RE: PH Blog: heart versus head

RE: PH Blog: heart versus head

Author
Discussion

nickfrog

21,194 posts

218 months

Wednesday 27th June 2012
quotequote all
Leggy said:
And then be seen in it? (...) I wouldn't be seen in one.
That's fine if you care about what people may think of you because of your choice of car.

Personally, I buy a car for me and no one else (and the way it drives...).

Bencolem

1,019 posts

240 months

Wednesday 27th June 2012
quotequote all
Funnily enough saw an M Sport 1 series going the other way today and thought it was a 5 series sport for a minute - this 125i looks a bit like the M5 from the front (if you squint a bit!).

anonymous-user

55 months

Wednesday 27th June 2012
quotequote all
The only 1 series I have driven is the 120d and whilst it was capable, economical and efficient it was entirely devoid of character. Maybe the bigger petrols are better?

405dogvan

5,328 posts

266 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
Jobbo said:
No car gets near its official economy figures but that's not specific to BMW. And I've never heard anyone say that BMW quote faster performance figures than they can really achieve.
'Achieve' is an interesting word - I could 'achieve' some interesting figures with any car in the right circumstances (a Lada will go pretty fast if pushed from the back of a cargo plane - for example!)

A few years ago - I think it was on the Evo Forums tho it might have been here - someone posted to say they'd written a performance calculator which could calculate top speeds and acceleration times based on knowing a car's power/torque/gearing and Cd.

They were chuffed at what they'd done - but there was one problem. Every car they'd tried had matched it's claimed/reported performance figures EXCEPT for some BMWs - specifically M models. In their case, the cars were putting in times which were noticeably faster than the maths said they should be (about 1sec to 60 quicker, for example).

The best answer they got was something along the lines of

"BMW achieve this miracle through the careful use of lies..." smile

Hellbound

2,500 posts

177 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
Leggy said:
Max_Torque said:
BMW are masters at making sure their new platforms with plenty of early, mid and late life cycle impluse revisions designed into them!
Disagree. They make an ugly car then spend the next few years trying to play catch up and improve it.
I agree with Max. Depending on which model you're talking about, BMW's have depth. Dynamically and visually.

I've disliked the 1 series for quite some time now. I've driven both a 130i and 135i, and on each occasion my heart thawed a little (although the 130i is overly harsh for my tastes). Stylistically, the second generation of cars looked a little out of sorts at first. But now BMW's new family face has become a not uncommon sight, I'm warming to the way it looks. It's actually quite handsome, in the right colour and spec.

Give it another year, wait for the 135i M-Sport and 235i M-Sport models and most of us won't mind them so much. We certainly won't be as vitriolic about them.

will261058

1,115 posts

193 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
I think this has to be the ugliest car BMW has ever made. It looks slightly better with the aerodynamics at the front than the boggo but you still wouldnt look over your shoulder for that final glimpse! hurl

astirling

419 posts

173 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
I have an M135i on order, so looking forward to the full driven review of the 125i in the meantime!

As for the looks, I certainly don't think it's pretty, but I don't think it is crazy ugly either. I'm more worried about how it drives...

iain1970

239 posts

163 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
For me, the last version 2-door saloon (or coupé if you're into marketing) was the best looking version of the 1-series. I hope that this second generation spawns one too.

As for subjective buying when all material specs are virtually the same, isn't that how we all buy stuff?

Bash Brannigan

211 posts

188 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
iain1970 said:
For me, the last version 2-door saloon (or coupé if you're into marketing) was the best looking version of the 1-series. I hope that this second generation spawns one too.

As for subjective buying when all material specs are virtually the same, isn't that how we all buy stuff?
I heard a while ago that the coupes are being split off, so the 3 series coupe will be a '4 series' and the 1 series coupe will be a '2 series'. Looks pretty tasty from this http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/...


farrendahl

1,248 posts

175 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
I had a seemingly similar head vs heart battle not that long ago when it came to replacing the MGF.

I needed four seats
An estate was preferred
A decent amount of poke but didn't need to set the world on fire
A budget of no more than £1500

The two it came down to? An MG ZT-T 190 or a Volvo V70 Cross Country.
Performance was comparable, pricing much of a muchness but the head kept yelling out Volvo, It would probably be more reliable, if I ever choose to sell it on I'd get a better price for it etc etc etc

So of course I went out and got the MG ZT-T

anonymous-user

55 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
Looks like it has some sort of car based syndrome!

PascalBuyens

2,868 posts

283 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
iain1970 said:
For me, the last version 2-door saloon (or coupé if you're into marketing) was the best looking version of the 1-series. I hope that this second generation spawns one too.
1 M coupe in Orange, definitely the best looking 1 Series indeed.

I believe that the upcoming "2" Series is the next coupe, but could be wrong about it.

