Is there any point in BMW anymore?

VolvoMan

Now that they're going FWD and news has just been announced that they're replacing their classic straight six with a turbocharged four cylinder (http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsArticle/AllCars/254939/), is there any reason for them to exist anymore?

ottostreet

Well, yes, but ti does take away some of what made them unique.

bmw535d

Eric Cartman

if they go fully fwd give it 10 years and theyll be as existant as the above posters evo

ok back on topic time.....

its a bad move for them

johnos1984

I have been keeping an eye on BMW's of late and have to say their cars are all starting to appear to be getting fat and top heavy looking.

Take the current 5 series, GT, all of the X range for starters.

The GT is especially big and poorly proportioned. It seems their design has been going down hill since the E39 which I regard as being one of the nicest looking cars on our roads

JerCotter7

So you can buy the 1 series in FWD as well as RWD. Now they make 4cyl turbos as well as 6cyl straight?

I don't see the big deal here since they are just offering more options.

^^^ would agree with the post above me though. Newer BMW's just don't look as nice anymore.

Eric Cartman

JerCotter7 wrote: »

So you can buy the 1 series in FWD as well as RWD. Now they make 4cyl turbos as well as 6cyl straight?

I don't see the big deal here since they are just offering more options.

that wouldnt be a problem if it wasnt ireland, Irish people dont like extras, so by introducing 4cyl turbo daysels along side the 6cyl and having fwd even a euro cheaper than rwd whenever the average joe soap middle managment goes to order his beamer hell order a fwd 4pot boredom wagon , eventually dealers will just stop selling the rwd or 6 cyl versions and all the 2nd hand beamers will be just as boring

VolvoMan

JerCotter7 wrote: »

So you can buy the 1 series in FWD as well as RWD. Now they make 4cyl turbos as well as 6cyl straight?

I don't see the big deal here since they are just offering more options.

The likes of the new 6 Series are no longer going to have the option of a straight six. The four cylinder turbo will be replacing these engines in a lot of models.

Plug

bmw535d wrote: »

Welcome back Mr Bond.

Big Nasty

I don't like to see this at all as it's against what I consider what BMW stands for. However I understand and appreciate that they have to move with the times and appeal to the masses. They did very well out of the tax band B 520d last year, simply be adapting.

Personally I would prefer if they remained RWD and their minimum engine size was 2L but that just ain't good business sense in this day and age.

I drive a '99 735 and love it - it will be a long, long time before I have a FWD or sub 2L car. Therefore I will continue to enjoy BMW until that day comes.

VolvoMan

VolvoMan wrote: »

is there any reason for them to exist anymore?

Loads of knobs will driving nothing but a Bimmer :pac:

johnos1984

RoverJames wrote: »

Loads of knobs will driving nothing but a Bimmer :pac:

You had one James

Mr Benevolent

I really think the F10 5 Series is one of the best-looking cars on the road. The Insignia is even better looking though. I know what it is, I just want to keep looking at it. I can't see BMW surpassing the F10. The E39 is lovely, but it has to be in the right trim and spec.

Big Nasty

RoverJames wrote: »

Loads of knobs will driving nothing but a Bimmer :pac:

Don't go there dude - gimme a Bimmer any day than a wannabe Jag!

They don't build Rover's no more either do they? Wonder why?

johnos1984

MCMLXXV wrote: »

They don't build Rover's no more either do they? Wonder why?

BMW screwed them over while in charge maybe?

Absurdum

I blame diesels for wrecking all the great cars we once had :mad:

Voodoomelon

MCMLXXV wrote: »

Therefore I will continue to enjoy BMW until that day comes.

Amen. I have another decade ahead of me of picking up massively depreciated luxury saloons and coupes, nothing to worry about just yet. :pac:

ei.sdraob

from OPs link

Two turbocharged petrol models will be available – a 640i with a 316bhp, 3.0-litre straight six, and a 401bhp 4.4-litre V8.

yum yum

Max_Damage

Absurdum wrote: »

I blame diesels for wrecking all the great cars we once had :mad:

Time moves on. Get used to it.

MCMLXXV

MCMLXXV wrote: »

Don't go there dude - gimme a Bimmer any day than a wannabe Jag!

