BMW and M Power Owners
- Thread starter panthro
- Start date
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,664
- Location
- Shakespeare’s County
Yeah I’m with you there Fox.
Had the M4 about 3 and a half years now, longest I've ever owned a vehicle now actually. When I first bought it, I had a paint correction and ceramic coating done, and it was about time to get it done again. Here it's first snow foam and rinse following the new ceramic coating.
you can say this about every car though surely?
even a 911 spends most of its time doing normal driving. I’d rather have performance and not use it than not have it at all.
You would and so would I, but a large number of others are different.
My sister drives a BMW X3 which takes something like 8.5 seconds to haul itself to 60. Despite this she has absolutely zero complaints about the performance. I suspect of this type of car owner our views are in the minority and hers in the majority. Tesla have distorted the market a bit by offering performance massively in excess of that many of the typical company car buyer ever really considered that they wanted. This doesn't make everything else slow.
My sister drives a BMW X3 which takes something like 8.5 seconds to haul itself to 60. Despite this she has absolutely zero complaints about the performance. I suspect of this type of car owner our views are in the minority and hers in the majority. Tesla have distorted the market a bit by offering performance massively in excess of that many of the typical company car buyer ever really considered that they wanted. This doesn't make everything else slow.
They haven’t distorted the market they have just moved the goalposts, things have moved on.
5 seconds to 60 on a performance car is no longer ok as it was 20 years ago
A smartphone with one camera isn’t good enough anymore
An ev that takes 7s to 60 and costs 63k isn’t good enough either imo.
5 seconds to 60 on a performance car is no longer ok as it was 20 years ago
A smartphone with one camera isn’t good enough anymore
An ev that takes 7s to 60 and costs 63k isn’t good enough either imo.
Is that because 7s to 60 is objectively not good enough for most people though or just because it doesn't 'keep up with the Joneses' as it were?
Maybe the goalposts need realigning back to a position where the manufacturer is spending money on making a nice car, not chasing performance numbers no one needs beyond having a **** measuring contest with the neighbours.
Maybe the goalposts need realigning back to a position where the manufacturer is spending money on making a nice car, not chasing performance numbers no one needs beyond having a **** measuring contest with the neighbours.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,664
- Location
- Shakespeare’s County
The power wars got out of hand a long time ago with 500hp+ AMG Mercs in the 2000s, not that I'd say no to one if I was brave enough to run it. But then, I drive a 140hp sluggard, so what do I know?
I disagree, this is something else.
Photocopier salesmen were not driving around in AMGs...
Nah not really, I and many many other people want fast cars
One of the traditional drawbacks of fast cars which was bad fuel economy has kind of been eliminated with evs too.
Genuinely, I think you massively over estimate a) how many want fast cars and b) what most people think is fast in the first place.
Most people think their 180-200bhp 2.0TDIs are rocket ships, 7s to 60 is a 'fast car' to your average joe.
Yeah EVs can go fast without using extra energy right?
Hammering a EV around will have terrible range and rip through tyres (probably a significant cost vs the cost of electricity at the moment)
Yes true but if things move on what a fast car is is redefined.
A car 7s to 60 was top of the line back in the 70s now it’s just normal
If you drive an ICE your cars efficiency will vary depending on the type of driving.
On an ev the efficiency always stays the same so the car actually uses more electricity at motorway speeds as it has to overcome drag. It’s more economical to drive it in stop start traffic. I’ve never noticed any significant drops by accelerating fast though.
Last edited:
Like I say though, is this where we need to stop and question whether people actually want the car to be faster or they just feel the need to be able to say it is because next door / Steve at work upgraded last year?
Are people actually driving around thinking 'damn my car is slow I really wish it was faster' - I don't think most people do. You and I might do, because we're motoring enthusiasts.
Most people would get in that iX3 and do a 6.8s sprint to 60 and think 'wow this is fast' to be frank.
True. But vehicles (and tech generally) has always been a game of top trumps in many respects, and 0-60 has always been the headline figure, daft as it may be. I don't care whether it takes sub-3s or 5s. Enough people do though, even if it's just for bragging rights in the pub.
Let's be honest, the performance capabilities of cars exceeded requirements a long, long time ago. It doesn't matter whether we're talking a 1100kg coupe or a 2300kg SUV, the principle is the same. They're faster than the vast majority of people could ever want, or be capable of properly using (I'm excluding the track here for obvious reasons). It's not much different to camera resolution/frame rate, or a whole plethora of other performance characteristics across different kinds of gadgetry.
Capitalism and economics don't just rely on what is needed. If it did, we'd be running around in modern day Trabants. The idea is to offer people things that they might want, or perhaps don't even realise they want yet (until they have it). Necessity doesn't come into it. If you're BMW, or Audi, or Tesla, and your competitor is outshining you on a particular characteristic of a product, then you'd better take sharp notice. It's not a good idea for anyone else to gain a foothold or advantage in a sector. It's essentially a technological and consumer-driven arms race, with no end in sight. Different companies vying for supremacy and market share, on a permanent basis.
this maybe - ix3 2185Kg, xdrive 3.0 1890kg
To your average motorist I can only imagine weight is even less of a perceived issue than performance.
To you. And probably quite a lot of us here, too.
But we are far from the majority. Most people swapping a 320d for a Tesla company car do so because the bik is nil not because they really want to outrun a Ferrari 360. They'd have still ordered it if it was significantly slower.
And on the flip side, a lot of people buying genuinely fast cars do so for reasons not just related to straight-line speed, which is why they don't pick a Tesla.