http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2009/06/25/467159.html
800 miles on 1 tank is my kind of deal.. I need it for work :clap:
i mean the 335d..
I can't imagine a diesel car being fun
Quote from: sportyaccordy on June 25, 2009, 10:20:38 AM
I can't imagine a diesel car being fun
Why not? Brain melting torque of a V8, but without the abysmal MPG's.
800 miles on 1 tank of gas is great.. That means i will only need to fill up every 2-3 weeks.. I do 90% highway driving so I am sure I will get close.. With Diesel cheaper now this is a great deal.. So yes this is fun..
a 116-hp 3-series sure would test the judgment of brand snobs. It would also struggle to pull ahead of a Prius. I'd rather they just sell the Mini diesel here.
There are many brand snobs that are green... This would steal Prius sales I am sure.. Mini Diesel is too small for me. Also its too childish for me.. Being in a brand snobby area, many people i know would like to have this choice.
I'd love to have one if I was a traveling businessman of some sort. Or if I just didn't care about speed.
But since I do... :lol:
Quote from: Yawn on June 25, 2009, 11:43:35 AM
There are many brand snobs that are green... This would steal Prius sales I am sure.. Mini Diesel is too small for me. Also its too childish for me.. Being in a brand snobby area, many people i know would like to have this choice.
Just to clarify, by "pull ahead" of a Prius, I meant acceleration-wise. The Prius's 11-second 0-60 sprint puts it right at the tail of this Bimmer.
And out of all the Euro brands with presence in the U.S., BMW's sporting pretentions make it difficult for them to sell a car so underpowered and focused on fuel economy. Buyers here are more likely to warm up to a "Blue Efficiency" C-class, Audi A3 TDI, or even a Volvo S40 diesel than a BMW 316d. Heck, BMW would probably have better luck selling a 120d or even a 118d here, granted it doesn't reach too low in the market.
I think they should do a mid-engine, rear drive Mini D using the 330d's engine.
I guess the only people that might drive this are company car drivers who are really desperate for the BMW badge. Like those 116i drivers.
BTW, did you guys realise the Volvo S80 will soon be available with a 1.6 diesel engine?
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on June 25, 2009, 02:15:17 PM
I guess the only people that might drive this are company car drivers who are really desperate for the BMW badge. Like those 116i drivers.
BTW, did you guys realise the Volvo S80 will soon be available with a 1.6 diesel engine?
CJ eagerly awaits it.
Who would buy it though in the US? You get a lower price point, better performance and no diesel smell and noise, in the 335i.
C&D (IIRC) had a value comparison betwixt the 328i, 335i and 335d. The payback for the 335d was way more than 100,000 miles (essentially beyond that of the average ownership time frame of the new car buyer).
The 320d is the sweet spot of the diesel 3-series range. At least until BMW comes out with a 323d with the 1-series 200+ bhp engine.
Want. Badly.
Quote from: GoCougs on June 25, 2009, 02:33:01 PM
Who would buy it though in the US? You get a lower price point, better performance and no diesel smell and noise, in the 335i.
C&D (IIRC) had a value comparison betwixt the 328i, 335i and 335d. The payback for the 335d was way more than 100,000 miles (essentially beyond that of the average ownership time frame of the new car buyer).
I've ridden in Jetta diesel cabs... if you don't know cars you wouldn't know the difference. If the payback is that long though then yea I guess it doesn't make a difference; however, we don't know what the cost of a 335d would be here so it's kind of a moot point.
I just want more diesel choices that aren't large pickup trucks.
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 25, 2009, 11:16:33 AM
a 116-hp 3-series sure would test the judgment of brand snobs. It would also struggle to pull ahead of a Prius. I'd rather they just sell the Mini diesel here.
I don't get it. Why is it such a big deal to Americans when you're riding in a luxury car and loose a race to a cheaper car?
Somebody buying a luxury car, even an entry-level 316d, probably cares more about creature comforts, comfort, the badge and other characteristics. Also, the 316d would rape a Prius in handling, dynamics and sport. So what's the big deal? I am sure that the BMW 0-100 km/h figure given here is also underrated (as is usually the case with German manufacturer claims) so in the end effect the 316d might even be quicker than the Prius. As if that matters though. :huh:
I don't recall hearing people I know personally bitch about the '70s when they were overtaken in their 316i or 200D's by a Volkswagen Golf GTI. It wasn't an issue. They bought their 316i or 200D because of this and that and that was enough. Performance wasn't an issue to them. I suspect it must be the same in the US where most buyers, even BMW folks, aren't true enthusiasts. They care about the badge and something else, but performance is probably irrelevant.
And there is always a 320d or 325d if you want more power...
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 26, 2009, 02:54:42 PM
I don't get it. Why is it such a big deal to Americans when you're riding in a luxury car and loose a race to a cheaper car?
Somebody buying a luxury car, even an entry-level 316d, probably cares more about creature comforts, comfort, the badge and other characteristics. Also, the 316d would rape a Prius in handling, dynamics and sport. So what's the big deal? I am sure that the BMW 0-100 km/h figure given here is also underrated (as is usually the case with German manufacturer claims) so in the end effect the 316d might even be quicker than the Prius. As if that matters though. :huh:
I don't recall hearing people I know personally bitch about the '70s when they were overtaken in their 316i or 200D's by a Volkswagen Golf GTI. It wasn't an issue. They bought their 316i or 200D because of this and that and that was enough. Performance wasn't an issue to them. I suspect it must be the same in the US where most buyers, even BMW folks, aren't true enthusiasts. They care about the badge and something else, but performance is probably irrelevant.
