Joy is BMW.

[EnI]

We also should not exclude the competition factor. Meaning: if eg. direct rivals like eg. Audi will start to push envelope further (like it seems the case with lighter alu A5), you can be pretty sure BMW will have to react if A5 starting to prove to be too close to 3er driving characteristics. Since that woild be a direct "attack" on a core product (3er coupe). Same case with eg. E-class coupe - meaning new A5 & 3er coupe will have to be even more luxurious inside to catch up the MB product. Etc.

I'm not sure some of you are aware of that by when E90 3er was designed - the N52 engine set for 330i was initially developed / set to output less HP (approx. 240HP). But then Audi did surprise BMW, and came up with A4 B7 & 3.2L engine with higher output (255HP) than anticipated by BMW. Therefore N52 engine had to be re-engineered a bit to output more (258HP).

So, there is a competition factor present as well. Very much.

Yet it still depends on customers demands - not on what engineers are capable to do. Therefore a better car does not necessarily sell better, or being perceived as superior in minds of the targeted customers - despite being perceived as such in eg. automotive media & professional circles.

In such case marketing people like to say the product is "overengineered".

And many times they put veto on some engineering solutions - like eg. they did in A5 case - when engineers developed a car with much more sharp & sporty handling, but had to set in in a way to understeer more - since Audi customers preferred that.

Mind companies address the needs & issues recorded in direct customer feedback - not issues & concerns expressed in the media. Since many times opinions of car journalists DO NOT reflect opinions (and needs) of real customers (or at least majority of them).

Therefore in some cases a product can be dissed & trashed in the media (by journalists or/and limited number of customers), but in the real life majority of customers is satisfied with the product & therefore it sells well.

And even more: sometimes we can here outcries (in media & on internet) some products do dilute the brand - but in real life it's just the opposite: the same products accused by media of diluting the brand are making brand image even more attractive & valuable in the eyes of (new) customers.

Therfore I have hard times sometimes to explain that something is not as bad as it thinks (or is presented in media). Since the more important feedback is a direct customer feedback - surveys done by the company itself (or its contractor).

 

[south]

It's a dynamic process of constant adaptations. Just like in every person's life. You live, you adapt, you change. Nobody is the same as eg. 10 or 20 years ago. Maturing progressively. Loosing "sharpness". You bet your granny was "sharper" 50 years ago than today. It's the same with brands / products - constantly reacting & adapting to new challenges. Sure - like any individual - they try hard to remain same core character as they have ever been ... yet projected into new / contemporary times.

So you're basically saying that BMW is getting old?

PS:
I do not understand the fact some people are now thinking that the existence of X5M / X6M, and non-existence of eg. Z4M or M3 CSL will make current or even more the new M3 worse. Or eg. even diluting the brand image ....
Just like the presence of Cayenne & Panamera, and absence of Carrera GT DOES NOT make 911 worse, and Porsche brand less appealing - even more: due to the new products the prand is even more appealing: to the completely new customers who else would have never bought a Porsche. Eg. Cayenne driver woud never buy a 911 - since he / she prefers an SUV - but now he can have a Porsche.
Same goes with BMW and X5M / X6M, 5er GT, X1 etc ...

You're right about the current generation of cars. There might be an impact on future cars though. We now see tech developed for the X5M and X6M being implemented into the next M5. That's quite a cheap shot. In case BMW really axes KERS, the next M5 will be just an X5M being lighter and sitting lower (and hence having better handling). That's something unheard of in the past. Porsche's lineup is not a good comparison. They don't use Cayenne engines in the 911, do they?


Best regards,
south

 

[EnI]

So you're basically saying that BMW is getting old?

More mature. The brand is almost 100 years old, duh.

It always follows the trends in customer demand.
People nowadays demand more comfort than ever before ... people in general are becoming spoiled. That's the real problem.
There's nothing more for the brand to do than to react / adapt.

That's something unheard of in the past.

