Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

1452453455457458860

Comments

  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    Where do you get that? The TT is a sub-3000 lbs coupe:

    Really, what an odd thing for you to say. And for my money, only the Cayman is sexier but it's also 15k+ more expensive.


    Odd? The link you provided is for a FRONT WHEEL DRIVE, 4-CYLINDER Coupe version of the TT. And it still weighs 100 lbs more than the Cayman, in spite of having nothing in common with a real sports car. The Cayman only costs $15k more? You could give me a FWD 2.0 TT and I wouldn't pay to insure it. Scroll down on your link - the 3.2 Quatro coupe version weighs in at 3,262 lbs, 400 lbs more than the Cayman, 300 lbs more than the Cayman S. And the convertible weighs in at a mere 500+ lbs more than the Boxster.

    Didn't mention the convertible as the S2000, TT convertible, Boxster are anything but stunning looking. They're all pretty darn ugly in my opinion.

    Yeah, that TT Coupe is a real head turner. Did they include the Audi version of the New Beetle's dash mounted vase in the redesign? Or did they just parts share that one directly?

    (From another post) I'd say you're pretty liberal with the term excellent then. I would at best on a scale of 1 to 10 rate a 335i with ZSP and 6 speed a 7. More likely a 6 with RFTs. But I'm a very hard marker and the BMW 335i has several deficiencies I can't overlook: weight, size, interior size, RFTs, mileage, power, transmission, body roll, reliability, cost, resale.

    Hard marker - ha! I'd say you're exceedingly liberal with the term "stunning". Based upon your criteria - similar to mine- I would rate the a grossly overpriced, fugly FWD 4-banger 3,000 lb coupe about a 2. But deduct 1 for false advertising as a sports car.

    Just so my previous point wasn't lost: Audi is the LAST manufacturer that deserves any credit for "weight saving measures". The TT is still a COW. And, IMO, the A4 will not get any closer to being a serious ELLPS by trimming a couple pounds when it needs to lose several hundred.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    So prior to the e92, it was not #1? What was your pecking order before the 335i was introduced?

    My point was that until now, there were some that perceived the past 3 series were/are underpowered. That HP "perception" is now ultimately eliminated from any argument in the E92. *MY* pecking order was the same regardless.

    I can not comment pre-2006 (E90) since I do not have first hand experience but for me, it was #1 when I made my decision. In other words, 255 HP vs. 280 HP in the G for '06 did not do it for me considering all of the other factors considered.

    Regards,
    OW
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    Yes and no, the a 3 series model does include LSD.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    "not exactly places for passionate sporty driving"

    Wow talk about not being able to see the forest from the trees. Are you suggesting that everyone that drives in Manhattan traffic has to drive an Accent?
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,353
    How 'bout a "Smart" car? You can use Oreo Cookies for tires on that one.

    Regards,
    OW
  • There is a good reason why they are called "Smart" cars and not "Fun" cars ;)
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    Are you suggesting that everyone that drives in Manhattan traffic has to drive an Accent?

    Not at all. Unlike some over-bearing nanny-wannabes, I don't think anyone should be told how to spend their own hard earned money, least of all by the government.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    Then I don't get your point. You made a thinly veiled dig about people who drive BMWs in heavy traffic.
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Posts: 6,257
    Odd? The link you provided is for a FRONT WHEEL DRIVE, 4-CYLINDER Coupe version of the TT. And it still weighs 100 lbs more than the Cayman, in spite of having nothing in common with a real sports car. The Cayman only costs $15k more? You could give me a FWD 2.0 TT and I wouldn't pay to insure it.

    to each his own. I have less interest in the weight, complexity and poor implementation of an AWD system, so i wouldn't go near Audi's mediocre-to-lousy quattro.

    Hard marker - ha! I'd say you're exceedingly liberal with the term "stunning". Based upon your criteria - similar to mine- I would rate the a grossly overpriced, fugly FWD 4-banger 3,000 lb coupe about a 2. But deduct 1 for false advertising as a sports car.

    Subjective, totally. I think the 08 TT is a brilliant design; nothing in the ELLPS is even remotely attractive on a purely aesthetic level. I can't comment on performance as I haven't driven one. My ranking of a 335i is based on the all around car. As an overall car in the world it's a 6, borderline 7 (remove the RFTs to get that high).

    the A4 will not get any closer to being a serious ELLPS by trimming a couple pounds when it needs to lose several hundred.

