Reviews C&D: 2012 Audi A7 3.0T Quattro vs. 2013 BMW 640i Gran Coupe

[Guibo]

Base Pricing in the UK is
6GC: £59.6k
CLS: £51.2k
Panny: £63.2k
I think you could argue that the Audi A7 (base price £48.7k) also competes in this 4 door coupe segment (as C&D have done here).
The 6GC is priced significantly above the Audi and Merc equivalents. I would agree with C&D (and a few other mags as well) that the 6GC is relatively expensive.

You could argue that, but you can't really claim (as some have here) that most are cross-shopping them based on car mag comparos. Its obvious by the prices you posted that BMW intends to position the 6GC closer to the Panamera side of the market than the A7 side.
The 6GC is relatively expensive, compared to the A7/CLS. No one is debating that. Nor can anyone debate that the 6GC is relatively underproduced (and thus, the pricing scheme can make perfect sense). Audi sold over 37,000 A7s last year. In its first (and perhaps best) full year, the 6GC may be lucky to pull in, what, 5-6000? When Audi sells 7x's as many, it's considered shrewd/clever marketing. When BMW asks a 22% premium, but is only selling 13% the volume, it's considered greed.
Is it relatively expensive compared to the Panamera? Doesn't look like it. And there can be a huge leap between being "relatively expensive" vs being "overpriced." The former is an assessment we can make based on pure, cold magazine stats. It sometimes agrees with the latter, but not always and there are many instances where the two are not in agreement. An RS5 can lose to the M3 in a C&D comparo; that doesn't mean the RS5 is overpriced, a fact that I'm sure Deckhook would agree to but doesn't want to admit in this thread as it would undermine his argument against the 6GC.

 

[L0U]

Every single one of my last 6 Audis can match the rated highway mileage, but never the city.
The 6 market is for the spend unlimited money on your car market, that likes bmw's image marketing.
No one in the world looking for value vs. the competition would buy one. Likely a large reason Audi is beating bmw in all of the recent comparisons is the large difference in price, but for no better results....or even worse results.

Clearly bmw didn't build this car to compete with anyone.....its a car for the ones that just want a 6 and don't cross shop, then pay whatever bmw prices it at. Likely they would lose some sales if it became a best in class value car. Buyers want it to be a certain class car....one that separates themselves from the comon sense cars. The shame is its not thatgreat to be pulling this marketing feat off.

Its 30k overpriced for anyone shopping. S7 is worth 20k more on a tested results based study, yet it costs much less. The 6 is like wearing a diamond ring with flaws, vs. a perfect cubic zirconia....only in the cars case the zirconia would be better than the real deal.

 

[L0U]

porsche is also overpriced in the panamera. Known fact. At least the crummy rs5 is only a few grand more than the loaded s5. M3s cost more in canada than the 77k rs5

 

[Hofmeister]

M3s cost more in canada than the 77k rs5

Perhaps because its the better car?? Convenient how you forget to mention the M3's ability advantage but mention the Audis pricing advantage. And in the 6GC/A7 both the Audis apparent ability advantage and pricing advantage, according to some American tests. I say this of course armed with the fact that the 6er GC won a comparison test against the CLS in the July 2012 of Car Magazine. Final Paragraph:
"Theres an argument that suggests even such significant price differences as these arent important in cars of this class beacuse they'll all be company run. If thats the case, I'll be going home in the BMW. If not I'll be smashing piggy banks and stealing childrens pocket money because much as I enjoy the Mercedes, I'll still be going home in the BMW. "
And it won a comparison test against the CLS and A7 in issue 232 of Top Gear magazine ( 100% credible because it wasnt written by any of the TV crew, rather Paul Horrell )

The 6 market is for the spend unlimited money on your car market, that likes bmw's image marketing.

Your problem with this is/the 6er is different from its competitors in what respect??

Likely a large reason Audi is beating bmw in all of the recent comparisons is the large difference in price, but for no better results....or even worse results.

Simply love these sweeping statements

Clearly bmw didn't build this car to compete with anyone

Ahem, Panamera?

Likely they would lose some sales if it became a best in class value car.

Please try to make sense, by that very reasoning the A7 is irredeemably flawed?

 

[Merc1]

On paper yes. But what in reality? I have never had a car that uses the same fuel as the carmaker claim.

Considering the gulping nature of BMW's turbo engines, I'd go with what the chart says.


M

 

[L0U]

the reason the a7 is not flawed,,,,is it won the test. Simply reducing the 6s price would not make it a better performing car...just a cheaper car....with less bling buyers wanting it due to the more acessable price. Reduce the price enough, and then if it competes and beats the a7 in bang for thebuck...sales again pickup. thats a very large price drop though...like less than a7 msrp.

i did call the rs5 crummy...
and call the panamers the same...overpriced...so yes it does compete....just not with the value buyers...like the 6 er.

 

[Zafiro]

Considering the gulping nature of BMW's turbo engines, I'd go with what the chart says.


M

IMO carmakers are liars when it comes to fuel consumption. They must be driving with an egg under their shoes when they test their cars.

 

[Zafiro]

the reason the a7 is not flawed,,,,is it won the test. .

Isnt a personal opinion which car is the best?
I've driven many cars and I rarely agree with what I read in a piece of paper. There is no universal law, its just opinions...

 

[Merc1]

IMO carmakers are liars when it comes to fuel consumption. They must be driving with an egg under their shoes when they test their cars.

That I can agree with because the 650i positively drinks petrol when you actuall drive it.


M

 

[Guibo]

the reason the a7 is not flawed,,,,is it won the test. Simply reducing the 6s price would not make it a better performing car...just a cheaper car....with less bling buyers wanting it due to the more acessable price. Reduce the price enough, and then if it competes and beats the a7 in bang for thebuck...sales again pickup. thats a very large price drop though...like less than a7 msrp.

i did call the rs5 crummy...
and call the panamers the same...overpriced...so yes it does compete....just not with the value buyers...like the 6 er.