In the past there were no X5M & X6M - if they had been, be sure they would have featured V10 or V8 like M5 / M6.

Porsche's lineup is not a good comparison. They don't use Cayenne engines in the 911, do they?

Not yet.
No, seriously: it's completely different engine layout, and type (boxer).
Btw, BMW also don't use same engine in M3 & X5M / X6M.

BUT mind ... Porsche do use the same engines in Panamera as they do in Cayenne, don't they?
So, same engine in X5M / X6M & M5/M6 isn't such a blasphemy after all, isn't it?

 

[Mr Robert]

No, seriously: it's completely different engine layout, and type (boxer).
Btw, BMW also don't use same engine in M3 & X5M / X6M.

BUT mind ... Porsche do use the same engines in Panamera as they do in Cayenne, don't they?
So, same engine in X5M / X6M & M5/M6 isn't such a blasphemy after all, isn't it?

Porsche seems to use one type of engines in their spin-off moneymakers and another type in the core cars. Very nice way of separating the models.

 

[south]

More mature. The brand is almost 100 years old, duh.

It always follows the trends in customer demand.
People nowadays demand more comfort than ever before ... people in general are becoming spoiled. That's the real problem.
There's nothing more for the brand to do than to react / adapt.

You know, it's easier to blame one marque than to blame all the customers who are the true culprits of that sad trend.

In the past there were no X5M & X6M - if they had been, be sure they would have featured V10 or V8 like M5 / M6.

They would have featured high-revving NA engines with SMG or DCT transmissions. This would go awfully wrong in such heavy cars with a center of gravity higher than the Mt. Everest, but nobody could accuse BMW of watering down their tech. When all the discussion about the X ///M models started, we've been tamed that some random X ///M models don't influence the core models like M5 or M3. Now, we see that was untrue. What's next? An M3 with an N54? Nip things in the bud!

M5/M6 isn't such a blasphemy after all, isn't it?

It is, see above.


Best regards,
south

 

[EnI]

How anyone can be SO sure an upcoming hypothetical (!!!) M5 with V8 TT & automatic would drive worse than the current M5 with V10 NA & SMG?




Sure the press would say the M sharpness & focus "has been wattered down" - just like they say for EVERY new M Mk. And they would say that even if new M5 came with upgraded V10 NA engine, and upgraded SMG / DCT. "More refined, softer, less raw than the predecessor." As heard every time new generation M model is presented.

The key point is how it compares to direct rivals: E63, RS6, Panamera Turbo etc

As said many times: the core M model is the M3 - and it will be given special care. M5 / M6 have different type of customers. Just like X5M / X6M do. Different cars, different characters.

MB & Porsche feature same engines & gearboxes in E / ML AMG or Cayenne / Panamera - and there are no outcries. Sure historically BMW have had different strategy - but even that wasn't always unchanged (M3: I4 -> I6 -> V8. or M5: I6 -> V8 -> V10). Today engine-sharing interseries is inevitable.

IMO only M3 has enough trademark cache & market potential to get special engine (for M3 usage only). While M5, M6, X5M, X6M etc are doomed: foreced to feature same base engine (sure some small modifications are possible: eg. more HP / less torque for the M5 / M6 etc).



******


Remember all the outcries when N54 engine was introduced? "The end of BMW is here!!!!" etc .... Really?

Same case will happen with M when new engines, transmissions & drives will be introduced ... A lot of fuss about nothing.

 

[Mr Robert]

EnI has a point here, there is always an outcry when a new M model is released. But most times it is just a case of the car being a bit heavier, stronger and more comfortable, the basic formula has stayed the same. Now there are probably going to be a lot of things that ara a first time and a lot of things that are done in ways that are generally associated with AMG.

Well, time will tell.

 

[rollo]

How anyone can be SO sure an upcoming hypothetical (!!!) M5 with V8 TT & automatic would drive worse than the current M5 with V10 NA & SMG?




