Maybe we can reach some sort of consensus on a topic that has been bugging me for a couple weeks. Namely, why does BWM get a pass when it comes to talking about underpowered luxury sedans?

We all know that the RL is probably underpowered for the market segment in which it competes. Fine, I accept that. But then why does no one bash the 525 (MSRP ~40K) for having a piddly 184 hp I6? Even the 530, which stickers for almost $45K,
"only" makes 225. The 3 series is not that far off the market baseline, though the 325xi is a dog.

Is RWD, snob appeal and a purty roundel enough to give BWM immunity? You certainly can't make the case that the interior makes up for the shortfalls in power, not in the price ranges we are talking about. Is it only a matter of time before either 1) BWM starts cranking up the power across the board, or 2) BWM begins losing significant market share.

Enlighten me.

 

The big point your missing here is that there is a 540 with a V8 available. The RL does'nt have a V8 available. That makes all the difference in the world IMO. At least BMW is offering an option to the underpowered 525.

 

I am not missing that fact, but that "alternative" is 15K more than the 525. That is 38% more, which I believe would be a significant factor for most consumers. Just because the models both start with "5" doesn't mean that they are comparable.

 

I think BMW gets a pass because HP isn't really that meaningful a statistic. The real important issue is performance. BMW vehicles tend to outperform Acrua's that have similar levels of HP because 1) they get the power to the ground more efficiently, 2) BMW engines tend to be underrated, 3) BMW engines have very useable torque curves.

 

But BMW is not forcing 1 engine on you like Acura is doing with the TSX, RL, TL and MDX. If you don't want the underpowered 525, then get the 530. If you don't want the 530 get the 540. There are choices.

 

...seems to me, after reading all the c**p pedaled by bimmer freaks on various similar forums, that the perceived prestige of driving something with the "purty roundel" is the most paramount part of BMW ownership, this dovetails with the, more than perceived, snob appeal that is displayed by said drivers. RWD is just something they use to attack anything that is FWD, as RWD is considered by some to provide the ultimate in sporty handling characteristics. If you go the the TOV site and watch the video of the TSX test drive, FWD certainly doesn't seem to be hindering the TSX in the slightest degree. Last night I was browsing through a book store while waiting for my daughter to finish her ballet class and found myself in the automotive section, several publications on used cars indicate that owners of BMW's had better have lots of discretionary income to put toward the maintenance of their cars, as well as for the purchase of them, as they are going to require it on a regular basis - they said it, not me!!
...it was also put forth that they, along with MB, have a real difficult time designing user friendly interiors. It evidently takes some serious time reading through the manual before a person can easily figure out what everything does and is used for.
When you get in a Honda product, it was said to be like putting an old glove on, everything just fit the way it was supposed to, they wondered why the other car makers couldn't get it right.
...the current 3 series exterior is certainly a very nicely done work of automotive styling, and it is a nice driver, but according to the reviews I read, it isn't without a few warts and thorns, but when you are more concerned about the prestige of driving a car with the whirling propeller on it, I presume reliability and user friendliness most certainly take a distant second place.

Lorne Miller

 

I've found any of the cars that come with the 2.5L I6 in the BMW line to be very driveable (in fact fun) as long as they have a manual tranny.

AT is a different story, but they still do OK.

What I really want to know is why the extra .5L for the 3.0 costs at least $5000 more...

 

The only thing that comes to mind after reading your post Lorne, "Different Strokes for different folks" Some people (See Gilboman) put greater value on RWD + 6 cylinders than others (See majority of TSX owners). Others value relaibility and value more than performance and name.

 

You could argue the 525 is underpowered. And some people do. But like domn said you have options, and you can have as much power as you want. People dont think of only the 525, they look at the "5 series" and think of the 540.

Plus, somehow BMW manages to make their cars go fast with less horsepower. Either their drivetrains are extremely efficient or the hp is underrated. Put it this way..the 525 with it "piddly hp" get to 60mph about as fast as the (lighter?) TSX with its 200 hp.

That being said those bmw engines are mostly a few years old. I'd look for increases in BMW engines across the board soon.

 

I agree with you completely, but that fact remains it is the one that is pointed out as Honda/Acura's shortcoming. 90% of the people who engage in these discussions have not driven the cars in question, so they fall back on HP/TQ numbers. Not an accurate measure of how a car drives or feels, but it is what it is. What confounds me is that no one ever points out the shortfalls in BWM's lineup.

I am not disputing the quality of the German machines, just wondering how far people will go to justify what amounts to snobbery.

 

That has to do mostly with the more aggressive gearing in the BWMs, which is also the reason that their MPG typically sucks.

 

I'll try at some point tonight or this weekend to scan in a section from the new Road & Track mag that talks about BMW's new technology. Something about a new engine technology thats a innovative breakthrough in the industry. Unlike any other engine before, and should make its debut in the new 3 series.

 

I think your going about trying to prove your point the wrong way. In my opinion the BMW lineup does'nt have any shortcomings. It is a very well rounded lineup with several choices which means it will cater to many people. The only potential shortcoming I can see, is cost. Not everyone can afford a BMW.

