Innovative Luxury : BMWi's centenary gift.

[Gianclaudio]

Love your avatar, @Rolf

 

[tomazino]

M760iXdrive....

 

[SCOTT27]

Maybe a concept of the new Z sportscar they are making with Toyota (Supra)?

New 5er is more likely indeed, I believe Scott already hinted at it as well. Would be boring, the new 5er would have come either way.

Yes the big news will be the reveal of the next 5er, everything learned within the 7er, technology.lightweight,quality, ambience and finesse will be on the new 5er. As well as some new ideas.
And of course you can never have enough outlines to know how good looking and dynamic it will be...

 

[hoffmeister_fan]

Maybe a concept of the new Z sportscar they are making with Toyota (Supra)?

New 5er is more likely indeed, I believe Scott already hinted at it as well. Would be boring, the new 5er would have come either way.

I feel like that's becoming automotive vaporware. There's been so much chatter, yet I don't even think there's been any prototypes running about.

 

[Betty Swollocks]

The only "gift" for BMW's centenary year should be one which would not have been made had it not been a significant milestone in BMW's history. This new "i" concept would have been unveiled had it been 87, or 103 years since BMW began. It has absolutely ZERO to do with BMW's centenary. Just like next year's new 5 Series. It's normal life cycle just happens to coincide with 100 years.


Now, if the M division bring out a proper out and out supercar to rival the R8 and 911, then we can call that a "celebration". They could even call it the "M100". But that's not going to happen.

 

[Rolf]

Love your avatar, @Rolf

Thanks a lot @Gianclaudio, this car is an icon in automobile styling.

 

[Mr Robert]

BMW M is too. So if you don't like the i car, you might like the M car. Or the regular BMW

For RR it could be a concept of the upcoming SUV, and for Mini maybe a new version of the Rocketman/roadster?

Thanks for clearing my point, klier. Godsamme! ;-)

 

[klier]

I feel like that's becoming automotive vaporware. There's been so much chatter, yet I don't even think there's been any prototypes running about.

Too early for prototypes. No vaporware.

 

[Mick Briesgau]

Yes the big news will be the reveal of the next 5er, everything learned within the 7er, technology.lightweight,quality, ambience and finesse will be on the new 5er. As well as some new ideas.
And of course you can never have enough outlines to know how good looking and dynamic it will be...

If you ask me, there's no reason anymore to buy a 7er, if all this is going to be in/on the new 5er. Besides, to me it's outlines look like a small 7er.

 

[klier]

And what's the reason for the S class when the new E is not up to par but even more cutting edge (which it will be)?

 

[martinbo]

Now, if the M division bring out a proper out and out supercar to rival the R8 and 911, then we can call that a "celebration". They could even call it the "M100". But that's not going to happen.

Yo.

I'd like to debate with you at a fundamental level if BMW could and - more importantly - should produce a "proper out and out supercar" to rival those you mention above. We all know that the iconic 911 is not just the mainstay of Porsche's sporting heritage but also the persisting embodiment of their engineering prowess. The 911 makes a business case for itself in the automotive world in (to mention just some) commercial, technological and marketing aspects. So, the 911 is, clearly, the pallbearer for a long and illustrious sporting car lineage.

Despite being in its second generation, the Audi R8 calls on little to zero sports car heritage; it's reason for being is clearly founded in the need for brand-building in the form of a halo model. Its dynamic and commercial success notwithstanding, the Audi R8 remains an answer to a question that no-one was asking. That it has achieved success and garnered almost universal praise following its emergence is all the more impressive.

Now, here's the thing... the R8 - in its intended role as an image builder for Audi - has done exactly what it needed to achieve and, moreover in doing so, Audi stole the march on BMW in this undertaking. That ship has now long sailed for BMW and, if I was a BMW honcho, I would never look at releasing a "me-too" product only to have it labeled as BMW's R8 Rival. Not at that level - that's tantamount to sucking hind tit. Compare this to the seemingly late-to-market introduction of FWD MPVs and I will argue that the target audience couldn't give a rat's arse regarding the significant departure these vehicles represent.

