From: bpita@ctp.com (Bob Pitas)
Subject: Re: INFFINITI vs BMW
Organization: Cambridge Technology Partners
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 19:11:16 GMT

In article <Nov08.232733.16777@engr.washington.edu> eliot@lanmola.engr.washington.edu (eliot) writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.155105.29650@ctp.com> bpita@ctp.com (Bob Pitas) writes:
>
>>???  How come all statements of how BMWs are such good cars always just
>>say "That car could NEVER be as good as a BMW", but they never explain
>>why.  I have a theory that the reason is that people who drop a load
>>on a car like a BMW with slow acceleration, soft handling, and spartan
>>interiors have no way to justify it other than saying "No other car
>>could be like a BMW".  Of course thats because they got drawn in by some
>>rhetoric about it being a "driver's car" or whatever bullshit BMW is using
>>to sell their mediocre cars nowadays.
>
>while i think that many bmw owners buy the cars simply for snob appeal
>i wouldn't go as far as to describe them as badly as you would.  it is
>not easy to defend a bmw by a barrage of numbers in the way that many
>people like to.  there are a lot of subjective qualities of bmws that
>are very pleasing.  and they are hard to defend because they cannot be
>quantified.  how would you defend a bottle of fine wine against a
>bottle of beer if the beer proponent is arguing that the buzz per buck
>factor is higher for the beer?

Call me a peasant, but I'd agree with the beer proponent!  :^)

>
>> I've also roadraced M3s, and flat
>>out accellerated an M5 and 630csi (European spec) up on the highway,
>>with no problem.  They don't have acceleration, topspeed, or handling,
>>nor do they have as many luxury appointments as a Caddy.
>
>i'm pretty sure that a M5 is faster than a q45.  wanna go look up the
>numbers?  anyway it is quite vague what you mean by "they don't have
>acceleration, topspeed or handling".  what does it take under your set
>of criteria for a car to have acceleration, topspeed and handling?
>is the q45 your yardstick for comparisons?

Your right, the M5 is the faster, and better handling car, but now your
getting into a *much* higher price bracket!

Actually, no, the Q45 is not my yardstick...  I meant in a general sense.
I personally prefer performance cars, and dispise luxury, if only because
it adds weight. (Therefore decreasing performance)  My point about
performance is that in order to get a BMW with the performance capabilities
of the Q, you have to go to BMWs that cost twice as much.  And at twice
the price, they're still no more luxurious than the Q.
I personally wouldn't own a Q because it's performance isn't up to the
standards I hold, but I've driven one, and I've driven the 735, and
there was no comparison.  Unfortunately, I didn't get to drive the
BMW at the limit (since it was my manager's manager's car) but I drove
the Q at the limit, and it was very composed.

>
>as for the luxury appointments, i'm sure the caddy wins hands down.
>i don't think bmw is aiming to be a caddy and vice versa.  they are
>apples and oranges.  and if luxury appointments are what you are
>looking for i think the choices are pretty clear.
>
>>>>It'd take the Q over a BMW any day..its more FUN TO DRIVE...and
>>>				     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>	Only if your idea of "fun to drive" is going fast.....
>>
>>What do you consider fun?  Thinking to yourself "I wish I had a car
>>with half the performance of a Q"?
>
>my definition of fun, in addition to acceleration and speed includes
>communication when conditions are not suitable for speed.  i like a
>car that talks back, not a silent obedient servant.  cars can talk
>back through the steering, the seat of your pants and the engine note.
>i drove a saab 9000 turbo and a 525i a while back.  while the 9000
>will easily blow the 525i into the weeds i ended up liking the 525i
>more.  much more.  it was the entire package that did it for me.  it
>was very pleasing how the entire car was designed and packaged.  there
>was so little wrong with it and so much that was right.  i have driven
>most of the 525i's competitors (and have reported my findings here)
>and it is still the car that i admire the most.  (no, i don't own a
>bmw)

You don't have to tell me about communication from from the car.
My car (as you can see from my .sig) is a very cheap car.  I only payed
$2900 for it, and spent a total of $1000 on upgrades.  It has very
stiff shocks, no road isolation at all, and Dynomax exhaust.  I can
hear *everything* that goes on with my engine, and I routinely shift by
sound alone.  I feel every little road irregularity I hit...
I wouldn't trade it for anything in the world.  (OK, if you *gave* me a
new RX-7 or LT1 Corvette I'd think about it...  :^)  )
But even though the car is noisy inside, and needs to be warmed up in
winter, (its carberated) and causes passengers fatigue during long trips
because it rides roughly, I absolutely LOVE to drive it, and look forward
to driving home (through Cambridge traffic, no less) every night.

I know it's hard to judge a car on any objective criteria, since so much
of the cars value is the fact that the driver should *enjoy* being in
the car.  After driving the BMW, with it's mushy suspension, and
no feedback at all, I couldn't wait to get back to my Mustang.  I didn't
get that feeling as much after driving the Q45.  That's what I'm basing 
my opinions on.
>
>while i don't expect to convince you to change your tune, i'd at least
>like to say that all out performance (or quarter mile seconds divided
>by decibels) is not the only criteria that people use to judge cars.
>it would be pointless to argue whose criteria is right.  there will
>always be a diversity of criteria.  i have attempted to state mine
>briefly..
>
>>No, unfortunately you don't understand the previous poster's point.  
>>Silence is achieved by building the car to extremely tight tolerances,
>>including engineering the motor to make as little vibrational noise as
>>possible.  
>
>and i happen to think that bmw straight six engines are excellent in 
>this regard..
>
>>Also the suspension can be engineered to reduce noise without
>>isolating the driver from road feel.
>
>this is largely a tradeoff.  it is certainly possible to push the
>envelope out, but they are conflicting requirements and there will
>always be compromises.
>
>>That's the beauty of the Q, it's
>>built to such close tolerances, yet with so much HP and Torque, that
>>it's one of the funnest cars to drive anywhere.
>
>i have not driven the q45 yet, so cannot offer my opinion on its fun
>factor.
>
>>The silence is not created by insulating the driver from all noise, it's
>>silent because the car doesn't make noise in the first place.  Maybe BMW
>>could take a lesson or two from Nissan on build quality.
>
>it is not a simple matter of build quality.  it is a deliberate design
>goal that the bmw's engine is audible.  it is considered part of the
>driving experience.  i drove the silent-as-a-tomb lexus and hated it
>because it was so cold and impersonal.  once again, if you value total
>engine silence you know which cars to buy.  but understand that for
>some people (perhaps in the minority) communication is a very
>important criteria.  have you seen the latest acura attack ad on the
>lexus?  the one where the lexus is being covered up gradually by
>armor?  i think they have a point there, but they are inevitably
>helping bmw.
>

I agree wholeheartedly!  (And that commercial is great!)  If people want
that type of isolation, though, you still can't beat a Caddy!
And Cadillac has some DAMN nice engines nowadays.  The STS has very
good acceleration figures, although I can't say anything about the
handling of something that heavy...  I wonder what the Allante with
the Northstar engine is like...  It's probably not quite as heavy as
the other cars, so maybe it handles better...

>
>eliot
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ___          
       / _ \                 '85 Mustang GT                        Bob Pitas
      /    /USH              14.13 @ 99.8                      bpita@ctp.com
     / /| \                  Up at NED, Epping, NH           (Cambridge, MA)

           "Laughed at by time, tricked by circumstances" -Peart
Disclaimer: These opinions are mine, obviously, since they end with my .sig!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------