I kind of had it with BMW after the debacle with my last 525d.

daveco

4,130 posts

208 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
405dogvan said:
Jobbo said:
No car gets near its official economy figures but that's not specific to BMW. And I've never heard anyone say that BMW quote faster performance figures than they can really achieve.
'Achieve' is an interesting word - I could 'achieve' some interesting figures with any car in the right circumstances (a Lada will go pretty fast if pushed from the back of a cargo plane - for example!)

A few years ago - I think it was on the Evo Forums tho it might have been here - someone posted to say they'd written a performance calculator which could calculate top speeds and acceleration times based on knowing a car's power/torque/gearing and Cd.

They were chuffed at what they'd done - but there was one problem. Every car they'd tried had matched it's claimed/reported performance figures EXCEPT for some BMWs - specifically M models. In their case, the cars were putting in times which were noticeably faster than the maths said they should be (about 1sec to 60 quicker, for example).

The best answer they got was something along the lines of

"BMW achieve this miracle through the careful use of lies..." smile
Several American magazines have achieved substantially quicker 0-60, 0-100 times in several models, mostly M and turbo models. EVO magazine took 5.9 seconds to get 60mph out of the E46 330; a car BMW says takes 6.7 seconds to do the same speed. 323/325/328 models are also quicker than BMW figures suggest and I've dyno'd several of them, all put out more hp/lb ft figures than the official figures too.

And yes, I am a BMW fan boy smile

Dion20vt

252 posts

163 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
farrendahl said:
I had a seemingly similar head vs heart battle not that long ago when it came to replacing the MGF.

I needed four seats
An estate was preferred
A decent amount of poke but didn't need to set the world on fire
A budget of no more than £1500

The two it came down to? An MG ZT-T 190 or a Volvo V70 Cross Country.
Performance was comparable, pricing much of a muchness but the head kept yelling out Volvo, It would probably be more reliable, if I ever choose to sell it on I'd get a better price for it etc etc etc

So of course I went out and got the MG ZT-T
Should have gone for the "standard v70" over the XC, more car for your buck, a decent T5 can be had for a grand. But saying that, theres something appealing about the MG ZT 260 biggrin

German

203 posts

148 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
I spend basically all day looking at/driving them, and I'm sorry it still looks like a polo from the back and like its melted at the front....not disputing that the M stuff is a huge improvement, but no. Just no. Only plus is that while driving you cant see anything but the interior. Nice drive mind smile

jamesghwilson

67 posts

150 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
As far as I can make out, I quite like the design APART from the headlights. Thet are too big and weirdly shaped. I reminds me of a blue whale.
But when you're driving it, you aren't looking at it and it's RWD. I guess if you want the 6 cylinder, you'd have to splash out 0n a 130 or 135.

SprintSpeciale

432 posts

146 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
I reckon the BMW would be the better long term ownership prospect, but I find it visually, uh, challenging. I would go for the standard GTI, which I think strikes just the right balance for a warm hatch - handsome, but not shouty. Having said that, Mrs SS insisted on a Giulietta Cloverleaf because she thought the Golf was just too boring. Given that its her daily runabout I couldn't really object.

xu5

639 posts

158 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
If I was forced to have one it would be the BMW.

It looks like the impreza hatch to me and a polo from the rear. That is not my reason for favouring it though!

cris9964

211 posts

181 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
I'm with Riggers... I really like them in the flesh.

Just ordered this car. Speaking with a good friend at BMW HQ this engine (I know 4 cyl but thats progress I suppose), is brand new, full of their best tech and occupies a good middle ground in terms of performance.

I'm using it for local driving and the view on the 135i is absolutely quicker and more evocative, but 80kgs more over the front wheels, and an economy headache. I also have 2 kids and four doors would be nice..(135i, no rear doors).

Added into this, sub 5% APR PCP deals right now on the 4 cyl model and its a no brainer. Im not into the estoril blue, so toned the colour down and I think its a bit of a sleeper.

Runflats will be off asap and I think it could "chip" nicely, looking at the output of the new 328i (4cyl!) - fully insured of course -

Edited by cris9964 on Thursday 28th June 11:14

RedSwede

261 posts

195 months

Thursday 28th June 2012
quotequote all
Comparing a previous gen 1-series M-Sport with a GTI MK5 Edition 30.

I absolutely agree that in a lot of ways, the subjective appeal of the 1 was better. But the suspension settings were so bad in that BMW, that I could have never lived with it. It was sooo bouncy - every undulation took the car an extra "bounce" to settle down, and this made it particularly unpleasant over an undulating moorland road. To be clear, I'm not talking hard - hard is fine, and it wasn't hard - it was bouncy.

The Mk5 GTI didn't have this issue - that alone made it the better car for me.