The BMW M1 legacy has been consigned to a 30 year old memory: a once off experimentation which briefly flirted with the mid-engine sports car notion so fashionable at that point in time. But the automotive landscape was so much simpler back then - a far, far cry from the plethora of technologies currently in play in today's world - and there was very little (comparatively speaking) scope for designers and engineers to express themselves creatively. So, the M1 will remain a curiosity within the maker's timeline and one purely indicative of the times rather than a portrayal of the marque's fundamental ethos.

Which brings us back to the questions of:
a) why a supercar?
b) what does BMW's product line truly portray?

For a) leading on from what's already been said above, a supercar in the traditional vein of the 911 or R8 will do little to capture the imagination of the car-buying public at large. The R8 certainly didn't do that for Audi - they already have a strong following in the compact and mass-market sectors - but then this wasn't its intention. The intention of the R8 was to lift Audi's image as a car maker and to showcase the brand as now being equal in desirability to the two traditional premium protagonists in BMW and Mercedes Benz. Clearly, the idiom of the traditional supercar (i.e. what the R8 presently is) is becoming outdated when one takes into account the moves toward all manner of technology such as hyridisation, eco-consciousness and social responsibility. The traditional supercar - as gloriously desirable as it may be for you and me - is an unwitting representation of all that is socially and financially reproachable in this grossly economically skewed world of ours. It's not the supercar's fault - technically it is hardly any different from another kind of "high performance" car but unfortunately it carries (not single-handedly, mind you) a stigma of ultimate excess. I don't feel that a supercar is anything by which a socially responsible car maker should be celebrating its centenary with.

Regarding b) - I think that this represents the various identity crises which afflict BMW. Often a victim of its own marketing endeavours, catch phrases like "The Ultimate Driving Machine" have unduly pigeonholed BMW as a purveyor of "sporting cars" within the minds of the general public who are unlike true motoring aficionados - y'know, like the ones that change their own oil or go on advanced driving courses every year or - yes - frequent internet car forums. BMW is hence a victim of its own marketing and, sadly, the perception out there is one where nothing less than a mid-engined, high-powered sports / supercar befits BMW's centennial celebrations.

 

[klier]

^ Audi didn't invent the niche it's in with the R8, so if BMW makes such a car it wouldn't be a me too product

Great read Martin. Mostly agree.

 

[martinbo]

^ Not meant to imply that Audi invented the niche - that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that Audi did what it did before BMW could get round (or wanted to get round) to doing it.
The purpose of the R8 was to change perceptions about Audi and not to create a niche for them.

 

[SKY]

If you ask me, there's no reason anymore to buy a 7er, if all this is going to be in/on the new 5er. Besides, to me it's outlines look like a small 7er.

That would be the case for the S-Class and the A8 as well. The 7er will always be more exclusive than the 5er, and more comfort oriented. Its tech being part of the 5er as well changes very little. It´s the E38 vs E39 formula all over again.

 

[hoffmeister_fan]

Yo.

I'd like to debate with you at a fundamental level if BMW could and - more importantly - should produce a "proper out and out supercar" to rival those you mention above. We all know that the iconic 911 is not just the mainstay of Porsche's sporting heritage but also the persisting embodiment of their engineering prowess. The 911 makes a business case for itself in the automotive world in (to mention just some) commercial, technological and marketing aspects. So, the 911 is, clearly, the pallbearer for a long and illustrious sporting car lineage.

Despite being in its second generation, the Audi R8 calls on little to zero sports car heritage; it's reason for being is clearly founded in the need for brand-building in the form of a halo model. Its dynamic and commercial success notwithstanding, the Audi R8 remains an answer to a question that no-one was asking. That it has achieved success and garnered almost universal praise following its emergence is all the more impressive.

