Yeah, but the 5-Series cars are about way more
11-28-2005, 06:53 AM
#21
Contributors
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 6,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2014 X5 xDrive 5.0 M Package Carbon Black Metallic/2008 M Roadster Imola Red
Originally Posted by rodybmw' post='204177' date='Nov 28 2005, 07:33 AM
Hi Rody:
You make some excellent points below.
Interesting subject vnod,
Here's my opinion. I think that you are giving too much weight to what you call "facts" or "figures" to support the superiority of one car over the other, while to most people (including me) the most important "fact" is the "FEEL" that we get while driving. Unfortunately the "feel" is not something that can be measured in numbers or units, but it is not any less important than the "facts and figures",..........if anything it is way MORE important. We had both MB's and BMW's in my family since I was 4 years old and I have been exposed to and driven both for decades. BMW's have always had the "feel" while MB's have not. The interesting thing is that as far as MB's have come in the past decade or so towards "sporty" cars (mainly VIA AMG), there is one thing that is still missing.......the "feel". Even the AMG models that are quicker than some standard (non-M) BMW's don't "feel" as sporty as those BMW's. It is sort of like the old American muscle cars that could go very fast in a straight line but were no fun otherwise
(no.....of coarse I am not really comparing an AMG to old muscle cars that had poor handling, I'm just exaggerating to make a point 
). When driving a BMW I always "feel" connected to the car and the road and therefore, it "feels" faster and quicker than many other cars, regardless of whether it actually is faster or not when comparing the "figures". To this day no MB (and for that matter no other sedan) that I have driven gives the same feel and confidence when driving. Heck, my wife's X5 feels more sporty and more connected to the road than an E class with sport suspension.
I can't argue with a thing you say above. I don't want to ignore feel in what I am trying to do. The problem is there is not much data available on feel. I am emphazing the use of data simply to demonstrate that MB's and other cars are not necessarily the lousy handlers that those making the "yeah, but" "argument" without comparative experience or viewing the available data appear to imply.
The times when I have really felt the difference between BMW's and "the competition" is when I have driven them back to back in an aggressive manner. The last time was when I drove the E90 330i, the Audi A4 3.2, and the Infiniti G35 back to back in the Ultimate Driving Experience. Even though the Infiniti had the horsepower edge by a good margin it still did not "feel" fast (even in srtaight line acceleration), certainly not as fast as the E90 felt. Driving the three cars fast in the curves and turns of the coarse really showed the difference between how fun a BMW feels to drive compared to the others.
You have the kind of comparative experience that makes your opinon on feel and preference for BMW's valuable.
The point that I am trying to make is that I (and I believe most others) could care less if a car is a fraction of a second, or even a whole second slower to 60 when comparing the "figures" as long as it feels more connected and fun to drive. In many cases cars that may be somewhat slower may still "feel" faster and more fun to drive, and that's more important to me. A good example of this was the comparison between the Audi A4 and Infiniti G35 in the UDE. Without a question the Infiniti was the faster car of the two, but the Audi "felt" a lot better and was more fun to drive.
You may be right on the majorty's preference. And, your preferences and opinions have a solid grounding in experience.
So you were looking for facts and figures to "back up claims" and I am not giving any of that to you. What I am submitting is the "fact" that to most people a fraction of a second difference in acceleration is a big NON-issue, it's other things that will come into play in makeing the decision on which car to get (ie. feel, fun to drive, confidence, design, exclusivity, luxury, etc.). I am not trying to prove to others that "my car is faster than theirs", so I don't care whether the M5 (or any other BMW) is a fraction of a second slower to 60 (or in track times) than the competition. What I care about is the "feel" and the "joy of driving"...........Hmmm that sound an awful lot like the BMW tag line in Germany: "Freude Am Fahren".
Great points. You should become BMW's marketing manager.
I think that data can influence opinions and preferences--although there is no reason that they should be the sole determinants. As you indicate and as has been discussed above and earlier, experience is very important too. Unfortunately, not that much comparative experiential data are out there. But, in the context of what I am trying to get at, one could add what various credible test drivers say about the how the cars feel, etc., to the comparative test data I "requested." I should have thought of asking for this sort of information in the first place. I have stated my preferences on roughly comparable cars above. So, I won't mention them again now.
Thank you very much for your excellent experience-based contributions on the issue.
You make some excellent points below.
