Does the history of a marque matter in the least??
Discussion
g3org3y said:
RDMcG said:
My question is:
What are the brands today that are authentic possessors of history and can connect back to their founding visionaries??
BMW still independent.What are the brands today that are authentic possessors of history and can connect back to their founding visionaries??
Unfortunately, the way the car market is going, they've had to go against some of their classic principles (RWD, naturally aspirated engines esp the inline 6).
I suppose brands have to develop and evolve to survive. History and nostalgia are for fanboys (*puts up hand*)
TBF, BMW have also done a great job with Mini and an amazing job with Rolls Royce so credit to them.
mike-v2tmf said:
Bought my son a 2010 Octavia VRS (petrol) last week I drove it home to north London from Hampshire , I was impressed
Yeah, I had an Octavia vRS petrol estate as a company car, a bit before then (but probably same generation). It was one of the best and most reliable cars I've 'owned'. I did 120K in the thing, in 3 years, with nothing but routine servicing.broombroomcar said:
Yeah, thanks for the history lesson..
Meanwhile, Lexus started in 1989 and has no real history, heritage or breeding relative to its rivals. I'm not saying they're bad cars, just not for me. It was a brand to fill a hole and look good on a spreadsheet.
Toyota Century, Mark X, Celicas, the ‘rice rocket’ scene of the 90’s, the FJ Land Cruiser, ‘Toyota Technicals’ in small wars? Plenty of history, heritage and breeding. OK so much of it resonates in the third world and Japan, but still not a spreadsheet. Meanwhile, Lexus started in 1989 and has no real history, heritage or breeding relative to its rivals. I'm not saying they're bad cars, just not for me. It was a brand to fill a hole and look good on a spreadsheet.
I think it is sort of illogical myself, but I have heavily researched the history of the various marques that I have repeatedly bought and have a ridiculous number of history and model books ( including the less savoury aspects of the histories) , and visited the various museums, met the drivers and sometimes the designers and principals, none of which makes a car one bit better than another. Have had some interesting people drive them and now and then sign them...
Dr Wolfgang Porsche signed my 991RS at his house:
Had it meet with the TYP 64 in Hamburg:
Vic Elford and Hurley Haywood did the same with my 7RS
Sabine and others drove my 7.2RS at the Ring:
It gives me some perspective, even though I am well aware that the current cars are now VAG products. I still have a couple that were designed when Porsche was a completely independent company.
Looking back, I did exactly the same obsessive research on BMW and Mercedes in the past, got into some to hhe non-public areas and archives.
Right now I am slowly accumulating stuff on Jeep, God help me.
Dr Wolfgang Porsche signed my 991RS at his house:
Had it meet with the TYP 64 in Hamburg:
Vic Elford and Hurley Haywood did the same with my 7RS
Sabine and others drove my 7.2RS at the Ring:
It gives me some perspective, even though I am well aware that the current cars are now VAG products. I still have a couple that were designed when Porsche was a completely independent company.
Looking back, I did exactly the same obsessive research on BMW and Mercedes in the past, got into some to hhe non-public areas and archives.
Right now I am slowly accumulating stuff on Jeep, God help me.
wisbech said:
broombroomcar said:
Yeah, thanks for the history lesson..
Meanwhile, Lexus started in 1989 and has no real history, heritage or breeding relative to its rivals. I'm not saying they're bad cars, just not for me. It was a brand to fill a hole and look good on a spreadsheet.
Toyota Century, Mark X, Celicas, the ‘rice rocket’ scene of the 90’s, the FJ Land Cruiser, ‘Toyota Technicals’ in small wars? Plenty of history, heritage and breeding. OK so much of it resonates in the third world and Japan, but still not a spreadsheet. Meanwhile, Lexus started in 1989 and has no real history, heritage or breeding relative to its rivals. I'm not saying they're bad cars, just not for me. It was a brand to fill a hole and look good on a spreadsheet.
I'm not simply having a go at Lexus, I do actually like some of their models. The point I'm making is it's sometimes difficult to go for a brand that has no real history behind it, especially in a relatively new area.
I nearly bought an Infiniti last year. I needed a saloon and didn't want the Germans, Swede or Italian. I didn't buy in the end, but I find out Infiniti are leaving the UK market and my local dealer has disappeared. That wont happen with Mercedes, and if it did it would be the end of the world..
jamei303 said:
It's interesting but how many Audi buyers know what the boy's wish is?
It's all about the monthlies and how many inches of wheel there are.
It's all about the monthlies and how many inches of wheel there are.
I doubt anybody driving a two 'undred an nineynine pahaaand a mumf base diesel XE would be able to tell you the names of the Jaguar company founders or anything about the racing victories at Le mans in the 50's or when the fiftieth anniversary of the XJ range was.But its a 'faaakin Jaaag innit. Neighbours are like, well impressed.
