M5 Autocar: AWD F10 M5 at the ready

[martinbo]

Yeah, Betty's right. The X5/6M have never received anywhere near the glowing reviews that the more traditional M cars have garnered in the past. We were initially led to expect physics-defying dynamics and a rearwardly biased handling characteristic but this turned out to be not-so. In the end, the X5/6M are mildly impressive for what they are but nowhere near the standards of the great M cars.

An ML63 AMG is said to be a more involving drive and Porsche's new Cayenne Turbo easily has the measure of the more powerful BMWs. But this point is largely irrelevant in the modern context of market. In a nutshell it all about this: "Is it fast? Yes. Does it look mean? Yes. Will it sell? More so if you have an M-badge on it." Result: X5/6M - and rightly so. As abhorrent as they are to me.

I came across this extremely interesting factoid in an unrelated article on the facelifted Jag XF on Autocar:

Also on its way is a four-wheel-drive XF, which will extend Jag’s market penetration in the snowbelt states of the US, which includes New York. Around three-quarters of executive saloon sales in the snowbelt are all-wheel drive.

Now, tell me rationally, why on Earth ought BMW not offer an AWD M5 in the US? Especially now that it has turbo'd torque-slugger of an engine that will largely negate the drivetrain losses of AWD compared with the effect of it on a high-revving naturally aspirated engine in a heavy body.

 

[Guibo]

It's all about status isn't it? We saw it with the M3 CSL - bought up in droves by those hankering after the latest and greatest, only to realise upon familiarity that it was unremittingly hardcore for their flabby buttocks and subsequently disposed of in such a rush that market values plummeted by 40% in the first year.

And the reality is that even those CSL customers were not as hardcore as they thought they were: In a 2007 Car Magazine interview with Gerhard Richter (then head of M), it was said that 85% of CSL customers "wussed out and piled the weight (of AC/stereo/options) back on."
In that interview, Richter was adamant of his vision for M cars: RWD, non-turbo, petrol. But he also knew the demographic had changed from what it originally was. The article notes: "50% of all M3 sales will go to the US where M is seen as simply the pinnacle of the range, not a motorsport-derived product."
Richter stressed the need for light weight, improved efficiency, and building increasingly large numbers of cars to spread the cost. It's left to the reader to deduce that you can't build large numbers of cars that appeal to a very small minority, unless you like to lose money.

I'd love for BMW to introduce an enthusiast-oriented 1-Series M as a feeder, something to aspire to within the brand. But that's not going to happen. Not with where the money comes from. And we should not forget that even the original M3 was never cheap. In the States, it was like a $35-40k car. And I'll bet the vast majority of new buyers at the time never tracked them; that was largely left to those who bought them second- or even third-hand.

 

[ACE]

For those of us who subscribe(d) to the long-standing M way of doing things, well, we have to accept that times change and that progress is an inevitability, though this doesn't necessarily mean that we have to like it either.

BMW weren't lying to us when they extoled the virtues of the long-standing M philosophy - it was special and it still is special. Unfortunately, however, "special" isn't always sustainable.

It seems sustainable over at Porsche. BMW M chose this path, they were not forced imo.

 

[EnI]

It seems sustainable over at Porsche.

Don't be so sure. The future Porsche (as a part of mighty VAG family) will also become a victim of extensive part sharing, joint R&D, model expansion policy etc. I don't think Porsche will feature an exclusive tech (engines, gearboxes etc) in the future.

 

[ACE]

Don't be so sure. The future Porsche (as a part of mighty VAG family) will also become a victim of extensive part sharing, joint R&D, model expansion policy etc. I don't think Porsche will feature an exclusive tech (engines, gearboxes etc) in the future.

I am talking about Porsche producing enthusiast focussed cars. I couldn't care less if the tech is not "exclusive". Do you have some info that indicates that Porsche are not going to produce enthusiast focussed cars in the future or are you just speculating (or VAG-hating)?

 

[EnI]

Sure Porsche will still produce focused cars, but will also offer additional not so focused models in general, although those cars will still be most dynamic in class. Eg. compact SUV, compact sedan / 4dr coupe, compact coupe / hatch etc. While supercars with limited edition are hardly made for enthusiasts but more for filthy rich car collectors.

Also: why do you think Porsche went for VAG, and unfortunately end up under VAG umbrella instead? To be able a part of huge conglomerate with huge purchasing power, and huge economy of scales possibilities. Being a part of VAG - even with VW as master, and not the slave as it was originally planned by Porsche - Porsche will be able to focus on niche cars. Something BMW is not in position to do it. Since it's an independent company, and has to produce lots of car to broader customer pool to get proper revenue figure for further R&D - including for the enthusiast's cars. Which sure are much more exclusive now in the ocean of other BMW models. IMO M still produces some very enthusiast focused cars - latest 1M proves that! Not to mention the E92 M3 GTS, and E46 M3 CSL before that. But it also produces sporty cars for the masses - with a dose of sportiness the majority wants.