Interesting subject vnod,
Here's my opinion. I think that you are giving too much weight to what you call "facts" or "figures" to support the superiority of one car over the other, while to most people (including me) the most important "fact" is the "FEEL" that we get while driving. Unfortunately the "feel" is not something that can be measured in numbers or units, but it is not any less important than the "facts and figures",..........if anything it is way MORE important. We had both MB's and BMW's in my family since I was 4 years old and I have been exposed to and driven both for decades. BMW's have always had the "feel" while MB's have not. The interesting thing is that as far as MB's have come in the past decade or so towards "sporty" cars (mainly VIA AMG), there is one thing that is still missing.......the "feel". Even the AMG models that are quicker than some standard (non-M) BMW's don't "feel" as sporty as those BMW's. It is sort of like the old American muscle cars that could go very fast in a straight line but were no fun otherwise
(no.....of coarse I am not really comparing an AMG to old muscle cars that had poor handling, I'm just exaggerating to make a point ). When driving a BMW I always "feel" connected to the car and the road and therefore, it "feels" faster and quicker than many other cars, regardless of whether it actually is faster or not when comparing the "figures". To this day no MB (and for that matter no other sedan) that I have driven gives the same feel and confidence when driving. Heck, my wife's X5 feels more sporty and more connected to the road than an E class with sport suspension.I can't argue with a thing you say above. I don't want to ignore feel in what I am trying to do. The problem is there is not much data available on feel. I am emphazing the use of data simply to demonstrate that MB's and other cars are not necessarily the lousy handlers that those making the "yeah, but" "argument" without comparative experience or viewing the available data appear to imply.
The times when I have really felt the difference between BMW's and "the competition" is when I have driven them back to back in an aggressive manner. The last time was when I drove the E90 330i, the Audi A4 3.2, and the Infiniti G35 back to back in the Ultimate Driving Experience. Even though the Infiniti had the horsepower edge by a good margin it still did not "feel" fast (even in srtaight line acceleration), certainly not as fast as the E90 felt. Driving the three cars fast in the curves and turns of the coarse really showed the difference between how fun a BMW feels to drive compared to the others.
You have the kind of comparative experience that makes your opinon on feel and preference for BMW's valuable.
The point that I am trying to make is that I (and I believe most others) could care less if a car is a fraction of a second, or even a whole second slower to 60 when comparing the "figures" as long as it feels more connected and fun to drive. In many cases cars that may be somewhat slower may still "feel" faster and more fun to drive, and that's more important to me. A good example of this was the comparison between the Audi A4 and Infiniti G35 in the UDE. Without a question the Infiniti was the faster car of the two, but the Audi "felt" a lot better and was more fun to drive.
You may be right on the majorty's preference. And, your preferences and opinions have a solid grounding in experience.
So you were looking for facts and figures to "back up claims" and I am not giving any of that to you. What I am submitting is the "fact" that to most people a fraction of a second difference in acceleration is a big NON-issue, it's other things that will come into play in makeing the decision on which car to get (ie. feel, fun to drive, confidence, design, exclusivity, luxury, etc.). I am not trying to prove to others that "my car is faster than theirs", so I don't care whether the M5 (or any other BMW) is a fraction of a second slower to 60 (or in track times) than the competition. What I care about is the "feel" and the "joy of driving"...........Hmmm that sound an awful lot like the BMW tag line in Germany: "Freude Am Fahren".
Great points. You should become BMW's marketing manager.
I think that data can influence opinions and preferences--although there is no reason that they should be the sole determinants. As you indicate and as has been discussed above and earlier, experience is very important too. Unfortunately, not that much comparative experiential data are out there. But, in the context of what I am trying to get at, one could add what various credible test drivers say about the how the cars feel, etc., to the comparative test data I "requested." I should have thought of asking for this sort of information in the first place. I have stated my preferences on roughly comparable cars above. So, I won't mention them again now.Thank you very much for your excellent experience-based contributions on the issue.
11-28-2005, 09:34 AM
#22
Contributors
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2005 BMW 545i, Silver Grey, Sport Package, R. Shades, Cold Pkg, Sat. Rad., Prem. Sound.
Originally Posted by vnod' post='204231' date='Nov 28 2005, 09:16 AM
People's preferences are what they are--as you say. However, preferences, like opinions, can change given data and experience. So, as indicated above:
"What I am interested in thinking about at this point is anything that comes to your mind when reading the following. But, I am also interested in comparisons of acceleration and handling times for cars that are major competitors with any roughly comparable 5-series cars you are interested in. To some extent, I have dealt with the M5 and some roughly comparable Mercs below. I encourage you to toss any biases out the window and have a sprited discussion based on the best "facts" that can be found."
