[cherrypie*]

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1862

[HeadlessChicken]

Wow, that guy must have some personal agenda. I tend to agree with his "logical" attack on the M add. He is right regarding the compromise and the way he puts it does make the add seem a little stupid to say the least. However, from that point on he just goes on a tirade. He provides no support for BMW no longer providing the ultimate driving machine. Is that why the 3er still sets the bar by which all sports sedans are compared and why the 330 edged out the new G35 and C350...never mind the 335. He must have an axe to grind.

[whippersnapper]

Nicely written article. I think there is more than a gem of truth in it. The sad thing is that it is probably a necessity for car makers to have broad appeal to survive hence the BMW and Porsche movement away from their core competence.

I love the "6 series is a travesty" comment.

[742]

I pretty much agree with whippersnapper--good article. However I do not agree that broad appeal is necessary for a company to prosper in the long term. It is only necessary if the management team is determined to rapidly grow sales, and willing to suck the life out of the brand identity to make it happen. Of course the long term prospects then suffer, but by then the boardroom parasites will either be retired or sucking off some other victim.

Yea, guess that I am a little bitter. It is sad watching great names fade.

[larsssss]

A few valid arguments mixed with subjective opinions and then exaggerated to the point where my respect for the author is severely compromised. Almost all car manufacturers write copy like that. It's just words put together by an advertising agency. Personally, I trust BMW buyers to have the intellectual capacity to see beyond all that and form their own opinions. To the author: Get over it.

[Bimmerista]

Well written but I do not agree with the article nor the comment about the 6 series (which outhandles the CL BTW-just not more confortable).

BTW that is the web site embargoed by BMW (no test car for you!!) following Farrago's Flying Vagina comment about the Subaru grille (which Subbie is ditching now-guess who gets the last laugh; but that is another story).

So there may be some hard feelings at play.

I do not agree that BMW is loosing its Mojo-it is simply moving one degree over to the luxury bin-which is fine bcs it results in a better, higher quality feel to the cars and more features for those who want them.

BMW has in fact never lost sight of the ultimate driving machine moto and each one of its offerings offers just that in its segment.

I am not sure that BMW should offer products in every segment, but if BMW can come up with a solution in a segment that does not compromise its core value, why not? After all today NO ONE is disputing the wisodm of the X5, but when first introduced people threw themselves off bridges.

[whippersnapper]

I don't doubt the value of the X5 as an SUV and it adheres to BMW driving principles (but in a very flawed way due to the weight and other compromises inherent in SUVs).

I do think though that the X5, ML320, A class, Cayenee etc... bring down the equity and purity of the brand.

Porsche would be held in even higher esteem if they only made sportscars and not the Cayenne. Mercedes would be even more of a luxury car brand if it didn't build the A class. BMW would be more "the ultimate driving machine" or the sportscar for those who must have 4 doors if the didn't build the X3 and X5.

I guess i am arguing these profitable moves have diluting the brand purity and the degree of clear differentiated positioning. The jury is still out as to whether these short term gains will lead to longer term problems as this relative positioning weakness leads to more opportunities for new entrants (think Infiniti). In some ways the Spec B Subuaru Liberty GT is closer to the original 3 series ideal than the E90 (light weight and performance orientation first, luxury a clear second)

[akhbhaat]

More to the point, BMW no longer produces “the ultimate driving machine.”

At the risk of being over-literal, which BMW model would that be? Yes, the M3 is a truly magnificent motor, well worth a seat in the Driver’s Car Hall of Fame. But anyone who’s driven a Porsche 911 or Ferrari knows the M3 doesn’t even play in the same league as these phenomenal foreigners. You could argue the point on price– the M3 offers maximum pistonhead pleasure for a more accessible entry fee– if BMW let you. Their M ad clearly states “We refuse to subject them [BMW’s M cars] to money-saving shortcuts or mass production.”

In truth, enthusiasts have known for over a decade that BMW has lost the plot. The company’s campaign to expand into every product niche extant has sacrificed their cars’ unique selling point on the altar of growth and profit. How can an SUV– any SUV– be an ultimate driving machine? Although you can credit the X5 for at least trying to satisfy the brand proposition, the X3’s execrable ride and handling demonstrate the company’s complete lack of commitment to their creed. By the same token, the rest of BMW’s product line has become heavier in weight and lighter in steering. The 6-Series is a travesty.