The point I think your trying to make is this. Why buy a BMW when they are better values at Acura or Lexus for example. I can't see why someone would choose a 525 over a new TL either and thats where I think the "snob" appeal comes into play. But don't fault BMW for offering underpowered cars that sell.

Another interesting tidbit is this. Next year we'll see the new 1 series. Apparently the cars will be powered by a 2.0 110 HP and 140HP I-4's. Why someone would buy those over a TSX which will probly cost the same will probly be inexpicable to me. Unless they want to play that RWD card again.

A 1992 Integra had 160HP from 1.8L's for crying out loud. What happened to BMW innovation with these new 2 Litres?

 

Glad to see that Acura is not the only luxury marque that can drag down a brand image

 

And how much torque were they getting from this engine? 115 lb-ft, maybe 125? What was the low-end torque like?

A 160 hp engine won't feel any different than a 120 hp engine in typical driving unless it has more torque or shorter gearing. In fact the engine with the lower hp will actually feel more responsive if it has more torque (other things being equal).

 

Did'nt read anything about tourque. I'm sure it will be a responsive engine though as most BMW's are. But 140HP just does'nt cut it anymore.

First fugly styling and now cheap cars that alot of people can buy. If it is'nt bad enough that I see a BMW on every street corner up here now. I'll see 3 on every corner when these things come out.

 

Well, I guess we 1st need to define "underpowered". Not everyone that buys a car is thinking about how fast it goes or how is holds a corner. Some people buy cars because of the performance, some buy them because they just like the way they look, some need a combination of both.
I like the look of the TSX and I like the look of the 3-Series. I had to make a choice and I chose the 3 series for the following reasons...

1. It was quick enough for me and very fun to drive.
2. I wanted an all-wheel-drive option because I live in MN.
3. I liked the fact that it had an I6 vs. the 4 despite the hp numbers. performance times are very comparable.
4. I got the exact car I wanted at the exact price I was willing to pay. 03 closeout pricing put this car in the range I was willing to spend.

There are 2 positives here. The positive thing about the TSX is that you get a lot for the money, there are not really any options (Navi) you just get the entire package. That is a good thing.
With BMW, you get options, you don't have to pay for things you don't care about and you can build your car to your exact needs and desires. Sure you have to pay more for more hp, but that is a choice. You don't have to pay for it if you don't want it. They are both catering to customer satisfaction in different ways.

The 5 series comes in 525, 530, 540 and M5. You pick what you need. I bet everyone here would love it if the TSX came in the standard 4 and an all-wheel-drive or "S" version with a 240hp V6 option. Sure you would have to pay "extra", but at least it would be an option for those who were interested. But then we run into the same problem, if there is a TSX with 240hp, does that make the 4cyl "underpowered"?

 

I hate to agree with Buff-Daddy, but he makes a good point here. Who would'nt want to see a 240HP TSX? I would have coughed up the extra few K in a second.

 

The 2.5 in the BMW325 doesn't feel a whole lot faster than the 2.4 four in the TSX. But, I agree with you about the $5000 issue.

Personally, I think ALL BMWs sold in America offer good enough performance. But, what really makes those cars worth the money (and if you overlook reliability, I think they are worth the money) is the incredible ride-handling compromise. The 325 has a nearly ideal ride (not too soft, and not too stiff) and also flat, neutral handling.

 

I'll try to keep this short. I love my car (SSM TSX 5AT) and I also love BMWs. They don't need to be mutually exclusive preferences.

Bottom line(s):

BMWs cost more because the've got a combination of prestige (a hard attribute to quantify), quality, innovation, style and handling. BMW simply make a great car and markets it in a very effective way.

Acura does most of the above just as well and other things better. As a brand, it's generally weaker on prestige and handling attributes (as would they would likely be defined by an experienced performance oriented driver). What Acura is better at is reliability, rationale design (with minor exceptions) and price/options.

In the end, bhp numbers and other stats are too superficial to understand to competitive cars. If, in the opinion of some, BMW gets more than its fair share of attention, I'd suggest that is so because of the recognized prestige of the marque, perceived and very arguable balance between leading edge handling and comfort, and a recognized history of design and innovation in the sport sedan niche (all the way back to the 2002 in the mid 1970s).

To say a BMW 325i is a better package than a TSX is a defendable but debatable statement. In the end both are great cars. The BMW will always win on prestige and sporty handling and the Acura on reliability and user-friendlyness.

My only comment on that is that, at the end of the analysis and performance stats aside, the BMWs strengths may not out-number those of the TSX, but they are "sexier"...

 

Well said, Spud. A fair and balanced analysis. I agree with everyone of your points.

 

Great post, Spud.

Junkster, who appreciates a good BMW now and then.

 

I think it has something to do with the fact that they're "German ponies".

 

BMW HP numbers are ALWAYS, ALWAYS underrated (on purpose).

 

And I'm sure a few companies have the 2.0L from the S2000 sitting in their engineering depts.

EDIT: WTF, I quoted Bob's post and now its gone

 

It's not the .5L!

It's the crankshaft that's forged in the 3.0 (and the 2.8 that came before it). The 2.5's crankshaft is just a casting.

