From: eliot@lanmola.engr.washington.edu (eliot)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: INFFINITI vs BMW
Date: 9 Nov 92 00:07:55 GMT
Organization: clearer than blir

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?

> 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?

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)

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.


eliot