RE: Kia Stinger GT-S vs. BMW 440i Coupe

RE: Kia Stinger GT-S vs. BMW 440i Coupe

Author
Discussion

Wills2

22,663 posts

174 months

Friday 17th November 2017
quotequote all
IforB said:
I am also a serial BMW owner as well and have seen many ups and downs with various models.
So am I, I've had 10 in the last 15 years driven over 400,000 miles in them and I don't recognise any of what you have said in this thread.

IforB said:
I’ll say it again. A rear drive 300+ bhp car with performance pretensions and it doesn’t have an LSD? What the actual f....
My 385hp 911 997.2 C2S didn't have an LSD either, no 997 C2 or C2S came with one as standard and it was an incredible car to drive better than any of the 5 LSD equipped M cars I've had, so that statement above is a load of tosh.....



Tony33

1,065 posts

121 months

Friday 17th November 2017
quotequote all
IforB said:
Tony33 said:
IforB said:
I’ll say it again. A rear drive 300+ bhp car with performance pretensions and it doesn’t have an LSD? What the actual f....
In my view a 440i is just a 4 series with a bigger engine. Very nice car and a powerful one too but it isn't distinguished from the range in any way as a performance model. Not an M car. Not an M Performance car. I don't think typical buyers would expect an LSD nor wish the premium price of speccing one.
Back in ye-olden days the top end 3 series were fitted with LSD's as standard. Earlier E36 325 and some 328i's had them. They dropped them in favour of an electronic nanny in around 1996. (Anorak firmly engaged...)

Now, knowing as I do, the difference that an LSD makes to a non-M but powerful 3 series, why would any petrolhead think it acceptable to hugely compromise these very expensive and powerful cars? They aren't M-cars, but they are a lot more powerful than many of the earlier M-machines. Having this differentiation for purely marketing or cost reasons should annoy all of us who care about vehicle dynamics and driving enjoyment.
A current fast Golf is more powerful and quicker than a Ferrari 308 that is just the way things have changed, it doesn't make it a supercar. As good and fast as it is the 440i isn't classified as a performance BMW model. If it was an M440i we might have this debate but it isn't even that.

IforB

9,840 posts

228 months

Friday 17th November 2017
quotequote all
Wills2 said:
IforB said:
I am also a serial BMW owner as well and have seen many ups and downs with various models.
So am I, I've had 10 in the last 15 years driven over 400,000 miles in them and I don't recognise any of what you have said in this thread.

IforB said:
I’ll say it again. A rear drive 300+ bhp car with performance pretensions and it doesn’t have an LSD? What the actual f....
My 385hp 911 997.2 C2S didn't have an LSD either, no 997 C2 or C2S came with one as standard and it was an incredible car to drive better than any of the 5 LSD equipped M cars I've had, so that statement above is a load of tosh.....



Porsche have reintroduced the LSD on the 911 after that. They did the same as BMW in using PSM to control traction. My old 996 had an LSD though, as does the current GT3...

However, you are comparing apples with filet steak here. Any 911 is a very different machine to a 3 series which has far less competent suspension as standard and is a far bigger and heavier machine. Of course it had better traction, the fact it had an engine at the back probably helped there too!

How often did you spin up the inside rear wheel or saw the lights flashing as PSM sorted things out on the 911? Not very often I'd warrant, whereas on a powerful 3 series, it happens regularly in the dry, let alone the wet. However, if you head to the Porsche forums and talk to people who use them for track days and have experienced both non-LSD and LSD cars, then they generally rave about the difference.

Maybe I just drive a bit quicker or get on the throttle earlier and harder than you do hence why I noticed it so clearly. It also appears I'm the only one who has back to back experience of a car without and with and I can tell you quite categorically, that I don't recognise what you are saying either. It is as plain as day if you ever have the opportunity to try it out.

IforB

9,840 posts

228 months

Friday 17th November 2017
quotequote all
Tony33 said:
IforB said:
Tony33 said:
IforB said:
I’ll say it again. A rear drive 300+ bhp car with performance pretensions and it doesn’t have an LSD? What the actual f....
In my view a 440i is just a 4 series with a bigger engine. Very nice car and a powerful one too but it isn't distinguished from the range in any way as a performance model. Not an M car. Not an M Performance car. I don't think typical buyers would expect an LSD nor wish the premium price of speccing one.
Back in ye-olden days the top end 3 series were fitted with LSD's as standard. Earlier E36 325 and some 328i's had them. They dropped them in favour of an electronic nanny in around 1996. (Anorak firmly engaged...)