Look closely and the evidence of BMW’s ultimate brand betrayal is everywhere: the fitment of stiff run-flat tires (that tramline on smooth pavement), disastrous ergonomics (what happened to the driver-angled console?), compromised visibility, over-complicated driver interfaces (column-mounted shift knobs, starter buttons and the world’s worst gearbox); even Chris Bangles’ fussy exterior shapes reveal a distinct turn away from the company’s former focus on driver satisfaction. The fact that BMW hasn’t built a convincing answer to Porsche's Boxster in ten years tells the tale.

Rooted in opinion or not, these passages speak the truth. Particularly the statement I bolded above - I agree in full.

For example: has anybody around here stopped to think about the fact that the Z4 - a compact roadster (traditionally the purist expression of a sporting car) - has completely lifeless electronically assisted steering?

[whippersnapper]

and if BMW didn't luxury up the 3 series and dumb down the steering and road holding we wouldn't have Infiniti and Lexus snapping at its heels.

I clearly believe the SUV's dilute the brands, I am a lot less interested in Porsche these days than I used to be.

I know however that I am in the minority and that at least from a $ perspective BMW and others are doing the right thing short term. But I believe that one day soon the japanese cars will make a better BMW than BMw do only because BMW has crept japanese as the japanese has crept toward BMW.

The reality is that most car purchasers have little interest whatsoever in the dynamic issues that are very important to the very few true enthusiasts.

[ksfrogman]

I agree with many of the points the author makes, but certainly many of the anecdotal examples he offers are anything but unbiased.

From the article:

"But anyone who’s driven a Porsche 911 or Ferrari knows the M3 doesn’t even play in the same league as these phenomenal foreigners."

True, but one could also say that anyone who has driven a dragster or funny car knows that the Porsche or Ferrari doesn't even play in the same league as these phenomenal race cars. In fact, they are in different leagues. The M3 is based off a more practical 4-seat coupe design. The Ferrari is not a 4-seater. Dragsters or funny cars are only 1-seat designs.

Also from the article:

The fact that BMW hasn’t built a convincing answer to Porsche's Boxster in ten years tells the tale.

The non-S Boxster is a dog. The Z4-M is also a two-seater sports car in the true sense, and though it may not look as boxy as a boxster, it's certainly a worthy car for comparison.

[akhbhaat]

People accuse companies like Lexus and Infiniti of "chasing" or "copying" BMW, but this really isn't the case. Neither of those companies builds truly engaging sport sedans. BMW set themselves up to be a target by morphing their cars into products the Japanese could conceivably compete against. The more refined, the more luxurious, and the more gadget/feature laden the 3 series becomes, the more Japanese it becomes, and the more likely it is for Lexus, Infiniti, Acura etc to build a car that will knock it off.

[whippersnapper]

Originally Posted by akhbhaat

People accuse companies like Lexus and Infiniti of "chasing" or "copying" BMW, but this really isn't the case. Neither of those companies builds truly engaging sport sedans. BMW set themselves up to be a target by morphing their cars into products the Japanese could conceivably compete against. The more refined, the more luxurious, and the more gadget/feature laden the 3 series becomes, the more Japanese it becomes, and the more likely it is for Lexus, Infiniti, Acura etc to build a car that will knock it off.

which is exactly what I said in my post

[whippersnapper]

Originally Posted by KenB

This I agree with 100% but the fact remains that making more the one line of vehicles for different niches (sports car and SUV) does not necessarily mean that one has to suffer.

I'm not sure agree with you final point Ken. Any corporation has only limited resources, so differentiation into classes that are not logical brand extensions (i.e SUVs) is extremely difficult to do without compromising the core products.

I see Lexus as a good example of a company that is sticking to its knitting. The reason car mags and customers are comparing an IS350 to a 3 series is simply because BMW has lost its way a little and is building a 3 series much closer to the Lexus lux ideal. Afterall what has the "relentless pursuit of perfection" got to do with the "Ultimate Driving Machine". Nothing on its face. Lexus can't compete 100% with the BMW dynamics because doing so would compromise its brand essence. They become somewhat comparable only because BMW has moved so much toward Luxury.