Again, thank you for your thoughts. Everything that you have said has helped me to refine my thoughts more.
"What I am interested in thinking about at this point is anything that comes to your mind when reading the following. But, I am also interested in comparisons of acceleration and handling times for cars that are major competitors with any roughly comparable 5-series cars you are interested in. To some extent, I have dealt with the M5 and some roughly comparable Mercs below. I encourage you to toss any biases out the window and have a sprited discussion based on the best "facts" that can be found."
Again, thank you for your thoughts. Everything that you have said has helped me to refine my thoughts more.
1. Straight line acceleration - On paper, we can calculate as to which car E55 or M5 is more powerful and likely faster from 0-60. Given that all conditions, car, driver, road, and climate are constant, which we have to accept a minimal deviation because the conditions change from minutes to minutes, we also have to allow a minimal deviation from the test results. Hence, on paper, we can eliminate those conditions, or variables.
2. Handle - On paper, that's limited. We can factor in weight distribution, shocks, suspension, transmission, etc. all parts or dynamic that will affect handling. But if you test in the real world, we have variables that, again, cannot be eliminated.
We can farther theorize that if we have to identical drivers, road, and climate (same time test) and the only variable is the car itself, we can clearly conclude which is the better handle and performance in a test.
OK, back to reality. So in reality, we have to accept a minimal deviation. Frankly, a split second is simply too technical for the average car buyer. And, because professional drivers can be bias in their driving (they feel and are humans too), people go with their preference or opinions and read the mag for "entertainment." That's why we test drive cars before we buy them.
Hence, to setup a test were the only variable is the cars i(n an attempt prove to the public that one handles better than the other by a split second) is not practical and cost effective - because you can't get identical drivers. We can try on paper, but I haven't found it anywhere yet.
The simple fact is car mags are not scientific enough to convince people or scientists because the test data can still be scrutinize (more than one variable in comparison testing).So, instead of spend their free time pondering about test data (which I love to do, but maybe I'm different
), most people go test drive for themselves, compound by getting opinions from others (including car mags), and finally making the purchase. Summary:
1. "Facts" with this regards, are relative and scarce.
2. We are forced to use various data sets which creates too many variables. If it can be scrutinize, it losses credabitility.
3. It's harder for us to prove anything without credability.
4. We're back at square one.
5. People go with their instincts (feelings and experience compound), and have a preference and/or opinion about which car they think it better.
6. You can only prove or disprove responder's claim only if your data set has one variable (the cars) and no varying factors such as drivers, road, and climate conditions. It's not about how many test, or the average, it's about what are the variables in the comparison data set.
11-28-2005, 09:58 AM
#23
Contributors
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 6,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2014 X5 xDrive 5.0 M Package Carbon Black Metallic/2008 M Roadster Imola Red
People's preferences are what they are--as you say. However, preferences, like opinions, can change given data and experience. So, as indicated above:
"What I am interested in thinking about at this point is anything that comes to your mind when reading the following. But, I am also interested in comparisons of acceleration and handling times for cars that are major competitors with any roughly comparable 5-series cars you are interested in. To some extent, I have dealt with the M5 and some roughly comparable Mercs below. I encourage you to toss any biases out the window and have a sprited discussion based on the best "facts" that can be found."
Again, thank you for your thoughts. Everything that you have said has helped me to refine my thoughts more.
"What I am interested in thinking about at this point is anything that comes to your mind when reading the following. But, I am also interested in comparisons of acceleration and handling times for cars that are major competitors with any roughly comparable 5-series cars you are interested in. To some extent, I have dealt with the M5 and some roughly comparable Mercs below. I encourage you to toss any biases out the window and have a sprited discussion based on the best "facts" that can be found."
Again, thank you for your thoughts. Everything that you have said has helped me to refine my thoughts more.
I agee with all of what you say. But, you are reading too much into what I am up to. Remember, I am not really trying to prove much of anything. I am interested primarily in providing the best objective data we can about the competition to lessen the impact of the "uniformed" implying that the cars that are in classes of the various 5-Series autos are dogs in the handling department. To me, the "uninformed" are those who have no knowledge of test data, no knowledge of the opinions of credible drivers, and no comparative experiential evidence.
Originally, I asked for test data for comparable cars. The best data would be the data derived from comparison tests. But, given the frequent lack of such data, then the next best data would be test data for individual cars. Once we get to this level, well, yes, there will be much noncomparability to factor in.
