Slowest "Performance" Brand Car ?

[Scobblelotcher]

Wills2 said:

culpz said:

So many assumptions linked in with personal preference, so little time.

I had a BMW 118i M Sport as a hire car for about 2-3 weeks. It was one of the worst new cars i've had the (dis)pleasure of driving. I genuinely wish i'd picked the other option, which was an Audi A3 2.0 TDI Sport. I just wanted to try the Beemer and see what it was like. It didn't take long to regret it.

I've just picked up a 118i as a loaner for the day, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it, I was really surprised at how smooth and torquey the engine is, it handles well, nicely built and cruises at 90mph perfectly.

I've no idea what you drive but the 118i is perfectly decent, I haven't driven one for years but it's good.

.

Edited by Wills2 on Thursday 22 March 12:34

According to Culpz profile he drives a 1.4 Audi A4.

[Shiv_P]

Wills2 said:

culpz said:

So many assumptions linked in with personal preference, so little time.

I had a BMW 118i M Sport as a hire car for about 2-3 weeks. It was one of the worst new cars i've had the (dis)pleasure of driving. I genuinely wish i'd picked the other option, which was an Audi A3 2.0 TDI Sport. I just wanted to try the Beemer and see what it was like. It didn't take long to regret it.

I've just picked up a 118i as a loaner for the day, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it, I was really surprised at how smooth and torquey the engine is, it handles well, nicely built and cruises at 90mph perfectly.

I've no idea what you drive but the 118i is perfectly decent, I haven't driven one for years but it's good.

.

Edited by Wills2 on Thursday 22 March 12:34

I've been the unlucky recipient of a 3 hour stint in the back of an M sport 116d on 500 inch wheels and it was the worst riding car I've ever been in. Just horrific.

[Wills2]

Shiv_P said:

Wills2 said:

culpz said:

So many assumptions linked in with personal preference, so little time.

I had a BMW 118i M Sport as a hire car for about 2-3 weeks. It was one of the worst new cars i've had the (dis)pleasure of driving. I genuinely wish i'd picked the other option, which was an Audi A3 2.0 TDI Sport. I just wanted to try the Beemer and see what it was like. It didn't take long to regret it.

I've just picked up a 118i as a loaner for the day, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it, I was really surprised at how smooth and torquey the engine is, it handles well, nicely built and cruises at 90mph perfectly.

I've no idea what you drive but the 118i is perfectly decent, I haven't driven one for years but it's good.

.

Edited by Wills2 on Thursday 22 March 12:34

I've been the unlucky recipient of a 3 hour stint in the back of an M sport 116d on 500 inch wheels and it was the worst riding car I've ever been in. Just horrific.

I wouldn't be a fan of the diesel engine, but ride quality is great on this one, just nipped out again in it, it's a great little car.

[Chestrockwell]

Shiv_P said:

I've been the unlucky recipient of a 3 hour stint in the back of an M sport 116d on 500 inch wheels and it was the worst riding car I've ever been in. Just horrific.

True, in the 1 series you sit right over the back wheels...add low profile tyres with the brickstone Runflat’s they come with and you have a terrible back seat journey.

[cerb4.5lee]

Chestrockwell said:

Shiv_P said:

I've been the unlucky recipient of a 3 hour stint in the back of an M sport 116d on 500 inch wheels and it was the worst riding car I've ever been in. Just horrific.

True, in the 1 series you sit right over the back wheels...add low profile tyres with the brickstone Runflat’s they come with and you have a terrible back seat journey.

I couldn't sit in the back of my E90 330d/330i either because it made me feel sick. The ride with the run flats was terrible...whoever came up with the idea of run flats needs shooting for me.

[RobM77]

cerb4.5lee said:

Chestrockwell said:

Shiv_P said:

I've been the unlucky recipient of a 3 hour stint in the back of an M sport 116d on 500 inch wheels and it was the worst riding car I've ever been in. Just horrific.

True, in the 1 series you sit right over the back wheels...add low profile tyres with the brickstone Runflat’s they come with and you have a terrible back seat journey.