By that same logic, the ZR1 is not flawed...it won the test against the LP640. And yet despite having set a goal of 1800/yr, GM has never ever once hit that sales target in any year; production for MY2012 ended at only 404 units, only 22% of the annual goal. Same with the STS-V beating the CLS55 AMG.
If the Panamera is overpriced, then why does Porsche continue to make it with no downward revision of the price?

 

[L0U]

its a fine line between ordinary and exotic in some cases. North american cars have trouble selling $ expensive ones. Bmw flogs cheap leases in the 3 series....making a "nice color prety car for too much dollars" a hard sell. Porsche is more consistantly overpriced. Bmw is not branded for the pay too much crowd, like Porsche.

I believe there are much more expensive cars being bought in canada lately, but a drop in showy bling/badge at the same time. While the young may care about image, the ones in the cash buying, want value. Audis success in the last 2 to 3 years is marketing and pricing their cars to the buyers with cash. Selling performance works on the M3, selling badge is wearing thin. The winners of the future luxury sport market will be selling bang for the buck. Information is easy to obtain, and the comparisons for preceived value will sell cars. kia and hyundai.....aka people spending money...not giving a toss about badge. That change in their market share shows a trend, and Audi is doing it in the lux sport segment. Eventually image changes....watch kia brand image 10 years from now. Hyundia has allready beat the 1980s image.

 

[Guibo]

its a fine line between ordinary and exotic in some cases. North american cars have trouble selling $ expensive ones. Bmw flogs cheap leases in the 3 series....making a "nice color prety car for too much dollars" a hard sell. Porsche is more consistantly overpriced. Bmw is not branded for the pay too much crowd, like Porsche.
Selling performance works on the M3, selling badge is wearing thin. The winners of the future luxury sport market will be selling bang for the buck. Information is easy to obtain, and the comparisons for preceived value will sell cars. kia and hyundai.....aka people spending money...not giving a toss about badge. That change in their market share shows a trend, and Audi is doing it in the lux sport segment. Eventually image changes....watch kia brand image 10 years from now. Hyundia has allready beat the 1980s image.

So then you've just refuted the direct correlation between mag test results and whether a car is "flawed" or not. Porsche is more consistently expensive. That doesn't make them overpriced. It merely means they are priced beyond those who were not Porsche's original target in the first place, in the same way that you would not rate a $10 burger's worth using a McDonald's customer point of view. BMW is not branded for the pay too much crowd, yet they still sell cars in Porsche's pricing territories (so do Audi/MB).
The answer to the question, which you did not answer, seems to be: "Porsche continues to sell the Panamera with no downward revision in prices because the market has determined it is worth the price." In the classic free market economy model, this does not represent a product being overpriced.
I agree that the value brands are moving up, but this only highlights the possible decrease in "prestige pricing" between BMW and Porsche, a move which can only happen with either Porsche adjusting the Panamera's price downward (not bloody likely to happen) or BMW moving a model up in price. Those value brands will get better, but it's not just about bang/buck in objective measurable terms. Design is a huge part of it; you can have a car that is as impeccably built as a Mercedes, offered at cutrate prices, but if it looks like a dog turd, it's still not going to sell well.

 

[L0U]

I'd agree with the market determining Porsche price, and they do sell. Although they too may find price becoming a factor soon from the future buyers.
I would think bmw is in error thinking that the 6 can have the same sucess at this point in their brand recongnition. The ones who like M cars are complaing of the new m5 being made for the majority, unlike the very sports pointed version of the previous m5. This trend is not helping the 6 be included into an exclusive Porsche type category. Bmw is getting it right on many of their models, to sell and profit (at the expense of pure sports enthusiasts). The 6 seems a miss, and in 1 to 2 years the experiment will show the results. So far the majority is shouting overpriced everywhere you look.

My bias is obvious, of course....awaiting delivery of an 8. I'll try to curb the buyers bias.

 

[Guibo]

The ship of M car enthusiasts has sailed long ago. BMW did not appease the core legion of fans who wanted the purest driving experience with the 1-Series coupe, then again with the quasi-M product 1M. BMW had been there before, and got burned when not enough people could sustain strong sales for the M3 CSL.
Is BMW's brand recognition any worse today than it was over 10 years ago when the Z8 was selling at 911 Turbo prices? I would argue that they are in a better position. If now is not the time, then when is it? I can tell you they're not going to get there any faster by continuing to offer models closer to A7 pricing (and volume) than Panamera pricing; and at a volume of 5k/yr, it will be closer to Panamera volume than A7 volume. It will also be more exclusive than the Panamera so, no, within the price/volume paradigm, BMW would not be asking for Panamera levels of revenue. Thus, it is not as ambitious nor greedy as you might think.
This "experiment" that you seem to believe will finally show BMW's folly in 1 to 2 years has been ongoing for 10 years and lasted the entire duration of the previous 6er. The new 650i starts at a price $5000 higher than the outgoing 650i. That BMW have seen fit to not only continue the 6er line when they could have killed it with the "mistake" of the old one, but also increased the prices, tells us there was probably no mistake at all. The simple fact is, nobody here seems to know the break-even point for the 6er. It's not like it's a car that has been built from the ground up for a specific purpose.
Of course the majority shout overpriced. BMW didn't build it (nor price it) for the majority. If we are to include the Panamera, A7, CLS, and 6GC within a class of competing vehicles, none of these cars has a majority support in regards to customers who are actually willing to pay. As I say, you don't measure the worth of a $10 burger based on the opinion of someone who can only buy burgers from McDonald's/Burger King/etc.