What would you ask Satch?

[Dave]

When I got my cabby, it had the original sticker in it - it was something like $34k. A 1987 car - $34k. Ouch.

[rThor432]

I was looking through my old Roundels from the 80's yesturday and noticed a "Current Model" pricing chart. The 635csi was the most expensive-- $44k in '87. How does that compute to 2008 dollars, if someone knows the conversion?

Fred is right, they are giving a lot of bang-for-the-buck now compared to back then.

[Charlie]

I know you guys love E30s, as do I, but I realize that paying $40K for an E30 would be ludicrous.

Yes and no. Look at what the competition was for an E30 back then, especially in the US. Alfa? Hah. Cadillac's closest competitor at the time would have been the cimmaron, again, a f'n cavalier. Ford had Merkur, which really never went over. Lexus wasn't around yet. Acura was just starting to pop up, and even then it was cars like the first gen integra. Volvo? Please.

Your only real competition then was from Porsche & Benz, and both the 944 and 2.3s were more expensive.

It wasn't until the early nineties when Acura and Lexus started making inroads into BMW & MB's market share that their prices started to fall.

-Charlie

[Dave]

what about all of those fabulous fords???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWqlebeYWwc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4Ws_Bp7WYA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8FCpDP9J7A&feature=related

[FredK]

Hm. That Tempo actually cornered pretty flat through that corner. :razz:

Sure there wasn't really a comparable car back when the E30 was being produced; maybe the Nissan Sentra SE-R could hang with some suspension mods (1991 model, similar to the 318is except wrong wheel drive), but my point was, there was no real entry level (sub-30K in 2008 dollars) BMW back then either.

[StereoInstaller1]

D'you suppose we could keep this on a discussion of questions for Satch?

oh fuck that, this is R3V!

[nmlss2006]

turbos are not in BMW's tradition? I learn something new every day. I also learn something new when someone laments the relative positioning of the E9x vs. the E30 when it was new.
If anything, BMW (like more marques) has gone MORE down the road of 'its heritage' as a sports car marque - heritage which, BTW, is quite recent and fairly heavily retconned, if we want to be precise and historically accurate about it.
So IRT Stereoinstaller's very pertinent comment: don't ask Satch Carlson why BMW is abandoning its heritage. You may get an iX axle upside the head for your troubles.

[TDE30]

turbos are not in BMW's tradition? I learn something new every day. I also learn something new when someone laments the relative positioning of the E9x vs. the E30 when it was new.
If anything, BMW (like more marques) has gone MORE down the road of 'its heritage' as a sports car marque - heritage which, BTW, is quite recent and fairly heavily retconned, if we want to be precise and historically accurate about it.
So IRT Stereoinstaller's very pertinent comment: don't ask Satch Carlson why BMW is abandoning its heritage. You may get an iX axle upside the head for your troubles.

Ah, riiiiiight, they used turbocharged two other times prior to this and they were both in the top-of-the-range models (2002 Turbo and E23 745i, respectively.) :roll:

Fast forward a few decades and BMW offers turbocharged motors for every one of its model lines. Surely you noticed a pattern over the last 20+ years of naturally-aspirated motors, right? And, perhaps, you might have heard a negative comment or two from enthusiasts when the word "forced induction" entered BMW's lexicon? Maybe, and this is a very minute possibility, you heard a mild uproar about BMW talking very seriously about the F10 M5 using a twin-turbo V8? Well, that's exactly what I am talking about. Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of BMW having a turbocharged motor for one or two model lines (e.g. I am a huge fan of the N54,) but when they start to outnumber the naturally-aspirated powerplants (like they will eventually do,) I begin to worry.

I just don't see how the X3, the X6, the new 5-series GT fit into BMW's "heritage" (as you put it.)

[z31maniac]

Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of BMW having a turbocharged motor for one or two model lines (e.g. I am a huge fan of the N54,) but when they start to outnumber the naturally-aspirated powerplants (like they will eventually do,) I begin to worry.

The motor they are detuning with software because of reliability problems?

[TDE30]

The motor they are detuning with software because of reliability problems?

Sure, that one. I am referring to its smoothness and how economical that motor is. Not sure why they are detuning it, but for BMW's first FI attempt in over twenty years, it seemed like a relatively solid motor.

