RE: Kia Stinger GT-S vs. BMW 440i Coupe
Discussion
Fair play to KIA, they're making some desirable warm-hot versions of decent cars now, and this test also points out the longstanding issue that BMW really do need to do better with their suspension set ups... But why do I predict a 'spotted' on the KIA in a few years when massive depreciation has kicked in! That said buying one after 4 years at a cheap price and still having 3 years warranty would be great!
Ares said:
dinkel said:
kambites said:
dinkel said:
BMW got worse - since last 10 years - and Kia gets better.
I think that's unfair. BMW have shifted their focus, the cars are better for most buyers than they've ever been; they're just not as "keen-driver" focused as they used to be because that's not what the huge majority of their customers want. The 440i isn't really meant to be a sporty car - it's a motorway mile muncher which happens to have a powerful petrol engine. That it (and the rest of the 3-series range) drives as well as it does whilst fulfilling its main brief so well is a credit to them really. How on Earth is making a car less of a driving experience anything but bad?
What is being suggested here is that somehow it is OK for a car to have worse handling and ride than it could, but that’s OK because most people won’t notice...
Gentlemen, please feel free to hand in your Pistonheads membership as you leave. That is absolute heresy!
s m said:
Jimmy Recard said:
Stormfly1985 said:
And yet no-one will buy a £40k Kia in the UK so other than a rare dealer car no-one will actually see one on the roads. Shame.
Yes, it's a shame. I can't afford a £40,000 car so I won't be buying one new.To be honest, even if I had the money, I'd still rather have a manual on the sparsely populated roads round here.
I mean, how many Hyundai Genesis have you seen on the road? They are £52k before you even start with the options.
According to HowManyLeft there's only 48 registered examples, and some of those will be dealer demonstrators.
Edited by shakotan on Friday 17th November 08:51
IforB said:
This is Pistonheads, now go and wash your mouths out for trying to justify making a car dynamically worse for keen drivers and somehow that being acceptable.
I wasn't saying it's not a shame theyv'e changed their focus, I was saying that the cars are not worse in the objectively overall sense of the word. Ultimately the market for BMWs is not primarily keen drivers and if they continued to focus on it at the expense of other attributes they'd lose sales because of it. shakotan said:
I mean, how many Hyundai Genesis have you seen on the road? They are £52k before you even start with the options.
According to HowManyLeft there's only 48 registered examples, and some of those will be dealer demonstrators.
They're all over the place in the States though and seem faily common in the rest of Europe, at least compared to here. The British market is odd. According to HowManyLeft there's only 48 registered examples, and some of those will be dealer demonstrators.
kambites said:
IforB said:
This is Pistonheads, now go and wash your mouths out for trying to justify making a car dynamically worse for keen drivers and somehow that being acceptable.
I wasn't saying it's not a shame theyv'e changed their focus, I was saying that the cars are not worse in the objectively overall sense of the word. Ultimately the market for BMWs is not primarily keen drivers and if they continued to focus on it at the expense of other attributes they'd lose sales because of it. That is what made them popular, the thought that you were getting something better than the competition.
I do not see how reducing quality in any area is what people want and also can’t rationalise that making a car ride worse or more realistically, not as good as it could be is what consumers want.
It may be true that the normal customer might not know how to spell LSD let alone explain how it works, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t notice the difference.
What BMW have done is to cut costs and covered that by making interiors and engines that disguise that fact. They know that the average customer doesn’t really understand the intricacies of vehicle handling, but do understand that if you put your foot down then it goes fast or that the interior is quite nice.
For those of us who are more interested in the car as a machine for enjoyment not just a transportation tool, this cost cutting and compromise of the car should not be seen as acceptable. Just because most people don’t notice these things doesn’t matter.
We should be the ones giving BMW a kick and saying no, this is not good enough.
kambites said:
I'd argue the entire german "premium" car industry hs been trading off past glories for a good couple of decades now. People still lap them up.
I couldn’t agree more. It’s not just BMW, but since they still trade on the moniker of being the “ultimate driving machine” then they are being the most cynical in my eyes.E65Ross said:
IforB said:
kambites said:
I'd argue the entire german "premium" car industry hs been trading off past glories for a good couple of decades now. People still lap them up.
but since they still trade on the moniker of being the “ultimate driving machine”....IforB said:
Ares said:
dinkel said:
kambites said:
dinkel said:
BMW got worse - since last 10 years - and Kia gets better.