The 3.0 BMW I6 is a lovely motor! I'm sure Honda must have examples of it in pieces in their engineering department that are reverently caressed by their engineers!

Why the a 325i costs $8000 more than a comparably equipped TSX is a more probing question.

 

OOPS! Yeah, my sentence turned out to be too dyslexic, I deleted it and corrected it. SORRY!

 

It's not just that, either. I'm pretty sure that some of the optional equipment on the 525 becomes standard on the 530.

 

Well, that's a definite ... maybe! (The option list looks suspiciously similar for both the 525i and the 530i.)

BMW is asking $44,995 for the '04 530i and they STILL expect you to pay EXTRA for the Xenon headlights, the seat heaters, a folding rear seat ($430), the leather upholstery and the good wheels, tires and suspension pieces!

LOL!

 

Some Honda engines tend to be underrated too...

 

I want to be careful not to be overly general or engaging in specific stereotyping, but in various countries, for example, the BMW is a actually prestigous make. I have casually noticed over the years, that some people from overseas--such as from Asia, for example--who have come over here to work and live still perceive that BMW is a prestigous make and carry those perceptions over here (to the US), where their wages are much better and the customs tariffs are lower, and thus their desired make of BMW or Mercedes is relatively affordable compared to where they came from. (In some of their homelands, imported cars like BMWs are extremely expensive, exotic, and subject to incredible tariffs.)

It's so ingrained in some people's thoughts that it's impossible for ~anyone~ to not desire a BMW (or maybe a Mercedes).

One acquaintance of mine is so obsessed with "perceptions before others" that he refused a ride with me in my pickup truck when we went to lunch one day. He insisted on taking his BMW. He feared "losing face" in case someone saw him in something not prestigous. It did not matter if he "lost face" before someone he knew, or other people driving BMWs, or total strangers. He didn't want to lose face before anyone.

I don't know what to call it exactly--such as if it's cultural paranoia, ethnic paranoia, or even racial paranoia--but it's very true and real amongst subsets of certain groups of people. To define yourself by the facade of materialism is extremely beholden to some people.

IMHO, this reminds me of the emporer having no clothes.

Money does not buy "class".

 

Apologies if anyone's already said this but IMO the reason nobody dogs BMW for their low power motors, is because they have lots of high power motors if that's what you want. European cars have always come in a range of trims and engine sizes - US and Japanese cars never seem to have such a comprehensive approach.

Nobody complains about a 525 being underpowered (which it is, although the same motor in the 325 is sweet) because they know they could have bought an M5 with 400hp. They chose not to for a variety of reasons (perhaps financial - but you can buy a used 00 M5 for about the cost of a loaded 03 525).

The TSX comes in a single trim and motor. The lack of choice leads people to having to make a decision that is more compromised and so they complain. As would I. I'd love to be able to get a 240hp TSX, I think it would absolutely kick ass.

C. <-- owns a 315hp BMW, could have got one with less power (riiiight).

 

Yeah, in China the tariff is about 100% on foreign cars, so you'd dish out $70-80K for a 3 series. It's great to live in America. But then again, the Chinese food here sucks.

BMW and MB have been around a lot longer than Acura and others, so in families the old would pass on the habbits to the young. But if MB keeps screwing up, things and prestige factor will eventually change. No one will be powerful forever. Not the Romans, not the dinasaurs.

 

It's all in the gearing. So BMW sacrifice a little economy for a little more performance.

 

That is a real good question and it applies across their entire line. They will price themselves completely out of the market if they're not careful. $50K for a 530i? Someone is smoking some serious sh*t at BMW HQ...and if you're going to fleece consumers, for god's sake, at least make the cars good looking! :angry:

 

I don't think so. Look what VW offers in one model:

100hp 1.9L TDI
115hp 2.0L
180hp 1.8T (formerly 150 hp 2001 and earlier)
204hp V6 (formerly 174 hp 2001 and earlier)

Economics steer folks in the direction of the TDI and 2.0, but the 1.8T and V6 both have their fans. All of the cars are very driveable.

4's and 6's tend to have different character. I love 4 cylinder engines as long as the car isn't too heavy and you have an MT. (The TSX is almost too heavy for a 4, and I think the A4 certainly is.) You get to stir the gear box more, I like the "purr" more than the "growl" you get with bigger motors, you save gas, and the car isn't nose-heavy.

 

Dunno. The 325i 5-speed turns almost the same RPM as the TSX on the highway (maybe a hair less, like 2950 @ 70 mph) and plus it doesn't have the close ratios afforded with the extra gear in the 6-speed. It's also heavier, all of which would seem to negate the gearing argument.

 

All I can say is drive one. You'll understand.

 

BMW 325I Acura TSX

1st 3.67 2.652
2nd 2.0 1.517
3rd 1.41 1.082
4th 1.0 .773
5th .74 .0566


Tell that the gearing has nothing to do with it.

 

FYI those are the auto tsx gear ratios.... also you hav to figure in the "final drive" gear. Effective gearing is tranny gear ration times final drive.

My question is has anyone seen any 5-60 rolling start acceleration tests for a 325? That would discount rwds advantage on the launch and I would guess the two would be near identical.