The new 3er, thank F*** they've......

[RobM77]

Vocht said:

Blame China for the oversized grilles. They love them.

I thought they stir fried food?

[Vocht]

RobM77 said:

I thought they stir fried food?

[Touring442]

yonex said:

No, those that don’t want scrabbling understeer and wheel spin. Like an Audi.

I can't say I noticed that. I drove a mate's 2014 A4 TDI over the snake pass to Glossop not long ago, and it was a pretty decent car. I was punting it along at a fair old lick and didn't bring the traction light on once. FWD has come a long way since the Allegro.

[anonymous-user]

LuS1fer said:

A somewhat pathetic attempt at ridiculing a motor bike faster than 90 % of most cars on acceleration. I've had a CBR 1000 but the SV with low weight and 71hp is just fine.

1. RWD is appropriate for a car with more than 450hp so RWD is pretty much a default choice. Would I be happy with a 350hp FWD and could I have just as much fun, if not more? Yes.

2. As the best selling sports coupe in the world, you might be in a minority there. The almost zero depreciation and public adulation also shreds your argument but it is of course subjective. That said, there is a common perception of what looks good. Besides which, it was 1968 not 1985 and the irony is that BMW have clung to the same 3 series blueprint since the 70s yet have ended up with this.

3. A Ford ST and many other cars are perfect for a given job. So is my fridge but it's a functional object with other alternatives but looks better.

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 26th April 07:29

It’s not my fault your perception of a quick motorcycle or an interesting car differs from mine. Your daft statement dismissing person perefences for rear, over front wheel drive using the old ‘driving god’ bs (how we laughed) makes you look a bit daft.

So 350 is the new arbitrary limit now? Caterham etc must have it all wrong, Lotus, pah.

If you’re going to build an argument why rwd is suitable the Mustang isn’t a great choice. Try an Elise and tell me it’s be more fun with fwd.

Maybe you don’t care, but others do.

[anonymous-user]

Touring442 said:

I can't say I noticed that. I drove a mate's 2014 A4 TDI over the snake pass to Glossop not long ago, and it was a pretty decent car. I was punting it along at a fair old lick and didn't bring the traction light on once. FWD has come a long way since the Allegro.

The A4 is a heap of crap. I have no idea why anyone would actually choose one over the competition. Over service brakes, poor low down grunt, horrible boosty power delivery. As for understeer, not the worst but in the wet traction isn’t great. One of the worst cars I’ve owned.

[thebraketester]

The new CR diesels in the VAG range are actually less "boosty" feeling than the old PD engines...... still sub optimal though :-)

[toon10]

yonex said:

Touring442 said:

I can't say I noticed that. I drove a mate's 2014 A4 TDI over the snake pass to Glossop not long ago, and it was a pretty decent car. I was punting it along at a fair old lick and didn't bring the traction light on once. FWD has come a long way since the Allegro.

The A4 is a heap of crap. I have no idea why anyone would actually choose one over the competition. Over service brakes, poor low down grunt, horrible boosty power delivery. As for understeer, not the worst but in the wet traction isn’t great. One of the worst cars I’ve owned.

Pretty much my experience. I use an A4 TDi pool car at work a lot and the brakes are too much and the understeer, whilst not horrific, is there. It is noticeable and unpleasant, especially when cheaper cars like the Mondeo drive so much better.

I was chatting the other day about the BMW and Audi line up with a mate. Like for like (A4 tdi vs 320d, etc.), we were struggling to think of which Audi we would choose over the BMW. The R8 over the i8 maybe but couldn't come up with much else.

[LuS1fer]

yonex said:

Try an Elise and tell me it’s be more fun with fwd.

Maybe you don’t care, but others do.

You just like arguing, others have different views.

I have tried an Elise. I even looked at buying one.

Didn't like it. It was noisy, tinny, flimsy and absolutely no fun at all - That's fun for me and let's not define fun or argue about what that is.

Others may care about RWD but far more don't, many probably can't tell the difference - it's not a difficult concept to grasp.

I could tell you to go and drive a new Civic Type R and come back and tell me it would be more fun as a RWD - I haven't driven one but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't find it dull or complain about it being FWD.

So let's just agree to disagree.

[RobM77]

LuS1fer said:

yonex said:

Try an Elise and tell me it’s be more fun with fwd.