The strange thing is that Audi has failed to capitalize on this since it is not as sporty as a BMW (but the margin has closed), has a strong european heritage and leads in interior design.

[Bimmerista]

Well I guess we disagree (nothing wrong with that).

Adding features to the ultimate sports sedan does not make it automatically less of the USS, rather a more luxurious version of it.

Sometimes BMW makes mistakes (overly assisted steering in e46.1 - active steering as standard equipment in the 5 series, Idrive), but overall the e90 is still the USS simply with more features.

I do agree that the luxury features add weight to the car, and therefore am the proponent of à la carte option features, with a base for safety (ABS DSC/DTC, airbags etc) offered accross the board.

I also really want them to introduce the 1 series cope when it comes here with less luxury features (because I couldn't care less for them). But just bcs I don't want them does not mean BMW does not have to offer them to those that do.

Over time, since the standard of being "the best driving machine" is limited in an aboslute way by the laws of physics, there will come a time when drastic and dramatic improvements in handling etc. will not be possible by BMW (or the purer sports cars like Porsche). At that time (which we long passed), improvements are only marginal and due to technological developments. At this point in time, where the standard bearer can no longer keep running ahead of the pack towards the "target", but rather can only "stand still" on top of it, then it becomes easier for competitors to close the gap. Hence the diminishing difference between BMW and Infinity for example. But this has nothing to do with brand dilution and more with the realities of vehicle development.

People who think the x5 is misguided would be correct, IMHO if the x5 where not the ultimate driving SUV - which I think it is (again perhaps the Porsche Cayenne Turbo is ahead, but that still leaves the x5 at the top). Saying that BMW should not build SUVs as an absolute statement or that, like a previous poster said it ain't a sports sedan unless you're uncomfortable in the back seat is somthing I do not agree with. As long as the basis proposition is kept intact: whatever segment you're in must be one where BMW can innovate with its distinctiveness, being the USS. So if the x5 handled like an Isuzu Rodeo (sorry to Isuzu but....) then BMW should NOT have made it. But it was able to make an SUV that is distinctively BMW. The competition tried to replicate, (FX, Cayenne) but noone could dispute that the X5 is still in the top pack.

The article picked appart the x3 "atrocious handling" or words to that effect. With all due respect to the author IMHO he was smoking crack on that one. We have an x3 which we (and I include my decidely non-sports oriented better half ) discovered in the x3 upon test driving it that it handles unbelievably good-agile, surefooted, great control in winter. The x3 at 160km/h on the HWY feels more stable and secure than the A4 I had before my e90.

I wellcome this type of exchanges amongst us - it makes think and justify your view of our beloved e90s and why why bought them

[cooljoe164]

There has to be a time when a company, in this case BMW, is profit-driven. Farago (the author) starts talking about driving Ferrari's, but lets be honest here: Ferrari almost died. It wasn't profit oriented enough, especially as a niche exotic car company. Most major exotic car companies are owned by a larger, cheaper company. Maserati is owned by Ferrari (MC12 and Enzo are same car with different body panels and detuned Enzo engine). Ferrari is owned by Fiat. Volkswagen owns Lamborghini, Bentley, and Bugatti. With those kinds of money problems, it's surprising that Ferrari can afford F1 and does so well in it (1 and 3 finish last weekend). You would expect larger companies, like Honda with billions to spend, to make a killing in F1 with all the research and development budget that they have.

It's apparent that every company has to be somewhat profit driven. Profits drive innovation making a better product for us.

Secondly, I think it's important to know that BMW is an independent company. The research that BMW does won't be picked up by its partners. The Audi Q7, VW Touareg, and Porsche Cayenne all use the same chassis. What's worse? Bentley is coming out with an SUV. It has the same chassis as the other 3 SUV's.

When Mercedes Benz paired up with Chrysler, their quality went down big time because they were cutting costs and people felt that the engineers had over-designed the cars. Only now has the quality started to improve.

BMW's doing their own thing. They don't have anyone to report to and can't have their research taken away from them and given to some other company. They don't need to worry about what their partners are doing and being told to cut costs, unless it's done internally.

[Bimmerista]

Originally Posted by whippersnapper

.