They don't build Rover's no more either do they? Wonder why?

Yawn :pac:

I didn't say all BMW drivers were knobs did I? No
On a serious note the irony of the BMW v wannabe Jag comment in reference to a 75/ZT is astounding.

messymess

In fairness, when they started to do things like a 116d, FWD is just a naturally evolution

The M division will hopefully always impress though. I just hope they don't change the essence of their cars so much that M versions have to 'do the best they can' as opposed to just being great!

maidhc

Is there anything wrong with FWD? OK I appreciate issues with torque steer on things over 250bhp, but I understand a lot of modern hot hatches are putting out 300bhp through the front wheels and are still good to drive (RS MkII seems to be one example).

Most modern cars are about half that, and I doubt they will get a huge amount more powerful with all the emphasis on greenery, so FWD is just fine for most stuff.

Everyone was delighted when RWD died a death with the maintream marques as it was then argued it gave safer and more predictable handling, as well as being simpler and cheaper.

The weight disribution argument is bollix. I have a capri RWD and if you don't have half of a roadstone quarry in the boot you will end up with your tail facing the wrong way at the first wet bend... There may be an argument made for weight distribution with RWD cars with a transaxle, but no modern BMW has this set-up to my knowledge.

I think RWD and 6cyl has been a marketing ploy for BMW. They have got new advice from a marketing consultant and they are going with it. 99% of their cars will still be overpriced repmobiles anyway.

bazz26

maidhc wrote: »

I think RWD and 6cyl has been a marketing ploy for BMW. They have got new advice from a marketing consultant accountant and they are going with it. 99% of their cars will still be overpriced repmobiles anyway.

FYP.

Ali Babba

Absurdum wrote: »

I blame diesels for wrecking all the great cars we once had :mad:

Don't blame diesel for the problem blame the greens. BMW have some of the finest diesel engines in the business.

alexmcred

I like the new range of BMWs personally right up to the x6. At the end of the day BMW needs to sell as many units as they can. Lest people forget wtihout bread and butter models there would be no m-sports no m3's or m5's.

From the other point of view engine technologies are evolving with more and more bhp being gotten from engines. Yes it's sad to see 6 cylinder becoming less popular but on the other hand greener cars are the way ahead and I'm delighted to see how much power they can get out of them because it ensures that in the future we can still have stupidly fast cars

Tragedy

I loved the E60 when it first came out and think it's aged beautifully in m-sport spec(I saw two 04 E60's today and they still look stunning).

F10? Blandmobile.

ei.sdraob

Ali Babba wrote: »

Don't blame diesel for the problem blame the greens. BMW have some of the finest diesel engines in the business.

Well said, if those Green Luddites have their way we be all driving donkeys and cart, or of they get their way completely the donkey gets put down for farting methane which is a much (40x) worse global warming climate change gas :P than CO2
I for one welcome our new donkey overlords

Leonard Hofstadter

To answer the OP's question directly - the answer has got to be a resounding NO.

Let's look at the current BMW range:

1 series - ugly as sin, no space and overpriced

3 series - dated, cramped and overpriced

5 series - doesn't drive well unless you spend several grand buying expensive driving options because BMW is too cheap to fit the F10 with aluminium suspension

6 series - based on the F10, so won't drive well either. Still not a looker.

7 series - very ugly at the front, very loud at speed, still no S-class

X1 - ugly and no six cylinder engines

X3 - ditto, has electric power steering but is supposed to be a decent enough steer

X5 - ok for an SUV I suppose, but if this car were a child, it would be a child only a mother could be proud of

X6 - utterly pointless

Z4 - meant to be good, but will shortly be losing its six cylinder engines, so it's really going to be a very ordinary roadster unless you spend the tens of thousands on the sDrive35i to get six cylinders

So, of the range today, the only good one is the Z4, and it won't even be that good for too much longer as BMW are going to be cheapskates and fit the car with the distinctly non premium and non BMW four cylinder engines.

This new engine quite frankly sucks - it's not that economical (the only reason it appears to be economical is because the six cylinder in the X1 does not have direct injection or auto start/stop), it has less power than the engine it is going to be replacing and of course will not sound anything like as good because it has the wrong number of cylinders for a BMW.