[Bimmerman325i]

Keep in mind that the N54 is hardly BMW's first FI attempt in twenty years--- remember their diesels. They know how to do turbos, they just don't count on americans driving as americans are wont to do....on race tracks. Rather foreign concept to the economically and emissions minded folks here. I mentioned to a coworker/boss that I a) have two cars and b) one is a race car in training(the E30). He flat out asked me why I needed either, as it burns more gas and produces more emissions. It's a different frame of mind really. There's also a huge, HUGE, push here to go to smaller and add turbos. I see it as a complete detachment from their heritage. Sure, they're very technologically advanced turbo motors, but....it just doesn't sit well with me. Plus...X5 and X6 M cars. They've lost their soul.

As for questions for Satch, I don't really have any, but I have to say reading his column on his love for the E30 and Red Rat (and E30 picnic) made me smile. I'm away from my car until November, and damn do I miss her. I've been considering buying an E36 M (idle mind being the devil's plaything and all), but reading his article reminded me why I love my E30 and don't want a newer car. So I guess just pass on my thoughts and praise!

[TDE30]

^ Excellent point about the turbodiesels, I completely neglected to remember those. I'm also in agreeance about the newer models having less soul than their predecessors.

[nmlss2006]

Ah, riiiiiight, they used turbocharged two other times prior to this and they were both in the top-of-the-range models (2002 Turbo and E23 745i, respectively.) :roll:

Which noone else was doing at the time, except for Porsche - and if you've ever driven a 930, Porsche needed.. a lot of fine tuning. So yes, heritage indeed and more experience than virtually anyone else.
And by the by, as someone else helpfully pointed out starting with the 524td, they also have made a line of turbodiesels which is still arguably the best on the market.

Fast forward a few decades and BMW offers turbocharged motors for every one of its model lines. Surely you noticed a pattern over the last 20+ years of naturally-aspirated motors, right? And, perhaps, you might have heard a negative comment or two from enthusiasts when the word "forced induction" entered BMW's lexicon? Maybe, and this is a very minute possibility, you heard a mild uproar about BMW talking very seriously about the F10 M5 using a twin-turbo V8? Well, that's exactly what I am talking about. Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of BMW having a turbocharged motor for one or two model lines (e.g. I am a huge fan of the N54,) but when they start to outnumber the naturally-aspirated powerplants (like they will eventually do,) I begin to worry.

I am going to be somewhat brutal here: I know those NA motors because, you see, I happen to own or have owned one of each S50B30 and S50B32 included, save for the new V10 which I refused to buy.
As an enthusiast, therefore, who can speak from first hand experience, I will say this: if the NA motors are going to be like the S85, I am very VERY much in favour of turbo engines in the Ms and in the regular cars. If 'enthusiasts' who don't actually BUY these cars choose to gripe - and I know a lot of these people - it is their choice, but I hope BMW will continue to ignore them.

I just don't see how the X3, the X6, the new 5-series GT fit into BMW's "heritage" (as you put it.)

An M3 was supposed to have four cylinders. Along came the E36 M3 and it redefined what a sportscar was supposed to be like. The E30 touring and the E34 touring didn't fit into the heritage. Yet now everyone loves BMW tourings. The diesels didn't fit into the heritage either. Yet now BMW makes some of the best diesels out there. A friend who POSITIVELY LOATHES SUVs has nothing but good things to say, dynamically, about the new X6.
Yes, BMW is not building E30s any more. But when they do build a car, they keep as much of the 'driver's car' paradigm in it as possible, even if it's an SUV. That fits perfectly with the heritage that began with the 1800tisa, I would say. Which is what BMW means today - and I'm just fine with that, thank you. I'm even considering an E93, though the pricing of the new cars is simply unrealistic.
Sorry for dragging the thread OT people.

[TDE30]

Which noone else was doing at the time, except for Porsche - and if you've ever driven a 930, Porsche needed.. a lot of fine tuning. So yes, heritage indeed and more experience than virtually anyone else.
And by the by, as someone else helpfully pointed out starting with the 524td, they also have made a line of turbodiesels which is still arguably the best on the market.

Yes yes, I'm sure the five people left on Earth who are still rocking M20-based diesels will say they're great, solid motors. I wasn't referring to turbodiesel motors though, if I was I would have mentioned the M52 or M67 V8. Anyways, not sure what you're trying to convey there.

I am going to be somewhat brutal here: I know those NA motors because, you see, I happen to own or have owned one of each S50B30 and S50B32 included, save for the new V10 which I refused to buy.
As an enthusiast, therefore, who can speak from first hand experience, I will say this: if the NA motors are going to be like the S85, I am very VERY much in favour of turbo engines in the Ms and in the regular cars. If 'enthusiasts' who don't actually BUY these cars choose to gripe - and I know a lot of these people - it is their choice, but I hope BMW will continue to ignore them.