I now have broadened my requested information to include the opinions and preferences of drivers who are judged to be credible. And, of course, I know that judgments about who is credible may vary greatly. But, in sum, if I was trying to decide if a car had decent handling ability, then the types of data/information mentioned above would, IMO, be much more desirable than what the "uninformed" have to offer.
I think it also is fair to offer personal experiences with comparable cars as Rody did. Personally, I would consider our members comparative experiences to be credible. But, I would probably put more store in what a highly credible driver said. For example, I have seen numerous tests where very experienced drivers have provided their opinions/preferences concerning the handling abilities of comparable cars. I hope we can add some data such as these to the discussion.
1. Straight line acceleration - On paper, we can calculate as to which car E55 or M5 is more powerful and likely faster from 0-60. Given that all conditions, car, driver, road, and climate are constant, which we have to accept a minimal deviation because the conditions change from minutes to minutes, we also have to allow a minimal deviation from the test results. Hence, on paper, we can eliminate those conditions, or variables.
That's a great idea. Yes, should make clear what the noncomparables are. And, we could even go so far as to try to make some crude adjustments to eliminate some of the noncomparables.
2. Handle - On paper, that's limited. We can factor in weight distribution, shocks, suspension, transmission, etc. all parts or dynamic that will affect handling. But if you test in the real world, we have variables that, again, cannot be eliminated.
We can farther theorize that if we have to identical drivers, road, and climate (same time test) and the only variable is the car itself, we can clearly conclude which is the better handle and performance in a test.
OK, back to reality. So in reality, we have to accept a minimal deviation. Frankly, a split second is simply too technical for the average car buyer. And, because professional drivers can be bias in their driving (they feel and are humans too), people go with their preference or opinions and read the mag for "entertainment." That's why we test drive cars before we buy them.
Hence, to setup a test were the only variable is the cars i(n an attempt prove to the public that one handles better than the other by a split second) is not practical and cost effective - because you can't get identical drivers. We can try on paper, but I haven't found it anywhere yet.
The simple fact is car mags are not scientific enough to convince people or scientists because the test data can still be scrutinize (more than one variable in comparison testing).So, instead of spend their free time pondering about test data (which I love to do, but maybe I'm different
), most people go test drive for themselves, compound by getting opinions from others (including car mags), and finally making the purchase. Summary:
1. "Facts" with this regards, are relative and scarce.
2. We are forced to use various data sets which creates too many variables. If it can be scrutinize, it losses credabitility.
3. It's harder for us to prove anything without credability.
4. We're back at square one.
5. People go with their instincts (feelings and experience compound), and have a preference and/or opinion about which car they think it better.
6. You can only prove or disprove responder's claim only if your data set has one variable (the cars) and no varying factors such as drivers, road, and climate conditions. It's not about how many test, or the average, it's about what are the variables in the comparison data set.
[/quote]
11-28-2005, 10:22 AM
#24
Contributors
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 6,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2014 X5 xDrive 5.0 M Package Carbon Black Metallic/2008 M Roadster Imola Red
People's preferences are what they are--as you say. However, preferences, like opinions, can change given data and experience. So, as indicated above:
"What I am interested in thinking about at this point is anything that comes to your mind when reading the following. But, I am also interested in comparisons of acceleration and handling times for cars that are major competitors with any roughly comparable 5-series cars you are interested in. To some extent, I have dealt with the M5 and some roughly comparable Mercs below. I encourage you to toss any biases out the window and have a sprited discussion based on the best "facts" that can be found."
Again, thank you for your thoughts. Everything that you have said has helped me to refine my thoughts more.
"What I am interested in thinking about at this point is anything that comes to your mind when reading the following. But, I am also interested in comparisons of acceleration and handling times for cars that are major competitors with any roughly comparable 5-series cars you are interested in. To some extent, I have dealt with the M5 and some roughly comparable Mercs below. I encourage you to toss any biases out the window and have a sprited discussion based on the best "facts" that can be found."
Again, thank you for your thoughts. Everything that you have said has helped me to refine my thoughts more.
I agee with all of what you say. But, you are reading too much into what I am up to. Remember, I am not really trying to prove much of anything. I am interested primarily in providing the best objective data we can about the competition to lessen the impact of the "uniformed" implying that the cars that are in classes of the various 5-Series autos are dogs in the handling department. To me, the "uninformed" are those who have no knowledge of test data, no knowledge of the opinions of credible drivers, and no comparative experiential evidence.
Originally, I asked for test data for comparable cars. The best data would be the data derived from comparison tests. But, given the frequent lack of such data, then the next best data would be test data for individual cars. Once we get to this level, well, yes, there will be much noncomparability to factor in.