In other words, this is all an epic fail by BMW.

It is a marque that has gone from hero to zero in only a few years.

Even in the Bangle years, there were still two things that stood out with BMWs - the way they drove and the straight six engines.

Let's just look at all the "principles" BMW has sold out on in recent time:

- M cars now have turbos
- the increasing number of models that are auto only
- wrong wheel drive is on its way
- the X5M and X6M (need I say more?)
- M cars have automatic gearboxes (thanks X5M and X6M for that - I thought the M stood for Motorsport as opposed to marketing)
- cars that don't drive like BMWs should
- the distinctly non premium and cost cutting approach to engineering - no aluminium suspension in the 5 series (which the previous two generations had), I thought an expensive marque like BMW was supposed to stand for engineering excellence?
- three cylinder engines on their way (if I want three cylinder noise I'll buy a Nissan Pixo, if I'm buying a BMW I expect it to be more expensively made than this)
- worst of all, replacing six cylinder engines with four cylinder engines. The least they could do is make them more powerful than the engines they are replacing, but BMW has decided to rub yet more salt in the wounds and actually make this new engine less powerful

BMW today is where Merc was in the late 90s - making $h!t cars at outrageous prices simply because they think they can get away with it. Merc thought they could get away with it too for a while but it wasn't long before people copped on and it didn't take Merc long to cop on either and they weren't long changing their minds and making cars feel expensive again and made properly.

Matt Simis

captainspeed wrote: »

- M cars now have turbos
- the increasing number of models that are auto only
- wrong wheel drive is on its way
- the X5M and X6M (need I say more?)
- M cars have automatic gearboxes (thanks X5M and X6M for that - I thought the M stood for Motorsport as opposed to marketing)
- cars that don't drive like BMWs should
- the distinctly non premium and cost cutting approach to engineering - no aluminium suspension in the 5 series (which the previous two generations had), I thought an expensive marque like BMW was supposed to stand for engineering excellence?
- three cylinder engines on their way (if I want three cylinder noise I'll buy a Nissan Pixo, if I'm buying a BMW I expect it to be more expensively made than this)
- worst of all, replacing six cylinder engines with four cylinder engines. The least they could do is make them more powerful than the engines they are replacing, but BMW has decided to rub yet more salt in the wounds and actually make this new engine less powerful

Well, to counter point that list:
1: BMW have made fast turbo (2002 Turbo) cars in the past, this isnt as "new" as you are painting it. The fact recent MCars didnt have turbos didnt make it a "rule". Also Turbos in 2011 are a lot better than in 1990.
2: Auto gearboxes now shift faster than manuals while delivering better economy. Good Auto gearboxes make perfect matches to narrow powerband diesels, which make up a large proportion of their sales, so therefore most of their sales have to be Autos.
3: The vast majority of 1series drivers (80%) not only dont know what FWD is, they dont care. This isnt BMWs fault, it isnt even a problem, horses for courses, small FWD cars make sense.
4: X5M and X6M - I like the idea I can get a crazy nutter version of nearly any model. IMO BMW need more fun, mental things like these and less "serious business".
5: Some people like Autos, even in sports cars, look at the GTR (yes its a DSG affair, but its driven as an Auto).
6: Subjective, they now produce far more models in different segments than before, its impractical and non-nonsensical to try make them all handle/drive the same.
7: Subjective, many people think the F10 handles better than last 2 generations of 5 series. It has other chassis improvements and even its bottom end diesel is more powerful than some marques top end version (vRS vs 520d).
8: I dunno about 3pots, didnt read that, but again, if its some rubbish town car and it makes logical sense, how can you deem it "wrong"?
9: 4pot vs 6pot engines... you do remember that one of the most famous M cars is a 4 cylinder right? Sure recently BMW recently had been on about 6pots uber allies (even when 8pots made more sense, see the X5 40d vs Touareg V8TDI), but they are not a "6 cylinder car maker".
Looking at the figures, a boosted 2.0 4pot with a better torque spread and presumably better economy than a dull 3.0NA (bottom of the ladder model) in a mom-mobile like the X1... what are you complaining about! Let the rubbish cookie cutters have the correct engine for their market.

Its reasons like yours that car enthusiasts cannot effectively run a Car marque.

