Hot damn.

[Roadstergal]

I drove the 645 today. Hot damn. That car goes fast, turns fast, stops fast, and sounds like a wet dream. I drove the auto, and it was chirping off of the line with DSC off. With the manual, I bet you would put down rubber.

My chances of getting one in my stocking for Christmas aren't good, are they? :cry:

[lemming]

my question is:

is it a good value/performance proposition relative to other cars that you have driven?

even compared to the 545i 6speed?

[clyde]

I drove the 645 today. That car...sounds like a wet dream.

You may be different, but I don't find that to be a particularly good selling point. :eek:

My chances of getting one in my stocking for Christmas aren't good, are they? :cry:

No...it would probably leak right through.

[Roadstergal]

is it a good value/performance proposition relative to other cars that you have driven?

That's a good question. If I were in a postion where 70K wasn't a huge amount of money for me, I'd be able to answer. As it is, all I can say is it's very impressive performance at a price I can't afford.


You may be different, but I don't find that to be a particularly good selling point.

You know what I meant! :P

[lemming]

is it a good value/performance proposition relative to other cars that you have driven?

That's a good question. If I were in a postion where 70K wasn't a huge amount of money for me, I'd be able to answer. As it is, all I can say is it's very impressive performance at a price I can't afford.


You may be different, but I don't find that to be a particularly good selling point.

You know what I meant! :P

yeah.

i guess my bias is that if i was outlaying 70k, since those rear seats of the 645ci are so lame and small anyway? i'd take performance and the 911 has more of that. naturally, this is just my bias. i think they did a nice job dynamically on the car --it's just that styling is over the top for me.

[Roadstergal]

i guess my bias is that if i was outlaying 70k, since those rear seats of the 645ci are so lame and small anyway? i'd take performance and the 911 has more of that. naturally, this is just my bias. i think they did a nice job dynamically on the car --it's just that styling is over the top for me.

The rear seats on the cab are minimal. The rear seats on the coupe are actually pretty good. I haven't driven a 911, so I can't compare. Porsche dealership won't give me the time of day. :D

[JST]

i guess my bias is that if i was outlaying 70k, since those rear seats of the 645ci are so lame and small anyway? i'd take performance and the 911 has more of that. naturally, this is just my bias. i think they did a nice job dynamically on the car --it's just that styling is over the top for me.

The rear seats on the cab are minimal. The rear seats on the coupe are actually pretty good. I haven't driven a 911, so I can't compare. Porsche dealership won't give me the time of day. :D

Have you driven an E46 M3? Wondering how it compares to that.

[Roadstergal]

Have you driven an E46 M3? Wondering how it compares to that.

I have driven an S54 M roadster quite a bit. I would say it's faster both to go and to stop. Not as intimate a driving experience, though.

[lemming]

i guess my bias is that if i was outlaying 70k, since those rear seats of the 645ci are so lame and small anyway? i'd take performance and the 911 has more of that. naturally, this is just my bias. i think they did a nice job dynamically on the car --it's just that styling is over the top for me.

The rear seats on the cab are minimal. The rear seats on the coupe are actually pretty good. I haven't driven a 911, so I can't compare. Porsche dealership won't give me the time of day. :D

WHAT!?!?!?!?!?

that's a crock of shit. that's what that is.

come to the right coast and visit. :lol:

if the s54 coupers and roadsters felt quicker, the m3 will definitely feel quicker. they just don't have that 'aural pleasure'. ;)

[Roadstergal]

if the s54 coupers and roadsters felt quicker, the m3 will definitely feel quicker. they just don't have that 'aural pleasure'. ;)

Oops, I meant the other way around - the 6er felt faster than the S54...

[lemming]

if the s54 coupers and roadsters felt quicker, the m3 will definitely feel quicker. they just don't have that 'aural pleasure'. ;)

Oops, I meant the other way around - the 6er felt faster than the S54...

1. it's all about the surfeit of torque, girlfriend.

2. 'aural pleasure' --> S54 doesnt' have it.