I couldn't sit in the back of my E90 330d/330i either because it made me feel sick. The ride with the run flats was terrible...whoever came up with the idea of run flats needs shooting for me.

To be fair it's not really that simple; it's mainly small profile tyres that have the issue. My E90 has 205/55/16 tyres and I've just switched from non-RFTs to RFTs. The ride and handling have been improved noticeably. All an RFT does is provide a stiffer sidewall - the suspension then needs tuning to suit. If BMW can't manage this, like they can't manage a DBW throttle in a petrol car without a lag, then that's largely (but perhaps not wholly) their problem, not the technology.

[cerb4.5lee]

RobM77 said:

To be fair it's not really that simple; it's mainly small profile tyres that have the issue. My E90 has 205/55/16 tyres and I've just switched from non-RFTs to RFTs. The ride and handling have been improved noticeably. All an RFT does is provide a stiffer sidewall - the suspension then needs tuning to suit. If BMW can't manage this, like they can't manage a DBW throttle in a petrol car without a lag, then that's largely (but perhaps not wholly) their problem, not the technology.

I'm surprised you've gone for run flats because I find they skip badly on poor surfaces, they tramline and if you hit a pothole or similar you get an almighty thud.

[Ares]

cerb4.5lee said:

RobM77 said:

To be fair it's not really that simple; it's mainly small profile tyres that have the issue. My E90 has 205/55/16 tyres and I've just switched from non-RFTs to RFTs. The ride and handling have been improved noticeably. All an RFT does is provide a stiffer sidewall - the suspension then needs tuning to suit. If BMW can't manage this, like they can't manage a DBW throttle in a petrol car without a lag, then that's largely (but perhaps not wholly) their problem, not the technology.

I'm surprised you've gone for run flats because I find they skip badly on poor surfaces, they tramline and if you hit a pothole or similar you get an almighty thud.

Rob....have you written that the wrong way around? Surely? Non-RFTs improve the ride/handling immeasurably.

[Buzypea]

I was thinking about this thread yesterday while stuck in a massive traffic jam.....the A Class A180 diesel AMG Line or 116D M Sport is a bit like having a Rolex watch with the workings of a Casio, or sewing an Armani badge on your Primark jeans. Just seems wrong, each to their own though.

[Ares]

Buzypea said:

I was thinking about this thread yesterday while stuck in a massive traffic jam.....the A Class A180 diesel AMG Line or 116D M Sport is a bit like having a Rolex watch with the workings of a Casio, or sewing an Armani badge on your Primark jeans. Just seems wrong, each to their own though.

Why?? It's merely an alternative aesthetic look. It's not pretending to be anything it isn't?

[The Dangerous Elk]

Ares said:

Why?? It's merely an alternative aesthetic look. It's not pretending to be anything it isn't?

Keep telling yourself that.....it is almost as bad as a chav (personal) plate

[daemon]

Ares said:

Buzypea said:

I was thinking about this thread yesterday while stuck in a massive traffic jam.....the A Class A180 diesel AMG Line or 116D M Sport is a bit like having a Rolex watch with the workings of a Casio, or sewing an Armani badge on your Primark jeans. Just seems wrong, each to their own though.

Why?? It's merely an alternative aesthetic look. It's not pretending to be anything it isn't?

But its not though is it? Its copying the look of something it isnt.

Mercedes A180CDI AMG (line)



AMG A45

[Ares]

The Dangerous Elk said:

Ares said:

Why?? It's merely an alternative aesthetic look. It's not pretending to be anything it isn't?

Keep telling yourself that.....it is almost as bad as a chav (personal) plate

Again. Why?

I don't like the look of the standard 1-series. I do like the look of the M Sport 1-series. It's a pure aesthetic thing.

Ditto the 6-series.

Ditto the A-Class.

If you are only allowed to look at a different body style at a certain engine size, what engine size? Or is it a certain BHP?


And are you saying all personal plates are chav? or just the ones you deem as such?