And there is always a 320d or 325d if you want more power...
+1
I would love a 316d. I don't care if it's slow, because it's not that slow and probably still really fun to drive.
I'm trying to get my parents to get a diesel car after the Accord goes.
Quote from: thecarnut on June 26, 2009, 02:56:18 PM
+1
I would love a 316d. I don't care if it's slow, because it's not that slow and probably still really fun to drive.
I'm trying to get my parents to get a diesel car after the Accord goes.
I think somebody eying a 316d in the first place really doesn't care about performance. They want a BMW that is sporty yet economical. The 316d is a modern engine so it is bound to have its own kind of agility that should please your average driver. And like I said, if you want more power but still want good gas mileage there is the 318d, 320d, 325d and even the 330d. The 330d and 335d are complete overkill already but they're probably the most "fun" because of their insane torque levels. :ohyeah:
Quote from: sportyaccordy on June 25, 2009, 05:49:13 PM
I've ridden in Jetta diesel cabs... if you don't know cars you wouldn't know the difference. If the payback is that long though then yea I guess it doesn't make a difference; however, we don't know what the cost of a 335d would be here so it's kind of a moot point.
But non-enthusiasts will still know diesel smell and lag, and the price premium.
C&D had a write up a couple of months ago on the 335d; its base MSRP in the US will be right at $45k.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 26, 2009, 02:54:42 PM
I don't get it. Why is it such a big deal to Americans when you're riding in a luxury car and loose a race to a cheaper car?
Somebody buying a luxury car, even an entry-level 316d, probably cares more about creature comforts, comfort, the badge and other characteristics. Also, the 316d would rape a Prius in handling, dynamics and sport. So what's the big deal? I am sure that the BMW 0-100 km/h figure given here is also underrated (as is usually the case with German manufacturer claims) so in the end effect the 316d might even be quicker than the Prius. As if that matters though. :huh:
There's a difference between riding around in a luxury car like an Escalade or DTS and a luxury car like the 3-series. Buyers who choose a 3-series for the most part want some semblance or sportiness, and while acceleration isn't everything, 116 hp pulling you to 60 mph in 11 seconds is unacceptable for a modern US-spec BMW.
QuoteI don't recall hearing people I know personally bitch about the '70s when they were overtaken in their 316i or 200D's by a Volkswagen Golf GTI. It wasn't an issue. They bought their 316i or 200D because of this and that and that was enough. Performance wasn't an issue to them. I suspect it must be the same in the US where most buyers, even BMW folks, aren't true enthusiasts. They care about the badge and something else, but performance is probably irrelevant.
And there is always a 320d or 325d if you want more power...
And people don't care now if their BMW's are slower than a GTI, because GTI's have always been pretty quick in relation to its contemporaries. It's when their BMW's are slower than cars that are
supposed to be slow that it becomes a problem (a more accurate comparison from the 70's would be the 4-cylinder Ford Pinto).
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 26, 2009, 03:18:50 PM
There's a difference between riding around in a luxury car like an Escalade or DTS and a luxury car like the 3-series. Buyers who choose a 3-series for the most part want some semblance or sportiness, and while acceleration isn't everything, 116 hp pulling you to 60 mph in 11 seconds is unacceptable for a modern US-spec BMW.
And it's also because 3ers aren't luxury cars. :lol:
If I wanted a luxury car, I wouldn't get one with such hard plastics.
Quote from: GoCougs on June 26, 2009, 03:01:18 PM
But non-enthusiasts will still know diesel smell and lag, and the price premium.
C&D had a write up a couple of months ago on the 335d; its base MSRP in the US will be right at $45k.
$43.9k
That's $2275 more than an AT 335i. At $2.50/gallon, break even is under 60k. Plus owners will probably find themselves getting a lot of the premium back in resale value.
Quote from: TBR on June 26, 2009, 04:04:19 PM
$43.9k
That's $2275 more than an AT 335i. At $2.50/gallon, break even is under 60k. Plus owners will probably find themselves getting a lot of the premium back in resale value.
No, per my post it's $44,725 (yer forgettin' delivery charge).
Quote from: GoCougs on June 26, 2009, 06:08:00 PM
No, per my post it's $44,725 (yer forgettin' delivery charge).
Indeed I did, turns out BMW BYO doesn't list that in MSRP. Regardless, the difference remains $2275.
In response to Wimmer's comments: a slow, underpowered car, no matter its dynamic abilities, interior appointments and other features, is not luxurious. North Americans won't even buy a compact ('economy') car with only 116 hp anymore.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 26, 2009, 02:58:22 PM
I think somebody eying a 316d in the first place really doesn't care about performance. They want a BMW that is sporty yet economical. The 316d is a modern engine so it is bound to have its own kind of agility that should please your average driver. And like I said, if you want more power but still want good gas mileage there is the 318d, 320d, 325d and even the 330d. The 330d and 335d are complete overkill already but they're probably the most "fun" because of their insane torque levels. :ohyeah:
i agree with you once!!
i already have my fast weekend car.. i commute distances for work and dont want no hybrid.. a 316d is perfect.. i always think the US market is too wide.. the market needs to be cut up.. certain consumers have different needs because of where they live..
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 25, 2009, 12:11:56 PM
Just to clarify, by "pull ahead" of a Prius, I meant acceleration-wise. The Prius's 11-second 0-60 sprint puts it right at the tail of this Bimmer.
But at 63 mpg hwy, you would only have to out accelerate it once and then you would never see it again. And, it proves hybrids are all hogwash.
QuoteAnd out of all the Euro brands with presence in the U.S., BMW's sporting pretentions make it difficult for them to sell a car so underpowered and focused on fuel economy. Buyers here are more likely to warm up to a "Blue Efficiency" C-class, Audi A3 TDI, or even a Volvo S40 diesel than a BMW 316d. Heck, BMW would probably have better luck selling a 120d or even a 118d here, granted it doesn't reach too low in the market.
The handling is still there, and if the BMW sporting brand snobs need or want a sporty diesel they would probably choose the 335d. It is the best sporty car out there, this one is aimed at women who believe in brand snobbery and economy are important.
I would love to have 5 series that is able to realize 55+ mileage for the many many long trips I take, acceleration be damned.
edit; a thought just crossed my mind, why have we not yet seen a hybrid diesel? Would one be capable of 70mpg?
The current Roundel magazine (the magazine of the BMW Club of America) has an article about living with the 335d for a week out in Vegas (and out in the desert around it). Summary, great big block gobs of torque down low, but runs out of breath quickly. Great fuel mileage but the sound of the diesel is still there (though the smell isn't). And they said the handling was numb. You could squirt nicely between corners, but really wasn't any fun in the corners.
Quote from: hounddog on June 27, 2009, 09:44:30 AM
edit; a thought just crossed my mind, why have we not yet seen a hybrid diesel? Would one be capable of 70mpg?
Part of what a modern hybrid does is engine shutoff, and I think that restarting the diesel, especially after a long period of not running, quickly enough is part of the hurdle that they can't overcome yet, as well as startup emissions levels.
Quote from: ChrisV on June 27, 2009, 09:58:37 AM
The current Roundel magazine (the magazine of the BMW Club of America) has an article about living with the 335d for a week out in Vegas (and out in the desert around it). Summary, great big block gobs of torque down low, but runs out of breath quickly. Great fuel mileage but the sound of the diesel is still there (though the smell isn't). And they said the handling was numb. You could squirt nicely between corners, but really wasn't any fun in the corners.
Neither was the 335i when I drove it, honestly. So it's not much of a departure.
Quote from: ChrisV on June 27, 2009, 09:58:37 AM
The current Roundel magazine (the magazine of the BMW Club of America) has an article about living with the 335d for a week out in Vegas (and out in the desert around it). Summary, great big block gobs of torque down low, but runs out of breath quickly. Great fuel mileage but the sound of the diesel is still there (though the smell isn't). And they said the handling was numb. You could squirt nicely between corners, but really wasn't any fun in the corners.
Most of the same could be said for most gas 3er models. Seriously. Test drive one if you don't believe me.
Quote from: the Teuton on June 27, 2009, 12:41:36 PM
Most of the same could be said for most gas 3er models. Seriously. Test drive one if you don't believe me.
*sigh*
They were comparing it TO a gas 3 series. It was more numb and much less fun in the twisties than the gas 3 series.
Quote from: ChrisV on June 27, 2009, 10:00:05 AM
Part of what a modern hybrid does is engine shutoff, and I think that restarting the diesel, especially after a long period of not running, quickly enough is part of the hurdle that they can't overcome yet, as well as startup emissions levels.
I can understand the second part, but quick starting should not be THAT difficult to overcome with a modified glow plug.
Or so it would seem.
Quote from: ChrisV on June 27, 2009, 02:28:09 PM
*sigh*
They were comparing it TO a gas 3 series. It was more numb and much less fun in the twisties than the gas 3 series.
Most are rather sedate, though. :huh:
Quote from: the Teuton on June 27, 2009, 03:14:30 PM
Most are rather sedate, though. :huh:
Which would make a diesel one that is commented on as being even more numb even less inspiring to think about, doesn't it? Which is the point.
I swear I'm speaking english, but the conversation is still one sided...
Ich spreche kein Englisch. Was sagst du?
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 26, 2009, 03:18:50 PM
There's a difference between riding around in a luxury car like an Escalade or DTS and a luxury car like the 3-series. Buyers who choose a 3-series for the most part want some semblance or sportiness, and while acceleration isn't everything, 116 hp pulling you to 60 mph in 11 seconds is unacceptable for a modern US-spec BMW.
I'm sure that the vast majority of 3 series buyers in the US buy / want them because
Car and Driver always puts it on their 10 Best list. :hammerhead: :wtf:
Seriously, the majority of 3 series buyers in the US probably want the name or badge and never fully exploit the capabilities of it. A 316d would be suitable for those who want the car but aren't performance oriented. Ok, so a 316d might be a little lame but a 320d or 325d could be an interesting alternative.
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 26, 2009, 03:18:50 PMAnd people don't care now if their BMW's are slower than a GTI, because GTI's have always been pretty quick in relation to its contemporaries. It's when their BMW's are slower than cars that are supposed to be slow that it becomes a problem (a more accurate comparison from the 70's would be the 4-cylinder Ford Pinto).
Why is this such a big deal? I really don't get it.
Here in Europe we have base BMW 318d's (now 316d's) or Mercedes C200 CDI's which are much slower than a Citroen C5 V6 or Renault Laguna V6 - and nobody here really cares if that is the case. If you want a faster than a V6 C5/Laguna 3er or C-Class you go for the 335i or C350. It's that simple.
Quote from: 93JC on June 26, 2009, 07:33:43 PM
North Americans won't even buy a compact ('economy') car with only 116 hp anymore.
