indeed 3200 pounds then by gosh it either has a ridiculously thick carcass or it has every known creature comfort and airbag known to man, cuz that car is small.
The 128i isn't that small. It looks to me like it's only slightly narrower and less long vs. the 3-series, but same height (or taller even). It will absolutely engulf an FRS:



The 1-series is pretty much 95% of a 3-series in terms of size/mass.

Last edited by ZDan; 02-15-2012 at 04:55 PM.
ZDan is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ZDan For This Useful Post:
amram (05-02-2014)
Old 02-15-2012, 05:27 PM   #44
ZDan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '71 240Z, '01 S2000, '94 RX-7 w/LS2
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 1,506
Thanks: 92
Thanked 588 Times in 363 Posts
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itgb View Post
I own an E46 M3 convertible, and it is heavy. Coupes are lighter, but still heavy relative to E30 M3s. In order to please consumers who constantly want more power, more luxury, more technology, BMW has gone that route with all of their cars. The only good thing is that this has left a gaping hole at the bottom of their lineup to bring something smaller, lighter, RWD, and fun to drive to the masses.
Yes, yes, yes, yes, and YES.

Quote:
A 128i starts at 3200lbs and $32k, so it's not far off the mark. Maybe the next generation 2-series coupe will bring us closer to the E30 weight and fun factor that we all wish for.
I think the next 1- and 2-series are 4cylinder-only models, so it *would* have been possible for them to be smaller and lighter-weight. But the word is that the new 1 is going to be BIGGER! wtf...

At least they're still going to be rwd, reaction from the enthusiast BMW community turned their fwd plan around, at least for the moment...
ZDan is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.