    For my money, even an acient A4 is quite a bit beyond cars like the IS350 and CTS. I'd take an A4 frontrak 2.0T for 30k before I'd pick up an IS350 for the same price. Heck, the IS could be cheaper and it still wouldn't register as a choice.
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    I agree with you that TL and TSX have similar, if not slightly superior real life resale. However, lease residuals offered by manufacturers are not determined by real life resale but by the manufacturers' eagerness to ush new cars and bend accounting books. Right now, for the month of March 2007, the 24/24 residual on 3 series sedan is 73%, that of the TL is only 68%, and TL Type-S is only 66%. The 5-7% difference there is huge because if you can get the car for 90% MSRP, the 3 series lease would only amortize 17% of MSRP over two years, whereas the TL would be amortizing 22%-24% of MSRP. TL MSRP would have to be 33% lower to make the amortization amount equal; fat chance of that :-)

    Like I said, the phenomenom of BMWFS giving out free fake money in the form of lease residual, fake but good for car payments on BMW's, is changing the cost equation dramaticly.
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    It's a simple statement that people can buy BMW's for all sorts reasons other than being involved in sporty driving.
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    Okay, you got me there. I meant tot say that they are _only_ 3-4 years out of date. The rationale being that TL is on a 4-yr model cycle, and the new one is coming out next year. By your reckoning, they are only perhaps a couple years being surpassed by new competition. I may even be inclined to agree with you on that. It furthers my argument that this segment is evolving really fast, and the previous generation products from each and everyone of the manufacturers (including BMW) can not hold candle to the latest competition. That's why I suggested that if we want cost to be partof the analysis at all, it has to be based on cost associated with rapid fleet update . . . because after 3-4 (or even 2 years), we are no longer talking about a competitive ELLPS vis. the new competition.
  • hausshauss Posts: 169
    That's fine for discussion of vehicles in general but since this is a sedan discussion the fact that BMW make coupes and convertibles is irrelevant to how their 3 series sedan compares to its competition. So, my argument is not about their product line in general but about their sedan and this forum.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    Of course, if you want to have a new car every 2 or 3 years, and don't mind always having a car payment, then BMW does make the money cheap.

    But that's the only scenario where it pays off.

    Paying $10,000 every 2 years for the benefit of having a brand new car every 2 years isn't cheap. At the end of 6 years, you've paid out $30,000 and own nothing.

    I know it's apples and oranges (leasing is a great solution for many people - business owners especially), but personally, I'd rather pay cash and own the car outright. I'll keep the car as long as I want, and then pass it on to my kids if it's a good one (like my V70).
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Posts: 6,257
    hat's why I suggested that if we want cost to be partof the analysis at all, it has to be based on cost associated with rapid fleet update . . . because after 3-4 (or even 2 years), we are no longer talking about a competitive ELLPS vis. the new competition.

    I wouldn't agree with that at all. The ELLPS is bloating and numbing at an alarming pace. Evolution usually implies improvement in the function of a species. ELLPS today v. an e46 (1998 chassis) - no contest, the e46. The only things my e46 ZHP sedan really lacked were power, weight reduction and an LSD - the M3's engine and LSD would have solved two of those.

    To each his own.
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    Well, E36 fans said the same thing about E46, and in turn were ridiculed by E30 fans who liked the jumpy rear end. Actually, E46 started the trend of bloat, by borrowing suspension geometry from E40 5 series, in order to get a smooth ride than smothers out pot holes.

    When Lexus tried to listen to the "real enthusiasts" and put forth the IS300, which was more in common to E30 than E46 was in terms of driving dynamics and riding quality, the market place gave it a big thumb-down. That pretty much proved that not only people don't always buy BMW's for performance; the "real enthusiasts" are not even in the driver's seat in terms of new car sales.
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Posts: 6,257
    Fed, pay out 30k over 6 years on any of the ELLPS cars and you still don't own anything. It'll take another 10-15k to pay off one of those. So after 40k and 8 years you might own an ELLPS and it'll be worth about 6-7k. Just keeping 40k in the bank would work out better (about 59k). :)
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Posts: 6,257
    I'd say the original IS failed more on the poor power, origins, bad gas mileage, boy racer exterior/interior. It was hard to get past the boy-racer feel of the car and the fact Lexus wanted 30k+ for a rebadged Toyota with little power and 18 mpg.
  • hausshauss Posts: 169
    Hey, to each their own, right? I'm 6' 1" and also have long legs for my height. I weigh less than you at 200 lbs but mostly found myself struggling for shoulder and arm room. I just felt crowded as I do in a lot of compact size cars in this group. We all have our own requirements.
  • brightness04brightness04 Posts: 3,151
    Exactly! You took the words right out of my mouth. When a lease deal is amortizing only 17% of MSRP over 24 months, it means the buyer would have to keep the car some 11 years to make depreciation outlay comparable. That's not even counting any repair and maintenance cost (which are none for the first 24mo, but sizable if not huge for BMW's over 5 years old). Then there's the subsidized lease money factor that is lower than interest that one can collect at a bank.
Sign In or Register to comment.