Also: Porsche can charge more for their cars. Something BMW can't. BMW competes with eg. MB, and not with Porsche. 911 is iconic. An iconic sportscoupe. A very niche car. Something a compact 2dr or 4dr sedan - something BMW is best known for - is not. And compact sedan buyers differ quite much from the rear-engined sportscoupe buyers, don't you think?

And all the BMW's (& M's also) philosophy derives from a compact sedan (in the New Class / 3er), while Porsche image & philosophy has a source in a sportscoupe - in the 911.

I think it's not fair to compete BMW to Porsche.

 

[Cashmere]

Eni, do you have any idea on the whereabouts of Gerhard Richter? Is he still affiliated with BMW M?

 

[vedjo01]

Oh,C˙mon ..I mean,what is going on at BMW lately??
Is BMW as a company really in that bad shape to ditch everything that made them unique in automotive world like,for example,NA engines,RWD focused cars?
Are we gonna see BMW becoming "just" another car maker?IMO,cars that define BMW as object of desire in automotive world are driver focused,light and powerful cars.
Do we not read how great BMW sales are..how profits rise up from day to day..and how global market is getting better..
Sorry,but this "we must,we cant" BS isn´t working for me.. .

*PS - Damn it,I just had to say those words..

 

[EnI]

1.

I have no idea what's Richter's current position. I guess he must be Head of Project IDE (It Doesn't Exist).


2.

The problem with BMW is that they invested too much in advertising, PR & promotion of certain tech, and made that a differentiation point, or even an advantage.

But now - with all the green madness going on - the tech BMW once despised (FI engines, auto & semi-auto gearboxes, AWD & FWD etc) proved to be more appropriate for the current times then the tech BMW bet on.
It feels strange nowadays when BMW suddenly ditched the "oh, we're so special" tech for the trendy one. But they have no choice. The targeted fleet emissions are strict, and if not met the fines will be enormous. Therefore every carmaker is racing furiously to meet those targets. Making turbo engines, more efficient auto gearboxes, start-stop systems, full & mild hybrids, EVs etc. It's the change that's going on across the whole industry. Nothing that BMW can fight. They just suffer more because they promoted the "wrong" tech in the past - as that special factor BMW car delivers. That makes them "not special" any more - regarding the tech. But IMO it was more about experience then the tech itself - although the advertising was focused on tech as well. Who says BMW can't make turbo engines in the future that are a bit more special (more NA-ish in character) then the engines of its direct rivals? I'm sure they can still make great engines & chassis ... yet they will have to pay more attention to weight reduction in the future, using more lightweight materials - since some rivals (Audi, Jaguar) are already overtaking them in this field. And agility & nimbleness can best be achieved with light(er) cars. Therefore also the BMW i - to experiment & lead the future lightweight materials, design & construction. Be sure the tech will trickle down from i to M & regular BMW cars as well in the future.
I'm sure BMW could go for full-alu chassis or even entire body, buying expensive alu and therefore make thinner profit margins, but they needed money to invest it in the future materials, tech & projects. The result is almost here: the BMW i cars.

The know-how & results gained in Project i development is ENORMOUS & VERY significant! And be sure other BMW Group cars will profit quite well from that in the future. Without heavy investment in Project i, and making the current generation a bit more porky compared to some rivals, the future lightweight material use won't be possible. The investment in hybrid & EV tech was necessary, even if temporarily slightly neglecting the current model line up (weight wise!).

And with limited sources the company has to prioritize. Investing in the future tech & projects, even by compromising the current product line a bit. Scarifying the present for the better future.

As said many times: automotive industry is in the transitional period right now. New tech emerging, new standards are set, alternative powertrins coming etc. Everything is new, in its initial phase of development. Therefore not optimal at all! But in a decade when we enter the next level, the things will settle down, and the investments will start to pay off significantly.

And for BMW the future is much more important than the present - from the sustainability point of view, and for the company's independence.

Just look @ Audi: the VAG canceled the R4 & postponed A2 - R4 since it could steal too much Cayman sales, while A2 is postponed since VAG wants Group platform to be developed first, not allowing Audi to make a bespoke one for A2 only. That's the price you pay for being a part of a larger family: you have to be a team player - scarifying your own interests for the whole group / family benefit (or even for the one other privileged family member only). VAG obviously made Audi an AWD specialist, responsible for VAG Group SUV platforms - that's the Audi specialization in the Group right now. that's their designated domain & home territory in the Group. All the others will be in the hands of other group members. Which is not necessarily bad - eg. Audi can benefit from VW & Skoda & Seat in the lower range, while benefiting from Lamborghini & Porsche & Bentley in higher product range. It looks Audi has been completely robbed of independence, reduced to a common platform user - and being only able to launch product that won't hurt other VAG's brands. It also looks Porsche with all the planned lower-end model expansion will take some glory from Audi within VAG. A price for being "just" a family member.