Now, knowing as I do, the difference that an LSD makes to a non-M but powerful 3 series, why would any petrolhead think it acceptable to hugely compromise these very expensive and powerful cars? They aren't M-cars, but they are a lot more powerful than many of the earlier M-machines. Having this differentiation for purely marketing or cost reasons should annoy all of us who care about vehicle dynamics and driving enjoyment.
A current fast Golf is more powerful and quicker than a Ferrari 308 that is just the way things have changed, it doesn't make it a supercar. As good and fast as it is the 440i isn't classified as a performance BMW model. If it was an M440i we might have this debate but it isn't even that.
The badge doesn't really matter though, that's just branding. The fact that it is more powerful and faster than super cars of days gone by to me says that it should be treated as a performance car.

E65Ross

34,941 posts

211 months

Friday 17th November 2017
quotequote all
IforB said:
Tony33 said:
IforB said:
Tony33 said:
IforB said:
I’ll say it again. A rear drive 300+ bhp car with performance pretensions and it doesn’t have an LSD? What the actual f....
In my view a 440i is just a 4 series with a bigger engine. Very nice car and a powerful one too but it isn't distinguished from the range in any way as a performance model. Not an M car. Not an M Performance car. I don't think typical buyers would expect an LSD nor wish the premium price of speccing one.
Back in ye-olden days the top end 3 series were fitted with LSD's as standard. Earlier E36 325 and some 328i's had them. They dropped them in favour of an electronic nanny in around 1996. (Anorak firmly engaged...)

Now, knowing as I do, the difference that an LSD makes to a non-M but powerful 3 series, why would any petrolhead think it acceptable to hugely compromise these very expensive and powerful cars? They aren't M-cars, but they are a lot more powerful than many of the earlier M-machines. Having this differentiation for purely marketing or cost reasons should annoy all of us who care about vehicle dynamics and driving enjoyment.
A current fast Golf is more powerful and quicker than a Ferrari 308 that is just the way things have changed, it doesn't make it a supercar. As good and fast as it is the 440i isn't classified as a performance BMW model. If it was an M440i we might have this debate but it isn't even that.
The badge doesn't really matter though, that's just branding. The fact that it is more powerful and faster than super cars of days gone by to me says that it should be treated as a performance car.
Back in the 1940's Ferrari made a 166S with 140bhp. Does that mean a VW Polo should be treated as a supercar?

Tony33

1,065 posts

121 months

Friday 17th November 2017
quotequote all
IforB said:
Tony33 said:
IforB said:
Tony33 said:
IforB said:
I’ll say it again. A rear drive 300+ bhp car with performance pretensions and it doesn’t have an LSD? What the actual f....
In my view a 440i is just a 4 series with a bigger engine. Very nice car and a powerful one too but it isn't distinguished from the range in any way as a performance model. Not an M car. Not an M Performance car. I don't think typical buyers would expect an LSD nor wish the premium price of speccing one.
Back in ye-olden days the top end 3 series were fitted with LSD's as standard. Earlier E36 325 and some 328i's had them. They dropped them in favour of an electronic nanny in around 1996. (Anorak firmly engaged...)

Now, knowing as I do, the difference that an LSD makes to a non-M but powerful 3 series, why would any petrolhead think it acceptable to hugely compromise these very expensive and powerful cars? They aren't M-cars, but they are a lot more powerful than many of the earlier M-machines. Having this differentiation for purely marketing or cost reasons should annoy all of us who care about vehicle dynamics and driving enjoyment.
A current fast Golf is more powerful and quicker than a Ferrari 308 that is just the way things have changed, it doesn't make it a supercar. As good and fast as it is the 440i isn't classified as a performance BMW model. If it was an M440i we might have this debate but it isn't even that.
The badge doesn't really matter though, that's just branding. The fact that it is more powerful and faster than super cars of days gone by to me says that it should be treated as a performance car.
Having owned a Golf R and driven a 308 many years ago the two are incomparable other then by stats on paper. Comparing power output and performance figures across eras does nothing to determine the categorisation in the current market.

IforB

9,840 posts

228 months

Friday 17th November 2017
quotequote all
E65Ross said:
Back in the 1940's Ferrari made a 166S with 140bhp. Does that mean a VW Polo should be treated as a supercar?
That's just a silly argument really, especially as a 166 came from an era long before the super car term had ever been considered.

Though, if you compared the relative performance of something like a contemporary Fiat Topolino then the 166 was something of a super car, even if in modern terms it had a very modest turn of speed, a fast Mondeo would leave it for dust.

