|
|
|
|
|
|
BMW Garage | BMW Meets | Register | Today's Posts | Search |
|
BMW 3-Series (E90 E92) Forum
>
MotorTrend 335i vs C350 vs ATS
|
|
12-06-2012, 12:39 PM | #45 | |
Captain
56
Rep 592
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-06-2012, 12:41 PM | #46 | |
I don't drink water. Fish fuck in it.
45
Rep 865
Posts
Drives: e90 335xi
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Some say he naturally faces magnetic north, and that all of his legs are hydraulic...
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-06-2012, 12:50 PM | #47 | |
das Eichhörnchen
47
Rep 279
Posts |
Quote:
After I was disappointed from the interior, lack of trunk space and room for people in the back seats (a child would not be able to sit behind me in the ATS, i'm 6ft), sound system was not impressive compared to the H/K etc, I was not interested in driving it. Reading about the gearboxes I knew what they were talking about from driving the CTS multiple times. I did however start the engine in a new ATS (3.6) and it sounded great, when the sales person asked if I want to drive it I said maybe some other time. If I want a "driver's car" with no room in the back and a small trunk I wouldn't get a sedan. If I want a sedan the ATS is definitely not great as one. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-06-2012, 07:58 PM | #48 |
New Member
0
Rep 13
Posts |
I hate to say it but I expect that the 3 Series will be marketed and engineered more toward the young professional non-enthusiast types in the future. The types that buy v-6 Mustangs, except with more money. This will be especially true once the 4 Series 4 door coupe comes out. I expect that they will market and engineer this as the performance version while the 3 will be the easy to drive, bland vehicle for people that just want a BMW to drive.
I at least hope so because I had an f30 335xi as a loaner for a few days and it was nice but it reminded me way too much of my old A6. Granted, the 335 had more power but driving and size wise, they seemed similar. I swear the f30 is bigger though. So if the 4 series isn't more fun to drive, I don't know that I would buy a newer BMW. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-06-2012, 08:08 PM | #49 | |
das Eichhörnchen
47
Rep 279
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 07:17 AM | #50 | |
First Lieutenant
33
Rep 393
Posts |
Quote:
The same thing has been happening between the Mustang & Camaro for decades. You can get a ZL1 with insane handling and 580 Hp for $55k. Ford responds with a 200+mph Mustang for $54k. I've had 3 Camaro's and loved them, but these newer models are just insane. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 07:47 AM | #51 |
Banned
87
Rep 2,446
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 08:10 AM | #52 | |
General
18667
Rep 19,442
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 08:40 AM | #53 | |
First Lieutenant
33
Rep 393
Posts |
Quote:
I haven't had a chance to drive the new car. Maybe it's fine. I crawled over one at an auto show. Trunk space is improved, rear seat room is better, and it's easier to get in and out of. But I keep hearing that it doesn't feel as responsive. Other manufacturers have been trying to bottle the 3-series magic for a long time. The ATS might be the closest thing yet. Product trumps marketing and Cadillac, aside from CTS, has always been all bark and no bite. Just like Cadillac, what BMW says it builds doesn't matter as much as what comes out of the factory. Slightly off topic, but here's a comparison between the Zeta and Alpha platform. The zeta is a Camaro version, but it also underpins CTS. Alpha is under the ATS. One is built to handle 500+ hp, and the other isn't. Zeta (you'll need to copy and paste this into your browser): "www.cartype.com/pics/5446/small/chevrolet_camaro_frame_10.jpg" Alpha: Last edited by Wrngway; 12-07-2012 at 12:35 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 08:48 AM | #54 |
Colonel
341
Rep 2,118
Posts |
Not sure this is the real reason the Regal has not sold well. A little research says it's overpriced and the average Buick buyer (60 years old) finds it too sporty.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 09:13 AM | #55 |
Captain
737
Rep 744
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 09:30 AM | #56 |
First Lieutenant
33
Rep 393
Posts |
The original picture wouldn't post for some reason. Fixed now.
Alpha is under ATS. Zeta is under the current Camaro, CTS, and was also used in Monaro and the Pontiac G8. Last edited by Wrngway; 12-07-2012 at 12:35 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 10:37 AM | #57 | |
Brigadier General
55
Rep 3,606
Posts |
Quote:
Times are changing. Mercedes is leading the sales race and they don't offer a manual trans. Audi is catching them both. I hope/think that the 4 will address a lot of these concerns. I think the 4 coupe looks AMAZING. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 11:55 AM | #58 |
Banned
87
Rep 2,446
Posts |
The whole idea (like for the ATS) is to steal consumers not only keep the ones in their '60s. The products in both cases is not good enough to achieve the mission. Too little too late.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 12:18 PM | #59 |
Captain
737
Rep 744
Posts |
As an attempt to enter the market at this level, the ATS is a better-than-expected result.
The exterior gets a B, the handling gets an A, the optional 3.6L engine gets a B+, the transmission gets a c, but whoever decided to put the dashboard from a 1988 Chevy Astro in a sport sedan needs to be sacked immediately - Interior gets an F. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 12:27 PM | #60 | |
Banned
87
Rep 2,446
Posts |
Quote:
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...mparison-tests |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 01:49 PM | #61 | |
Colonel
341
Rep 2,118
Posts |
Quote:
You know this how? I agree that at this point the 2.0T version of the ATS is lacking compared to the F30 328i but it's not far behind. And this is from an enthusiast's point of view. The general public we be fine with the ATS. As a BMW devotee I think the ATS is 90% of what the F30 is and handles better to boot. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 02:44 PM | #62 |
Banned
87
Rep 2,446
Posts |
Both are not impressive. The N20 gets the same EPA rating as the N55. The GM 2.0T in the ATS works hard to get a miserable 19mpg city if manual. For the record, both Honda and Toyota V6 do better.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 02:50 PM | #63 |
Colonel
341
Rep 2,118
Posts |
I don't recall that we were talking about fuel economy. Why are you bringing that up?
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 02:54 PM | #64 |
Banned
87
Rep 2,446
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-07-2012, 03:01 PM | #65 | |
Colonel
341
Rep 2,118
Posts |
Quote:
Yes, the Caddy 2.0T engine does poorly in this regard. But them again, these cars are not bought because they get great fuel economy. The need for greater efficiency in BMW is because of CAFE numbers. For GM, I'm guessing Cadillac is a very small part of the overall volume and they make that up by selling a lot of Cruse's and Sonic's. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Bookmarks |
|
|