Jaguar steve said:
I doubt anybody driving a two 'undred an nineynine pahaaand a mumf base diesel XE would be able to tell you the names of the Jaguar company founders or anything about the racing victories at Le mans in the 50's or when the fiftieth anniversary of the XJ range was.But its a 'faaakin Jaaag innit. Neighbours are like, well impressed.
rosetank said:
Jaguar steve said:
I doubt anybody driving a two 'undred an nineynine pahaaand a mumf base diesel XE would be able to tell you the names of the Jaguar company founders or anything about the racing victories at Le mans in the 50's or when the fiftieth anniversary of the XJ range was.But its a 'faaakin Jaaag innit. Neighbours are like, well impressed.
rosetank said:
No. You buy what best fits your requirements. To be honest Porsche are one of the worst for milking their loyal fan base, I buy a car because I like it, not for some spurious reason.
Well, of course. Edited by rosetank on Sunday 23 February 17:49
I used to drive M BMWs when they were more edgy, responsive cars. I liked the marque and the service, but most of all they were a blast to drive on road or track. I moved only because my personal driving requirements were less satisfied by later models.It was not a brand decision.
Equally I drive a Jeep because it suits my off-roading needs better than anything else for the price.
I like to research any marque where I am a repeat buyer, but even then, most of the models in any. year are of zero interest to me.
g3org3y said:
RDMcG said:
My question is:
What are the brands today that are authentic possessors of history and can connect back to their founding visionaries??
BMW still independent.What are the brands today that are authentic possessors of history and can connect back to their founding visionaries??
Unfortunately, the way the car market is going, they've had to go against some of their classic principles (RWD, naturally aspirated engines esp the inline 6).
BMW as an example. Time and again people talk about how they are moving away from their “history” with less RWD, more NA and moving away from inline 6’s. That ignores the fact that many of their most iconic cars were not RWD NA I6 cars. The Isetta, Turbo 2002, M1, Half of M3’s, including the original E30 which was an i4, most M5s have not been i6, and the last two turbo. BMW have done some very good i6 NA cars, which people have noticed, but i6 NA is not a BMW “thing”. Not like the BMW Boxer twin on their bikes.
DoubleD said:
What people want from a car changes over time. BMW are the same as the rest in that they move with the times, they would be gone if they hadn't.
But "the times" aren't some mysterious force sweeping over the market annually, throwing car design into chaos. The manufacturers themselves define what is trendy and what is old. So no sympathy if they then find themselves slewn by that same sword.Really, what progress does an F10 mark over an E39?
Edited by FA57REN on Sunday 23 February 21:17
Electro1980 said:
This is one of the most bizarre bits to me about history. I like the history of brands and value it, but most of it is marketing guff and made up in people’s heads.
BMW as an example. Time and again people talk about how they are moving away from their “history” with less RWD, more NA and moving away from inline 6’s. That ignores the fact that many of their most iconic cars were not RWD NA I6 cars. The Isetta, Turbo 2002, M1, Half of M3’s, including the original E30 which was an i4, most M5s have not been i6, and the last two turbo. BMW have done some very good i6 NA cars, which people have noticed, but i6 NA is not a BMW “thing”. Not like the BMW Boxer twin on their bikes.
Sorry, I disagree. The use of an inline 6 is absolutely a BMW thing and one of their defining engines. When most manufacturers decide to focus on V6s for packaging purposes, BMW always stuck to the inline 6 as it was considered inherently better balanced and smoother.BMW as an example. Time and again people talk about how they are moving away from their “history” with less RWD, more NA and moving away from inline 6’s. That ignores the fact that many of their most iconic cars were not RWD NA I6 cars. The Isetta, Turbo 2002, M1, Half of M3’s, including the original E30 which was an i4, most M5s have not been i6, and the last two turbo. BMW have done some very good i6 NA cars, which people have noticed, but i6 NA is not a BMW “thing”. Not like the BMW Boxer twin on their bikes.
rosetank said:
Jaguar steve said:
Just saying - I don't see where I said it mattered.
It was more your negative attitude toward anyone who chose finance, casting them all as simple minded people unable to have made the correct choice for themselves. Very strange indeed. Stranger still you aspire to make so much out of so little.
g3org3y said:
Electro1980 said:
This is one of the most bizarre bits to me about history. I like the history of brands and value it, but most of it is marketing guff and made up in people’s heads.
BMW as an example. Time and again people talk about how they are moving away from their “history” with less RWD, more NA and moving away from inline 6’s. That ignores the fact that many of their most iconic cars were not RWD NA I6 cars. The Isetta, Turbo 2002, M1, Half of M3’s, including the original E30 which was an i4, most M5s have not been i6, and the last two turbo. BMW have done some very good i6 NA cars, which people have noticed, but i6 NA is not a BMW “thing”. Not like the BMW Boxer twin on their bikes.
