Myth of the M car

[NlckyBlack]

A good read on the myth of the M car and represents alot of sentiments i feel carried by most including myself

http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/the...car-1507516158

[mstmng]

Originally Posted by NlckyBlack

A good read on the myth of the M car and represents alot of sentiments i feel carried by most including myself

http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/the...ium=socialflow

says NOT FOUND

this should be correct link
http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/the...car-1507516158

[Leveraged Sellout]

I mostly agree with what he said...although he actually used my quote in the opening and I think he thought I was on the other side.

I do agree that we need to stop looking back at the older cars with rose-colored glasses. I mean, some do. I don't. I love them to death but an F10 M5 is just a better car than an E39 M5...or an E34 M5. That doesn't mean that the E34 M5 isn't fun to drive...it most certainly is. But as a cohesive, overall performance car, the new one beats it up and down.

Also, he made a great point...in the grand scheme of history, we're in an awkward "in-between" point where we've figure out all this awesome stuff we want in our cars...but we also for some reason expect a large, 4 door 5 passenger scifi-advanced extremely luxurious sedan with a huge trunk and enough power to keep up with exotics in a straight line to somehow also weigh 3000 pounds and also by the way, we want to be able to crash it however and walk away. And if it could never break either, that would be great. We don't have that yet. Once technology makes some larger leaps in the next decade or so, I predict we will see some crazy things. Until then, we have to deal with the consequences of what we want.

Just look at what the next M5 will bring...high composite and aluminum content, 180+ kgs less weight (damn near 400 pounds), I'm sure a quite advanced AWD system, a tech suite that will make the current one look like an Apple II in comparison, and an advertised 600+ hp, which will likely mean closer to 700 hp in actuality. That's crazy. If you had told someone back when the first M5 was being sold that in less than 30 years, the equivalent car would be more than twice as powerful, be many times stiffer, quitter, more refined, have unimaginable technology on board, practically drive itself, be faster than any exotic car made for the next 10 years (expect for the McLaren F1), get 50% better gas mileage at least, last for basically forever, be bigger, more comfortable, safer, and yet somehow cost only a bit more when adjust for inflation and only weight a couple hundred pounds more, they'd think you were insane. But we're there now. I think this is something to be celebrated, not something to be sad about.

The one thing I do disagree with is that he seems to argue that BMW and M don't have a certain "feel" or a certain X factor (as all brands do) and I believe they most certainly do. When we all think of what we expect without even asking out of a great M car, I think we'd all say the same thing: Great steering that's quick, accurate, and gives a decent picture of what's going on. Great throttle response. Power and handling that makes you work a bit for results but rewards you greatly when you nail it. A willingness and desire to be driven hard around a track. Striking the perfect balance between sport and comfort, such that it can put a smile on your face during the weekend but provides dependable practicality during the week. So far, it would seem the new cars live up to that spec, and are worthy of the M badge.

[RPiM5]

I really like the article. One of the best I've ever read on the topic.

[Spinny02]

Thanks for sharing.

[NlckyBlack]

Originally Posted by RPiM5

I really like the article. One of the best I've ever read on the topic.

It's a great write up and i must say pretty accurate.

[shahano]

Great write up...

[Dionysus]

This is an OK article, but there are some major omissions.

The first time BMW was criticised for not producing a 'real M-car' was the 3.0 E36 M3. Most of the UK motoring press lamented the E30 M3 and said that BMW should have called the E36 the 330i not an M3 (some concluded that it was closer in feel to the BMW SA/Aplina developed E30 333i rather than the E30 M3). The 3.2 E36 addressed some of the criticism, but it wasn't until the E46 M3 that the press said BMW had returned somewhat to form.

M5 never had competition until F10? Poppycock - what about E34 & Lotus Carlton? Agreed that these cars were very different in character in their time, but in many ways the LC blew the M5 out of the water. In some respects, the F10 M5 is closer to being a modern day interpretation of the LC than the E34 M5.

M5s have never really been 'race cars for the road'. They have always been multifaceted luxury cars - a mixture of comfort & sport. Agreed the focus has shifted towards comfort. What I disagree with is that this can only be achieved by compromising elsewhere.

To excuse shortcomings the F10 M5 (isolation, etc.) based on need for luxury, crash worthiness, etc. is also a flawed argument. In this generation of cars, Porsche can engineer a similar car with a more connected chassis, Mercedes can Engineer similar cars with better steering feel, and both still provide luxury, refinement, tech, etc. Many manufacturers can engineer similar cars with a more emotive soundtrack which still provides refinement when it's required. And that's all without the need for next gen technologies. Are those cars any lighter than the F10 - no.

Many have said that the F10 M5 should have come standard with the Competition Package from the start, but if we take a cynical view, why would any manufacturer not hold something back so that they could encourage repeat business (noting that for Europe, the LCI & CP has been timed when many owners will be naturally considering changing their cars)?