[JST]

if the s54 coupers and roadsters felt quicker, the m3 will definitely feel quicker. they just don't have that 'aural pleasure'. ;)

Oops, I meant the other way around - the 6er felt faster than the S54...

1. it's all about the surfeit of torque, girlfriend.

2. 'aural pleasure' --> S54 doesnt' have it.

Yeah, but S54 M3 drivers have OEM Fart Tips. So, no need to add one from Pep Boys. Gotta love that rasp.

I need a frigging V8.

[TD]

i guess my bias is that if i was outlaying 70k, since those rear seats of the 645ci are so lame and small anyway? i'd take performance and the 911 has more of that. naturally, this is just my bias. i think they did a nice job dynamically on the car --it's just that styling is over the top for me.

The rear seats on the cab are minimal. The rear seats on the coupe are actually pretty good. I haven't driven a 911, so I can't compare. Porsche dealership won't give me the time of day. :D

WHAT!?!?!?!?!?

that's a crock of shit. that's what that is.

come to the right coast and visit. :lol:

if the s54 coupers and roadsters felt quicker, the m3 will definitely feel quicker. they just don't have that 'aural pleasure'. ;)

I feel like Beavis...

Heheheh... He said, "aural pleasure"... Heheheh...

[The HACK]

if the s54 coupers and roadsters felt quicker, the m3 will definitely feel quicker. they just don't have that 'aural pleasure'. ;)

Not really.

Un-officially, the S54 roadster is the FASTEST production BMW ever built. BMW press won't admit it but the S54 roadster is faster to 60mph than the E46 M3 coupe.

Official BMW acceleration #s for the 645Ci is what, like 5.2 to 60? That's not exactly that far off of the E46 M3 numbers.

[The HACK]

The rear seats on the cab are minimal. The rear seats on the coupe are actually pretty good. I haven't driven a 911, so I can't compare. Porsche dealership won't give me the time of day. :D

The rear leg room feel larger than the E46 coupe and wider to the side, but the headroom is about 2" shorter on the 645Ci due to the sloping rear window. So if you're shorter than 5'8", it's comfortable. If you're taller than 5'11" then you're head will hit the roof.

Compared to the 3'er Coupe, it feels like it's got more room to the side but not up top and not down low in the driver's seat.

[Roadstergal]

if the s54 coupers and roadsters felt quicker, the m3 will definitely feel quicker. they just don't have that 'aural pleasure'. ;)Official BMW acceleration #s for the 645Ci is what, like 5.2 to 60? That's not exactly that far off of the E46 M3 numbers.

Official BMW acceleration numbers can be a bit goofy. Testers got better than their published 0-60 for the S54 roadster. IIRC...


The rear leg room feel larger than the E46 coupe and wider to the side, but the headroom is about 2" shorter on the 645Ci due to the sloping rear window. So if you're shorter than 5'8", it's comfortable. If you're taller than 5'11" then you're head will hit the roof.

I'm not a good person to use to investigate headroom.

[Masskrug]

The rear seats on the cab are minimal. The rear seats on the coupe are actually pretty good. I haven't driven a 911, so I can't compare. Porsche dealership won't give me the time of day. :D

The rear leg room feel larger than the E46 coupe and wider to the side, but the headroom is about 2" shorter on the 645Ci due to the sloping rear window. So if you're shorter than 5'8", it's comfortable. If you're taller than 5'11" then you're head will hit the roof.

Compared to the 3'er Coupe, it feels like it's got more room to the side but not up top and not down low in the driver's seat.


heheheheh...he said headroom...hehheheheheh...

[Roadstergal]

I can see BMW's new ad campaign. "Headroom. Aural pleasure. Your very own 6ual fantasy." :roll:

[JST]

if the s54 coupers and roadsters felt quicker, the m3 will definitely feel quicker. they just don't have that 'aural pleasure'. ;)

Not really.

Un-officially, the S54 roadster is the FASTEST production BMW ever built. BMW press won't admit it but the S54 roadster is faster to 60mph than the E46 M3 coupe.

