Re: Don Cicchetti's rant about no new 4cyl BMW

[Don Cicchetti <dcicchet@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Mike,  You said: (edit edit)


>Don, I think the reason that BMW is no longer offering 4 cylinder engines
>is because Americans, in general, don't want them.   They want torque!
>Horsepower!   Leather!    Young, naked, nubile... excuse me, I got carried
>away.   BMW, like most consumer goods manufacturers, is driven by the
>marketing department.     Why else would they have added an electric
>pull-down on the trunks of the seven series?   Stolen right out of the
>Lincoln Towncar and Caddy Sedan Deville.   Cruise buttons on the steering
>wheel of all but the E36.   I liked the old stalk, but no, Americans want
>all their buttons right there on the wheel so their fingers can get torn
>off when the airbag goes off... but that's another rant.


Hey It's friday, rant on!   You know, I really think that the marketeers
have us americans wrong.   that's what I was getting at in my other post.
Yeah yeah, they can produce stats showing this and that, but you can
produce stats showing anything.


>most Americans want big V8 power and torque, power windows,
>leather, integrated remote illuminated voice-command activated garage door
>openers, you get the idea.   They want to enjoy the fruits of their labors,
>and when you figure that the average price of all BMWs sold new in this
>country is probably in the upper 30s, they want their "money's worth".
>Multi-cylinder, multi-valve multi-computer controlled engines are what the
>market demands, and so, as a company trying to make a profit, BMW is giving
>us what we want.   And when you can buy gas for less than a dollar, who
>cares if your car gets 24 MPG instead of 28 MPG?

This concept of what constitutes "enjoying the fruit" of one's labors is
not driven by US, IMO, but by the concepts and conceits of the marketeers.
Yes, they can say "look at the money we make" but that won't save them if
they merely follow the market instead of lead it.

Back in the 70's people were clamoring for better cars from the US
manufacturers.  All we got was "rich corinthain leather", and (squeaky
voice on) "my Granada was mistake for a Mercedes!!" (squeaky voice off)
poorly designed/manufactured, cynically-marketed junk.   The response from
the big three?   Arrogant snickers about what fools the complainers were;
look at all the MONEY we make they said.

Soichiro Honda made the comment that:

 "American car companies think they make *money*, but they forgot that they
actually make *cars*".

And sure enough, it took the big three over a decade to recover.   So I
would say your market-driven model is inadequate because it screens out
vision as a guiding force for a company.

God knows, an M5 is not a Granada, BUT, I think BMW is too far, once again,
from its roots and its forte.    Don't you think the Japanese will
eventually do "quality luxury/performance cars" better than BMW?   Read the
Powers numbers on Lexus recently?

Luxury luxury luxury...   Ho-hum....

My point is this:  We know that the 1600-2002 series established BMW as a
manufacturer.   OK, go make expensive cars, but where is that 02 car today?
What is the equivalent?   There's still a Mustang, there's still a Camaro,
There's till a Vette, sheesh, there's still a Firebird fer Pete's sake.
Where's the "02??    The '02 did more for BMW than those cars ever did for
Chevy or Ford!   Where is it today?    Nope, WE get "luxury"....

The new BMW's are nice, but they are a bit numb, quiet, and isolated,
frankly.   I just don't need that much pampering....   Take a nice '02,
take the route (I think it is the J16) from Carmel (Califorinia) over the
hill to the 101.   Using your arm, open the sunroof, using your arm, open
the windows.   Leave the radio off.  Listen, drive, breathe, feel..   ahhhh
alive again.   Yes, the new cars are mostly quicker, but the experience is
not the same.  Something is missing.


Now I don't begrudge you guys your fancy cars.   I just want to know why
they refuse to make a car for *me*...   And I don't believe that it
wouldn't sell.  Rubbish!


>And I'll bet you dollars
>to doughnuts that my high-tech double VANOS 24 valve 2.8 6 cylinder (E39)
>gets better gas mileage than your 4 cylinder 2002.  I mean, your car back
>when it had the original engine, Don.   I mean, you weren't happy with the
>original, right?   M42?  How many cylinders in that?   Uh oh!   I think I
>found a flaw in your argument...
>
>Michael

Ha!  Nope, you made my point.   Boy, does a modern engine in a simple
lightweight car work nice!
And last time I checked, both the 02 engine and the 318ti (M42) motor are
both 4-cylinders.

Heck, in the right car, even a 6 is cool.    I might even put your motor in
an '02!   <grin>   How about a V8 from a 540 in a 3.0CS?

Folks, there is a reason why so many of us are keeping our 02's.   And if
BMW ain't paying attention, then they will lose sales.   They already lost
a 318ti sale to me.

DC


- -----------
Don Cicchetti - BMW CCA member 122043
dcicchet@domain.elided
'71 2002/M42 (waddya mean that motor don't go in there?)

- -Beatnik Motor Werke-       0=OO=0
- -----------

------------------------------