Outside of mentioning that you've had a few iterations of the S50, I'm still not sure what you're trying to say. From my experience (driven once, rode another time with a BMW test driver at the wheel,) the S85 is an amazing motor, very peaky and incredibly smooth. Not sure why you "refused" to buy an E60 M5, but I have to admit it captured my attention more than the E39 M5 (which was, for all intents and purposes, the muscle car of the M5 range.) You sound like you're obviously in favor (or favour) of BMW using forced induction in all of their models, but I just think it takes away from what makes BMW BMW. Am I saying it's the first time they have used FI on their models? Certainly not. Is it the first time that many BMW models will be offered with more turbocharged powerplants than gas powerplants? It certainly seems that way. I just don't think some dorky X6 X Drive 50i Type X AWD nonsense exactly follows the BMW "heritage." So, you say you hope BMW ignores their enthusiasts? Well, that's a first.

An M3 was supposed to have four cylinders. Along came the E36 M3 and it redefined what a sportscar was supposed to be like. The E30 touring and the E34 touring didn't fit into the heritage. Yet now everyone loves BMW tourings. The diesels didn't fit into the heritage either. Yet now BMW makes some of the best diesels out there. A friend who POSITIVELY LOATHES SUVs has nothing but good things to say, dynamically, about the new X6.
Yes, BMW is not building E30s any more. But when they do build a car, they keep as much of the 'driver's car' paradigm in it as possible, even if it's an SUV. That fits perfectly with the heritage that began with the 1800tisa, I would say. Which is what BMW means today - and I'm just fine with that, thank you. I'm even considering an E93, though the pricing of the new cars is simply unrealistic.
Sorry for dragging the thread OT people.

I'm not sure what you're on about with the E30 M3 and the E34iT, nor do I understand how an E30iT or E34iT are exactly desirable. Sure, the E30iT is high on the list because the US never got it, and maybe the E34iT is somewhat desirable, but how in the heck does this fit into the FI discussion? If you are saying that touring/estate models don't fit into the BMW heritage, then I guess you have a point, but was a touring model such a radical departure from the norm like the incorparation of FI outnumbering the usage of normal gas motors? I think not. As for the E30 M3 to the E36 M3 and the increase in cylinders, that's just evolution. Are you suggesting that nowadays an M5 should have a 3.5 liter naturally-aspirated 6-cylinder? Yeah, I bet our pals in Stuttgart and Ingolstadt would looooove that idea.

In your previous remark, you say BMW should ignore enthusiasts who don't agree with the incoproration of FI, but now you say that BMW continues to build a "driver's car". I guess it all depends on how you define "driver's car."

[nmlss2006]

Yes yes, I'm sure the five people left on Earth who are still rocking M20-based diesels will say they're great, solid motors. I wasn't referring to turbodiesel motors though, if I was I would have mentioned the M52 or M67 V8. Anyways, not sure what you're trying to convey there.

Evidently you are not. What I am trying to convey is that what BMW has built and, arguably, excelled at, has changed quite a bit over the years - though the way they've positioned themselves in the market, that is, as the 'everyday sports brand' vs. the luxury image of say Mercdes, has remained more or less constant after the late 70s, even as the products changed. That is what 'makes a BMW a BMW' even when it isn't true (it takes a lot of faith to define a 518 E34 a 'sporty' car).
And, by the by, the people who are using all the turbodiesels that BMW has made since the M20 based diesel also rather like them. There are quite a few.

Outside of mentioning that you've had a few iterations of the S50, I'm still not sure what you're trying to say. From my experience (driven once, rode another time with a BMW test driver at the wheel,) the S85 is an amazing motor, very peaky and incredibly smooth. Not sure why you "refused" to buy an E60 M5, but I have to admit it captured my attention more than the E39 M5 (which was, for all intents and purposes, the muscle car of the M5 range.)