I now have broadened my requested information to include the opinions and preferences of drivers who are judged to be credible. And, of course, I know that judgments about who is credible may vary greatly. But, in sum, if I was trying to decide if a car had decent handling ability, then the types of data/information mentioned above would, IMO, be much more desirable than what the "uninformed" have to offer.
I think it also is fair to offer personal experiences with comparable cars as Rody did. Personally, I would consider our members comparative experiences to be credible. But, I would probably put more store in what a highly credible driver said. For example, I have seen numerous tests where very experienced drivers have provided their opinions/preferences concerning the handling abilities of comparable cars. I hope we can add some data such as these to the discussion.
1. Straight line acceleration - On paper, we can calculate as to which car E55 or M5 is more powerful and likely faster from 0-60. Given that all conditions, car, driver, road, and climate are constant, which we have to accept a minimal deviation because the conditions change from minutes to minutes, we also have to allow a minimal deviation from the test results. Hence, on paper, we can eliminate those conditions, or variables.
That's a great idea. Yes, we should make clear what the noncomparables are. And, we could even go so far as to try to make some crude adjustments to eliminate some of the noncomparables.
2. Handle - On paper, that's limited. We can factor in weight distribution, shocks, suspension, transmission, etc. all parts or dynamic that will affect handling. But if you test in the real world, we have variables that, again, cannot be eliminated.
Agreed. We will have many uncontrolled noncomparables. But, I would still rather base my opinions and preferences on such data, the opinions of the credible, and my personal experiences with comparable cars than on what the "uninformed" have to offer.
We can farther theorize that if we have to identical drivers, road, and climate (same time test) and the only variable is the car itself, we can clearly conclude which is the better handle and performance in a test.
Right.
OK, back to reality. So in reality, we have to accept a minimal deviation. Frankly, a split second is simply too technical for the average car buyer. And, because professional drivers can be bias in their driving (they feel and are humans too), people go with their preference or opinions and read the mag for "entertainment." That's why we test drive cars before we buy them.
I thought we were in reality before--the ever-present state of reality--confusion and trying to deal with fuzzy data and uninformed opinions, etc.
Hence, to setup a test were the only variable is the cars i(n an attempt prove to the public that one handles better than the other by a split second) is not practical and cost effective - because you can't get identical drivers. We can try on paper, but I haven't found it anywhere yet.
The simple fact is car mags are not scientific enough to convince people or scientists because the test data can still be scrutinize (more than onevariable in comparison testing).No doubt. We can't get things down to the split second no matter what we do. But, remember, I am, among other things, only interested in showing that, generally speaking, the BMW competitiors are not dogs--handling-wise. Or, alternatively, its fine with me if what we end up showing is that they really are dogs and the "uninformed" either made lucky quesses or weren't uninformed after all. In this regard, I also am interested in providing the best information we can muster on the performance abilites of BMW's and their comparables to help us to develop more well-founded opinions and preferences.
So, instead of spend their free time pondering about test data (which I love to do, but maybe I'm different
), most people go test drive for themselves, compound by getting opinions from others (including car mags), and finally making the purchase.I already bought my car.
Now, its time for me, like you and some other geeks, to ponder some more. 
And, of course, by pondering and encouraging the gathering of data, we might be able to provide another source of information for those considering BMW's and their competition. I'm still working on the 545i and AMG C55 comparison--the only two cars I considered seriously when buying the "Mind Candy" 545i. I pondered that too publicly. You guys have been keeping me so busy I haven't been able to get to it. But, the discussions have been great fun. Summary: See above. I did not realize this guy
is a geek. He looks cooler than the supposedly cool guy: 
Maybe, I just like geeky ponderers.1. "Facts" with this regards, are relative and scarce.
2. We are forced to use various data sets which creates too many variables. If it can be scrutinize, it losses credabitility.
3. It's harder for us to prove anything without credability.
4. We're back at square one.
5. People go with their instincts (feelings and experience compound), and have a preference and/or opinion about which car they think it better.
6. You can only prove or disprove responder's claim only if your data set has one variable (the cars) and no varying factors such as drivers, road, and climate conditions. It's not about how many test, or the average, it's about what are the variables in the comparison data set.
[/quote]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
carid
Vendor Classifieds
0
03-27-2015 04:47 AM
carid
Vendor Classifieds
0
03-11-2015 04:40 AM
carid
Vendor Classifieds
0
03-06-2015 04:58 AM