I think that's unfair. BMW have shifted their focus, the cars are better for most buyers than they've ever been; they're just not as "keen-driver" focused as they used to be because that's not what the huge majority of their customers want. The 440i isn't really meant to be a sporty car - it's a motorway mile muncher which happens to have a powerful petrol engine. That it (and the rest of the 3-series range) drives as well as it does whilst fulfilling its main brief so well is a credit to them really. How on Earth is making a car less of a driving experience anything but bad?
What is being suggested here is that somehow it is OK for a car to have worse handling and ride than it could, but that’s OK because most people won’t notice...
Gentlemen, please feel free to hand in your Pistonheads membership as you leave. That is absolute heresy!
To berate BMW for having a perceptive drop in dynamics is poor form - drive one compared to an E46, non-M, 330i Vs 335i, the modern cars are better.
Go and drive just about any of their competitors, they still lead the way in that. Perhaps not in many other ways, but compared to mid-model Audi/Merc/VW/etc, the mid-model Beemers are still the dynamic leaders, IME.
The fact that their sales keep going up suggests they are getting it right too
IforB said:
kambites said:
IforB said:
This is Pistonheads, now go and wash your mouths out for trying to justify making a car dynamically worse for keen drivers and somehow that being acceptable.
I wasn't saying it's not a shame theyv'e changed their focus, I was saying that the cars are not worse in the objectively overall sense of the word. Ultimately the market for BMWs is not primarily keen drivers and if they continued to focus on it at the expense of other attributes they'd lose sales because of it. That is what made them popular, the thought that you were getting something better than the competition.
I do not see how reducing quality in any area is what people want and also can’t rationalise that making a car ride worse or more realistically, not as good as it could be is what consumers want.
It may be true that the normal customer might not know how to spell LSD let alone explain how it works, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t notice the difference.
What BMW have done is to cut costs and covered that by making interiors and engines that disguise that fact. They know that the average customer doesn’t really understand the intricacies of vehicle handling, but do understand that if you put your foot down then it goes fast or that the interior is quite nice.
For those of us who are more interested in the car as a machine for enjoyment not just a transportation tool, this cost cutting and compromise of the car should not be seen as acceptable. Just because most people don’t notice these things doesn’t matter.
We should be the ones giving BMW a kick and saying no, this is not good enough.
You can berate ride quality (people have done so with BMWs for over 20 years), but aside from the fact the you can change away from RFT which does improve, I would say the cars ride better, and that is as someone that has had BMWs since 1994, with a couple of year off in the middle....and for the last 4 months.
Ares said:
What area do you think their quality has gone down?
You can berate ride quality (people have done so with BMWs for over 20 years), but aside from the fact the you can change away from RFT which does improve, I would say the cars ride better, and that is as someone that has had BMWs since 1994, with a couple of year off in the middle....and for the last 4 months.
I am also a serial BMW owner as well and have seen many ups and downs with various models.You can berate ride quality (people have done so with BMWs for over 20 years), but aside from the fact the you can change away from RFT which does improve, I would say the cars ride better, and that is as someone that has had BMWs since 1994, with a couple of year off in the middle....and for the last 4 months.
So, my biggest problem has been the quality of suspension components and those in the drive train.
Control arms that simply don’t last, bushes that wear far too quickly, crashey rides that are only solved by replacing OEM provided tyres for something totally different, rear boot floors that crack, springs that crack for no reason and last and definitely not least a #%+€¥?}# LSD fitted to their powerful models like the 440i.
BMW’s tens to be given a lot of latitude by owners, but I cannot think of any other cars that I’ve owned that have had so many well known faults that people just shrug their shoulders at.
Whilst there is no doubt that modern cars are superior in every measurable way compared to cars from 20 years ago, that doesn’t mean they are necessarily better in all respects.
My problem is the fact that BMW have compromised by value engineering the basic driveline and suspension components and covered that up by adding fancy electronics to cover the fact that they have cut corners underneath.
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....
I would say that the ride quality isn't what it used to be. Back in the days of the E34 5 series and the E32 7 series, they rode very well indeed. However, they were also a bit, shall we say, unlevel when cornering.
The E34 535i I used whilst my E21 was in for some work (I did about 1500 miles in the E34) was one of the nicest riding cars I've ever been in to be honest.
Otherwise I don't think anything else has deteriorated over time. PERHAPS the quality of the interior in terms of longevity.
The E34 535i I used whilst my E21 was in for some work (I did about 1500 miles in the E34) was one of the nicest riding cars I've ever been in to be honest.
Otherwise I don't think anything else has deteriorated over time. PERHAPS the quality of the interior in terms of longevity.
IforB said:
Ares said:
What area do you think their quality has gone down?
You can berate ride quality (people have done so with BMWs for over 20 years), but aside from the fact the you can change away from RFT which does improve, I would say the cars ride better, and that is as someone that has had BMWs since 1994, with a couple of year off in the middle....and for the last 4 months.
