You'll have to indulge me and quote the bit that supports your OP. I reread and can't find it.

 

In response to Pennetta's earlier inquiry, I do own a BMW 545i and would never buy either a GM or Chrysler vehicle.

As for the article, old news with very small sample -- Pennetta should read Driven. Further, we should add Pennetta to the small sample of examples produced by this Wall Street Journal reporter in the article of disgruntled BMW owners (at least it was not the NYT, which has no further credibility in my book after the scandals and poor election reporting).

Further, the WSJ reporter has exceptionally poor analytical skills -- sure, he points to a 6% decline in auto (excluding SUV) sales in 2004 and a 3% decline in 5 series 2004 sales, although overall BMW increased 6% in 2004 sales. He fails to compare these sales results to any other European competitors so that the reader can get some perspective of how BMW is really doing in the overall market (e.g., according to FDMeloan in this forum, MB only increased sales 1.9% in 2004, at least 3 times lower than BMW's 6.9%).

More importantly, the WSJ reporter points out a specific example of a G35 buyer who gloats over the $7K lower price of his G35 versus the comparable 3 series -- this increased price due to extremely unfavorable $ vs. Euro exchange rates is exactly the primary reason that BMW has not increased sales even further in 2004. The 3% decline in 5 series sales can be explained solely by the elasticity of demand in view of the increased pricing relative to the 2003 models, which reflects the unfavorable $ to Euro exchange rates.

Of course, none of this appears to matter to Pennetta as he seeks only "vindication" (apparently from any spurious source that he can find) that BMW should increase the HP of each of its models -- good thing he is not running BMW....

 

My point was that the competition is encroaching where BMW was the lone star. I was mostly concerned with the apparent HP race from specifically MB, as I think a hard core BMW person, like most of us here in this forum, might look at a Lexus but never actually get one in place of a BMW. I do feel however that many more would migrate to MB if it became more BMWish than BMW.
I read in article in Autoweek that stated in March '05 the E350 will be making 272 HP and 268 ft/lbs and that a sports package will be offered that will not only be cosmetic as in the past but would include quicker steering, firmer dampers, firmer springs, bigger brakes etc. Sounds like BMW's sports package now.
Its cold, wet and the roads have sand on them from the last snow storm up here in NY and its depressing for us sports sedan fans. I love this forum, many helpful and intelligent people here, I was just making conversation. I'm sure BMW will continue to do the right thing for the strong survival of the brand.

 

pennetta,

It would seem that BMW haven't been sleeping at all when you look at the outputs of the forthcoming new 6 cylinder engines (UK figures): -

525i - 215bhp, 184lbf.ft, 7.5 secs, 152mph, 32.5mpg
530i - 258bhp, 221lbf.ft, 6.5 secs, 155mph (limited), 32.1mpg

Compare the above to the current model: -

525i - 192 bhp, 7.9 secs, 148mph, 30.1mpg
530i - 231bhp, 6.9 secs, 155mph (limited), 29.7mpg

The acceleration times take the 530i to within 0.6 seconds of the 545i so it is little wonder that this variant is being replaced by the 550i.

At the end of the day bare horse power figures don't tell the full story. Torque is the factor you need to look at as this is where strong acceleration comes from - just ask any of us who drive the diesel models in Europe which will outrun the petrol equivalents in mid range acceleration (50 - 70 mph)

 

I absolutely agree, the above is a quote from me from another thread currently running. However BMW needs to keep up in the torque department as well.

 

If I lived in London, I would not be able to afford a 545 either. $120 per tank of petrol? Once more, it was not my intention to knock your rationale for buying a 530i. Faced with my choices in Los Angeles, the 545i was the car for me. I was speaking of the brand image and how many people (not those on this board, perish the thought) in tinsel town, where I live buy the brand with little or no appreciation for the machinery.

 

"$120 per tank of petrol? "
OH MY GOD! And I thought $30/tank was a lot!

 

Tank capacity=70 Liters
Approx Price in London =82p
Cost of Tank = ?58 or USD108.

So I was off a little but we still have it really good here.

 

Compared to other parts of the world are gas prices are rather cheap, but last year at this time we were paying at least $.20 less for premium.

 

Premium prices in California peaked out somewhere in the $2.80/gal range last year, which is still considerably less than the price in Europe. That being said, the oil embargo in the 1970s ended the then ongoing horsepower wars of the 1960s (anybody remember the Ford Pinto engine being used in the Mustang II??).

History may repeat itself (with respect not only to higher horsepower engines, but also SUVs) now if gasoline prices rise above $3.00/gal for regular unleaded in the continental US for any sustained period of time. With just the short rise in mid-2004, SUV sales suffered badly.

I do not believe that the existing hp race will last very much longer -- if gov't does not get involved to regulate hp (as gov'ts have done in most of Asia with displacement taxes to extract agreements not to exceed certain hp from the manufacturers), then insurance premiums will increase disproportionately for high hp cars making the cost of ownership unreasonably high and unacceptable (even for those glorified auto renters who lease). Thus, BMW and other manufacturers will have to consider innovations other than increased hp to improve the driving experience and performance of its vehicles.