# New Five Scores Poorly In R&T and CR



## bimmerguy (Dec 26, 2001)

I see it quite simply, BMW has lost its way. 
Ever since the Rover debacle and the subsequent loss of billions resulting in the outflow of talented top level executives, BMW has lost touch with its core strengths.

Its only true success has been with the Mini Group.

I have no interest at all in any of the new BMW's, I do like the current M3 but the engine failures are always in the back of my head. I can't stand the new dashboards and all the other icrap.

I would go with the Audi S4 over the M3, I like its sport sedan concept.

So I'm probably out of here as well.


----------



## JetBlack330i (Feb 8, 2002)

PhilH said:


> I hate points systems like this to tell you who "won" a comparison test. I just want to hear the comments about how the cars drive, and I'll figure in how much luggage space and styling matter to me.


Points are necessary to give objectivity and quantify those comments.
You still can assign your own weights to the points and come up with your own ranking. :dunno:


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

JetBlack330i said:


> Points are necessary to give objectivity and quantify those comments.
> You still can assign your own weights to the points and come up with your own ranking. :dunno:


By virtue of what it is, a critique of cars and that humans are involved, there exists no objectivity. Maybe the illusion of such but it's not an objective thing.


----------



## PhilH (Jun 7, 2002)

JetBlack330i said:


> Points are necessary to give objectivity and quantify those comments.
> You still can assign your own weights to the points and come up with your own ranking. :dunno:


I think points in this case give a false sense of objectivity. When an enthusiast (or an enthusiast magazine) makes a choice between various performance machinery, the choice of how to spend hard earned dollars, of which is the car they want to own, there is so much that is intangible and emotional, that trying to have a bunch of numbers mean anything is just going to make things confusing.

Recently, I remember a Lexus LS400 that won a recent comparison test in either C&D or R&T using their new points system. Lexus' brand of smooth Camry-esque luxury produces a car that's good in all areas, however by most accounts it doesn't inspire emotion. I don't expect _my_ enthusiast magazine to endorse such a car with a comparison test victory.

I want them to tell us which car they liked best and why.

Weighted numbers systems that average out a bunch of disparate elements may work for a computer magazine or for reliability rankings, but I don't think they belong in an enthusiast car magazine.


----------



## PhilH (Jun 7, 2002)

Just a few more points, while I'm on the subject...

Let's say a car company makes a car that puts up staggering performance numbers, however it's the ugliest thing that anybody has ever seen (think Pontiac Aztek with no exterior modifications, but mechanically on steriods). Are the "exterior styling" points sufficient to bring this car down, or will it win the comparison test because of all its other strong points? Should they endorse a car that no one wants to be seen in?

How about two cars, one that is decent all around. The other is a bit slower, but has ultra-precise handling that cuts like a scalpel, making it a hoot to drive. Are the "fun to drive" and "handling" categories weighted enough to give the car that's more fun the win, or does the bigger trunk and horsepower of the more mundane car give it the #1 spot?

When all the editors who drove the cars say, yeah, the Lexus won, but I would have bought the _____, then there's a problem.

In short, I don't think their points systems have prepared for all eventualities.

C&D seems to have addressed this by putting in two huge subjective categories with 20 points each - "fun to drive" and the "gotta have it factor". Fine, choosing a car is subjective. Then let's quit the averaging numbers BS and make it subjective.

I actually prefer R&T's format better, in that they allow each editor to have their own paragraph about which car they like the best and why. This doesn't entirely make up for letting a crappy car win a comparo, but at least the writers get their say.

I'm not a guy that hates numbers. As an accountant, I love playing "what if" all the time. But, again, this type of system doesn't fit for a car enthusiast comparison test.

Yes, besides b!tching on the internet, I also wrote a long letter to C&D complaining about their new system. They didn't print my letter and I didn't hear back from them. There are obviously some people that think these points systems work. I think the points systems mislead and they might wind up making these magazines more of a joke than they already are to some people.


----------



## JetBlack330i (Feb 8, 2002)

PhilH said:


> Let's say a car company makes a car that puts up staggering performance numbers, however it's the ugliest thing that anybody has ever seen (think Pontiac Aztek with no exterior modifications, but mechanically on steriods). Are the "exterior styling" points sufficient to bring this car down, or will it win the comparison test because of all its other strong points? Should they endorse a car that no one wants to be seen in?