Official BMW acceleration #s for the 645Ci is what, like 5.2 to 60? That's not exactly that far off of the E46 M3 numbers.

Do you have a cite for the M roadster numbers?


BMW lists 0-60 on the 645Ci as 5.5, and 0-60 for the M3 as 4.8. The 645 likely feels like it pulls harder because of the torque from the V8, but with less weight, lower gearing, and more power, the M3 is going to be faster in every circumstance.

FWIW, the 645 has a slightly better coefficient of drag (.32 to .33), but almost certainly has more frontal area. The 645 is speed limited to 150, v. 155 for the M3.

Source: BMWUSA.com

[blee]

I don't think 645 drivers are in it to beat M3s off the line. That said, it looks to be producing some impressive acceleration numbers.

[JST]

I don't think 645 drivers are in it to beat M3s off the line. That said, it looks to be producing some impressive acceleration numbers.

Yeah. Almost as good as the GTO.

[blee]

I don't think 645 drivers are in it to beat M3s off the line. That said, it looks to be producing some impressive acceleration numbers.

Yeah. Almost as good as the GTO.The 645 - a GTO for richer people. :dunno:

[lemming]

if the s54 coupers and roadsters felt quicker, the m3 will definitely feel quicker. they just don't have that 'aural pleasure'. ;)

Not really.

Un-officially, the S54 roadster is the FASTEST production BMW ever built. BMW press won't admit it but the S54 roadster is faster to 60mph than the E46 M3 coupe.

Official BMW acceleration #s for the 645Ci is what, like 5.2 to 60? That's not exactly that far off of the E46 M3 numbers.

Do you have a cite for the M roadster numbers?


BMW lists 0-60 on the 645Ci as 5.5, and 0-60 for the M3 as 4.8. The 645 likely feels like it pulls harder because of the torque from the V8, but with less weight, lower gearing, and more power, the M3 is going to be faster in every circumstance.

FWIW, the 645 has a slightly better coefficient of drag (.32 to .33), but almost certainly has more frontal area. The 645 is speed limited to 150, v. 155 for the M3.

Source: BMWUSA.com

car and driver, in their infamous ways, clocked both a corvette ragtop and the s54 m roadster in 4.5 seconds to 60mph and something like 13.1 to run the quarter mile. couple of years back. the same comparison article where they compared the m3 cabrio to the clk55 cabrio and the m5 to the e55.

[elbert]

car and driver, in their infamous ways, clocked both a corvette ragtop and the s54 m roadster in 4.5 seconds to 60mph and something like 13.1 to run the quarter mile. couple of years back.

Yep.

8/2001
M roadster 4.5
13.1 @ 109
Corvette convertible 4.5
13.1 @ 111

5/2003
M3 coupe 4.8
13.6 @ 105

5/2004
645ci coupe (slushbox) 5.3
13.9 @ 102



the same comparison article where they compared the m3 cabrio to the clk55 cabrio and the m5 to the e55.

I don't remember them comparing cabrios. They did compare coupes, though, as well as the M5 and E55.

[The HACK]

car and driver, in their infamous ways, clocked both a corvette ragtop and the s54 m roadster in 4.5 seconds to 60mph and something like 13.1 to run the quarter mile. couple of years back.

Yep.

8/2001
M roadster 4.5
13.1 @ 109
Corvette convertible 4.5
13.1 @ 111

5/2003
M3 coupe 4.8
13.6 @ 105

5/2004
645ci coupe (slushbox) 5.3
13.9 @ 102



the same comparison article where they compared the m3 cabrio to the clk55 cabrio and the m5 to the e55.

I don't remember them comparing cabrios. They did compare coupes, though, as well as the M5 and E55.

That slush box number can't be right. If the auto can do 0-60 in 5.3, the manual and SMG should do 4.9 and 5.0, respectively...If not better. :?