Cheapskate

72 posts

105 months

Friday 17th November 2017
quotequote all
Ares said:
Exactly, the 340/440 is exactly the same as it's forebears. 323/325/328/330/335.... 3-series with the biggest engine pre-M3.

It's great car. A really great car. Always has been. Mid-tier sports car performance in a saloon and at affordable price.

I can still remember nailing a 328i back in the mid/late 90s coming away from lights, and feeling the push when the VANOS kicked in. Felt like a rocket.
Not exactly, because there’s a chance that your 328i was equipped with a factory LSD. It is a shame/madness that the E90 evolution of that car, boasting an additional 85Kw and twice the torque, was exclusively open diff. Even if it is a valid point that 90% of drivers wouldn’t care, give the remainder an option to tick on the order sheet.
The cynic in me suggests that a 335i outperforming the E46 M3 while shod with runflats might have annoyed M Division. Not to mention leaving a margin for the V8 M3 as further justification the price differential.

I gave my 328i to my brother and it has now covered over 400,000km with almost faultlessly. As an all-rounder, it is excellent. But I preferred the MR2 Turbo I had at the same time in most respects. And the E90 335i is better in every way, despite the weight penalty.

r11co

6,244 posts

229 months

Saturday 18th November 2017
quotequote all
theplayingmantis said:
The beemer <snip> is better quality both tangible and intangible.
I highly doubt that. The Germans are masters at hiding the compromises in the quality of their vehicles.

I'm willing to bet my house that the KIA will be solid and corrosion free long after the BMW has revealed its flakey, cracked subframes and rusty wheel arches. KIA and Hyundai targeted the best of the Japanese as the standard for the quality of build for their cars.

I've not long sold an E90 330i that I owned for nearly 5 years. When I got it it had a fuel leak caused by a cut in the petrol tank breather hose where it passed through a badly-finished hole in the bodywork. Not a one-off BTW - a known problem as a result of compromises in the quality of the finish of the vehicle. BMW knew about it and quietly introduced a fix to later models and retrofitted it to existing cars where the owners had spotted it (clearly the previous owner of mine hadn't). Other manufacturers would have issued a recall, but that would have been bad publicity and might have damaged the stage-managed reputation for quality.

Despite that I loved the car, but part of the reason for selling it on was that I was fighting a losing battle to keep it in the condition that would satisfy me. I had the edges of the rear wheel-arches refinished not long after I got it as the original protection was inadequate, the paint was flaking and rust was starting to appear. Last winter the driver's side front wing started to show corrosion that had started on the inside edge that I had to take measures to stop spreading. I would probably be doing the same on the passanger side right now if it had not been sold.

Not a one-off. Run your hands along the lip of a wheelarch of any BMW that has experienced more than 3 or 4 UK winters and you will feel the beginnings of the problem I am talking about.

Edited by r11co on Saturday 18th November 08:21

Ares

11,000 posts

119 months

Monday 20th November 2017
quotequote all
Cheapskate said:
Ares said:
Exactly, the 340/440 is exactly the same as it's forebears. 323/325/328/330/335.... 3-series with the biggest engine pre-M3.

It's great car. A really great car. Always has been. Mid-tier sports car performance in a saloon and at affordable price.

I can still remember nailing a 328i back in the mid/late 90s coming away from lights, and feeling the push when the VANOS kicked in. Felt like a rocket.
Not exactly, because there’s a chance that your 328i was equipped with a factory LSD. It is a shame/madness that the E90 evolution of that car, boasting an additional 85Kw and twice the torque, was exclusively open diff. Even if it is a valid point that 90% of drivers wouldn’t care, give the remainder an option to tick on the order sheet.
The cynic in me suggests that a 335i outperforming the E46 M3 while shod with runflats might have annoyed M Division. Not to mention leaving a margin for the V8 M3 as further justification the price differential.

I gave my 328i to my brother and it has now covered over 400,000km with almost faultlessly. As an all-rounder, it is excellent. But I preferred the MR2 Turbo I had at the same time in most respects. And the E90 335i is better in every way, despite the weight penalty.
I've no idea if it was or wasn't, but the E90 330i I has was still a better car when subsequently out side by side.