Maybe you don’t care, but others do.

You just like arguing, others have different views.

I have tried an Elise. I even looked at buying one.

Didn't like it. It was noisy, tinny, flimsy and absolutely no fun at all - That's fun for me and let's not define fun or argue about what that is.

Others may care about RWD but far more don't, many probably can't tell the difference - it's not a difficult concept to grasp.

I could tell you to go and drive a new Civic Type R and come back and tell me it would be more fun as a RWD - I haven't driven one but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't find it dull or complain about it being FWD.

So let's just agree to disagree.

Everyone looks for something different in a car, and even if two people look for the same thing they'll have different preferences.

As a footnote, I drive my wife's FN2 Civic Type R from time to time and yes, I do feel that ultimately FWD limits its enjoyment for me. There's a great video somewhere of a Honda test driver caning one around a hilly test track and it shows this point very well.

[SidewaysSi]

LuS1fer said:

yonex said:

Try an Elise and tell me it’s be more fun with fwd.

Maybe you don’t care, but others do.

You just like arguing, others have different views.

I have tried an Elise. I even looked at buying one.

Didn't like it. It was noisy, tinny, flimsy and absolutely no fun at all - That's fun for me and let's not define fun or argue about what that is.

Others may care about RWD but far more don't, many probably can't tell the difference - it's not a difficult concept to grasp.

I could tell you to go and drive a new Civic Type R and come back and tell me it would be more fun as a RWD - I haven't driven one but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't find it dull or complain about it being FWD.

So let's just agree to disagree.

I have an Elise which I love - would be far too noisy for you though.

Been looking at a practical family car and drove the new Civic R for some considerable distance. Liked it a lot - very capable and would no doubt be half decent on a circuit.

Jumped back in my old E36 to drive back home. Yep, the BMW was significantly more fun on road so no order placed for the Honda.

[anonymous-user]

LuS1fer said:

You just like arguing, others have different views.

I have tried an Elise. I even looked at buying one.

Didn't like it. It was noisy, tinny, flimsy and absolutely no fun at all - That's fun for me and let's not define fun or argue about what that is.

Others may care about RWD but far more don't, many probably can't tell the difference - it's not a difficult concept to grasp.

I could tell you to go and drive a new Civic Type R and come back and tell me it would be more fun as a RWD - I haven't driven one but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't find it dull or complain about it being FWD.

So let's just agree to disagree.

It's fine for me, but when someone starts making comments about 'driving gods' in an attempt to belittle the preferences of others it's always going to grate. Personally I don't care, I have owned many different types of cars, the DC2 was one of the most fun cars ever, but as soon as I got into rwd it opened up a whole new world for me. I totally don't accept that the differences cannot be felt, but agree enthusiasts are in the minority, with pretty much everything it appears.

Anyway back OT

It appears nobody has come up with a viable alternative still.

[Ares]

kambites said:

Ares said:

So what is it then...? If you think it looks better and drives better??

I don't know but I'd guess advertising, brand history and perception, perceived reliability, perceived quality, availability of cheap personal finance and/or company car leases,.. those sorts of things.

ETA I'm not saying those things are bad reasons to pick a car, by the way.

Edited by kambites on Thursday 25th April 17:40

So you don't think it has anything to do with preference foe the car/drive? Do you really have such a dim view of all BMW drivers?

[Ares]

LuS1fer said:

1. RWD is appropriate for a car with more than 450hp so RWD is pretty much a default choice. Would I be happy with a 350hp FWD and could I have just as much fun, if not more? Yes.

Edited by LuS1fer on Friday 26th April 07:29

A 350bhp FWD will be inherently compromised at best. Downright st at worst.

I'm struggling to think of a single 350bhp FWD car that I would class as good, let alone fun.

[Ares]

LuS1fer said:

I have tried an Elise. I even looked at buying one.

Didn't like it. It was noisy, tinny, flimsy and absolutely no fun at all - That's fun for me and let's not define fun or argue about what that is.

Are you sure you are on the right site? Or that you have a pulse?

[kambites]

Ares said:

So you don't think it has anything to do with preference foe the car/drive? Do you really have such a dim view of all BMW drivers?