[elbert]

That slush box number can't be right. If the auto can do 0-60 in 5.3, the manual and SMG should do 4.9 and 5.0, respectively...If not better. :?

Who says they can't? Like Rdstrgal said, BMW official numbers can be goofy.

And don't forget, there can be variations due to production tolerances. C/D got a 4.5 second 0-60 time in a different m3 test.

[FC]

That slush box number can't be right. If the auto can do 0-60 in 5.3, the manual and SMG should do 4.9 and 5.0, respectively...If not better. :?

Who says they can't? Like Rdstrgal said, BMW official numbers can be goofy.

And don't forget, there can be variations due to production tolerances. C/D got a 4.5 second 0-60 time in a different m3 test.

I know that when MB offered a manual tranny on the SLK, they actually got better acceleration times on the auto tranny.

[The HACK]

That slush box number can't be right. If the auto can do 0-60 in 5.3, the manual and SMG should do 4.9 and 5.0, respectively...If not better. :?

Who says they can't? Like Rdstrgal said, BMW official numbers can be goofy.

And don't forget, there can be variations due to production tolerances. C/D got a 4.5 second 0-60 time in a different m3 test.

I know that when MB offered a manual tranny on the SLK, they actually got better acceleration times on the auto tranny.

Yeah, but MB builds slushie cars for a living. It's no wonder they can't get manual trannies straight. BMW build manuals for a living. I've yet to see an automatic version of a BMW chassis do BETTER than its manual counterpart.

Both companies know where their bread and butter lie. MB won't cannibalize slushie sales by putting out a faster manual and BMW won't cannibalize manual sales by putting out a faster auto.

[Doug]

Actually someone else builds BMWs trannys for them

[Roadstergal]

Actually someone else builds BMWs trannys for them
I got me a GM tranny.

[Roadstergal]

http://www.edoghouse.com/cbishop/4_6_04/index.htm

[clyde]

I find the postulation that any car manufacturer is concerned about the possibility of one transmission type "cannibalizing" sales of another transmission type in the same model mildly amusing.

[nate]

http://www.edoghouse.com/cbishop/4_6_04/31.jpg

Why not put the licence plate in the proper place?

[Nick M3]

I find the postulation that any car manufacturer is concerned about the possibility of one transmission type "cannibalizing" sales of another transmission type in the same model mildly amusing.

To say the least...

[clyde]

Why not put the licence plate in the proper place?

Funny...you look like you have a three digit IQ. :?

:slap:

[lemming]

now that i've seen more of the 645Ci, the front looks like a honda accord v6 coupe and the rear end still looks like a dodge stratus.

gawd. and i thought some AMG wheels were ugly. could be dressed up in those pictures with some nice BBS LM-type wheels.

the interior chrome-colored plastic still bothers me. that the pedals are black plastic and not chrome or metal with drilled holes bothers me.

can the car be ordered without active steering? i refuse to ever like iDrive. it's inherently stupid. the style and the iDrive are being force fed down our throats and i don't have to like either. if i ever get "old" (mentally and not chronologically), i'd rather get the maserati for sheer interest or the MB because it's got more intangible classiness.

it's like being forced to use windows: forget that --> linux or mac os X beckon.

[clyde]

gawd. and i thought some AMG wheels were ugly.

What did you say was ugly?

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?s=93fded1a6b5d6067a7c0b06930d9b6f4& postid=305439

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?s=93fded1a6b5d6067a7c0b06930d9b6f4& postid=305702

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?s=93fded1a6b5d6067a7c0b06930d9b6f4& postid=305706

[blee]

:lol: "MR WRX" :lol:

[lemming]

gawd. and i thought some AMG wheels were ugly.

What did you say was ugly?

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?s=93fded1a6b5d6067a7c0b06930d9b6f4&postid=305439

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?s=93fded1a6b5d6067a7c0b06930d9b6f4&postid=305702

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?s=93fded1a6b5d6067a7c0b06930d9b6f4&postid=305706

them asian brothers from other mothers have some godawful taste. not that an asian in a corvette helps any stereotype, but those are examples of sheer bad taste and prominent automotive stupidity.