[Ares]

daemon said:

Ares said:

Buzypea said:

I was thinking about this thread yesterday while stuck in a massive traffic jam.....the A Class A180 diesel AMG Line or 116D M Sport is a bit like having a Rolex watch with the workings of a Casio, or sewing an Armani badge on your Primark jeans. Just seems wrong, each to their own though.

Why?? It's merely an alternative aesthetic look. It's not pretending to be anything it isn't?

But its not though is it? Its copying the look of something it isnt.

Mercedes A180CDI AMG (line)



AMG A45

Aside from the fact the A-Class AMG Line came out before the A45..... And that AMG Line has been spec'd to look more like an A45.

Are you saying that the A-Class should be just the standard one if it isn't the A45?

And what about the 1-series? There is no 'M' version of that?

[daemon]

Ares said:

Aside from the fact the A-Class AMG Line came out before the A45..... And that AMG Line has been spec'd to look more like an A45.

Are you saying that the A-Class should be just the standard one if it isn't the A45?

And what about the 1-series? There is no 'M' version of that?

You said the AMG Sport was an alternative asthetic look. It isnt. It can be made to look like a copy of the AMG variant.

An alternative asthetic look wouldnt need to look like an A45 - does Mercedes not have enough confidence in their own sporting variants not to have to make them look like clones of the cooking variants?

At least with BMW the M cars do tend to have significant bodywork changes to help differentiate them and you generally cant get exact replica rims of M cars for your 116d. Theres even unique colours for M cars. Not so with Mercedes.

[daemon]

Ares said:

If you are only allowed to look at a different body style at a certain engine size, what engine size? Or is it a certain BHP?

Why not? It used to be you could only get the Sport variants of a 3 series in a 325i then 328i spec. The lower end variants stood on their own two feet rather than rely on being copies of cooking variants.

Surely manufacturers can have sporting variants without them just being clones of the hot models? Ford has with the RS and ST brands (and then ST-Line now beneath that). Audi with the RS and S brands (and then S-Line and Sport beneath that again). Why does Mercedes have to pitch their sporting variants so close to the hot variants (even in name)? Similarly (but not quite so much) with BMW?

[Ares]

daemon said:

Ares said:

Aside from the fact the A-Class AMG Line came out before the A45..... And that AMG Line has been spec'd to look more like an A45.

Are you saying that the A-Class should be just the standard one if it isn't the A45?

And what about the 1-series? There is no 'M' version of that?

You said the AMG Sport was an alternative asthetic look. It isnt. It can be made to look like a copy of the AMG variant.

An alternative asthetic look wouldnt need to look like an A45 - does Mercedes not have enough confidence in their own sporting variants not to have to make them look like clones of the cooking variants?

At least with BMW the M cars do tend to have significant bodywork changes to help differentiate them and you generally cant get exact replica rims of M cars for your 116d. Theres even unique colours for M cars. Not so with Mercedes.

You know aesthetic means look don't you? The AMG-line is a different look to the non AMG-line. A manufacturer that offers differing looks. Not really that radical?

And the differences between AMG and AMG-line are there with wheels/kit/body if you look at a geeky level. I'm no Merc aficionado, but I spot an A45 from an AMG-line on the road. Ditto S and S-Line/M and M-Sport.

[DoubleD]

Why do people care if 1 car made by a manufacturer looks the same as another car thats made by the same manufacturer?

[Efbe]

DoubleD said:

Why do people care if 1 car made by a manufacturer looks the same as another car thats made by the same manufacturer?

daft isn't it!

probably because of some warped social backwards class ideal that you should only have what you can afford.

[Wills2]

Buzypea said:

I was thinking about this thread yesterday while stuck in a massive traffic jam.....the A Class A180 diesel AMG Line or 116D M Sport is a bit like having a Rolex watch with the workings of a Casio, or sewing an Armani badge on your Primark jeans. Just seems wrong, each to their own though.

That analogy is upside down, full fat M/AMG/RS are the exception not the rule of what BMW/Merc/Audi do.

The reverse is more accurate, a C63 saloon is a Casio watch with a Rolex movement inside as it looks no different to the untrained eye to a c220d.

The standard cars are what they are and aren't trying to be anything other than what they are...