Wolverine_1999

johnos1984 wrote: »

It seems their design has been going down hill since the E39 which I regard as being one of the nicest looking cars on our roads

I wouldn't mind adding an E39 with the M Sport package to my garage.. definitely my favourite of all the 5 series also

thirtythirty

BMW's hay day was the 8 series.

I'm getting pretty bored of german design now tbh - there seems to be a standard template for the small hatch, mid to large saloon thats all these manufacturers take and then tweak a little bit with a narrower light here, a roundy corner there. Even Citroen's are taking ques from them now.

Occasionally there is an attempted break from the norm, such as the bmw 6 series (irrespective of whether you think it worked or not!), but then i suppose you could also argue that was just a refined mercedes cls!

Anan1

Matt Simis wrote: »

Its reasons like yours that car enthusiasts cannot effectively run a Car marque.

+1, it's buyers and not armchair enthusiasts who keep companies afloat.

Matt Simis

spottyelephant wrote: »

BMW's hay day was the 8 series.

The 8 series (e31) was a commercial failure, panned by Reviewers as being too expensive (they were all more expensive than an M6 is today) and not quite as fast as it looked, panned by Enthusiasts as not delivering the "white knuckle" ride they expected (and being way too expensive) while not looking "like a BMW" and not bought in the numbers expected due to woeful timing (Oil crisis, emissions changes) and again, price.

It interesting to see how the e31 has recently gained a place with enthusiasts now thats it affordable, but in many ways, its a very, very un-BMW car. The e31 was the X6M of 1990 IMO.

thirtythirty

Matt Simis wrote: »

The 8 series (e31) was a commercial failure, panned by Reviewers as being too expensive (they were all more expensive than an M6 is today) and not quite as fast as it looked, panned by Enthusiasts as not delivering the "white knuckle" ride they expected (and being way too expensive) while not looking "like a BMW" and not bought in the numbers expected due to woeful timing (Oil crisis, emissions changes) and again, price.

You obv know more than me on the topic, but still.....nah!

8 series ftw

VolvoMan

Anan1 wrote: »

+1, it's buyers and not armchair enthusiasts who keep companies afloat.

BMW got by just fine in the 80's and 90's by making desirable cars. Say what you want about them being a company that makes money, but there are no excuses for them making the sh1te they make these days.

You can't spend so many years preaching about the benefits of RWD and 50/50 weight distribution and then just sell out. If Lamborghini went out tomorrow and launched a four door family saloon with a diesel engine I can imagine there would be uproar. If you're a car manufacturer you've got to stick to your principles and show some respect for your brand identity.

Anan1

VolvoMan wrote: »

BMW got by just fine in the 80's and 90's by making desirable cars.

Yes, desirable to buyers.

VolvoMan wrote: »

Say what you want about them being a company that makes money, but there are no excuses for them making the sh1te they make these days.

Sh1te to who? Are fewer people buying them?

VolvoMan wrote: »

You can't spend so many years preaching about the benefits of RWD and 50/50 weight distribution and then just sell out. If Lamborghini went out tomorrow and launched a four door family saloon with a diesel engine I can imagine there would be uproar. If you're a car manufacturer you've got to stick to your principles and show some respect for your brand identity.

Bollocks. They're in it for the money, and they can (and will) do as they please. 'Brand identity' is a marketing construct, if it's not bringing in the cash then out it goes.

maidhc

Anan1 wrote: »

Bollocks. They're in it for the money, and they can (and will) do as they please. 'Brand identity' is a marketing construct, if it's not bringing in the cash then out it goes.

I wonder is it a mistake. The whole "sheer driving pleasure" did them well, and differentiated them from MB on one side and VW on the other. Perhaps they are envious of VW churning out particularly unimaginative econoboxes, but I dont think there is room for another VW in the market.

Anan1

maidhc wrote: »

I wonder is it a mistake. The whole "sheer driving pleasure" did them well, and differentiated them from MB on one side and VW on the other. Perhaps they are envious of VW churning out particularly unimaginative econoboxes, but I dont think there is room for another VW in the market.