Now, here's the thing... the R8 - in its intended role as an image builder for Audi - has done exactly what it needed to achieve and, moreover in doing so, Audi stole the march on BMW in this undertaking. That ship has now long sailed for BMW and, if I was BMW honcho, I would never look at releasing a "me-too" product only to have it labeled as BMW's R8 Rival. Not at that level - that's tantamount to sucking hind tit. Compare this to the seemingly late-to-market introduction of FWD MPVs and I will argue that the target audience couldn't give a rat's arse regarding the significant departure these vehicles represent.

The BMW M1 legacy has been consigned to a 30 year old memory: a once off experimentation which briefly flirted with the mid-engine sports car notion so fashionable at that point in time. But the automotive landscape was so much simpler back then - a far, far cry from the plethora of technologies currently in play in today's world - and there was very little (comparatively speaking) scope for designers and engineers to express themselves creatively. So, the M1 will remain a curiosity within the maker's timeline and one purely indicative of the times rather than a portrayal of the marque's fundamental ethos.

Which brings us back to the questions of:
a) why a supercar?
b) what does BMW's product line truly portray?

For a) leading on from what's already been said above, a supercar in the traditional vein of the 911 or R8 will do little to capture the imagination of the car-buying public at large. The R8 certainly didn't do that for Audi - they already have a strong following in the compact and mass-market sectors - but then this wasn't its intention. The intention of the R8 was to lift Audi's image as a car maker and to showcase the brand as now being equal in desirability to the two traditional premium protagonists in BMW and Mercedes Benz. Clearly, the idiom of the traditional supercar (i.e. what the R8 presently is) is becoming outdated when one takes into account the moves toward all manner of technology such as hyridisation, eco-consciousness and social responsibility. The traditional supercar - as gloriously desirable as it may be for you and me - is an unwitting representation of all that is socially and financially reproachable in this grossly economically skewed world of ours. It's not the supercar's fault - technically it is hardly any different from another kind of "high performance" car but unfortunately it carries (not single-handedly, mind you) a stigma of ultimate excess. I don't feel that a supercar is anything by which a socially responsible car maker should be celebrating its centenary with.

Regarding b) - I think that this represents the various identity crises which afflict BMW. Often a victim of its own marketing endeavours, catch phrases like "The Ultimate Driving Machine" have unduly pigeonholed BMW as a purveyor of "sporting cars" within the minds of the general public who are unlike true motoring aficionados - y'know, like the ones that change their own oil or go on advanced driving courses every year or - yes - frequent internet car forums. BMW is hence a victim of its own marketing and, sadly, the perception out there is one where nothing less than a mid-engined, high-powered sports / supercar befits BMW's centennial celebrations.

@martinbo, you've made many valid points that I agree with. The R8's goal was to elevate Audi's sporty credentials and was instrumental in achieving it. Audi was shrewd in this approach.... 1.) Having a supercar in your stable gives you a better profile than releasing a sports car that could compete at the level of, say a Nissan Z or Corvette...fast but attainable, and 2.) it was a cost-effective endeavor in spreading their developmental costs with Lamborghini.

Now, would I want to have BMW do a similar car because their Bavarian neighbor also did it? Yes. No. Sorta.

Primarily, I would like to see BMW employ their know-how in producing a traditional supercar just to see what it would be like. I'd imagine it would be brilliant. Many people would counter that the i8 fills that niche, but I wouldn't. That's not a knock at the i8 either. I think it's a brilliant car with avant-garde progressive design and forward-thinking approach to its propulsion system. But I'd be lying if I didn't say I'd love to see a screaming high-revving M engine chucked in a mid-engine design that's been obsessively tinkered to perfection by the good folks at the M-division.

Now regarding why I'd want to see BMW do it because the ladies and gents in Audi did it.... Yes, BMW still retains its sporty credentials despite its ventures in electrification, FWD blasphemy, and other alternative approaches. BMW has the upcoming M2, they are diligently working on lightening up their cars, and they participate in numerous motorsport activities...so sporty they still are but relatively less so from where they were. The aforementioned ventures coupled with criticism of vehicle dynamics that have become comfier has brought them further away from the sporty end of the spectrum. I feel like a car that could compete at the level of a 488GTB or the upcoming NSX would at least slow down the inevitable slide to the middle that has to happen for BMW to survive as an independent entity.