Sure the press would say the M sharpness & focus "has been wattered down" - just like they say for EVERY new M Mk. And they would say that even if new M5 came with upgraded V10 NA engine, and upgraded SMG / DCT. "More refined, softer, less raw than the predecessor." As heard every time new generation M model is presented.

The key point is how it compares to direct rivals: E63, RS6, Panamera Turbo etc

As said many times: the core M model is the M3 - and it will be given special care. M5 / M6 have different type of customers. Just like X5M / X6M do. Different cars, different characters.

MB & Porsche feature same engines & gearboxes in E / ML AMG or Cayenne / Panamera - and there are no outcries. Sure historically BMW have had different strategy - but even that wasn't always unchanged (M3: I4 -> I6 -> V8. or M5: I6 -> V8 -> V10). Today engine-sharing interseries is inevitable.

IMO only M3 has enough trademark cache & market potential to get special engine (for M3 usage only). While M5, M6, X5M, X6M etc are doomed: foreced to feature same base engine (sure some small modifications are possible: eg. more HP / less torque for the M5 / M6 etc).



******


Remember all the outcries when N54 engine was introduced? "The end of BMW is here!!!!" etc .... Really?

Same case will happen with M when new engines, transmissions & drives will be introduced ... A lot of fuss about nothing.

Well said.

And the performance will tell us if the sharing strategy works. We might even be pleasantly surprised.

 

[EnI]

But there will still be a huge difference (not in tech though) between M & AMG - since the capability of base chassis (5er vs E-class) is different, and M are known for re-engineering the chassis even more than AMG do.

So, no need to worry ...

Regarding the tech ... Yes the difference in tech (I6, manual gearbox, SMG, NA engine, LSD etc) was also used in marketing / promotion / advertising purposes - to capitalize on advantages / differences.

Be sure that will be the case in future as well ... despite different tech. They will find another innovation to capitalize on.

Yet it's true - due to heavy presence & role of electronics (hardware & software) in automotive tech / systems - the car's are becoming more & more alike. And basically there is a much more difference in software than in hardware sometimes ...

Therefore lately (eg. last 10 years) carmakers are heavily investing electronic / software development ... employing more & more engineers from these professional area - while in the past most valuable ones were the mechanic engineers. Today eg. they are just "hand", while the others are the "brain" - since the hardware is today so heavily controlled & influenced by software & electronics (sensors, processor units etc).

And it will be even "worse" with hybrid & full-electric cars - when integrated electronic / software solutions will be crucial for the car's performance (eg. energy / battery management, integrated drive management etc).

I just hope BMW won't be run over by some other brand when this paradigm shift occurs. But that can easlily happen if there isn't enough R&D investments: remember the once mighty German analog audio & TV industry (Grundig, blaupunkt etc) which were completely run over by Asian rivals (Sony, Panasonic, LG, Samsung etc.) when digital revolution occurred.

And the performance will tell us if the sharing strategy works. We might even be pleasantly surprised.

Think of X5M / X6M as testbeds for M5 & M6 - regarding the powertrain.
Be sure M engineers are already working on M5 intensively, and the outcome will be very satisfactory - more most.
Sure some hardcore aficionados will be disappointed - just like they have already been with every M car since original E28 M5 & E30 M3.

Perhaps tech-wise M cars won't be as special anymore (mind. lack of inline engine in M model line!), but the performance & balance (especially handling & steering & driving fun) will still be very special - and better then the one offered by rivals.

 

[rollo]

Perhaps tech-wise M cars won't be as special anymore (mind. lack of inline engine in M model line!), but the performance & balance (especially handling & steering & driving fun) will still be very special - and better then the one offered by rivals.[/quote]



BMW DNA = Performance and Balance

The result is much more important than the means.

I will reserve judgment but agree that it will "special", regardless of which drivetrain they choose.

 

[south]

How anyone can be SO sure an upcoming hypothetical (!!!) M5 with V8 TT & automatic would drive worse than the current M5 with V10 NA & SMG?

Well, we're warned. We used to believe that the introduction of X5M and X6M doesn't affect the other core models. You made this point for quite some time. Now, we're already at the point of the M5 and X5M sharing essential parts like engine and transmission. BMW is hurrying the M5 introduction which means there won't be KERS. There isn't much hypothetical left about, the S63 is a sure shot. Only point left is whether this car will have DCT or an Automatic. Reading between the lines it won't be the former.

Sure the press would say the M sharpness & focus "has been wattered down" - just like they say for EVERY new M Mk. And they would say that even if new M5 came with upgraded V10 NA engine, and upgraded SMG / DCT. "More refined, softer, less raw than the predecessor." As heard every time new generation M model is presented.

The key point is how it compares to direct rivals: E63, RS6, Panamera Turbo etc

True, but it's still different this time. If you want to see your model over the competitor's you need an USP. For BMW this used to be high revving NA engines with Manual(-esque) transmissions and the best chassis. BMW is forgoing the unique engine and transmission tech. The breaktrough of electronic suspension doesn't make things better. In the past manufacturers had to find a compromise between sporty and comfy. BMW always tended to the former. Now, with the pleasure of having all the electronic tech, all manufacturers can offer both at the same time. BMW does, Porsche does, Merc does, everybody does.

Furthermore, I realized that you're contradictory. You said in one post that the goal for the AG models should be to have a chassis that's also suited for M cars. Else, there would be expensive modification needed. Now you point on the differences between AG and M models. You probably know that the ///M engineers have to break every single AG suspension piece to get the permission to develop an ///M specific part.

So the question remains: What's ///M's unique selling point then?

As said many times: the core M model is the M3 - and it will be given special care. M5 / M6 have different type of customers. Just like X5M / X6M do. Different cars, different characters.

MB & Porsche feature same engines & gearboxes in E / ML AMG or Cayenne / Panamera - and there are no outcries. Sure historically BMW have had different strategy - but even that wasn't always unchanged (M3: I4 -> I6 -> V8. or M5: I6 -> V8 -> V10). Today engine-sharing interseries is inevitable.

IMO only M3 has enough trademark cache & market potential to get special engine (for M3 usage only). While M5, M6, X5M, X6M etc are doomed: foreced to feature same base engine (sure some small modifications are possible: eg. more HP / less torque for the M5 / M6 etc).

Let's talk about the M3 in a year or two. I wouldn't be surprised if only few things being on the special care agenda now would be left then.


Eventually, it's a pretty simple arithmetic for BMW. If the amount of enthusiasts they lost due to loss of "Uniqueness" is less than the amount of buyers coming from competitors, they did it right. If not, oh well... I suppose that BMW is trying to gain their profit on ///M cars. They can't increase the price arbitrarily, so they have to reduce costs of development. But I'm not sure if this Strategy called One will prevail for M cars.


Best regards,
south

 

[EnI]

Well, we're warned. We used to believe that the introduction of X5M and X6M doesn't affect the other core models. You made this point for quite some time. Now, we're already at the point of the M5 and X5M sharing essential parts like engine and transmission.

Yes, and you know for sure the not-so-typical M driving experience is caused by engine & transmission in those two vehicles, and not by eg. AWD & huge weight?

Nobody said anything about tech-sharing - I was talking about character & driving experience. Sure M5 won't be just a bit sharper X5M - but will be true M5 ... an evolution (driving charecteristic wise) from current M5.

BMW aren't stupid: of course they won't change car's character that much. New M5 will be typical M5 - yet as any new M: a bit more refined.

Furthermore, I realized that you're contradictory. You said in one post that the goal for the AG models should be to have a chassis that's also suited for M cars. Else, there would be expensive modification needed. Now you point on the differences between AG and M models. You probably know that the ///M engineers have to break every single AG suspension piece to get the permission to develop an ///M specific part.