[Roadstergal]

can the car be ordered without active steering?

Active Steering only comes with the Sport Package. The cars out for demos didn't have it. I wanted to try it. :(


the style and the iDrive are being force fed down our throats

No, they're not... you're free to not buy the car... :P

That's like saying the styling and traction control were being force-fed down your throat with the E36, or the styling and DBW were on the E46. It's just how the car comes.

[lemming]

can the car be ordered without active steering?

Active Steering only comes with the Sport Package. The cars out for demos didn't have it. I wanted to try it. :(


the style and the iDrive are being force fed down our throats

No, they're not... you're free to not buy the car... :P

That's like saying the styling and traction control were being force-fed down your throat with the E36, or the styling and DBW were on the E46. It's just how the car comes.

couple things here just as rebuttal:

1. i'm a BMW fan. i'm not thrilled with the "base" product these days but it's less of an issue since i'd personally never drive one for my own car. and that especially applies to the 5 and 7 and 6 series. i'd just never want one of those even when i get a 5 car garage. never. but it is worrisome how the trends that start in those cars trickle down to the 3 series, my focus.

2. the styling of the e46 is still cohesive and fluid. it may be boring, but realize that the majority of wealthy people don't want the same things as look-at-me nouveau types. that's why mercedes is boring. DBW is a natural extension of DSC which is fine. it obviously needed some tweaking, but it's not something that gets in the way of driving on the track. active handling, in all of its reviews, ACTIVELY interferes with high speed highway running and track work. nothing has ever said contrary to this. secondly, as iDrive becomes standard and i sense it will be a 3 series standard piece, that is basically being force fed, isn't it?

BMW used to differentiated itself with handling and performance. i don't know when they decided to start using electronics and styling to carry sales. but it's not their forte. the japanese do electronics better most other brands do "avant garde" styling better --> OR NOT AT ALL.

[Roadstergal]

active handling, in all of its reviews, ACTIVELY interferes with high speed highway running and track work. nothing has ever said contrary to this.

I've heard quite a few people say positive things about it. I will reserve judgement on everything until I try it m'self, though. With such hostility to it, you've tried it, haven't you? ;)

http://www.bmwpugetsound.com//vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23318

http://www.bmwpugetsound.com//vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24642

The I-drive was not needed in anything I did in the 6 - start it, adjsut seats, play with the radio, drive it, turn the DSC off, change to manual shifting mode... it didn't interfere with driving one iota.

[The HACK]

ACTIVELY interferes with high speed highway running and track work. nothing has ever said contrary to this.

I wish some of you constant bashers would at least go out and DRIVE one before you bash the car. I drove an active steering equipped 530i at high speed (would 80mph be qualified as high speed amongst this bunch?) and it DOES NOT interfer at all with your steering. In fact, at certain point active steering turns itself off completely at high speed and you're left with BMW's servotronic steering controls.

Yes, it took some getting used to but it can let novices (which is 90% of all BMW drivers, by the way) drive like they're born on the track. It's amazing how you can make sharp U-turns by just holding the steering wheel a quarter turn, and the turn is completely SMOOTH as a baby's butt. If you've never actually driven it, then you probably should not be bashing it BASED ON SOMEONE ELSE'S OPINION.

Just like I think TD has no right bashing SMG because he's never actually spend any quality time behind it. SMG kicks ass on the track, and it's a good implementation on the street. Active steering would kick SERIOUS ass on a tight track.

[lemming]

haha!

got you there.

'have now officially driven the new 645Ci (automatic) and the 545i 6 speed.

i love the 545i 6 speed, but my thinking is more colored by its practicality as well as the fact that BMW builds that powertrain configuration.

the 645Ci was okay, but very unthrilling otherwise. sky-high premium price. styling. sheer size. sheer bulk. lack of interior space. i am a pushrodder, now, you realize? the thrust of those cammy v8s is just "okay".