While a hundred-year anniversary is a call for looking to the future, it'd be nice if BMW would take stock of the past and give us dinosaurs one last hurrah.

 

[Mick Briesgau]

That would be the case for the S-Class and the A8 as well. The 7er will always be more exclusive than the 5er, and more comfort oriented. Its tech being part of the 5er as well changes very little. It´s the E38 vs E39 formula all over again.

I see that in a different way. The difference/gap between S-Klasse and E-Klasse has always been tremendous.This difference/gap I haven't seen quite so clear between 7er and 5er. Especially the current 5er and (still current or allready former?) 7er (F01?) are very close. Comfortwise the difference is hardly noticeable (IMO!). They're much closer to each other than forementioned S and E. Latter are miles apart. If that changes with the W213? We'll see.

 

[Mr Robert]

I see that in a different way. The difference/gap between S-Klasse and E-Klasse has always been tremendous.This difference/gap I haven't seen quite so clear between 7er and 5er.

That could be down to the driver orientation. I think BMW tries to make a point of giving the 7-series driver an experience of driving a drivers car, like the 3-series, and not that of the helmsman of a barge. Therefore, the feeling when driving the car must not change that much and the immediate impression will suffer, if looking fore something completely different from the rest of the range.

 

[Rolf]

I see that in a different way. The difference/gap between S-Klasse and E-Klasse has always been tremendous.This difference/gap I haven't seen quite so clear between 7er and 5er. Especially the current 5er and (still current or allready former?) 7er (F01?) are very close. Comfortwise the difference is hardly noticeable (IMO!). They're much closer to each other than forementioned S and E. Latter are miles apart. If that changes with the W213? We'll see.

I would say that the difference with the older E-class and S-class models (W123 and W116) was narrower and possibly W124 and W126 as well these were much closer in their comfort and driving levels, they shared interior components such as seats as well. I do agree that the difference between later S-class and E-class models has been greater, take for instance the W140 and W210 it was massive difference in the level of technology and build quality, that S-class had so many unique features that never made it to other Mercedes models such as the double glazing and also the rear reversing aerials as well wonderful seats adjustable in 20 planes. The 7 series and 5 series models have always been closer in their differences, for instance the E38 vs E39, some could say the E39 was a better car in all aspects except for space. I would say the new E-class W213 will be closer to the S-class than possibly in 2 or 3 generations, it will even have newer technology that is not yet introduced on the S-class, the only thing maybe is what about seats (S-class hugely impressive front and rear seats) and suspension (Magic Ride Control) will not be featured in the E-class, but we will wait and see.

 

[Mick Briesgau]

I would say that the difference with the older E-class and S-class models (W123 and W116) was narrower and possibly W124 and W126 as well these were much closer in their comfort and driving levels, they shared interior components such as seats as well. I do agree that the difference between later S-class and E-class models has been greater, take for instance the W140 and W210 it was massive difference in the level of technology and build quality, that S-class had so many unique features that never made it to other Mercedes models such as the double glazing and also the rear reversing aerials as well wonderful seats adjustable in 20 planes. The 7 series and 5 series models have always been closer in their differences, for instance the E38 vs E39, some could say the E39 was a better car in all aspects except for space. I would say the new E-class W213 will be closer to the S-class than possibly in 2 or 3 generations, it will even have newer technology that is not yet introduced on the S-class, the only thing maybe is what about seats (S-class hugely impressive front and rear seats) and suspension (Magic Ride Control) will not be featured in the E-class, but we will wait and see.