Refused should have no quotes: after the E34 and the E39, the E60 M5 is a very big letdown and after test driving it I did not purchase it. The S85 is in no way amazing, unless you happen to like VTECs ('very peaky', indeed), which however don't quite belong in an M5. And which, by the way, have been produced with some success by Honda for a little over 20 years now, IIRC.
The issue is, the S38 in its various iterations was a pretty amazing engine, it managed to have a vast usable torque range and impressive everyday capabilities, yet it managed to maintain the record for highest piston velocity until very recently and was great at high RPM. The rest of the E34 was very impressive too - especially when it came out and again when the Evo with the 6 gear and the composite brakes came out.
After that came the E39 with the S62: calling an E39 'the muscle car of the M5 line' demonstrates, I dearly hope, very limited familiarity with the car.
Then we get the E60: great on the track, weight aside (and even that is remarkably well controlled) - but an M5 has never been about going on the track. And simply not as good at everything else.
That, by the way, was the main thrust of my mentioning that I have owned several Ms: I happen to be talking about cars that I've driven for tens of thousands of miles each. I think I have a pretty good idea of what makes a BMW a BMW. What makes an M5 an M5 is most certainly NOT the ability to go to Imola and play with Porsches: it's the ability to be competent at that AND carry four people grocery shopping around town or on a 1000 mile trip without discomfort. The E60 is nowhere near as good as the E39, for that. The balance is off.
That balance, by the by, also happens to be one of the defining traits of the 530i E39, arguably one of the finest cars anyone has made in the past 15 years or so. Perhaps it is the most 'BMW' car in recent memory, in some ways.

You sound like you're obviously in favor (or favour) of BMW using forced induction in all of their models, but I just think it takes away from what makes BMW BMW. Am I saying it's the first time they have used FI on their models? Certainly not. Is it the first time that many BMW models will be offered with more turbocharged powerplants than gas powerplants? It certainly seems that way. I just don't think some dorky X6 X Drive 50i Type X AWD nonsense exactly follows the BMW "heritage." So, you say you hope BMW ignores their enthusiasts? Well, that's a first.

No sir: I am saying I hope that BMW ignores the people who speak of cars that they have not driven, to say nothing of purchased, and yet complain about 'taking away from what makes BMW BMW' without mentioning what it is. You may even have a point, I am not saying that you do not: please articulate it, as I have tried to do. You said that the newer cars have lost soul. This is generally true of all brands - evolution of cars in general has lead towards a more 'disconnected' experience, but that is inevitable - and it's why a lot of enthusiasts own cars of different generations. The older cars are certainly not 'better' in a factual sense but they can be 'more entertaining at normal speeds' because they involve the driver in the process more, despite being generally slower. Much slower.
Mind, the funny thing is that I generally don't like turbocharged engines: there are very few that actually perform like they should. The N54, however, is one of them, so is the new V8. There are indubitable advantages to *modern* turbocharged engines and very few of the old disadvantages. In the interest of building BMWs (not Ferraris and not Porsches) this is a very good marriage.

I'm not sure what you're on about with the E30 M3 and the E34iT, nor do I understand how an E30iT or E34iT are exactly desirable. Sure, the E30iT is high on the list because the US never got it, and maybe the E34iT is somewhat desirable, but how in the heck does this fit into the FI discussion? If you are saying that touring/estate models don't fit into the BMW heritage, then I guess you have a point, but was a touring model such a radical departure from the norm like the incorparation of FI outnumbering the usage of normal gas motors? I think not. As for the E30 M3 to the E36 M3 and the increase in cylinders, that's just evolution. Are you suggesting that nowadays an M5 should have a 3.5 liter naturally-aspirated 6-cylinder? Yeah, I bet our pals in Stuttgart and Ingolstadt would looooove that idea.

I am not getting through at all: I was suggesting quite the opposite, you see. All of these have become part of BMW's current image. The 'sporty' wagons, the diesels that behave no worse than petrol engines, the SUVs which really are not SUVs, etc.
And as you yourself remarked, 'evolution' is inevitable: so evolution is not only putting six cylinders into an M3, it's also creating an SUV which still behaves 'more like a BMW' than an ML and it's about producing a 335 which behaves definitely better than the US S52, it's about finally producing an E92 M3 that costs like a Carrera 2S but is an M3 again, despite not being as revolutionary as the E36 was. And by the way, it's also about producing a new 750i that is a real sports sedan despite an over 4000lb curb weight.
It's about positioning DURING this evolution, certainly with a few twists along the way (the E36 M3, again, was quite a remarkable one, it changed the market for 'everyday sportscars' for everyone, Porsche included).

In your previous remark, you say BMW should ignore enthusiasts who don't agree with the incoproration of FI, but now you say that BMW continues to build a "driver's car". I guess it all depends on how you define "driver's car."

No: I said that I hope that BMW should keep doing what they are doing - building cars that are 'driver's cars' - even when they are not. If you think that a 335i is not more of a BMW than an Audi A4 or a C-klasse, I'll suggest this. Drive all three. Then let's continue this discussion - perhaps in another thread, we have spammed this one to death.
To finish off: the other entertaining part is that I very much don't agree with the direction that BMW has taken recently, yet I'm here defending them. Irony indeed.