I am also a serial BMW owner as well and have seen many ups and downs with various models.You can berate ride quality (people have done so with BMWs for over 20 years), but aside from the fact the you can change away from RFT which does improve, I would say the cars ride better, and that is as someone that has had BMWs since 1994, with a couple of year off in the middle....and for the last 4 months.
So, my biggest problem has been the quality of suspension components and those in the drive train.
Control arms that simply don’t last, bushes that wear far too quickly, crashey rides that are only solved by replacing OEM provided tyres for something totally different, rear boot floors that crack, springs that crack for no reason and last and definitely not least a #%+€¥?}# LSD fitted to their powerful models like the 440i.
BMW’s tens to be given a lot of latitude by owners, but I cannot think of any other cars that I’ve owned that have had so many well known faults that people just shrug their shoulders at.
Whilst there is no doubt that modern cars are superior in every measurable way compared to cars from 20 years ago, that doesn’t mean they are necessarily better in all respects.
My problem is the fact that BMW have compromised by value engineering the basic driveline and suspension components and covered that up by adding fancy electronics to cover the fact that they have cut corners underneath.
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....
As for an LSD. 99% of 300bhp BMW/Merc/Audi/Etc buyers wouldn't know what one was, let alone need it.
I've said it before. I recently drove an E36, E46 and a current 3-series. The modern one is such a better drive, ride and place to be. The beauty of the E36 etc is a rose-tinted memory.
Ares said:
IforB said:
Ares said:
What area do you think their quality has gone down?
You can berate ride quality (people have done so with BMWs for over 20 years), but aside from the fact the you can change away from RFT which does improve, I would say the cars ride better, and that is as someone that has had BMWs since 1994, with a couple of year off in the middle....and for the last 4 months.
I am also a serial BMW owner as well and have seen many ups and downs with various models.You can berate ride quality (people have done so with BMWs for over 20 years), but aside from the fact the you can change away from RFT which does improve, I would say the cars ride better, and that is as someone that has had BMWs since 1994, with a couple of year off in the middle....and for the last 4 months.
So, my biggest problem has been the quality of suspension components and those in the drive train.
Control arms that simply don’t last, bushes that wear far too quickly, crashey rides that are only solved by replacing OEM provided tyres for something totally different, rear boot floors that crack, springs that crack for no reason and last and definitely not least a #%+€¥?}# LSD fitted to their powerful models like the 440i.
BMW’s tens to be given a lot of latitude by owners, but I cannot think of any other cars that I’ve owned that have had so many well known faults that people just shrug their shoulders at.
Whilst there is no doubt that modern cars are superior in every measurable way compared to cars from 20 years ago, that doesn’t mean they are necessarily better in all respects.
My problem is the fact that BMW have compromised by value engineering the basic driveline and suspension components and covered that up by adding fancy electronics to cover the fact that they have cut corners underneath.
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....
As for an LSD. 99% of 300bhp BMW/Merc/Audi/Etc buyers wouldn't know what one was, let alone need it.
I've said it before. I recently drove an E36, E46 and a current 3-series. The modern one is such a better drive, ride and place to be. The beauty of the E36 etc is a rose-tinted memory.
I’m with you that there can be a huge dose of rose tinted specs about the older versions, but it is not the actual quality of the drive that frustrates, but the missed opportunity about how good it could be!
OK this is a generation of car ago (though I felt similar issues when I changed to the f31 later) but my old E92 335d was utterly transmformed when I changed the suspension over for the Birds B3 kit and added the Quaife LSD too. It was quite literally like a different car. It handled better, the ride quality was transformed (and I’d already moved to non-RFT’s) and when you pushed on a bit, you had so much more confidence in the feedback from the car. There was also the fact that the traction control light wasn’t flickering away and became a rare sight rather than a constant companion.
It was a revelation. Truly. Springs, dampers and an LSD shouldn’t make that much difference to a car that was marketed as a performance vehicle. The engine was of course amazing, but the overall package was definitely compromised.
When moving into the F31 after that then I found that it was a better car overall, the gearbox was epic, the handling and ride was better but I found the steering was just a bit dumb and the interior seemed a bit unresolved and lower quality compared to the E9x series though obviously it had much better tech included. Compared to the standard E9x series then it was better, but compared to the upgraded version. I had, it was much more difficult to differentiate.
Edited by IforB on Friday 17th November 14:24
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.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.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.
Ares said:
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.
I used to hate getting blown away by those in my Xr4x4 around a similar time, it was only until I got my 200sx(tuned) that I got my own back! I always thought the 328i was quick. 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.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.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff