135 vs EVO

The EVO XIII/IX felt like Touring Cars to me - and either you wanted a race car feel or you didn't. Many who wanted one couldn't afford it, that was the problem.

I'm not sure what the EVO X is though - those who want a race car for the road may feel it's too soft and refined, while those who want a bargain M5 may feel it's too cheap and unrefined.

EVO X and M5 aren't in the same universe. How many EVOs can you buy for the price of an M5? Two? Two and a Miata?

Originally Posted by superstock

EVO X and M5 aren't in the same universe. How many EVOs can you buy for the price of an M5? Two? Two and a Miata?

That's the problem with Mitsubishi's EVO X - it's the performance of an M5, at less than half the cost - that should sell, right?

But who's the target audience? Not M5 buyers, they won't touch it. Ricers probably can't afford $35k, and if they could, the EVO is probably too upmarket in feel. Track junkies probably don't want a 3600 lb car.

Lots of people like me will say "yeah, the EVO is cool," but we won't buy it. I wonder who's going to actually buy it?

Originally Posted by Chris90

That's the problem with Mitsubishi's EVO X - it's the performance of an M5, at less than half the cost - that should sell, right?

But who's the target audience? Not M5 buyers, they won't touch it. Ricers probably can't afford $35k, and if they could, the EVO is probably too upmarket in feel. Track junkies probably don't want a 3600 lb car.

Lots of people like me will say "yeah, the EVO is cool," but we won't buy it. I wonder who's going to actually buy it?

You just stated my argument against the 135!!!! Who wants it???
Track junkies? Naa, too expensive and one wheel drive sort of ruins the whole point. Luxury car buyers? Naa, too small and not very practical.
Window shoppers without the money to buy? Yes!!

Just like the EVO, the car appeals primarily to an audience without the means to purchase the car.

I doubt it will even make a very attractive used car. A CPOd version that is stripped might be the right price but they will be incredibly rare. Most will have sticker prices over 40k new and the CPO price (3 years old) will probably be high 20s. That is a lot for a car that was probably beaten on a track and has 36k miles.

Originally Posted by superstock

You just stated my argument against the 135!!!! Who wants it???
Track junkies? Naa, too expensive and one wheel drive sort of ruins the whole point. Luxury car buyers? Naa, too small and not very practical.
Window shoppers without the money to buy? Yes!!

Just like the EVO, the car appeals primarily to an audience without the means to purchase the car.

Huge difference - the 1 series has a BMW badge, the EVO doesn't. That will make all the difference in the world.

I could argue that BMW purists who liked the E46 but think the E92 is fat & ugly, might buy the car, but it matters not, cause badge hounds will scoop them up like free ice cream.

Chris has got you on this argument Superstock.

Plus Superstock, you never told us what you drive. It must be the perfect car.

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

Chris has got you on this argument Superstock.

Plus Superstock, you never told us what you drive. It must be the perfect car.

LOL!

Originally Posted by superstock

You just stated my argument against the 135!!!! Who wants it???
TI doubt it will even make a very attractive used car. A CPOd version that is stripped might be the right price but they will be incredibly rare. Most will have sticker prices over 40k new and the CPO price (3 years old) will probably be high 20s. That is a lot for a car that was probably beaten on a track and has 36k miles.

Me.

Alright, allow me to try to clarify a few points I was making. I stated very clearly, or at least I thought I did, that I couldn't get a real feel for the Evo X handling potential in a test drive, and that maybe on the track its true potential could be realized. Although I have no hard evidence, my memory and my BDM (Butt Dyno Meter) indicated that the Evo X was slower in it's off the line and midrange acceleration than my stock 05. The fact that the 08 has traction control that was turned on initially may have contributed to the overall slouch sensation (why they have that on an Evo I don't know). To the best of my knowledge, Auto cross is a short course that is set up primarily with cones and does not involve multiple cars on the course at the same time, but is primarily a race against the clock, whereas road course racing is a much more challenging and stressful event on both the driver & car. I've never auto crossed, so I cannot speak from experience, but I have an extensive amount of road course racing experience and have successfully completed the Dragon at high speeds with great success numerous times. All my experience has been based on actually owning and driving my own car, not barrowing someone else's car, as the Evo drives totally different than a RWD vehicle, it would take you a day or two to realize the cars full driving potential, IMO. I hope this helps.