So the question remains: What's ///M's unique selling point then?

I guess I wasn't clear enough: BMW chassis is more capable - yet there are more modifications done on M cars (not necessary expensive ones) than on AMG cars --- which gives you double-capable car.

Regarding USP: I think M3 / M5 selling point is unique driving experience, not a certain tech.

Eventually, it's a pretty simple arithmetic for BMW. If the amount of enthusiasts they lost due to loss of "Uniqueness" is less than the amount of buyers coming from competitors, they did it right. If not, oh well... I suppose that BMW is trying to gain their profit on ///M cars. They can't increase the price arbitrarily, so they have to reduce costs of development. But I'm not sure if this Strategy called One will prevail for M cars.

Romantic times have been over @ BMW AG sometimes in early 90s when their takeover planes (Porsche, LandRover, RR & Bentley) went horribly wrong - ending up in Rover debacle, when BMW AG almost bankrupted.

Now most things are driven by profit margin as well ... So, if there is an opportunity for some fine product - it only gets green light if it proves to be profitable enough. Otherwise not. It's business after all, not game.

 

[Mr Robert]

^ How does Rolls fit into that? There must be some silly margins on those cars, seeing as virtually none are sold.

 

[south]

Yes, and you know for sure the not-so-typical M driving experience is caused by engine & transmission in those two vehicles, and not by eg. AWD & huge weight?

I'll only need to say this: Engine response, redline, sound. I know you're all about the chassis, but the other things equally make for the M driving experience.

Nobody said anything about tech-sharing - I was talking about character & driving experience. Sure M5 won't be just a bit sharper X5M - but will be true M5 ... an evolution (driving charecteristic wise) from current M5.

BMW aren't stupid: of course they won't change car's character that much. New M5 will be typical M5 - yet as any new M: a bit more refined.

I really hope so.

I guess I wasn't clear enough: BMW chassis is more capable - yet there are more modifications done on M cars (not necessary expensive ones) than on AMG cars --- which gives you double-capable car.

You know that AMG is catching up on this point. Well, maybe catching up isn't even the right term anymore, they're likely on par with BMW now. I probably don't need to tell you that BMW's goal is to develop cars with a chassis being good for both AG cars and ///M cars. If this is a good thing for AG cars or a bad thing for M is up to anyone's guess.

Regarding USP: I think M3 / M5 selling point is unique driving experience, not a certain tech.

Let me ask then: How is this unique driving experience achieved? What's the tech behind that makes it outstanding in the line of competitors using the same tech (engine, transmission, active suspension, torque vectoring)?

Romantic times have been over @ BMW AG sometimes in early 90s when their takeover planes (Porsche, LandRover, RR & Bentley) went horribly wrong - ending up in Rover debacle, when BMW AG almost bankrupted.

Now most things are driven by profit margin as well ... So, if there is an opportunity for some fine product - it only gets green light if it proves to be profitable enough. Otherwise not. It's business after all, not game.

Nice way to back up my point. Though, it's not like the margin on ///M cars is miserable now. Potential buyers will realize whether the price is appropriate or not. I hope BMW is aware they're walking on a thin line here.


Best regards,
south

 

[Zafiro]

One thing thats important is engine sound. X6M haven't gotten good praise for the engine sound, for instance its too quiet. Look at the new E63 and C63, those cars sound loud and evil. I really hope next M5 is going to sound louder than X6M does. Engine sound is a part of the joy.

 

[EnI]

Look, guys. There are detailed customer satisfaction & expectation survey available. Done methodically correct - so very representative ... used for further product developments.

So, if M5 turns out to be more comfy (eg. more daily-usable gearbox) & not as loud etc - it's because majority of customers (current M5 customers!!!) wanted so.

Do you really think eg. BMW care what a 120i or 320d T owner thinks about M5, X5M, etc - about a car out of his/her reach? THEY DON'T! They only care about REAL prospects - real potential customers. Other groups are irrelevant. (Potential) 1er customers are relevant when it comes to 1er, and (potential) 3er customers when it comes to 3er etc.