:-)

ps. SMG is okay with me. it makes sense, at least and driving it is marginally interesting.

[TD]

Bullshit.

I totally have the right to say that I have no interest in shifting my car video-game style. I do not need to drive one to know that. It's no different from telling you that I know that I'd hate driving a car with a CVT tranny.

Or, for that matter, that I'd hate driving a Ford Excursion. I've never driven an Excursion but I feel quite safe in saying I'd hate it.

[nate]

Bullshit.

I totally have the right to say that I have no interest in shifting my car video-game style. I do not need to drive one to know that. It's no different from telling you that I know that I'd hate driving a car with a CVT tranny.

Or, for that matter, that I'd hate driving a Ford Excursion. I've never driven an Excursion but I feel quite safe in saying I'd hate it.

Your cavalier attitude about such things just shows your aherence to textbook definitions of driving fun.

To quote you, "Your lack of real world perspective really showed itself here"

:kekeke: :kekeke:

[lemming]

Bullshit.

I totally have the right to say that I have no interest in shifting my car video-game style. I do not need to drive one to know that. It's no different from telling you that I know that I'd hate driving a car with a CVT tranny.

Or, for that matter, that I'd hate driving a Ford Excursion. I've never driven an Excursion but I feel quite safe in saying I'd hate it.

i believe that you both have merit on your points.

hack does have that a priori point that if one hasn't empirically tried something, assumptions cannot always be verified as universal truths.

that said, opinions from people that drive and write about cars for a living carry a lot of weight. it does cover all bases to read from "informed" sources and to also augment with primary data, but this is much like reading a restaurant review written by julia child. if she doesn't like it, i do take that opinion with some serious weight.

if roundel and car and driver do not like active steering, then that is meaningful.

yes, it helps my argumentative point of view to have gained my own experience and to see how it meshes with the published data, but it does not really detract from the published viewpoint. statistically speaking, the law of averages will show that people who review and write about cars for a living are more accurate than most car enthusiasts because their sampling size is much greater.

[The HACK]

Bullshit.

I totally have the right to say that I have no interest in shifting my car video-game style. I do not need to drive one to know that. It's no different from telling you that I know that I'd hate driving a car with a CVT tranny.

Or, for that matter, that I'd hate driving a Ford Excursion. I've never driven an Excursion but I feel quite safe in saying I'd hate it.

Saying you have no interest in driving one, and bashing it because you have absolutely NOTHING to base that opinion on is two different things. If you're not going to ever drive it, fine. But don't tell me (and others) that the SMG is an inferior transmission or that you wouldn't buy it because it sucks (based on Shafer's opinion, no less).

Frankly, until you actually go spend some quality time behind it your opinion on this matter is about as valid as Al Gore's claim that he invented internet. :roll:

EDIT: At least I've spent some qt behind an Explorer/SUV/whatever. Have you ever driven an SUV before or are you basing your SUV rant on other's opinion as well? :slap: :undwech: :flame:

[Roadstergal]

haha!

got you there.

What? You just said that you liked the one with active steering (E60) and were not thrilled by the one without (6er sans sport package). ;)


Oh, and I've driven SUVs. I do know firsthand that they suck. :P

[clyde]

Frankly, until you actually go spend some quality time behind it your opinion on this matter is about as valid as Al Gore's claim that he invented internet. :roll:

Actually, I believe that there was more validity to Gore's internet creation statement than many of TD's pronouncements regarding certain automtoive technologies such as SMG. TD's statements that he has no interest in driving one is certainly valid. However, when he states that he knows that he would hate driving a car with a CVT is wrong. He may believe it to be true, but he can not know it to be true without having driven one.

[The HACK]

...but this is much like reading a restaurant review written by julia child. if she doesn't like it, i do take that opinion with some serious weight.

if roundel and car and driver do not like active steering, then that is meaningful.

Yeah, but don't go around making that YOUR opinion. It's someone else's opinion that Active Steering sucks.