Agree with almost everything. I'd like to Ad following: the drive experience of a S-klasse with the 'normal' airmatic is allready miles above that of a E-klasse with Airmatic. There is more to the differences between them two than mere technical features, common used or not, would suggest. Coming from an E in a S feels in every way more like an upgrade than coming from a 5er to a 7er.

 

[Betty Swollocks]

Yo.

I'd like to debate with you at a fundamental level if BMW could and - more importantly - should produce a "proper out and out supercar" to rival those you mention above. We all know that the iconic 911 is not just the mainstay of Porsche's sporting heritage but also the persisting embodiment of their engineering prowess. The 911 makes a business case for itself in the automotive world in (to mention just some) commercial, technological and marketing aspects. So, the 911 is, clearly, the pallbearer for a long and illustrious sporting car lineage.

Despite being in its second generation, the Audi R8 calls on little to zero sports car heritage; it's reason for being is clearly founded in the need for brand-building in the form of a halo model. Its dynamic and commercial success notwithstanding, the Audi R8 remains an answer to a question that no-one was asking. That it has achieved success and garnered almost universal praise following its emergence is all the more impressive.

Now, here's the thing... the R8 - in its intended role as an image builder for Audi - has done exactly what it needed to achieve and, moreover in doing so, Audi stole the march on BMW in this undertaking. That ship has now long sailed for BMW and, if I was a BMW honcho, I would never look at releasing a "me-too" product only to have it labeled as BMW's R8 Rival. Not at that level - that's tantamount to sucking hind tit. Compare this to the seemingly late-to-market introduction of FWD MPVs and I will argue that the target audience couldn't give a rat's arse regarding the significant departure these vehicles represent.

The BMW M1 legacy has been consigned to a 30 year old memory: a once off experimentation which briefly flirted with the mid-engine sports car notion so fashionable at that point in time. But the automotive landscape was so much simpler back then - a far, far cry from the plethora of technologies currently in play in today's world - and there was very little (comparatively speaking) scope for designers and engineers to express themselves creatively. So, the M1 will remain a curiosity within the maker's timeline and one purely indicative of the times rather than a portrayal of the marque's fundamental ethos.

Which brings us back to the questions of:
a) why a supercar?
b) what does BMW's product line truly portray?

For a) leading on from what's already been said above, a supercar in the traditional vein of the 911 or R8 will do little to capture the imagination of the car-buying public at large. The R8 certainly didn't do that for Audi - they already have a strong following in the compact and mass-market sectors - but then this wasn't its intention. The intention of the R8 was to lift Audi's image as a car maker and to showcase the brand as now being equal in desirability to the two traditional premium protagonists in BMW and Mercedes Benz. Clearly, the idiom of the traditional supercar (i.e. what the R8 presently is) is becoming outdated when one takes into account the moves toward all manner of technology such as hyridisation, eco-consciousness and social responsibility. The traditional supercar - as gloriously desirable as it may be for you and me - is an unwitting representation of all that is socially and financially reproachable in this grossly economically skewed world of ours. It's not the supercar's fault - technically it is hardly any different from another kind of "high performance" car but unfortunately it carries (not single-handedly, mind you) a stigma of ultimate excess. I don't feel that a supercar is anything by which a socially responsible car maker should be celebrating its centenary with.

Regarding b) - I think that this represents the various identity crises which afflict BMW. Often a victim of its own marketing endeavours, catch phrases like "The Ultimate Driving Machine" have unduly pigeonholed BMW as a purveyor of "sporting cars" within the minds of the general public who are unlike true motoring aficionados - y'know, like the ones that change their own oil or go on advanced driving courses every year or - yes - frequent internet car forums. BMW is hence a victim of its own marketing and, sadly, the perception out there is one where nothing less than a mid-engined, high-powered sports / supercar befits BMW's centennial celebrations.

Great post, as usual. It's hard not to agree with what you're saying. Audi definitely needed the R8 then more than BMW need an R8-esque car now.

I'm just still bitter that BMW gave me no choice but to move to Audi.

And on-topic. Just give me something that wouldn't have been released anyway, BMW.