I see Lexus as a good example of a company that is sticking to its knitting. The reason car mags and customers are comparing an IS350 to a 3 series is simply because BMW has lost its way a little and is building a 3 series much closer to the Lexus lux ideal. Afterall what has the "relentless pursuit of perfection" got to do with the "Ultimate Driving Machine". Nothing on its face. Lexus can't compete 100% with the BMW dynamics because doing so would compromise its brand essence. They become somewhat comparable only because BMW has moved so much toward Luxury.

With all due respect to Lexus which makes good quality autos, Lexus does not have a "Knitting", other than the ultimate proposition of "we make cars that do not break down".

They target BMW with the IS (have done so since day one), just so they can say they have a sporty sedan.

They kind of target the 5 series and kind of the Eclass with the GS sedans just so they can say again, that they have a full size sporty thingi with 4 large doors on it.

With the LS they have been copying the S class since the day that the LS was born.

Tehy are shooting at anything that moves and hopes it sticks.

Interstingly, the only (accidental) Lexus innovation is their best seller: the RX. The RX was a supposed to be a copy of the ML class, but by using a car platform, Lexus indeed struck one out of the ball park.

Lexus now is trying to have a unified brand message with the "Lfinesse", but Toyota giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other, as all the design cues are copied to the Toyota line (camry, Avalon), thus resulting in Lexi now looking a LOT MORE like Toyotas and therefore less distinct than ever before.

Lexus's success in the US and US only is due to its core proposition: well build and cheaper than the Germans. Period. Lexus has no real other brand identity despite the fact the they try. You really want to know why the IS is being compared to the 3 series: becuae Toyota pays journos to trinkets to do such comparisons.

Outside if the NA market, in Europe and in its own home market of Japan, Lexus is not suceeding. Lexus sales in Japan are 40-50% BELOW their own (low) expectations. In Japan the Japanese know what Lexuis are: Toyota JDM market Crowns etc. with another badge.

[whippersnapper]

Thanks for your thoughts bimmerista

My concern is that the money spent on active steering, iDrive etc.. is all R&D resources diverted from making the car better to drive. And of course, then there is the weight which you identified.

I say leave the crazy innnovations that are mostly just gimmicks to the luxury manufacturers Mercedes and Lexus. Lexus needs a computer controlled parking system because deep down, their core customers would rather not drive at all.

Me, I love to drive. I turn the excellent logic 7 off sometimes just to listen to that creamy engine. I love the way the stick flicks into the center gate as I come out of second and move to third gear. I love the way the car hooks in and drive forward as I feed in the power harder past the apex rather than understeering like many vehicles.

I would like to stay part of the BMW family. But I find a Maserati Quattroporte more appealing than a 7 series

[Bimmerista]

Originally Posted by whippersnapper

Thanks for your thoughts bimmerista

My concern is that the money spent on active steering, iDrive etc.. is all R&D resources diverted from making the car better to drive. And of course, then there is the weight which you identified.

I say leave the crazy innnovations that are mostly just gimmicks to the luxury manufacturers Mercedes and Lexus. Lexus needs a computer controlled parking system because deep down, their core customers would rather not drive at all.

Me, I love to drive. I turn the excellent logic 7 off sometimes just to listen to that creamy engine. I love the way the stick flicks into the center gate as I come out of second and move to third gear. I love the way the car hooks in and drive forward as I feed in the power harder past the apex rather than understeering like many vehicles.

I would like to stay part of the BMW family. But I find a Maserati Quattroporte more appealing than a 7 series

My pleasure -I think you will enjoy my Lexus rant...

Be carefull with the Mass - it is really not spacious in the back, nor comfortable and if you think SMG is cranky wait untill you try their tranny.

But it does look great I admit.

[BK]

Robert Farago is an excellent writer and I much prefer reading his articles and car reviews than about 97% of the reviews out there. IMO, that website is a fun place to read car reviews.

However, like a lot of good writers, Farago is clearly a bit self-absorbed. Kind of a smarty pants. As a result, IMO he sometimes expresses opinions more harshly than he should -- either to generate controversy to get a rise out of his readers, or to show off his mad writing skillz.

I like the article, but I think this falls into that general category. Lots of truth to it, but written with a more extreme viewpoint than I bet Farago really believes.

[whippersnapper]

Originally Posted by Bimmerista

With all due respect to Lexus which makes good quality autos, Lexus does not have a "Knitting", other than the ultimate proposition of "we make cars that do not break down".