Companies have other marketing tricks in their sleeves to make fans drool - and that excludes gambling with products. Products are tailored to satisfy customer needs, not to satisfy some fantasies of random dreamer.

Customers always have the latest word ... and the USP is what customers want to be an USP.

So in the end - perhaps - in some 30 or 40 years customer pools of M & AMG will be exchanged. Who knows.

Be sure BMW also learned some lessons with iDrive, electronic glitches, iffy cabin materials, too dividing design etc. - be sure they are more focused on customer voices & demands.

So ... if BMW cars are evolving in more refined & less raw products - blame it on the customers (the vast majority of them).

As said many times: voices of car journalists & some members of internet communities are not representative sample of true customer opinion. And therefore not very relevant to carmakers - sure some times some issues mentioned there are relevant, but not all. And what matters is group voice, not a voice if an individual. Critical mass is important ... Individuals are not. They never really are - marketing only cares about masses. But there are some tricks to reach / communicate customer directly - and therefore making him feel he is very important to the company. He is - but only as a member of larger group, not as an individual.

Yes, sad fact. But that's how things work.

 

[Zafiro]

So, if M5 turns out to be more comfy (eg. more daily-usable gearbox) & not as loud etc - it's because majority of customers (current M5 customers!!!) wanted so.

If the car doesn't get loud and sound evil then AMG owners are better customers than M owners. M5 owners want the next M5 not to sound loud is just bullshit. M owner dont want a silent car, thats for sure. Everything BMW does arent always a wish from owners. So dont act like BMW always listen to customers.
I havent heard a single complaint from M owners that they want their car to sound like a muted monster, dont try to convince me that M owners have become more mature than AMG or RS owners.

 

[EnI]

So dont act like BMW always listen to customers.

Eg. M5 customers wanted more torque & power - and got it: in the form of V10. They wanted sporty gearbox - they got SMG. After that enough customers wanted a manual- and got it. They wanted sporty ride: and they got stiff suspension.

But now (too) many customers say the car is unusable for daily driving ... too sensitive, too jerky, too stiff etc.

The truth is a bit too much comfort makes much less damage & dissatisfaction than not enough comfort. Since many customers still want the car to be usful for daily drive as well.

Be sure BMW would stick to manual gearboxes - but customers are lazy & spoiled, and they want more convenient & easy-to-operate transmission. Yes, to some manual transmission in such a car means a nightmare.

So, yes - sometimes even when listening customers too much is not good. Since many of them do not differ their own WISHES from their own NEEDS. They wish something - and when they get it they realize that's not what they NEED. WISH vs. NEED. Companies has to be very careful not to be fooled by that. It's tricky.


Regarding the sound: have you heard X5M / X6M engine / exhaust sound in person? I guess not. Just to remind you: when M3 E92 was introduced many media claimed the V8 engine sounds "too civilized", "rumbling like 4-cyl turbo" , "far inferior to M3 E46 high-pitch from I6 engine" etc. I also remember your reaction to the first M3 reviews - and your panic & hysteria. A lot of fuss about nothing. And you are doing the same right now - taking some media reports from granted.

 

[Mr Robert]

Yes, sad fact. But that's how things work.

If something becomes to accessible, the magic is lost. Right now, people are really starting to, litterally, buy the sporty image of BMW. But people does not want sporty for real, they want comfortable cars that are perceived as sporty - because of the image.

For how long can the sporty image prevail, when it is only skin deep?

 

[EnI]

For how long can the sporty image prevail, when it is only skin deep?

Still ... to most perception is the most important thing.

So, you can stick to the principles - and get overtaken by rivals, and in the end loosing money ... or you join the game.



It's one big crazy carousel ... And when it stops - everybody can get back to the roots if really needed. In this case the brands with rich heritage will have much better chance then the others.