I just don't think a warm saloon needs one. Overkill.

anonymous-user

53 months

Monday 20th November 2017
quotequote all
I drove the V6 variant at the weekend. I'm still collating my thoughts entirely, but essentially I'm not in the market for a replacement car let alone a new car, however there is serious man-maths going on! The Stinger gets the thumbs up unreservedly from me. It drives superbly, the ergonomics are spot on, and is the driving position is perfect. Performance wise it is everything that I need (and more).

culpz

4,881 posts

111 months

Monday 20th November 2017
quotequote all
The lease deals for the Stinger are out. The GT-S model is over £500 pcm on Lings. Other sites, like Nationwide Vehicle Contracts, are more like over £700 pcm. I believe the 440i is much the same but i think they did a streak of really cheap limited deals, like they did on the new Audi S4/S5.

Ares

11,000 posts

119 months

Monday 20th November 2017
quotequote all
culpz said:
The lease deals for the Stinger are out. The GT-S model is over £500 pcm on Lings. Other sites, like Nationwide Vehicle Contracts, are more like over £700 pcm. I believe the 440i is much the same but i think they did a streak of really cheap limited deals, like they did on the new Audi S4/S5.
440i the same? The M3 wasn't far from that 3 months ago, and a 340i could be had for under £400.

culpz

4,881 posts

111 months

Monday 20th November 2017
quotequote all
Ares said:
culpz said:
The lease deals for the Stinger are out. The GT-S model is over £500 pcm on Lings. Other sites, like Nationwide Vehicle Contracts, are more like over £700 pcm. I believe the 440i is much the same but i think they did a streak of really cheap limited deals, like they did on the new Audi S4/S5.
440i the same? The M3 wasn't far from that 3 months ago, and a 340i could be had for under £400.
Out of those two sites, yes. I haven't checked any others, mind you. I didn't look at the 340i but those might have been the cheap ones i was on about.

Ares

11,000 posts

119 months

Monday 20th November 2017
quotequote all
culpz said:
Ares said:
culpz said:
The lease deals for the Stinger are out. The GT-S model is over £500 pcm on Lings. Other sites, like Nationwide Vehicle Contracts, are more like over £700 pcm. I believe the 440i is much the same but i think they did a streak of really cheap limited deals, like they did on the new Audi S4/S5.
440i the same? The M3 wasn't far from that 3 months ago, and a 340i could be had for under £400.
Out of those two sites, yes. I haven't checked any others, mind you. I didn't look at the 340i but those might have been the cheap ones i was on about.
Best deals on 440i Vs Stinger:




Stinger is 20% more expensive

culpz

4,881 posts

111 months

Monday 20th November 2017
quotequote all
Ares said:
culpz said:
Ares said:
culpz said:
The lease deals for the Stinger are out. The GT-S model is over £500 pcm on Lings. Other sites, like Nationwide Vehicle Contracts, are more like over £700 pcm. I believe the 440i is much the same but i think they did a streak of really cheap limited deals, like they did on the new Audi S4/S5.
440i the same? The M3 wasn't far from that 3 months ago, and a 340i could be had for under £400.
Out of those two sites, yes. I haven't checked any others, mind you. I didn't look at the 340i but those might have been the cheap ones i was on about.
Best deals on 440i Vs Stinger:




Stinger is 20% more expensive
Yeah, not great in comparison.

Kitchski

6,514 posts

230 months

Monday 20th November 2017
quotequote all
I love the Stinger. I'd never spend anything like that kind of money on a daily driver (reserve it for classics and fun weekend stuff.....if I had it) but if I won the lotto and didn't really care as much, I'd buy a Stinger for daily duties. Full list, no discounts, every box ticked, and probably just in black.

Sportidge

1,032 posts

236 months

Monday 20th November 2017
quotequote all
Kitchski said:
I'd buy a Stinger for daily duties. Full list, no discounts, every box ticked, and probably just in black.
AFAIK, the only "boxes to tick" are what colour you want it painting. Everything else comes as standard, depending on which trim level you choose.....

Kitchski

6,514 posts

230 months

Monday 20th November 2017
quotequote all
Sportidge said:
AFAIK, the only "boxes to tick" are what colour you want it painting. Everything else comes as standard, depending on which trim level you choose.....
My lust for the Kia further flourishes.

Willy Nilly

12,511 posts

166 months

Monday 20th November 2017
quotequote all
culpz said:
The lease deals for the Stinger are out. The GT-S model is over £500 pcm on Lings. Other sites, like Nationwide Vehicle Contracts, are more like over £700 pcm. I believe the 440i is much the same but i think they did a streak of really cheap limited deals, like they did on the new Audi S4/S5.
Are the cheap lease deals a good deal or have they built some spartan cars with rubbish spec? I recall people looking for used Golf R's on here and the ex lease cars spec wasn't up to much.

Liking that Kia though. driving