They target BMW with the IS (have done so since day one), just so they can say they have a sporty sedan.

They kind of target the 5 series and kind of the Eclass with the GS sedans just so they can say again, that they have a full size sporty thingi with 4 large doors on it.

With the LS they have been copying the S class since the day that the LS was born.

Tehy are shooting at anything that moves and hopes it sticks.

Interstingly, the only (accidental) Lexus innovation is their best seller: the RX. The RX was a supposed to be a copy of the ML class, but by using a car platform, Lexus indeed struck one out of the ball park.

Lexus now is trying to have a unified brand message with the "Lfinesse", but Toyota giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other, as all the design cues are copied to the Toyota line (camry, Avalon), thus resulting in Lexi now looking a LOT MORE like Toyotas and therefore less distinct than ever before.

Lexus's success in the US and US only is due to its core proposition: well build and cheaper than the Germans. Period. Lexus has no real other brand identity despite the fact the they try. You really want to know why the IS is being compared to the 3 series: becuae Toyota pays journos to trinkets to do such comparisons.

Outside if the NA market, in Europe and in its own home market of Japan, Lexus is not suceeding. Lexus sales in Japan are 40-50% BELOW their own (low) expectations. In Japan the Japanese know what Lexuis are: Toyota JDM market Crowns etc. with another badge.

Not sure I agree with all of this but passionately argued

The scary thing is what does it say about the average american prestiege car customer that they are so successful her

[whippersnapper]

Originally Posted by KenB

We seem to be at odd lately, you are wrong all the time

If anyone thinks that BMW, Infiniti, and Lexus are not benchmarking each other then that person is crazy. The products are converging with each redesign, but they are trying to keep their own “flavor” so they don’t completely alienate their core buyers.

BMW obviously is boosting the Luxury that they put into the car (just sit in an E36 or E30 for evidence). Where do you suppose they got the idea that a car in this class needed lighter steering and more isolation from road feed back (E46). Is the BMW still the sportiest in its class, yes but not by as much as it was. I am not talking about raw performance numbers here, obviously design and technology has progressed, look at one of these older BMWs and it is obvious where development money was spent. The steering was heavier and more communicative. The center stack favors the driver, the secondary controls are very simple and fall easily to hand, there is very little to distract the driver, there are not even any cup holders (yes there was an accessory cup holder for the E36, SHUT IT). Back then the Germans said ‘when you are in the car you should be driving not having lunch’ now my Boxster has 2 cup holders…

Lexus is bumping up the “sportiness” or at least what they consider to be sportiness, but still completely isolating the driver from the road and the environment because that is what a Lexus driver expects. You can even turn off the stability and traction control on the new LS for huge power slides, if that doesn’t say that they are going after more of a sport image then nothing will.

There is an alternate explanation to benchmarking. Now I am sure each manufacturer does benchmark their products but what all good companies really try to do is to meet customer needs. The better you meet customers needs the more you will sell. there is an unfortunate side effect which is the race to the middle (and often mediocrity) because unlike web 2.0, vehicle manufacturing doesn't lead itself to mass customization so you need to build the vehicle that best meets the needs of the greatest profit pool (this isn't necessarily the greatest number of people, since different customer segments are capable of developing vastly different profit pools).

I can just imagine the kind of discreet choice market research methodologies that BMW must be using to select the inclusion of various fluffy features. It doesn't help that there is so much access to credit in the USA and cars are so inexpensive that a BMW is almost a mainstream proposition resulting in the "average" man having a substantive say in how are cars are designed and made. With more and more lower class values being incorporated into mainstream culture it is hardly surprising that there are now more 3 series sold in the UK than Ford Mondeos.

Guess, I'll have to keep saving for that Ferrari

[Bimmerista]

Originally Posted by whippersnapper

The scary thing is what does it say about the average american prestiege car customer that they are so successful her

Actually, it is a compliment, in NA we have a much more open mind than anywhere else in the world and manufacturers here constantly have to proove themselves worthy of our patronage, since there is no such thing as a sacred cow (lifetime loyalty to a brand died the day Cadillac died).
This explains in part why this market is most cutthroat, competitive in the world and, because of its size and wealth, the most lucrative if you do succeed.