Again, assuming they assign the points correctly (without bias), then you assign the weights that match your preference, and determine your winner. You don't have to look at their choice of winner. Just take the points data and compute your own.
Look at the alternative (what you're proposing). They give you something like "We really liked car A. It puts up staggering performance numbers, however it's the ugliest thing that anybody has ever seen. All things considered, we choose car A as the winner."
All it tells me is that *they* chose car A as the winner. Would I? Everybody has different preferences...


----------



## jw (Dec 21, 2001)

vexed said:


> Let me--I mean us--know what you think about it.:eeps: :eeps:
> 
> I was reading the thread on the toadfly E60 board about the R&T article, brought out lots of er uh emotion


Just got back from driving the E320. Hmm... where to start....

MB seemed like a more refined auto, better luxury items, and I think better styling. I haven't driven a comparable E60, since I've been looking at the 545, so it would be hard to compare engine/performance.

To be honest, I'd consider the E320 a viable car. If I can get past the stigma that I've attached to MB (it's not just you're father's MB... ala Oldsmobile), perhaps I'd have signed the deal at lunch.

Caddy CTS (non-V) is still something worth considering. The V is difficult to find w/ GMS pricing, but the standard model w/ the 255hp engine looks very nicely priced.  Guess I'll drive that one tomorrow (or on the way home from work today...)


----------



## Thertorch (Mar 10, 2004)

jw said:


> Just got back from driving the E320. Hmm... where to start....
> 
> MB seemed like a more refined auto, better luxury items, and I think better styling. I haven't driven a comparable E60, since I've been looking at the 545, so it would be hard to compare engine/performance.
> 
> ...


In a month, you can get that CTS with a 6MT..... :thumbup:


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

jw said:


> Just got back from driving the E320. Hmm... where to start....
> 
> MB seemed like a more refined auto, better luxury items, and I think better styling. I haven't driven a comparable E60, since I've been looking at the 545, so it would be hard to compare engine/performance.
> 
> ...


I had an E320 before my E46 I agree--and certainly on this board--there is an erroneous perception that an MB is a car for an *older* person:yikes:


----------



## jw (Dec 21, 2001)

vexed said:


> I had an E320 before my E46 I agree--and certainly on this board--there is an erroneous perception that an MB is a car for an *older* person:yikes:


The sales guy at the MB dealership said...

BMW is performance luxury.
MB is luxury performance.

I asked him if he worked for military intelligence.


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

Before we stampede to the CTS, keep in mind that some US car mags picked the Chrysler 300M, Dodge Intrepid and Dodge Neon as their cars of the year. I remember test driving the 300M after it won, and thinking "Oh my god, what a POS! Is this the same car they picked?"
C&D loves BMW, and I think 6th place finish is a statement to BMW: get your head out of your ass!


----------



## operknockity (Apr 19, 2002)

vexed said:


> I had an E320 before my E46 I agree--and certainly on this board--there is an erroneous perception that an MB is a car for an *older* person:yikes:


 When I got my BMW, a friend of mine said "too bad, I had such high hopes for you". When questioned, he said "BMWs are for those still trying to make it whereas MBs are for those that have already made it".


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

operknockity said:


> When I got my BMW, a friend of mine said "too bad, I had such high hopes for you". When questioned, he said "BMWs are for those still trying to make it whereas MBs are for those that have already made it".


:rofl: I guess I am regressing since I went from an E36 to an E320 to an E46.:yikes: No question MB puts more emphasis on luxury than performance but when I get my June R&T (in a few weeks ) I am very curious to read about the handling scores.


----------



## JetBlack330i (Feb 8, 2002)

vexed said:


> *I had an E320* before my E46 I agree--and certainly on this board--there is an *erroneous* perception that an MB is a car for an *older* person:yikes:


How's that erroneous? You're even older than me. :rofl:


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

JetBlack330i said:


> How's that erroneous? You're even older than me. :rofl:


:flipoff: But when I got my E320 I bet I was younger than you are now:stickpoke


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

I'm a big MB fan, but I have no qualms admitting that they don't handle as nicely as BMWs do, for the most part.

E-classes look hot, but for someone who prefers buying over leasing, the abysmal reliability would scare me off long before I even considered test driving one.


----------



## Motown328 (Jun 4, 2003)

jw said:


> The sales guy at the MB dealership said...
> 
> BMW is performance luxury.
> MB is luxury performance.
> ...


Yeah, no sh!t. I would have asked him what the hell do you mean by that babble??? The BMW is a luxury car that has performance and the MB is a performance car that has luxury??? If that is the case, he switched them. If you take my 328 versus its competitor (a car I happen to adore) the C280, the 328 runs circles around it in performance, but not luxury.