Firstly I don't view is as "dim" at all, I'm not snobbish enough to believe that one reason for buying a car is any "worse" than any other reason.

To answer the question though, clearly people wont buy a car they don't like but that's not really the point. Most people don't short-list cars like enthusiasts do - they will pick a car they like the idea of, possibly drive it (although many do not), and if they like it buy it. If they like the first car they try they wont bother to test drive the competition to see if they might like them more because a car is an appliance, it just has to be good enough. Nothing wrong with that attitude whatsoever, it's much the same approach I take to buying things I view as "white-goods" myself.

The result is that the whole market becomes a battle to get people to look at your product first and make sure it's not bad enough that they reject it, rather than a battle to produce the best product.

[Ares]

kambites said:

Ares said:

So you don't think it has anything to do with preference foe the car/drive? Do you really have such a dim view of all BMW drivers?

Firstly I don't view is as "dim" at all, I'm not snobbish enough to believe that one reason for buying a car is any "worse" than any other reason.

To answer the question though, clearly people wont buy a car they don't like but that's not really the point. Most people don't short-list cars like enthusiasts do - they will pick a car they like the idea of, possibly drive it (although many do not), and if they like it buy it. If they like the first car they try they wont bother to test drive the competition to see if they might like them more because a car is an appliance, it just has to be good enough. Nothing wrong with that attitude whatsoever, it's much the same approach I take to buying things I view as "white-goods" myself.

The result is that the whole market becomes a battle to get people to look at your product first and make sure it's not bad enough that they reject it, rather than a battle to produce the best product.

So manufacturers should ditch R&D on cars and just invest in the best marketing?

[kambites]

Ares said:

So manufacturers should ditch R&D on cars and just invest in the best marketing?

Clearly not, because they need to make their cars good enough and the barrier for "good enough" keeps moving as the market evolves. They also need to keep the media onside; not the "serious" motoring media (if such a thing exists) but the tabloids and entertainment TV type media and those do make direct comparisons between cars.

You can see the same thing in the tech industries with companies like Apple. Yes the products need to be decent but at a technical level they don't need to be exceptional or even necessarily better than the competition. Other factors have more market value. Would Apple survive if they ditched their R&D? Of course not because their products would quickly cease to be good enough.

[Ares]

kambites said:

Ares said:

So manufacturers should ditch R&D on cars and just invest in the best marketing?

Clearly not, because they need to make their cars good enough and the barrier for "good enough" keeps moving as the market evolves. They also need to keep the media onside; not the "serious" motoring media (if such a thing exists) but the tabloids and entertainment TV type media and those do make direct comparisons between cars.

You can see the same thing in the tech industries with companies like Apple. Yes the products need to be decent but at a technical level they don't need to be exceptional or even necessarily better than the competition. Other factors have more market value. Would Apple survive if they ditched their R&D? Of course not because their products would quickly cease to be good enough.

Yes, my question was tongue in cheek....but if a car is great, it will quickly sell exceptionally well. The Jag XE just isn't on too many levels. That's why it isn't selling well, not due to the list of intangible/historic reasons you gave.

[Barga]

Ares said:

kambites said:

Ares said:

So manufacturers should ditch R&D on cars and just invest in the best marketing?

Clearly not, because they need to make their cars good enough and the barrier for "good enough" keeps moving as the market evolves. They also need to keep the media onside; not the "serious" motoring media (if such a thing exists) but the tabloids and entertainment TV type media and those do make direct comparisons between cars.

You can see the same thing in the tech industries with companies like Apple. Yes the products need to be decent but at a technical level they don't need to be exceptional or even necessarily better than the competition. Other factors have more market value. Would Apple survive if they ditched their R&D? Of course not because their products would quickly cease to be good enough.

Yes, my question was tongue in cheek....but if a car is great, it will quickly sell exceptionally well. The Jag XE just isn't on too many levels. That's why it isn't selling well, not due to the list of intangible/historic reasons you gave.

Not always as brand snobbery can scupper even good products if not you would see many more Alfa Romeo Giulias on the road!

[kambites]

Ares said:

Yes, my question was tongue in cheek....but if a car is great, it will quickly sell exceptionally well. The Jag XE just isn't on too many levels. That's why it isn't selling well, not due to the list of intangible/historic reasons you gave.

I think we'll have to agree to differ there.