Perhaps the competition has caught up with BMW, then again perhaps BMW as a business have learnt how to do enough (and no more) to sell the products without having to over-engineer. Mercedes no longer over engineer their cars as they once did (in terms of quality) and they're more profitable today. Do the majority of MB buyers today care that their cannot buy a car and expect it to last a lifetime - clearly not judging by their sales figures - win:win for MB and their current customer base. For several generations BMW have been producing cars with less focus on handling and more on improved ride quality, Mercedes going the other way - a watering down of USPs to meet in some highly lucrative middle ground. 'Ultimate driving machines' (as opposed to 'real M-cars') and all the compromises they inherently come with (compromises that I'm not prepared to live with) are probably to be found elsewhere - even BMW admit this indirectly as they have largely moved on from using that slogan (probably one of the most powerful marketing slogans in car history)...

And just for the record... do I like my F10 M5 - yes. Looking at the competition today, would I consider buying another F10 M5 as a replacement - yes. Do I feel I need to justify my purchase by saying never saying anything negative about the M5 - no. What I do believe in is providing honest & accurate feedback on what I believe to be the shortcomings (and the virtues) of any car I own to help inform prospective buyers. Am I saddened the fact that the majority consumers do not want a modern day interpretation of the E30 M3 from BMW - yes (accepted that 1 series M Coupe, M135i, M235i come close), however, could I now live with such a car - probably not. Do I believe that constructive feedback is damaging to the brand - no; BMW do listen to feedback - the current DCT alone is proof of that.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by Dionysus

This is an OK article, but there are some major omissions.

The first time BMW was criticised for not producing a 'real M-car' was the 3.0 E36 M3. Most of the UK motoring press lamented the E30 M3 and said that BMW should have called the E36 the 330i not an M3 (some concluded that it was closer in feel to the BMW SA/Aplina developed E30 333i rather than the E30 M3). The 3.2 E36 addressed some of the criticism, but it was until the E46 M3 that the press said BMW had returned somewhat to form.

M5 never had competition until F10? Poppycock - what about E34 & Lotus Carlton? Agreed that these cars were very different in character in their time, but in many ways the LC blew the M5 out of the water. In some respects, the F10 M5 is closer to being a modern day interpretation of the LC than the E34 M5.

M5s have never really been 'race cars for the road'. They have always been multifaceted luxury cars - a mixture of comfort & sport. Agreed the focus has shifted towards comfort. What I disagree with is that this can only be achieved by compromising elsewhere.

To excuse shortcomings the F10 M5 (isolation, etc.) based on need for luxury, crash worthiness, etc. is also a flawed argument. In this generation of cars, Porsche can engineer a similar car with a more connected chassis, Mercedes can Engineer similar cars with better steering feel, and both still provide luxury, refinement, tech, etc. Many manufacturers can engineer similar cars with a more emotive soundtrack which still provides refinement when it's required. And that's all without the need for next gen technologies. Are those cars any lighter than the F10 - no.

Many have said that the F10 M5 should have come standard with the Competition Package from the start, but if we take a cynical view, why would any manufacturer not hold something back so that they could encourage repeat business (noting that for Europe, the LCI & CP has been timed when many owners will be naturally considering changing their cars)?

Perhaps the competition has caught up with BMW, then again perhaps BMW as a business have learnt how to do enough (and no more) to sell the products without having to over-engineer. Mercedes no longer over engineer their cars as they once did (in terms of quality) and they're more profitable today. Do the majority of MB buyers today care that their cannot buy a car and expect it to last a lifetime - clearly not judging by their sales figures - win:win for MB and their current customer base. For several generations BMW have been producing cars with less focus on handling and more on improved ride quality, Mercedes going the other way - a watering down of USPs to meet in some highly lucrative middle ground. 'Ultimate driving machines' (as opposed to 'real M-cars') and all the compromises they inherently come with (compromises that I'm not prepared to live with) are probably to be found elsewhere - even BMW admit this indirectly as they have largely moved on from using that slogan (probably one of the most powerful marketing slogans in car history)...

And just for the record... do I like my F10 M5 - yes. Looking at the competition today, would I consider buying another F10 M5 as a replacement - yes. Do I feel I need to justify my purchase by saying never saying anything negative about the M5 - no. What I do believe in is providing honest & accurate feedback on what I believe to be the shortcomings (and the virtues) of any car I own to help inform prospective buyers. Am I saddened the fact that the majority consumers do not want a modern day interpretation of the E30 M3 from BMW - yes (accepted that 1 series M Coupe, M135i, M235i come close), however, could I now live with such a car - probably not. Do I believe that constructive feedback is damaging to the brand - no; BMW do listen to feedback - the current DCT alone is proof of that.

Hear, hear