I would have also asked him if he thought a 168hp V6 in a $35,000-plus vehicle equated to high-performance? :thumbdwn:


----------



## Motown328 (Jun 4, 2003)

operknockity said:


> When I got my BMW, a friend of mine said "too bad, I had such high hopes for you". When questioned, he said "BMWs are for those still trying to make it whereas MBs are for those that have already made it".


Yeah, and you should respond, that's why I drive a BMW...so I don't have to put up with the snobs who drive a MB. Hahahaha...

Go ask him if the $24,000 C230 ($2000 off MSRP + added discounts), which a guy working full-time at Walmart can afford, means you made it??? :rofl: :lmao:

BTW...I bet he's never driven a BMW before right???


----------



## EdCT (Mar 14, 2002)

Motown328 said:


> Yeah, and you should respond, that's why I drive a BMW...so I don't have to put up with the snobs who drive a MB. Hahahaha...
> 
> Go ask him if the $24,000 C230 ($2000 off MSRP + added discounts), which a guy working full-time at Walmart can afford, means you made it??? :rofl: :lmao:
> 
> BTW...I bet he's never driven a BMW before right???


Truth is, just about anyone can "afford" an MB/BMW/Audi/Acura etc today, what with incentives and a huge pool of off-lease certified cars.

I see used big S-series MB's just two or three years old on our local dealer's Sunday morning infomercial going for unbelievably low prices. They even have a Jag convertible, original list price 80K, offered at 29k; it's only six years old, but looks just like the new model. If you're a status seeker, who'd know the difference.

This phenomenon of paying Honda Accord prices for second hand luxury cars is part of the reason we're seeing Mercedes introduce the Maybach line; these cars are truly out of reach of most folks.

Ed


----------



## Thertorch (Mar 10, 2004)

So JW, did you test drive the CTS??


----------



## jw (Dec 21, 2001)

Thertorch said:


> Ooops, right you are. :thumbup:


Off to the Caddy dealership... they've got a CTS w/ Sport Lux. and DVD.... in Silver Smoke. Plus GM put out a $1500 competitive incentive. Add that to the GMS pricing... and :wow:


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

jw said:


> Off to the Caddy dealership... they've got a CTS w/ Sport Lux. and DVD.... in Silver Smoke. Plus GM put out a $1500 competitive incentive. Add that to the GMS pricing... and :wow:


I thought they weren't letting you use that pricing?


----------



## jw (Dec 21, 2001)

swchang said:


> I thought they weren't letting you use that pricing?


Only the _V_. They'll probably open it up next year, but not sure I'll wait until the fall. Time is of the essense and I'm still completely 100% undecided. :bawling:


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

jw said:


> Only the _V_. They'll probably open it up next year, but not sure I'll wait until the fall. Time is of the essense and I'm still completely 100% undecided. :bawling:


Some of us are test driving vicariously through you, I am curious as to your thoughts on the CTS since it was recommended to me as well...:eeps:


----------



## jw (Dec 21, 2001)

vexed said:


> Some of us are test driving vicariously through you, I am curious as to your thoughts on the CTS since it was recommended to me as well...:eeps:


It's all too convenient when there are about 10 car dealerships less than 1/2 mile from my office. Lunch becomes rather mundane, but the test drives have been very enjoyable! I'll probably miss them once I settle on a car. :yikes:


----------



## Scorp76 (Dec 9, 2002)

Thertorch said:


> Seem odd that a Mazda driver would be giving advice to BMW owners on what's proper etiquette for complaining about the direction of styling at BMW?


No one is giving advice to anyone. All I was saying is that the *****ing is stupid because BMW is going to style their cars however the fuk they want so the whiners need to get on board or move on.

If the so-called old-timers, who I like to call Ostritches, (except their heads are in their @sses instead of the sand) don't like what their precious 3 series ends up looking like, oh well-whatever, they'll still sell.


----------



## Scorp76 (Dec 9, 2002)

EdCT said:


> I'm not quite sure how your analogy fits into the discussion at hand, but the reason we three series folks are complaining is we really LIKE our cars and feel the E46 represents the last true BMW of the old guard.
> 
> Many of us who might have wanted to "upgrade" to a five, are smarting after seeing the goofy bangled designs and less driver involvement and are looking to other marks.
> 
> ...


Im quite clear on the whole scenario, thanks. I maintain my position that the complaining is stupid because, last I checked, BMW wasnt the only carmaker in the US. If the new ones are that bad then move on to some other company with designs nice enough to win your neighbor's approval. :thumbup:


----------