 

[martinbo]

The problem with BMW is that they invested too much in advertising, PR & promotion of certain tech, and made that a differentiation point, or even an advantage.

But now - with all the green madness going on - the tech BMW once despised (FI engines, auto & semi-auto gearboxes, AWD & FWD etc) proved to be more appropriate for the current times then the tech BMW bet on.
It feels strange nowadays when BMW suddenly ditched the "oh, we're so special" tech for the trendy one. But they have no choice. The targeted fleet emissions are strict, and if not met the fines will be enormous. Therefore every carmaker is racing furiously to meet those targets. Making turbo engines, more efficient auto gearboxes, start-stop systems, full & mild hybrids, EVs etc. It's the change that's going on across the whole industry. Nothing that BMW can fight. They just suffer more because they promoted the "wrong" tech in the past - as that special factor BMW car delivers. That makes them "not special" any more - regarding the tech. But IMO it was more about experience then the tech itself - although the advertising was focused on tech as well. Who says BMW can't make turbo engines in the future that are a bit more special (more NA-ish in character) then the engines of its direct rivals? I'm sure they can still make great engines & chassis ... yet they will have to pay more attention to weight reduction in the future, using more lightweight materials - since some rivals (Audi, Jaguar) are already overtaking them in this field. And agility & nimbleness can best be achieved with light(er) cars. Therefore also the BMW i - to experiment & lead the future lightweight materials, design & construction. Be sure the tech will trickle down from i to M & regular BMW cars as well in the future.

And that dear members is the reality of the situation. Fine post EnI.

If I could just alter one sentence I would change this:

"The problem with BMW is that they invested too much in advertising, PR & promotion of certain tech..."

to this:

"The problem with BMW is that they invested heavily in advertising, PR & promotion of certain tech..."

BMW's investment in espousing their magnificent technology wasn't too much - it was exactly what they needed to do. If you have a differentiator and that differentiator gives you a tangible competitive advantage then you have to get the message out there. BMW did, the Press did, BMW fans did. Nothing wrong with that at the time in all fairness and you can't blame them.

Market forces can change rapidly rendering what once was a competitive advantage irrelevant in the new dispensation. Organisations (any organisation - not just a car maker) have to adapt to changes in the market. They simply don't have control over the external factors and influences.

Car makers have to change. In turn, we consumers have to wise up and accept the way of the world. I'm not saying that I'm happy with the situation, I'm actually very sad that the outgoing M3 is the very end of an exquisite lineage of cars that - for a fair stretch of time - brought quality and precision performance motoring within the reach of the moderately wealthy. It was Power to the People.

This is a very interesting period of change in the industry; the old differentiators and unique selling points no longer hold as much sway. New, emerging technologies and the routes that each of the major players will embark upon now (or have already) will result in a new and different way of comparing automotive products.

BMW is a mass car maker on a far larger scale than Porsche is. They're two completely different companies: Porsche's bread-and-butter model is the 911, BMW's is the 3 Series. Even Porsche's cheapest cars are bought by the top echelon and as a result they can charge a premium for all of their models, couple this with an insane profit generator called an options list and still produce, in lower numbers, exotica like the new GT3 RS 4.0 whilst avoiding excessive emissions penalties. For now.

It's a clear strategy that Porsche will be burgeoning its line up at the bottom end of the product range in order to bring down its average CO2 and fuel consumption figures in order to a) avoid penalties and b) ensure the sustainability of exotica like the GT3.

How has Porsche managed to "get away" with producing a big SUV and a hunchback sedan? Well they've been very clever to advertise the superiority of their engineering without ever harping on a specific engineering philosophy as being superior. This was BMW's mistake in hindsight.

 

[EnI]

Not to mention cocky & big-mouthed (and therefore strategically myopic) BMW & M CEOs, who said "We will never make ...". I'm sure BMW & M have learned that lesson. Never say never - since you never know what external forces will force you to revise prior decisions.

Now we have turbo engines, even in M cars ... and some day due to turbo tech the I6 will have to go, giving room the V6. Since the V6 turbo is a more compact package than I6 turbo is.

And with all the torque from turbo engines the AWD gives a front-engined car a performance (and even daily driving) advantage: acceleration, traction, corner stability etc ... Therefore (optional) M AWD cars & coupes are inevitable in the future. Perhaps not in the upcoming M5 sedan already, but later ...

The only thing that's stopping them from doing it right now is the too heavy regular BMW chassis / body M has to work on, and the weight unoptimized AWD system. With lighter body & lighter AWD systems M sedans & coupes will be inevitable option.

 

[Human]

Call me cocky but have a go in a BMW X6 M, I can't imagine that BMW M can be wrong in producing a M5 X-Drive.
I invested a lot of down payments into my X6 M and no car I have ever owned put such a satisfactory smile on my face and butterflies in my stomach.