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

Chris has got you on this argument Superstock.

Plus Superstock, you never told us what you drive. It must be the perfect car.

Originally Posted by Chris90

Huge difference - the 1 series has a BMW badge, the EVO doesn't. That will make all the difference in the world.

I could argue that BMW purists who liked the E46 but think the E92 is fat & ugly, might buy the car, but it matters not, cause badge hounds will scoop them up like free ice cream.

I didn't realize that I was speaking to that rare breed, the BMW purist. The "purist" can also be defined by the guy who bought the earlier model of the car which is now eclipsed by the newer, faster, more modern and all together better model.

The "purists" are famous at Porsche because of their affinity for air cooled engines but at least they back up their conviction with their pocketbooks. A 1996 Carrera is worth more than a 2000 because of that purity. Do people flock to 2004 330s because they are better than 2008's? Did the value of them go up? No, it went down and will continue to go down to zero. Why? Because they arent' special or pretty or exclusive or even that great of a car. They are just a standard BMW.

I will not argue that the E92 is fat, it is. I will call it a wash between the e92 coupe and E46 coupe because i like the look of both cars.

And the reason that people will look at the 1 series is because of a badge, it won't make them buy it. If BMW didn't already have a car that competed so closely on price in the 3 series than it would be more successful. By making simply a shrunken 335 they have not differentiated themselves enough. People will look at the 135 and leave in a 328.

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

Chris has got you on this argument Superstock.

Plus Superstock, you never told us what you drive. It must be the perfect car.

I fail to see what I drive making a huge difference in the vaildity of my argument but I have an E36 M3 coupe, 2007 Miata and 2005 Jeep Rubicon for daily driving, depending on the weather. My project car right now is an 1984 DeTomaso Pantera GTs. Just finishing the cosmetic work but the American V8 they came with is builtproof and the car is much much much cheaper to drive and maintain than an other italian exotic (Lambo, Ferrari, etc) so you can actually enjoy it. Fast and fantastic sounding.

So yes, taken in whole, i do drive the perfect car(s). I have a vehicle for any need that may come up. One car cannot do everything you want and to try is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by superstock

I didn't realize that I was speaking to that rare breed, the BMW purist. The "purist" can also be defined by the guy who bought the earlier model of the car which is now eclipsed by the newer, faster, more modern and all together better model.

The "purists" are famous at Porsche because of their affinity for air cooled engines but at least they back up their conviction with their pocketbooks. A 1996 Carrera is worth more than a 2000 because of that purity. Do people flock to 2004 330s because they are better than 2008's? Did the value of them go up? No, it went down and will continue to go down to zero. Why? Because they arent' special or pretty or exclusive or even that great of a car. They are just a standard BMW.

I will not argue that the E92 is fat, it is. I will call it a wash between the e92 coupe and E46 coupe because i like the look of both cars.

And the reason that people will look at the 1 series is because of a badge, it won't make them buy it. If BMW didn't already have a car that competed so closely on price in the 3 series than it would be more successful. By making simply a shrunken 335 they have not differentiated themselves enough. People will look at the 135 and leave in a 328.

You missed my point as usual.

BMW traditionally had a more boxy, compact look. The 1 series appeals to those who liked that look, and aren't ready to jump on the Japanese design bandwagon that spawned the E90/E92 etc. I view my E46 as already too far in that direction of fatness, softness etc, but it's a good compromise. At least it still has a dipstick, and window controls by the stick shift. I think many will view the 1 series the same way - sure, it's not a purist's BMW, but it's a step in the right direction, and would make a nice daily driver.

Faster, more fun, $5k cheaper, and better looking than a 3 series? I'd have to be an idiot to buy a 3 series coupe.

Originally Posted by Chris90

You missed my point as usual.

BMW traditionally had a more boxy, compact look. The 1 series appeals to those who liked that look, and aren't ready to jump on the Japanese design bandwagon that spawned the E90/E92 etc. I view my E46 as already too far in that direction of fatness, softness etc, but it's a good compromise. At least it still has a dipstick, and window controls by the stick shift. I think many will view the 1 series the same way - sure, it's not a purist's BMW, but it's a step in the right direction, and would make a nice daily driver.

Faster, more fun, $5k cheaper, and better looking than a 3 series? I'd have to be an idiot to buy a 3 series coupe.

That is because you are a genius and I can't follow your logic. Or you are a madman.

Both cars are heavy cruisers built more for laidback autobahn cruising. The 1 series just happens to be worse at that. My argument, and I will put it in caps for you remedial readers, is that:

BMW DOES NOT MAKE A SERIOUS SPORTS CAR. THEY ONLY MAKE SOFT EDGED TOURING CARS WITH SPORTING PRETENSIONS. IF YOU WANT A TRUE SPORTS CAR YOU WILL HAVE TO LOOK OUTSIDEOF BMW TOWARDS OTHER MANUFACTURES LIKE LOTUS OR EVEN MAZDA.

The fact that every single BMW is offered with a sunroof, navigation and leather (vinyl standard!) proves that BMW has abandoned the sports car driver.

If the 3 series is a pig than the 1 series is the pig wearing lipstick. She is still a pig. Window controls by the stick and oil dipsticks do not a BMW make. There is a reason BMW also does not make a boxy car anymore, it is called evolution of design. Why don't you wear a top hat or powdered wig? Because they aren't in style. Same reason you won't ever see a new BMW look like a 1985 3 series.

Originally Posted by superstock

That is because you are a genius and I can't follow your logic. Or you are a madman.

Both cars are heavy cruisers built more for laidback autobahn cruising. The 1 series just happens to be worse at that. My argument, and I will put it in caps for you remedial readers, is that:

BMW DOES NOT MAKE A SERIOUS SPORTS CAR. THEY ONLY MAKE SOFT EDGED TOURING CARS WITH SPORTING PRETENSIONS. IF YOU WANT A TRUE SPORTS CAR YOU WILL HAVE TO LOOK OUTSIDEOF BMW TOWARDS OTHER MANUFACTURES LIKE LOTUS OR EVEN MAZDA.

The fact that every single BMW is offered with a sunroof, navigation and leather (vinyl standard!) proves that BMW has abandoned the sports car driver.

If the 3 series is a pig than the 1 series is the pig wearing lipstick. She is still a pig. Window controls by the stick and oil dipsticks do not a BMW make. There is a reason BMW also does not make a boxy car anymore, it is called evolution of design. Why don't you wear a top hat or powdered wig? Because they aren't in style. Same reason you won't ever see a new BMW look like a 1985 3 series.

BMW never made sports cars by that definition. And I drove a Miata Special Edition over the entire Hana Highway, and I was not that impressed, so excuse me if I don't bow down to Mazda. Yes, it was light and neutral, but there is no steering feel, and I missed the lovely sound of a BMW inline six. The Miata's motor sounds awfully ordinary. And then there's the issue of torque.

So I want my cake and eat it too.

Originally Posted by superstock

My argument, and I will put it in caps for you remedial readers, is that:

BMW DOES NOT MAKE A SERIOUS SPORTS CAR. THEY ONLY MAKE SOFT EDGED TOURING CARS WITH SPORTING PRETENSIONS. IF YOU WANT A TRUE SPORTS CAR YOU WILL HAVE TO LOOK OUTSIDEOF BMW TOWARDS OTHER MANUFACTURES LIKE LOTUS OR EVEN MAZDA.

You're preaching to the choir. There isn't a single serious BMW driver on the planet who doesn't realize or understand this.

My car? It has four doors. It rides well enough to survive city streets. It's also very quiet (too quiet if you ask me). Who out there would honestly think of it as a "serious sports car?"