By the way, Roundel's review of Active Steering was a pre-release implementation. According to everyone I talked to, the "twitchy" active steering has been fixed long ago, way before any of the 5 series and 6 series officially hit U.S. shore.

That's the thing, I have no problem with anyone spouting Magazine XXX thinks it sucks. There's valid testers behind the statement and it's a valid opinion. But don't let that BE your opinion as well until you can judge for yourself.

Now, if you go drive the 6 series and come back with the same conclusion, then your opinion on the matter is certainly a lot more valid than mine. Heck, I haven't even had the opportunity to drive a 6'er. And that will certainly be another datapoint in the whole argument. But I'm not going to go around and say "yeah, the 6er SUCKS because lemming think it sucks." Fact is, I still need to go drive one before I will ever come to any sort of conclusion and form my OWN opinion.

No offense to anyone of course.

[nate]

He may believe it to be true, but he can not know it to be true without having driven one.

points to sig quote.

[lemming]

...but this is much like reading a restaurant review written by julia child. if she doesn't like it, i do take that opinion with some serious weight.

if roundel and car and driver do not like active steering, then that is meaningful.

Yeah, but don't go around making that YOUR opinion. It's someone else's opinion that Active Steering sucks.

By the way, Roundel's review of Active Steering was a pre-release implementation. According to everyone I talked to, the "twitchy" active steering has been fixed long ago, way before any of the 5 series and 6 series officially hit U.S. shore.

That's the thing, I have no problem with anyone spouting Magazine XXX thinks it sucks. There's valid testers behind the statement and it's a valid opinion. But don't let that BE your opinion as well until you can judge for yourself.

Now, if you go drive the 6 series and come back with the same conclusion, then your opinion on the matter is certainly a lot more valid than mine. Heck, I haven't even had the opportunity to drive a 6'er. And that will certainly be another datapoint in the whole argument. But I'm not going to go around and say "yeah, the 6er SUCKS because lemming think it sucks." Fact is, I still need to go drive one before I will ever come to any sort of conclusion and form my OWN opinion.

No offense to anyone of course.

but, by definition, a lemming's opinion is the mob mentality, and not always the right way.

:smile:

just as i used to pooh-pah pushrod engines, i've had to eat my words alive and then some. maybe vomit them and eat them again. but it took the RIGHT pushrod engine, is the thing.

i was still wrong. still had to eat my words. no issue ever doing that.

ps. active steering is just not my cup of tea. the steering feel is not linear and that's just strange. not as bad as my experience with the sucky ass electric steering on the saturn vue, but still oddly boosted.

pps. magnasteer isn't all that bad.

[Roadstergal]

ps. active steering is just not my cup of tea.


What? You just said that you liked the one with active steering (E60) and were not thrilled by the one without (6er sans sport package).

[Roadstergal]

Now, if you go drive the 6 series and come back with the same conclusion, then your opinion on the matter is certainly a lot more valid than mine. Heck, I haven't even had the opportunity to drive a 6'er.

Just to clarify - all new 5s have Active Steering. Only Sport Package 6ers have it. All non-sport-package 6ers have regular ol' steering.

[JST]

Frankly, until you actually go spend some quality time behind it your opinion on this matter is about as valid as Al Gore's claim that he invented internet. :roll:

Actually, I believe that there was more validity to Gore's internet creation statement than many of TD's pronouncements regarding certain automtoive technologies such as SMG. TD's statements that he has no interest in driving one is certainly valid. However, when he states that he knows that he would hate driving a car with a CVT is wrong. He may believe it to be true, but he can not know it to be true without having driven one.

Does anyone really know what time it is?

Does anyone really care?


FWIW, I don't "hate" driving SMG cars; on the track, they're kind of nice. I imagine that they would kick ass on some of the tighter autox courses we get around here.

But I find them kind of boring. Unless lap times are your key concern, I don't see why you would pay extra for one. And, having driven one, I don't think one needs to drive one to form an opinion on them. There's nothing transcendental about the experience--it is exactly as I predicted it would be. It's like driving a Steptronic that shifts really fast.

