A car that everybody should hate is now beating records

[Red Bread]

BMW doesn't care if their cars are capable. They only care if they sell now. And boy, do they sell.

[GuidoK]

Yes but they sell on previously gained merits.

If they dont sustain that image, they wont sell that much (for that reason) in 20 years.

[Anon]

I don't hate it but I don't like it either. :/ probably if I was younger I'd consider it.

[3GFX]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

BMW doesn't care if their cars are capable. They only care if they sell now. And boy, do they sell.

[MightyMouseTech]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

If they dont sustain that image, they wont sell that much (for that reason) in 20 years.

In 20 years you will only be able to buy an electric, so doesn't really matter.

[GuidoK]

^it does because all brands will make electric cars. There will still be affection for this or that brand.
Its just like saying 20 years ago that it doesnt matter because over 20 years (now) all cars will have turbo's or esp or whatever.

[BimmerMat135]

Originally Posted by jmg

Who's comparing? You asked a question, I answered. If you don't agree, that's fine, but I'm not going to change my answer because you have another criteria that you didn't state earlier. In hindsight, it sounds like that question was loaded and more rhetorical than a legitimate request for information. If you want the Type R, get it, you don't need anyone else's approval, there are no arguments to be won here to validate your choice. I will never get a Type R, it's not my type of car. Maybe it's your type of car? That's your prerogative. Please post pictures when you do, because I think it's an interesting car! Just not for me.

You want a track warrior and are worried about your warranty? Sounds like you want more like a street car you can track rather than a track warrior you can street. That's a whole different ballgame. A truly track ready Type R will still need modifications.

You think that Type R will be good in the snow? I don't think so.

I'm of course not talking about doing the 24 hours of Le Mans but for occasional track duty with a set of cup 2 tires the type r will do just fine.

For winter driving I've had many fwd cars in winter and they do great. Now you had a lsd and appart of the low ground clearance you have everything to perform well.

But of course I respect your choice.

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

Cars like this have been beating or equalling m3's and porsches on the ring for quite some time now (5 years or so)
Everyone that has been there (or in the villages around it) may think he's currently in france because the amount of renault meganes/renault garages is immense.
Also the leon cupra is popular. All cars not sold in the us, but very very popular and very fast on track.
These cars (these versions at least) are designed as track performance cars from factory because there is this insane war between some manufactureres to see who's the fastest on the nordschleife, and that makes these cars very fast. Its like a bmw form the era when /M stood for 'Motorsport' and not /Marketing (think e36 m3 eurospec)
These cars have well tuned suspension, quality brakes, low in weight, very fast, and less than half the price of an M4 and just as fast or faster on a track.
And that with over 100 hp less. That means they're extremely good in corners and on braking.
BMW could take an example to that.

That's why management at the Motorad division should take over the M division. The wars you speak of above have been going on in the superbike world since at least 2004 when Kawasaki put out the ZX-10R. Ever since then, we've seen escalation in horsepower, chassis/suspension, electronics, and brakes. The cliche the modern sportbike is a street legal race bike is no cliche. The S1000RR is an example of this superbike war and I've had the pleasure of running one on the track.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by zx10guy

The S1000RR is an example of this superbike war and I've had the pleasure of running one on the track.

Thats a good point.
The s1000rr was such a capable machine when it came out it could virtually be raced stock from the dealer.
Its a bit like having a bmw car in the showroom for sale that could qualify in a DTM race.
And it was a very good efford too, as bmw has never been a player in the superbike market with their models (more enduro oriented I guess), so they stepped in and got it pretty much right first time as the bike got very popular.
Thats quite an achievement from the Berlin division.

[AtlasM]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Ahh...so tell me why Porsche uses a mid-engine configuration for their hypercars? Even the 911 RSR http://www.roadandtrack.com/motorspo...rank-walliser/

The article you linked says Porsche moved the engine forward to get better weight distribution and make room for a huge rear diffuser for better aero, because those things would make the RSR more competitive within the rules dictated by the class in which it races. It doesn't say that mid engined cars are inherently superior to rear engined cars.

Who cares if a car is "fighting physics"? There are all different kinds of cars out there and it's cool to see their potential maxed out even if there are drawbacks to their overall architecture.

[Never_Enough]

Originally Posted by AtlasM

Is it really that important what image a car projects?

If you're in sales and care that much about the message your car sends to your customers you should be driving a loaded Camry or Accord, maybe a Grand Cherokee. If you show up to some big sales meeting with a Civic Type R they might think you're goofy, and if you show up in an M4 they might think you're price gouging them. But either way it's more attention to your car than is desirable unless you're in some line of business where you're trying to look like a baller to your customers.

I've worked in a consulting firm where I was out with the sales team in front of customers, and that routine got old very quickly for me. Hopefully I never have to go on another client lunch or happy hour again. More power to you if that's your thing but no thank you.

Anyway, as for the CTR's ring time, until Honda discloses what kind of tires they used, and what tires will come on it from the factory, it gets a big fat Barry Bonds asterisk from me. Even though I'm an old school Honda fanboy and cut my car tuning teeth on a '92 Integra GSR (VTEC y0!) and still want to do a restomod '92-'93 Integra with a built K20 swap with an LSD, big brakes, nice suspension, etc. If they did it on Pilot Sport Cups or something similar, that better be the stock tire from the factory for the time to be worth anything.

I don't think anyone associates baller with Civic

[PoorLurker]

Originally Posted by Never_Enough

I don't think anyone associates baller with Civic

I think that is what his message stated.

Even a $40k civic does not show baller status.

The more you spend on a civic, you just seem more of a die hard "fan boy" as they say.

[AtlasM]

Originally Posted by Never_Enough

I don't think anyone associates baller with Civic

Originally Posted by PoorLurker

I think that is what his message stated.

Even a $40k civic does not show baller status.

The more you spend on a civic, you just seem more of a die hard "fan boy" as they say.

I was saying:

1. If you are in a line of work where you need your car to project a certain image to your customers, you should be trying to have a boring, "nice but not too nice" car like a loaded Accord/Camry/etc.

1(a). Unless your job requires you to look rich to project the "I'm a successful business person worthy of transacting large deals with" image, in which case get something fancy.

2. If you aren't in such a job, then who cares if you're a 30/40/50-something gainfully employed person who happens to drive an immature-looking car like a Civic Type-R? If it's fun and you can afford it, go ahead.

[Towerworld]

Originally Posted by MightyMouseTech

Otherwise stock.

So not even close to stock basically.