Granted, it actually drives better than most current sports cars (note that my car is of the very earliest generation of the E46 and has an E34 M5 clutch in it, so it has quite a lot in common with the E36 from a control feel standpoint), with visceral steering and a fantastic (albeit aftermarket) clutch. And at 3000 lbs empty, it isn't all that heavy, either. Control feel is certainly on par with (or even better than) than the Evo, or the STi, or the Miata, or numerous others. However, the performance isn't there to back up those impressions - the suspension has far too much body roll and serious tendency to understeer, and the engine is anemic (by performance car standards). It has an open differential. I've beaten a number of supposed performance cars around an autox course with it, but that's only because most people can't drive worth a damn.

But that's why you buy one - it's more than practical enough to serve as a daily driver (which is why I bought one) and it doesn't guzzle fuel. Yet, it's enjoyable enough to entice you to push it around when the opportunity arises. That's the purpose. What we're all lamenting isn't the fact that the BMW touring cars are "no longer sports car" (they never were), but rather than they've become too much like generic luxury cars. I haven't seen anybody here argue otherwise - it's a large portion of the M3 crowd that you have to convince.

Originally Posted by superstock

BMW DOES NOT MAKE A SERIOUS SPORTS CAR. THEY ONLY MAKE SOFT EDGED TOURING CARS WITH SPORTING PRETENSIONS. IF YOU WANT A TRUE SPORTS CAR YOU WILL HAVE TO LOOK OUTSIDEOF BMW TOWARDS OTHER MANUFACTURES LIKE LOTUS OR EVEN MAZDA.

The fact that every single BMW is offered with a sunroof, navigation and leather (vinyl standard!) proves that BMW has abandoned the sports car driver.

Utter nonsense! If the Z4M is not a serious sports car, then you are just left with a few niche track cars (Lotus Elise being the softest of the crop) in your definition of a "serious" sports car.

BMW makes a whole range of cars from soft roaders (X-series) to serious sports (Z4M). Most are interesting to drive compared with other manufacturers with a similar breadth of range. They have more manual transmission models available compared with other manufacturers in the same market segment.

Originally Posted by jsc

Utter nonsense! If the Z4M is not a serious sports car, then you are just left with a few niche track cars (Lotus Elise being the softest of the crop) in your definition of a "serious" sports car.

BMW makes a whole range of cars from soft roaders (X-series) to serious sports (Z4M). Most are interesting to drive compared with other manufacturers with a similar breadth of range. They have more manual transmission models available compared with other manufacturers in the same market segment.

The Z4M is definitely very close to my definition of a sports car but the plethora of luxury options pushes into into the soft sports car. I honestly forgot abou the Z4M but no one can claim it is a focused sports car. It is a very good dual purpose car in that it can coddle you and perform admirably at the track. While it is definitely capable of some serious performance it is still way too heavy and is still dulled in a way that only a 3000+lb car can be.

BMW long ago forgot that the best way to add performance is to add lightness.

Originally Posted by Chris90

BMW never made sports cars by that definition. And I drove a Miata Special Edition over the entire Hana Highway, and I was not that impressed, so excuse me if I don't bow down to Mazda. Yes, it was light and neutral, but there is no steering feel, and I missed the lovely sound of a BMW inline six. The Miata's motor sounds awfully ordinary. And then there's the issue of torque.

So I want my cake and eat it too.

No argument about the ordinary exhaust note, the car loves an aftermarket exhaust. Fortunately they are cheap and plentiful. Torque has been remedied in the latest version with the 2.0 while maintaining its desire to rev. The miata is great because it lets you use the entire powerband while staying under the speed limit.

But if you don't think the miata has steering feel then you have no idea what steering feel is. The car is practically telepathic, it has the best feel outside of a lotus. Did you drive one without a steering wheel or do you have hooks instead of hands? Those are the only two possibilites that I can see.

Originally Posted by superstock

But if you don't think the miata has steering feel then you have no idea what steering feel is. The car is practically telepathic, it has the best feel outside of a lotus. Did you drive one without a steering wheel or do you have hooks instead of hands? Those are the only two possibilites that I can see.

I've spent a lot of time in E36s, including M3s, so I know steering feel. It's not the same as steering sharpness.

From EVO Magazine's review of the Miata. Guess they're also blind.