I am reserving judgment on active steering until I drive the car, but my problems with the 545 and 645 are so legion that my ultimate conclusion on active steering (with respect to those cars) is academic. I won't buy either one, so it doesn't really matter whether I like or hate active steering.

[lemming]

ps. active steering is just not my cup of tea.


What? You just said that you liked the one with active steering (E60) and were not thrilled by the one without (6er sans sport package).

i only got one onramp and one offramp for both (one has to go to the right BMW dealership for test drives b/c the one in the city is a more difficult proposition for this).

one little highway burst. i'm sure for 99% of the populace who drive these things that it's a performance advantage (overActive steering), but it doesn't compare to the e39 530 steering (loaner) in terms of roadfeel and linearity.

i wasn't fixated on the steering feel at all in the 645Ci. i was too busy trying not to hit anything in it (barge) and figure out why something that weighs 3780 pounds is deemed "athletic" by anyone.

the new 5er obviously, when compared to demo-ing an automatic 645ci (basically same chassis) was more fun. i can see how it's a dynamic upgrade on the e39 5 series, but most of that was lost on me. i liked the drivetrain. a little too floaty boaty, too heavy, and not quick enough off the line for me, though. that would translate over to the 6er, too, except i hate automatics.

[Roadstergal]

too heavy, and not quick enough off the line for me, though.

The E60 is lighter and has the same output as the E39. :?


why something that weighs 3780 pounds is deemed "athletic" by anyone.

The E46 M3 cab is 3800lbs. :paranoid:

[TD]

Hack, you have put quite a few words in my mouth here. I have never uwsed the word "hate" with respect to SMG and you have totally convoluted the context of my reference to Shafer. We may disagree on some topics (SMG being one) but that doesn't excuse your blatant misrepresenation of my opinions on the subject.

I have said I have no interest in SMG. I have said that to most buyers, SMG is just a technologially advanced Steptronic (that is the point on which Jon Shafer has concurred). Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't "hate" anything.

[lemming]

too heavy, and not quick enough off the line for me, though.

The E60 is lighter and has the same output as the E39. :?


why something that weighs 3780 pounds is deemed "athletic" by anyone.

The E46 M3 cab is 3800lbs. :paranoid:

have i ever said that the 5 series is appealing enough to buy? never.

i just don't understand that class of car at all. canines and people have plenty of space in the F-XT.

further, i've never been a fan of the m3 cabrios because they invariably weigh more, accelerate less, and no matter what they say, lack some torsional rigidity.

[Roadstergal]

i just don't understand that class of car at all.

I've never owned one, but my friend and now my brother have an E34, and the appeal is a car that fits five adults and a lot of crap in the trunk, while still handling decently, getting decent mileage and looking swank. I think the E60 follows in that tradition.

[lemming]

i just don't understand that class of car at all.

I've never owned one, but my friend and now my brother have an E34, and the appeal is a car that fits five adults and a lot of crap in the trunk, while still handling decently, getting decent mileage and looking swank. I think the E60 follows in that tradition.

in general, people who drive subarus have zero interest in looking swank.

:D

blowing the doors off of cars that do look swank could be considered a favorite hobby, though.

:lol:

[Roadstergal]

The Forester turbo is a special case. A very special case. ;)

M'self, I really am happy with the E30 and the Miata. I don't see myself changing any time soon, despite the fun I have on drives and my liking of cars.

[The HACK]

Hack, you have put quite a few words in my mouth here.

I learn from the best. :D

I have never uwsed the word "hate" with respect to SMG and you have totally convoluted the context of my reference to Shafer. We may disagree on some topics (SMG being one) but that doesn't excuse your blatant misrepresenation of my opinions on the subject.

I have said I have no interest in SMG. I have said that to most buyers, SMG is just a technologially advanced Steptronic (that is the point on which Jon Shafer has concurred). Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't "hate" anything.

Fair enough, obviously I perceived your posts on SMG much differently than what your intentions were.