I suppose it depends on what you define as a mistake. It'll certainly be a shame if the cars become less driver-focused, but hopefully other manufacturers will fill the void. Personally, i'm a lot more saddened about the changes at Lancia since the Fulvia than I ever will be about BMW.;)

VolvoMan

Anan1 wrote: »

Yes, desirable to buyers.

Yes, and these buyers happen to be idiots that BMW are taking advatage of. They know they can sell them anything and that is why they produce such tripe today like the X1, they can get away with it.

'Brand identity' is a marketing construct, if it's not bringing in the cash then out it goes.

Yeah, wrong use of term. What I meant was brand heritage.

Anan1

VolvoMan wrote: »

Yes, and these buyers happen to be idiots that BMW are taking advatage of. They know they can sell them anything and that is why they produce such tripe today like the X1, they can get away with it.

Most buyers don't want the same things as you or I do. Take the example I gave earlier of Lancia, who took the high road in terms of producing really well engineered cars in the early 1970s - the idiots wouldn't buy them, and the company ended up being sold to FIAT.

TCP/IP

VolvoMan why do you keep talking rubbish about BMW seriously you are into Volvo cars fair enough but lets call a spade a spade they are an embarresment to own and you just try and rise people for the sake of it. Surely you would be better off pointing out why you feel Volvo make better cars nowadays.

TCP/IP

TCP/IP wrote: »

VolvoMan why do you keep talking rubbish about BMW seriously you are into Volvo cars fair enough but lets call a spade a spade they are an embarresment to own and you just try and rise people for the sake of it. Surely you would be better off pointing out why you feel Volvo make better cars nowadays.

He hasn't said much that is factually incorrect though has he?
A Volvo is an embarrassment to own?
And you reckon he is trying to rise people for the sake of it, come on :pac:

TCP/IP

VolvoMan wrote: »

Now that they're going FWD and news has just been announced that they're replacing their classic straight six with a turbocharged four cylinder (http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsArticle/AllCars/254939/), is there any reason for them to exist anymore?

This has to be one of the most stupid comments of all time. If a car has a 4 cylinder with twin turbos and it creates more power and better MPG how is this a bad thing. As someone who own a twin turbo BMW it is a monster stepup from a 6 cylinder on its own.

TCP/IP

TCP/IP wrote: »

lets call a spade a spade they are an embarresment to own

TCP/IP wrote: »

This has to be one of the most stupid comments of all time.

I think it will be hard to beat yours to be honest gadget man :P

TCP/IP

RoverJames wrote: »

I think it will be hard to beat yours to be honest gadget man :P

Maybe for fun we should put up a poll with which car the people of boards would prefer. A Volvo or a BMW. I am happy for Volvoman to Pick the Volvo and I will pick the BMW.

johnos1984

TCP/IP wrote: »

Maybe for fun we should put up a poll with which car the people of boards would prefer. A Volvo or a BMW. I am happy for Volvoman to Pick the Volvo and I will pick the BMW.

Can we use an image of a sheep so people know which one to pick?

Big Nasty

TCP/IP wrote: »

Maybe for fun we should put up a poll with which car the people of boards would prefer. A Volvo or a BMW. I am happy for Volvoman to Pick the Volvo and I will pick the BMW.

The funny thing is, and this is coming from a BMW driver, that in the last few years Volvos have become 'sexy' while recent model BMW's no longer have that presence (for me anyway).

TCP/IP

Please explain John more sheep as you call them buy Ford

johnos1984

TCP/IP wrote: »

Please explain John more sheep as you call them buy Ford

People have little or no imagination when it comes to buying cars in that segment.

if its not an Audi or Bmw people are too blinkered to look any further even if there are far better options out their.

Thats what I meant by sheep, also you limited the choice to BMW and Volvo not Ford

TCP/IP

MCMLXXV wrote: »

The funny thing is, and this is coming from a BMW driver, that in the last few years Volvos have become 'sexy' while recent model BMW's no longer have that presence (for me anyway).

I have yet to see a sexy Volvo and the thread "lend me 40 grand" did not show me one earlier.

TCP/IP

I dont agree my last car was a Porsche and I find the BMW better to drive, more comfy and better speced. There is loads of cars to choose from in that sector but my point is few if any can match the total package of BMW at the moment. But talking about Audi they do have some lovely cars at the moment.