:facepalm: x infinity
But Wimmer, in Europe, BMWs and Mercedes are used as fleet taxis. You know how much Americans hate buying cars that reek of fleet sales...
Quote from: ChrisV on June 27, 2009, 05:36:38 PM
But Wimmer, in Europe, BMWs and Mercedes are used as fleet taxis. You know how much Americans hate buying cars that reek of fleet sales...
I really need to take an education class on
American Automotive Consumer Behavior 101. :wtf:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 27, 2009, 05:34:05 PM
I'm sure that the vast majority of 3 series buyers in the US buy / want them because Car and Driver always puts it on their 10 Best list. :hammerhead: :wtf:
So what happens when the car rags start ragging on the embarrassingly underpowered 1.6L diesel?
QuoteSeriously, the majority of 3 series buyers in the US probably want the name or badge and never fully exploit the capabilities of it.
Does that make it ok to piss away the reputation the company has earned?
QuoteWhy is this such a big deal? I really don't get it.
Here in Europe we have base BMW 318d's (now 316d's) or Mercedes C200 CDI's which are much slower than a Citroen C5 V6 or Renault Laguna V6 - and nobody here really cares if that is the case. If you want a faster than a V6 C5/Laguna 3er or C-Class you go for the 335i or C350. It's that simple.
Again, noone cares if their 325i might be outgunned by a Maxima or V6 Camry, which are a bit quicker than the average new car. My point is that they'll care if their 316d is outgunned by a Prius or late-model Scion XB, which are much slower than the average new car.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 27, 2009, 05:37:43 PM
I really need to take an education class on American Automotive Consumer Behavior 101. :wtf:
Wims, you get up in arms about history, heritage, and tradition; in America we don't want to get outrun by a horse and buggy, especially if we paid a premium for our car (like you would in a BMW).
Quote from: TBR on June 26, 2009, 06:50:12 PM
Indeed I did, turns out BMW BYO doesn't list that in MSRP. Regardless, the difference remains $2275.
I did not concern myself with the price difference, only that the 335d base MSRP was ~$45k, and that C&D's mileage payback calculation versus the 328i and 335i was financially untenable:
vs. 328i: 960,000
vs. 335i: 193,000
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 27, 2009, 08:20:19 PM
So what happens when the car rags start ragging on the embarrassingly underpowered 1.6L diesel?
Car rags?
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 27, 2009, 08:20:19 PMDoes that make it ok to piss away the reputation the company has earned?
How can this reputation be lost by one model? I would think people there are smart enough to realize that if they want a 3-Series that is quicker than a Prius then they can
BUY one. The 316d isn't appropriate for the US market, I realize that, but a 320d or 325d might be something interesting. Some people care about gas mileage more in a premium car or sporty car and something like a 320d or 325d might be just what they're looking for. Handles well and is quick enough.
Quote from: Raza on June 27, 2009, 11:28:40 PM
Wims, you get up in arms about history, heritage, and tradition; in America we don't want to get outrun by a horse and buggy, especially if we paid a premium for our car (like you would in a BMW).
:lol:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 28, 2009, 03:19:57 PM
Car rags?
it's a corrupted slang that originated from "car magazine" -> "car mag" -> "car rag"
QuoteHow can this reputation be lost by one model? I would think people there are smart enough to realize that if they want a 3-Series that is quicker than a Prius then they can BUY one. The 316d isn't appropriate for the US market, I realize that, but a 320d or 325d might be something interesting. Some people care about gas mileage more in a premium car or sporty car and something like a 320d or 325d might be just what they're looking for. Handles well and is quick enough.
Yeah, and in the 80's, GM figured that if people wanted a Caddy that's nicer than a Cimarron, they can just pay extra for one also.
The discussion in this thread reinforces, in spades, the different priorities between a US market buyer and a European one.
In Europe, badge prestige has become far more important in the last 20 years or so, with the 3 series now outselling the Ford Mondeo, for instance, but the reality is that the cost of owning and running a car play a fundamental part in most people's decision criteria. With fuel at not far short of $10 a gallon, and annual road tax fees in most European countries which vary from expensive to totally crippling, it is no surprise that vehicles produced specially to reduce the owning cost by (in most cases) artificially getting under any thresholds look very attractive.
With annual taxation moving to CO2 based limits in Europe, and the bar getting higher every year, it is no wonder that cars with high gearing, and any other trick that can be deployed to get the COs rating way down are flooding from the manufacturers. There's a double hit, that cars that are costly to run have much steeper depreciation, so as well as costing more to buy, and to run, they are worth less..........
I saw my very first Mondeo 2.5T the other day, a car that has been on sale for 2 years. Renault recently announced that they would kill the 204bhp GT version of the Laguna, because so few people buy it.............. in the UK, where the 3 series is in thge Top 10 seller list, only about 1% of sales for the 335i petrol, and not a lot more are of the 335d. It is predicted that fewer than 5% of the new E Class will be petrol engined in the UK.
This is all very different to the US, where fuel is still relatively very cheap, and the obsession with 0 - 60 times seems to matter far more than anything else. There is plenty of space for large cars, which in Europe we do not have on our congested roads and cities, with minimal parking places........ I did note that when US gas reached $5 a gallong, people did stop buying big trucks and SUVs, so presume that if the price goes high enough, people will eventually start to have some of the same priorities as are forced upon Europeans. It will be painful for you all on the other side of the Pond, but the day will surely come..............
(PS: No, I would not want a 316d, either, but I predict a huge number of people will!).
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 27, 2009, 05:37:43 PM
I really need to take an education class on American Automotive Consumer Behavior 101. :wtf:
There is no single American automotive buyer. You have city dwellers, suburban people, farm people, country folk. You have people that spend many months in crappy winter weather, and people that never see snow. You have people that live in mountainous or coastal regions with lots of twisty backraods, and you have people that live in the midwest with straight roads that run for hundreds of miles without a corner. This is a nation that spans 3500 miles east to west, with climates that range from England cold to Italy hot.
(http://crew.snowboard-revolution.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/06/Straight-road.jpg)
For example, Iowa's a state that's big enough to be it's own country in Europe. Look at these roads:
(http://www.sitesatlas.com/Flash/USCan/static/IAFH-800.gif)
A comfy, solid sedan or truck is the best choice out here.
On the other hand, California hyw 1 almost doesn't have a straight stretch on it...
(http://www.worldofstock.com/slides/DEC1589.jpg)
You have brand conscious buyers, and buyers who just want value. Buyers who wouldn't be seen in a low end car, and buyers who hate the image of high end cars. So really, in that regard, not that much differnt than what you're used to. But, more of our contry is spread out, between the cities, and a solid car, that's cheap and easy to get parts/service for, is a driving concern for most of middle America.
That's a good point, Chris. I think a lot of Europeans forget that within one of our states, we have enough diversity, in people and in topography, and real estate for it to be a whole European country. When I went to school in the middle of the state, I met people who were shocked that I could leave the state in 20 minutes, or go out of state in something even smaller scale than a daytrip. Our country is the size of western Europe, so it's not easy to typify the American consumer in the car market.
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 28, 2009, 05:52:24 PM
it's a corrupted slang that originated from "car magazine" -> "car mag" -> "car rag"
Honestly, I learned to stop listening to what car magazines said a long time - German or American. Most car magazines are so performance oriented it is sickening. I love how generally
Car and Driver always thinks BMW makes the benchmark in every class: 3-Series and 5-Series - and that every car from their rivals should
try and emulate the BMW handling and steering feel. Why should they? Car companies know what sells their product and what their target market wants. Car magazines and especially most of the moronic 20 year old "car enthusiasts" we have on other forums should really STFU. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 28, 2009, 05:52:24 PMYeah, and in the 80's, GM figured that if people wanted a Caddy that's nicer than a Cimarron, they can just pay extra for one also.
Here's the issue. A base model shouldn't be burdened with the same expectations as a higher end model. The folks going for a 316d will know it will be slower than some mainstream cars. Big deal. If they want performance they have to pay for it. And someone who can afford a 316d can easily afford a 320d or a 325d or even a 335d. But they WANT the 316d because they want a 3-Series that looks good, handles and drives well, is reasonably quick but also fuel efficient.
I've said it before here that I realize the 316d is probably not the right car for the US, but a 320d and 325d might be alluring as an entry-level BMW 3er. They're faster than a Prius I believe. :tounge:
Quote from: ChrisV on June 29, 2009, 07:11:58 AM
There is no single American automotive buyer. You have city dwellers, suburban people, farm people, country folk. You have people that spend many months in crappy winter weather, and people that never see snow. You have people that live in mountainous or coastal regions with lots of twisty backraods, and you have people that live in the midwest with straight roads that run for hundreds of miles without a corner. This is a nation that spans 3500 miles east to west, with climates that range from England cold to Italy hot.
You have brand conscious buyers, and buyers who just want value. Buyers who wouldn't be seen in a low end car, and buyers who hate the image of high end cars. So really, in that regard, not that much differnt than what you're used to. But, more of our contry is spread out, between the cities, and a solid car, that's cheap and easy to get parts/service for, is a driving concern for most of middle America.
Thanks for the lecture. :ohyeah:
Looking at Iowa, are those dead straight highways I see!? Think of the gas mileage one could achieve on those in a 316d at cruising speed! :lol:
Fuel economy is still a much less important buying consideration in North America than it is in Europe. There are no displacement taxes. There are no CO2 taxes. There are much lower fuel taxes.
For a typical BMW owner, fuel economy is just not that big a deal. Let's assume a 3-series owner buys their car for $35,000. He or she puts $15,000 down, and finances the rest over three years (36 months). Let's assume 0% interest for the sake of making this calculation easier.
$35,000-$15,000 down = $20,000 financed / 36 months = $555.55 monthly payments
$1,200 insurance per year / 12 months = $100 monthly insurance
Assume this person drives 20,000 miles per year (I think the actual average is closer to 15,000 (~24,000 km)). Assume gasoline is $2.00/USgal, and a fuel economy average of 24 mpg.
20,000 miles / 24 mpg = 833.33 gal / year / 12 months = 69.44 gal/mth
69.44 gal/mth x $2.00.gal = $138.89/mth on gasoline
So, in a month, a 3-series driver will spend $794.44 on his car, not including maintenance. Of that $794.44, only 17.5% is for fuel. The difference between a 3-series getting 40 mpg and a 3-series getting 24 mpg is only a monthly cost of $55.56, or 7%.
$55.56 won't make or break a BMW owner. A 7% difference in monthly costs is not significant enough for someone to chose a 316d over a 335i.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 29, 2009, 09:42:12 AM
Here's the issue. A base model shouldn't be burdened with the same expectations as a higher end model. The folks going for a 316d will know it will be slower than some mainstream cars. Big deal. If they want performance they have to pay for it. And someone who can afford a 316d can easily afford a 320d or a 325d or even a 335d. But they WANT the 316d because they want a 3-Series that looks good, handles and drives well, is reasonably quick but also fuel efficient.
I've said it before here that I realize the 316d is probably not the right car for the US, but a 320d and 325d might be alluring as an entry-level BMW 3er. They're faster than a Prius I believe. :tounge:
I wouldn't call the 316d "reasonably quick" by any stretch of the imagination.
Although a 325d would be interesting, I think a 120d or 123d would make more sense as an entry model for BMW.
Wait a minute. How much power (HP and torque) does the Prius have and what are its emissions? Moreover, what about that Lexus hybrid that's coming out (based on the Prius)? I doubt either are significantly more powerful than the 316d. The Prius sells, and I bet that Lexus will be a big hit too. If those cars can do well, why not the 316d?
It's all about perception. If you could convince people that this is as green and cool as a hybrid (it probably is), it would sell pretty well I think. Shit, you could even badge it 'hybrid' instead of diesel and they would fly off the lots! Remember, people will buy anything with a BMW badge on it.
Yes, very true, Nick..... but even though diesel is now a tad cheaper than gasoline (petrol in the US, the majority still believe that this is the devil's fuel, just full of soot and appallingly noxious emissions....... I don't know who spread and perpetuated the anti-propaganda, but I have my suspicions.
Go back to 93Jc's analsysis............ that explains it all. If Americans had to pay CO2 based road taxes with the sort of penalties that we are starting to see in Europe, I think it would start to encourage the same sort of change in attitude there as we have seen here, Without them, I quite understand why they all want the most powerful model in the range not the green (or blue) one.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on June 29, 2009, 12:10:48 PM
Wait a minute. How much power (HP and torque) does the Prius have and what are its emissions? Moreover, what about that Lexus hybrid that's coming out (based on the Prius)? I doubt either are significantly more powerful than the 316d. The Prius sells, and I bet that Lexus will be a big hit too. If those cars can do well, why not the 316d?
It's all about perception. If you could convince people that this is as green and cool as a hybrid (it probably is), it would sell pretty well I think. Shit, you could even badge it 'hybrid' instead of diesel and they would fly off the lots! Remember, people will buy anything with a BMW badge on it.
The Prius sells big, hybrids do not. Any hybrid that looks like a regular model sells quite poorly.
Gen II Prius: 2900 lbs / 110 hp
Gen III Prius: 3042 lbs / 134 hp
Lexus HS250: ???? lbs / 187 hp
BMW 316d: ~3300 lbs / 116 hp
Quote from: 93JC on June 29, 2009, 10:46:52 AM
Fuel economy is still a much less important buying consideration in North America than it is in Europe. There are no displacement taxes. There are no CO2 taxes. There are much lower fuel taxes.
For a typical BMW owner, fuel economy is just not that big a deal. Let's assume a 3-series owner buys their car for $35,000. He or she puts $15,000 down, and finances the rest over three years (36 months). Let's assume 0% interest for the sake of making this calculation easier.
$35,000-$15,000 down = $20,000 financed / 36 months = $555.55 monthly payments
$1,200 insurance per year / 12 months = $100 monthly insurance
Assume this person drives 20,000 miles per year (I think the actual average is closer to 15,000 (~24,000 km)). Assume gasoline is $2.00/USgal, and a fuel economy average of 24 mpg.
20,000 miles / 24 mpg = 833.33 gal / year / 12 months = 69.44 gal/mth
69.44 gal/mth x $2.00.gal = $138.89/mth on gasoline
So, in a month, a 3-series driver will spend $794.44 on his car, not including maintenance. Of that $794.44, only 17.5% is for fuel. The difference between a 3-series getting 40 mpg and a 3-series getting 24 mpg is only a monthly cost of $55.56, or 7%.
$55.56 won't make or break a BMW owner. A 7% difference in monthly costs is not significant enough for someone to chose a 316d over a 335i.
I see your point and you explained it quite well. :ohyeah:
But aren't there some buyers who are interested in better mileage for whom say a 325d entry-level model might be alluring enough?
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 29, 2009, 10:50:57 AM
I wouldn't call the 316d "reasonably quick" by any stretch of the imagination.
I'm speaking in "European terms". :tounge:
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 29, 2009, 10:50:57 AMAlthough a 325d would be interesting, I think a 120d or 123d would make more sense as an entry model for BMW.
Most American car forums I scout (to see what is said on them) seem to have a very negative opinion about the 1-Series. I think you know the insults that are hurled at it and BMW. :ohyeah:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 30, 2009, 09:11:08 AM
I see your point and you explained it quite well. :ohyeah:
But aren't there some buyers who are interested in better mileage for whom say a 325d entry-level model might be alluring enough?
Someone THAT bent on mpg would have to be convinced it's worth the extra price over a Prius (which itself isn't even worth the extra price over a Corolla). A 325d and 120d is the lowest I'd go.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 30, 2009, 09:12:16 AM
I'm speaking in "European terms". :tounge:
Well, they're already selling the car in Europe, so they're not the ones who need to be convinced. I ain't paying $30 grand for a car that takes 20 seconds to cover 1/4 mile.
QuoteMost American car forums I scout (to see what is said on them) seem to have a very negative opinion about the 1-Series. I think you know the insults that are hurled at it and BMW. :ohyeah:
I used to not care for the 1-series myself, but it's grown on me. My ex-gf got a 128 convertible soon after they came out, and although too pricey, it's a neat little car.
I think I'd take Wimmer's side on this. For some reason power=luxury in the U.S. I tend to lean towards the European view on this where the two are separate and there is nothing wrong with getting the car you want with whatever level of power you need.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on June 30, 2009, 10:50:59 AM
I think I'd take Wimmer's side on this. For some reason power=luxury in the U.S. I tend to lean towards the European view on this where the two are separate and there is nothing wrong with getting the car you want with whatever level of power you need.
Yeah, but BMW's are supposed to be sporty. Cadillac can probably get away with selling Escalades with 5.3L engines instead of 6.0, and DTS's with 3.6L V6's instead of the Northstar, but people expect BMW's to be quick. Or at least stay ahead of Corollas and Honda Fits in an acceleration sprint.
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 30, 2009, 10:30:32 AM
Well, they're already selling the car in Europe, so they're not the ones who need to be convinced. I ain't paying $30 grand for a car that takes 20 seconds to cover 1/4 mile.
Why is the 1/4 mile so important? :huh:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 30, 2009, 11:21:20 AM
Why is the 1/4 mile so important? :huh:
It's just a general metric used to gauge the overall acceleration abilities of the car. Something that accelerates that slowly isn't going to have any passing power on the highway, and will be scary to pull onto a main road from a side street or driveway.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 30, 2009, 09:11:08 AM
I see your point and you explained it quite well. :ohyeah:
But aren't there some buyers who are interested in better mileage for whom say a 325d entry-level model might be alluring enough?
I'd consider it, personally. Though I'd be more likely to adopt a 1 series diesel than a 3 series diesel (mainly because I'd be more likely to buy a 1er than a 3er).
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on June 30, 2009, 10:50:59 AM
I think I'd take Wimmer's side on this. For some reason power=luxury in the U.S. I tend to lean towards the European view on this where the two are separate and there is nothing wrong with getting the car you want with whatever level of power you need.
What is a luxury? It's something you don't need, but like to have, right?
So where is the luxury in an expensive car with a fairly cheap interior that can get outrun by a smugmobile like the Prius?
As people have already said, a 316d would bomb in the US. You have to keep in mind; powerful cars here don't have the price artificially inflated anywhere near as much as they do in Europe so we don't have to make a compromise. There just isn?t much incentive, or at least very little, to buy a 316d over a 328i. And, since the difference will be primarily in the engine, I doubt the main price difference would be that great either. The 316d will be sold here when it has to be sold and not before that.
Quote from: Vinsanity on June 30, 2009, 11:44:13 AM
It's just a general metric used to gauge the overall acceleration abilities of the car. Something that accelerates that slowly isn't going to have any passing power on the highway, and will be scary to pull onto a main road from a side street or driveway.
Don't you guys measure the 1/4 based on 0-60 or 5-60 mph (flying start)?
Man, I remember the days on
Car and Driver when people told me my families 2002 Mercedes E320 was "underpowered" (224-hp V6) and "slow" - and I can overtake with that thing with ease. Midrange power of most modern cars is completely adequate regardless of their 1/4 mile performance. I'll wait until the 316d is tested but with its diesel torque and BMW's knack for correct gearing it should be just fine and dandy. :ohyeah:
If I lived in a land where more powerful engines for a given model are priced so amazingly close to lesser ones, I wouldn't be clamouring for a 4-cylinder 3 or a diesel, either. I do find it interesting, however, that in a market as large as that of the US there isn't sufficient demand to warrant the introduction of smaller-engined or diesel variants as extra choice for consumers.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on June 30, 2009, 06:21:03 PM
Don't you guys measure the 1/4 based on 0-60 or 5-60 mph (flying start)?
Man, I remember the days on Car and Driver when people told me my families 2002 Mercedes E320 was "underpowered" (224-hp V6) and "slow" - and I can overtake with that thing with ease. Midrange power of most modern cars is completely adequate regardless of their 1/4 mile performance. I'll wait until the 316d is tested but with its diesel torque and BMW's knack for correct gearing it should be just fine and dandy. :ohyeah:
1/4 mile (400m) times are based on standing starts. Edmunds provides a second 1/4 mile time with 1 foot of rollout, which usually shaves off a tenth or two.
I wouldn't call a 224-hp E-Class slow by any means, but it has almost twice as much power as a 316d ... which can use all the torque and ideal gearing it can get to go up against the mighty Prius's torquey electric motor + CVT (always in the "right gear")
Well, I guess we won't get anywhere here. The American and European car markets and consumers have totally different expectations. :cheers:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on July 01, 2009, 04:24:18 AM
Well, I guess we won't get anywhere here. The American and European car markets and consumers have totally different expectations. :cheers:
You mean we expect cars that can quickly get up to highway speeds?
Quote from: the Teuton on July 01, 2009, 09:20:44 AM
You mean we expect cars that can quickly get up to highway speeds?
I find it funny all of you mentioning how important is it to quickly accelerate to highway speeds on American, 65 mph highways. A 10 second car will do fine where a semi truck can do it. American highways have huge on-ramps. I have rented slow cars when traveling in the U.S. and its no problem at all to merge. This "safety" argument about why everyone need s a sub-8 second car is bullshit.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on July 01, 2009, 10:00:51 AM
I find it funny all of you mentioning how important is it to quickly accelerate to highway speeds on American, 65 mph highways. A 10 second car will do fine where a semi truck can do it. American highways have huge on-ramps. I have rented slow cars when traveling in the U.S. and its no problem at all to merge. This "safety" argument about why everyone need s a sub-8 second car is bullshit.
I drive a car that, when it was new, hit 60 mph in 12.4 seconds. Add another second or two onto that today realistically.
I'm talking about the
really underpowered cars. And yes, there are times when 110 hp in a 2,700 lbs. car isn't enough I feel.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on July 01, 2009, 10:00:51 AM
I find it funny all of you mentioning how important is it to quickly accelerate to highway speeds on American, 65 mph highways. A 10 second car will do fine where a semi truck can do it. American highways have huge on-ramps. I have rented slow cars when traveling in the U.S. and its no problem at all to merge. This "safety" argument about why everyone need s a sub-8 second car is bullshit.
Most are, but get into some cities and there are some pretty damn short ones. Especially here on the east coast where they are absolutely obsessed with clover leaves.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on July 01, 2009, 10:00:51 AM
I find it funny all of you mentioning how important is it to quickly accelerate to highway speeds on American, 65 mph highways. A 10 second car will do fine where a semi truck can do it. American highways have huge on-ramps. I have rented slow cars when traveling in the U.S. and its no problem at all to merge. This "safety" argument about why everyone need s a sub-8 second car is bullshit.
Yes, we have 55-70mph speed limits. We also have seatbelt laws, laws dictating that you have to use a turn signal, et al.
That all has little bearing on how people drive.
Quote from: TBR on July 01, 2009, 10:21:27 AM
Most are, but get into some cities and there are some pretty damn short ones. Especially here on the east coast where they are absolutely obsessed with clover leaves.
We don't really have those up north, just so you know. Jersey has a lot of jughandles, but that's not exactly the same. Cloverleaves were a little new to me when I went down to the Carolinas (although they're kind of like a bunch of jughandles connected).
BMW really ought to bring it over, pump some money into advertising ("achieves better gas mileage than both Toyota Prius and Honda Insight" is a pretty powerful statement) and people will flock to the 316d.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on July 01, 2009, 02:19:46 PM
BMW really ought to bring it over, pump some money into advertising ("achieves better gas mileage than both Toyota Prius and Honda Insight" is a pretty powerful statement) and people will flock to the 316d.
Only if they give it some funny name.
"Better gas mileage than both the Toyota Prius and Honda Insight. World renowned handling. The Ultimate Driving Machine. The Ultimate Environmental Machine.
Introducing the BMW 316d Green Motion."
BMW 3-series GreenDrive16d
ugh. I hate it even more.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on July 01, 2009, 10:00:51 AM
I find it funny all of you mentioning how important is it to quickly accelerate to highway speeds on American, 65 mph highways. A 10 second car will do fine where a semi truck can do it. American highways have huge on-ramps. I have rented slow cars when traveling in the U.S. and its no problem at all to merge. This "safety" argument about why everyone need s a sub-8 second car is bullshit.
Many interstates have long onramps, but there are a TON of 55mph secondary roads that have NO on ramps, just a 90 degree turn onto the road. Or your home driveway connects directly to said 55 mph road (my parents driveway, where I grew up, was directly on a 55 mph road, that had a blind corner less than 30 yards away, so pulling out was an excersize in top accelleration).
Then there are the multi-lane divided highways that are one step down from interstates, like, say, the Merritt Parkway in Connecticut, where the onramps are barely a carlength long, if that.
(http://excitingny.com/nyphotos/welcomenysignlg.jpg)
That entrance is 2 carlengths long, and right before a bridge so there is no merge room. You come around a 20 mph corner and have to get up to speed FAST. And there are dozens like that on that highway alone.
Your Fiat can't be faster than a 10-second 0-60, is it?
Quote from: Tave on July 02, 2009, 06:51:48 AM
Your Fiat can't be faster than a 10-second 0-60, is it?
It was about 8 seconds, and sometimes pulling out of a driveway on a fast road was scary. OTOH, I never drove it on a road connecting to the Merritt.
But my folk's driveway was part of why I built so many quick cars.
Quote from: ChrisV on July 02, 2009, 08:00:48 AM
It was about 8 seconds, and sometimes pulling out of a driveway on a fast road was scary. OTOH, I never drove it on a road connecting to the Merritt.
But my folk's driveway was part of why I built so many quick cars.
Love the Merritt. Getting on is a great excuse to floor it.
I hate highways that have a short onramp (2 carlengths or so) and then 4 carlengths later there's the exit so you have to merge while others are taking the exit. I've had to nail the accelerator on the Accord before to get it up to speed and merge onto the highway before I get tangled with people getting off the highway.
But then again, we have exactly the same things here in Oz and they still manage to sell a whole lot of slow-moving eco-socks. It's probably a factor, but one of many.
Considering Volkswagen can't keep Jetta diesels in stock and they are one of the few cars selling ABOVE sticker price right now, it seems there IS a market for fuel efficient diesels in America. I agree with Wimmer and think the 320d or 325d would sell over here if only BMW brought them over.
It's not 1978 anymore. Diesels are no longer loud, smelly and slow. Welcome to 2009.
Cheers,
Madman of the People
Quote from: Madman on July 03, 2009, 10:09:08 AM
It's not 1978 anymore. Diesels are no longer loud, smelly and slow. Welcome to 2009.
That's not my problem with the 316d. Well, except that it
is slow. God awfully slow (It makes the same hp as your Volvo 240).
And besides, it's easier to sell a $23k car like the Jetta TDI or Prius on the merits of fuel economy than it is to sell one for $10k more like a BMW 3-series.
But again, I wouldn't have a problem with a 325d. But I think that given the choice, there would probably be more buyers here for a Mercedes C250 CDI.
I have been in a 320D and its perfect and not slow at all.. I serious doubt the 316D would make a difference.
Who can provide stats on the 2 models?