The steering seems to have been given more weight, which eliminates the two-stabs-at-a-corner feeling. However, the wheel still doesn't really provide you with any tangible evidence of what sort of contact there is between Messrs Macadam and Bibendum. You could put up with this in isolation, but from the moment the rear squats strangely as you turn in, the MX-5's suspension feels all at sea. It just never feels poised or planted through a corner.

This is getting interesting.

Get the popcorn out.

[QUOTE=superstock;3195879]
The "purists" are famous at Porsche because of their affinity for air cooled engines but at least they back up their conviction with their pocketbooks. A 1996 Carrera is worth more than a 2000 because of that purity. Do people flock to 2004 330s because they are better than 2008's? Did the value of them go up? No, it went down and will continue to go down to zero. Why? Because they arent' special or pretty or exclusive or even that great of a car. They are just a standard BMW.[QUOTE=superstock;3195879]


I'm sorry, but your take on the late model E46s is just waaaay off. My last 330Ci 6spd was an almost perfect daily driver that still allowed me to have a lot of fun. Miata over a late model E46? - you are on the wrong board dude! The E46 has a way smoother and torqier engine, a better chassis, way better looks, and better steering feel. No contest.

Originally Posted by superstock

No argument about the ordinary exhaust note, the car loves an aftermarket exhaust. Fortunately they are cheap and plentiful. Torque has been remedied in the latest version with the 2.0 while maintaining its desire to rev. The miata is great because it lets you use the entire powerband while staying under the speed limit.

But if you don't think the miata has steering feel then you have no idea what steering feel is. The car is practically telepathic, it has the best feel outside of a lotus. Did you drive one without a steering wheel or do you have hooks instead of hands? Those are the only two possibilites that I can see.

Why don't we take a poll on who thinks the Miata has better steering feel than a E36, or E46?

Originally Posted by superstock

That is because you are a genius and I can't follow your logic. Or you are a madman.

Both cars are heavy cruisers built more for laidback autobahn cruising. The 1 series just happens to be worse at that. My argument, and I will put it in caps for you remedial readers, is that:

BMW DOES NOT MAKE A SERIOUS SPORTS CAR. THEY ONLY MAKE SOFT EDGED TOURING CARS WITH SPORTING PRETENSIONS. IF YOU WANT A TRUE SPORTS CAR YOU WILL HAVE TO LOOK OUTSIDEOF BMW TOWARDS OTHER MANUFACTURES LIKE LOTUS OR EVEN MAZDA.

The fact that every single BMW is offered with a sunroof, navigation and leather (vinyl standard!) proves that BMW has abandoned the sports car driver.

If the 3 series is a pig than the 1 series is the pig wearing lipstick. She is still a pig. Window controls by the stick and oil dipsticks do not a BMW make. There is a reason BMW also does not make a boxy car anymore, it is called evolution of design. Why don't you wear a top hat or powdered wig? Because they aren't in style. Same reason you won't ever see a new BMW look like a 1985 3 series.

Superstock,

Your really just arguing points that have been argued here for the last six months.

Yes the 135i is not a light car. It 200 lbs less than the 335i, which isn't a lot, but it is something. Its BMW's lightest 4-seater they sell, whether that is good or not, its reality. Compared to Evo, Sti, Miata the 1-series offers the same refinement and fit/finish in any BMW. Yes there are lighter cars out there for less money, but does that mean the 1-series is worthless. I don't think so.

If you dislike current BMWs so much. Why are you on this forum?

As far as the 135i doing worse than a 335i. Actually it does everything better. I don't see a reason to pay an extra $5900 for 2-3 inches more rear leg room.

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

As far as the 135i doing worse than a 335i. Actually it does everything better. I don't see a reason to pay an extra $5900 for 2-3 inches more rear leg room.

Three reasons:

The real world difference is more like 3-4k.

I take full grown people in my backseat occasionally, not just circus midgets. 3 inches isn't a large difference but it is in the most important spot, knee room.

Not that this hasn't been said 10 million times but: The 3 series is better looking than the 1 series. Any poll of 100 people anywhere in the world (outside of a 1 series forum) will agree. And even a poll on the 1 series forum will probably be pretty damn close.