Sorry, I disagree. The use of an inline 6 is absolutely a BMW thing and one of their defining engines. When most manufacturers decide to focus on V6s for packaging purposes, BMW always stuck to the inline 6 as it was considered inherently better balanced and smoother.BMW as an example. Time and again people talk about how they are moving away from their “history” with less RWD, more NA and moving away from inline 6’s. That ignores the fact that many of their most iconic cars were not RWD NA I6 cars. The Isetta, Turbo 2002, M1, Half of M3’s, including the original E30 which was an i4, most M5s have not been i6, and the last two turbo. BMW have done some very good i6 NA cars, which people have noticed, but i6 NA is not a BMW “thing”. Not like the BMW Boxer twin on their bikes.
As Electro says, a lot of the most famous and seminal BMWs aren't I6s. The majority of BMWs sold have always been I4s and over the decades the company has been quite happy to use V8, V10 and V12 engines when it deemed it necessary. And most of those (excellent) I6s were part of engine families which included I4s. It's not as if BMW were making a real effort to make I6s; it was just the most feasible and straightforward way of getting its mid/large power units.
It's notable that BMW only really began leaning into the 'inherent advantages' of I6s when the rest of the industry (including Mercedes and Jaguar, both of which were arguably much more dedicated to the I6 in the previous decades than BMW) began shifting to V6s... supposedly on the grounds of refinement, weight distribution and efficiency.
Rather like how BMW only seemed to become ideological about RWD when the 3-Series began competing against FWD cars in the 90s. Before that RWD was just the normal way of building mid-size saloons and executive cars; it's not like BMW set out to trailblaze RWD in the 1960s. Like their engines they just adopted modern conventional design, executed it very well, stuck with it and made it into a virtue. To make the same comparison, no-one holds up Merc and Jag as paragons of I6 RWD saloons, even though both have just as much (if not more) heritage to claim for doing so. It's just that neither chose to make it front-and-centre of their marketing angle.
2xChevrons said:
g3org3y said:
Electro1980 said:
This is one of the most bizarre bits to me about history. I like the history of brands and value it, but most of it is marketing guff and made up in people’s heads.
BMW as an example. Time and again people talk about how they are moving away from their “history” with less RWD, more NA and moving away from inline 6’s. That ignores the fact that many of their most iconic cars were not RWD NA I6 cars. The Isetta, Turbo 2002, M1, Half of M3’s, including the original E30 which was an i4, most M5s have not been i6, and the last two turbo. BMW have done some very good i6 NA cars, which people have noticed, but i6 NA is not a BMW “thing”. Not like the BMW Boxer twin on their bikes.
Sorry, I disagree. The use of an inline 6 is absolutely a BMW thing and one of their defining engines. When most manufacturers decide to focus on V6s for packaging purposes, BMW always stuck to the inline 6 as it was considered inherently better balanced and smoother.BMW as an example. Time and again people talk about how they are moving away from their “history” with less RWD, more NA and moving away from inline 6’s. That ignores the fact that many of their most iconic cars were not RWD NA I6 cars. The Isetta, Turbo 2002, M1, Half of M3’s, including the original E30 which was an i4, most M5s have not been i6, and the last two turbo. BMW have done some very good i6 NA cars, which people have noticed, but i6 NA is not a BMW “thing”. Not like the BMW Boxer twin on their bikes.
As Electro says, a lot of the most famous and seminal BMWs aren't I6s. The majority of BMWs sold have always been I4s and over the decades the company has been quite happy to use V8, V10 and V12 engines when it deemed it necessary. And most of those (excellent) I6s were part of engine families which included I4s. It's not as if BMW were making a real effort to make I6s; it was just the most feasible and straightforward way of getting its mid/large power units.
It's notable that BMW only really began leaning into the 'inherent advantages' of I6s when the rest of the industry (including Mercedes and Jaguar, both of which were arguably much more dedicated to the I6 in the previous decades than BMW) began shifting to V6s... supposedly on the grounds of refinement, weight distribution and efficiency.
Rather like how BMW only seemed to become ideological about RWD when the 3-Series began competing against FWD cars in the 90s. Before that RWD was just the normal way of building mid-size saloons and executive cars; it's not like BMW set out to trailblaze RWD in the 1960s. Like their engines they just adopted modern conventional design, executed it very well, stuck with it and made it into a virtue. To make the same comparison, no-one holds up Merc and Jag as paragons of I6 RWD saloons, even though both have just as much (if not more) heritage to claim for doing so. It's just that neither chose to make it front-and-centre of their marketing angle.
While the BMW E30 M3 was a 4, the E36 and E46 versions were straight 6s.
As were the 635Csi, M635Csi and M1, which has to be one of the BMW all-time greats.
I had a 1994 Mercedes C280 Sport, but by 1998 the C280 became a V6.
Jaguar gave up on straight 6s long before that - probably because parent company Ford used V6s!
But I've had 6 post 2000 straight 6 petrol BMWs, and I can't think of another manufacturer that could offer as many straight 6 options in that era!
Just curious, but why are Mercedes going back to a straight 6?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff