 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / BMW Cars / January 2006Considering a BMW - A Few Questions
After driving Subarus, Toyotas, Hondas and yes - a Chevy, all my life, I'm finally at the point that I can afford (and want) to step up to a new "luxury" car. However, I still want to find the best overall deal (ie - bang for the buck). That's just my nature, I guess. I'm just getting started looking at BMW's, Audis, Acuras, Infinitis, Lexuses (Lexi?) etc, so I'm far from finalizing a decision. I have a few general questions about BMW's: 1. Does BMW ever run "specials" on new car purchases - ie - rebates, etc? Is there any "better" time to buy? Any buying tips? 2. Do BMW's generally require Premium gas? If so, what are the practical consequences of running mid-grade or regular? Engine Damage or just less-than-optimal performance? (By less-than optimal, I mean just normal tooling ariound town - no redlining). 3. I don't have a garage, but parking is off-street, so how well do BMW bodies hold up? (I live in Central Virginia). Can't think of anything else to ask right now. Any help with these questions would be appreciated. > After driving Subarus, Toyotas, Hondas and yes - a Chevy, all my life, I'm > finally at the point that I can afford (and want) to step up to a new [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > 1. Does BMW ever run "specials" on new car purchases - ie - rebates, etc? > Is there any "better" time to buy? Any buying tips? For a 3 series, you should be able negotiate at least $500~$1,500 off MSRP. > 2. Do BMW's generally require Premium gas? If so, what are the practical > consequences of running mid-grade or regular? Engine Damage or just > less-than-optimal performance? (By less-than optimal, I mean just normal > tooling ariound town - no redlining). Yes, Bmw's require premium although lower octane may be used - but with lower performance and economy due to the retarded timimg. So it's probably penny-wise & pound foolish to use less than 91 octane. My 328i and Z4 3.0 both get 22 in town and 30 on the road with 92-93 octane, and I suspect that most of the cars you are considering also require premium. > 3. I don't have a garage, but parking is off-street, so how well do BMW > bodies hold up? (I live in Central Virginia). I'm in the DC suburbs and my non-garaged 1999 328i still looks great (Zymol wax at least three times per year). Tom K. > After driving Subarus, Toyotas, Hondas and yes - a Chevy, all my life, > I'm finally at the point that I can afford (and want) to step up to a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I'm just getting started looking at BMW's, Audis, Acuras, Infinitis, > Lexuses (Lexi?) etc, so I'm far from finalizing a decision. I'd go with the Lexus. I'll never buy another BMW, but that's just me. Do what you like. > I have a few general questions about BMW's: > > 1. Does BMW ever run "specials" on new car purchases - ie - rebates, > etc? Is there any "better" time to buy? Any buying tips? No, most dealers will give the poor mouth, claiming they can't afford to lower their prices. > 2. Do BMW's generally require Premium gas? If so, what are the > practical consequences of running mid-grade or regular? Engine Damage > or just less-than-optimal performance? (By less-than optimal, I mean > just normal tooling ariound town - no redlining). My owner's manual recommends the mid-range octane as a minimum. Another source recommends the highest octane, so flip a coin. I can tell you that while running mid-range, I still get pings, say, when going up fairly steep hills. > 3. I don't have a garage, but parking is off-street, so how well do BMW > bodies hold up? (I live in Central Virginia). A bad seam under the edge of my hood started a bad (really bad) rust problem which spread to the top of the hood, lifting paint as it spread. This car has always resided in snowless (very very little anyway), sea-less central Georgia. And it has always been very well maintained (with regular washes and at least two waxes per year). Had to have hood refinished at my own expense. > Can't think of anything else to ask right now. Any help with these > questions would be appreciated. I'd X out BMW as an option. -- Cliff > I'd X out BMW as an option. Why bother reading this group, then? Or are you wistful about what you're missing? Lexus make fine cars. Pity they're just so boring to drive.  Signature*Is there another word for synonym? Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >>I'd X out BMW as an option. > > Why bother reading this group, then? Or are you wistful about what you're > missing? > > Lexus make fine cars. Pity they're just so boring to drive. IMO, life is too short to drive (even luxurious) boring cars. Signature-Fred W My 2 cents/pennies worth... If you want a cosseting limousine like silky ride and lots of toys and gadgets in your car don't buy a BMW 3 series; a Mercedes C class (over priced)) or the new Lexus IS probably are better bets. If a classy luxurious interior is the priority the Audi A4 is probably the best bet. If reliability is the priority Lexus again, though any problems on BMW's are generally minor and few (according to various consumer surveys in the UK). Volvo and Saab win for seat and long distance driving comfort, the Saab 9-3 has the most comfortable car seat I've ever sat in. The Jaguar X-Type manages to be a great all rounder that sits somewhere in the middle of this lot and has one of the quietest diesel engines... which is meaningless in the USA If you want everything else a luxury/executive/premium sports car can offer in a practical package (seats for passengers, trunk for luggage) then it's the 3 series. BMW beats Audi/Mercedes/Jaguar/Saab/Volvo on refinement (it's quiet), performance vs. fuel economy (comparing 5/6 cyclinder engines and diesels if you are in Europe), space (more leg room than the others and equal best trunk/boot space) and of coarse handling and steering responses. The build quality and quality of materials is higher than Toyota/Honda/Subaru. I was able to get the additional equipment I wanted from the options list without spending too much extra, lumbar support essential option for me as seats not quite comfortable enough without it. The 3 series highlights are the engine and the drive, you have to want great handling as the ride is a touch on the firm side (hence the "limousine like silky ride" comment above) but for me never uncomfortable. There are some that hate the firm ride, so you need to drive it yourself. BMW is not exactly exclusive but still very desirable and in demand used which still makes them a good buy despite higher prices as they hold their value well... at least in Europe. There are few horror stories around on the internet about exploding engines etc., but just as many if not more similar problems with Honda / Toyotas etc. No machine is perfect. >Volvo and Saab win for seat and long distance driving comfort, the Saab >9-3 has the most comfortable car seat I've ever sat in. Hmmm -- haven't sat in one. Does it have the extended thigh support of the BMW sport seats? My wife's 325i has the leather sport seats with 12-way adjustment, etc.. For me, at 6'3+", the extendable thigh support makes all the difference in the world. -- Larry > Hmmm -- haven't sat in one. Does it have the extended thigh support of the BMW sport seats? I don't think so, just a long seat base as standard, no need for extensions. 3 series plus sports seats a better option for the enthusiast as the Saab is a bit soggy compared to 3 series and Volvo even more soggy. Also engines though good, not as good. The other day a colleague and I hired a Saab 9-3 (in western Europe), both driving it. Our journeys were not long enough to comment on the seats but we both found it tinny and a great disappointment (his comments are not printable in a family newsgroup, even though this is not a familiy NG...). "GM penny-pinching" is another comment. I had not been in a Saab for many years, having driven one once with a view to getting one as a company car. Tinny then, tinny now. Just did not feel solid, not at all like the Volvo S60 I rented a few weeks before. Now that was a revelation. If you're wondering, he drives a VW Touareg, having had a BMW X5. We have a Merc CLK Cab and a 190E. Even the 190E feels more solid than the 9-3... DAS SignatureFor direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] > I don't think so, just a long seat base as standard, no need for > extensions. 3 series plus sports seats a better option for the > enthusiast as the Saab is a bit soggy compared to 3 series and Volvo > even more soggy. Also engines though good, not as good. PS. Cf the Saab 9-3, IMO we would probably have been better off sticking with the originally-reserved (European) Ford Mondeo... DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- > The other day a colleague and I hired a Saab 9-3 (in western Europe), both > driving it. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >> enthusiast as the Saab is a bit soggy compared to 3 series and Volvo >> even more soggy. Also engines though good, not as good. > My 2 cents/pennies worth... > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > engines etc., but just as many if not more similar problems with Honda > / Toyotas etc. No machine is perfect. Yes, no machine is perfect. In fact, nothing (except G-d) is perfect. That being said, the following views are mine alone... 1. BMW is a nice car, but overpriced and expensive to maintain. Also, undriveable in the winter without very good snow tires (except for the AWD XI models). They are still rated an enthusiast's car, particularly known for their exceptional handling. And yet most are sold with automatic transmissions. because a lot of folks just want the cachet of owning a bimmer. 2. Volvo used to be known as "the car for people who hate cars". That is, folks who did not care that much about driving per se, but wanted safety, reliability, and longevity. The 240 was a legend on all three counts, but Ford has unraveled a lot of what Volvo stood for. EG, now they do not do particularly well in crash tests, whereas they were once the benchmark. Still good cars, but not what they used to be. 3. Saab has been eviscerated by GM. The only things left are the signature grill and the key in the console. All of the great individualistic design is gone, all of the quirky but loveable Saabisms are history. A very sad story. Buy a Saab today and you are getting a gussied-up Opel, or an overpriced Suburu. But, thanks to the durability of Saabs, there are a lot of pre-GM examples still out there that are real bargains. In its heyday (the 70's and early 80's), Saab was every bit as good as BMW (but in a different way). 4. Mercedes-Benz is now a mediocrity, after its fusion with the brain-dead Chrysler Corporation. They now make $100K cars that match Yugo and Renault for reliability problems. 5. Jaguar is junk. It used to be the country club car for English lords and ladies (and those aspiring to be such). It is now a marquee of mediocre engineering hiding under nice leather and wood interiors. 6. American cars are pathetic. The country that invented automotive mass production now can't seem to make cars that appeal to its home market. Very depressing. 7.Asian cars will rule. So get used to their unique combination of reliability, gee-whiz gimmickry, and anime styling. It's here for keeps. Sob. On second thought, go out and get that bimmer! > 5. Jaguar is junk. It used to be the country club car for English > lords and ladies (and those aspiring to be such). It is now a marquee > of mediocre engineering hiding under nice leather and wood interiors. This simply isn't true. The engineering is fine and quite innovative - the major use of aluminium in some models is ahead of the pack. Their main problem IMHO is basing the smaller models on Ford body shells and failing to make them look special. And with the larger one sticking to the classic look of a '60s design. Signature*Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool. Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >This simply isn't true. The engineering is fine and quite innovative - the >major use of aluminium in some models is ahead of the pack. Their main >problem IMHO is basing the smaller models on Ford body shells and failing >to make them look special. And with the larger one sticking to the classic >look of a '60s design. I agree. Jaguar is still making some very impressive cars, but somewhat like Porsche's unwillingness to let the 911 die, they seem terrified of doing a serious redesign of the XJ. epbrown -- 2003 BMW 325i Black/Black 2003 BMW Z4 Black/Black > >This simply isn't true. The engineering is fine and quite innovative - the > >major use of aluminium in some models is ahead of the pack. Their main [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > 2003 BMW 325i Black/Black > 2003 BMW Z4 Black/Black Jaguar is one of the most unreliable cars made, only slightly better than the Chrysler Sebring (according to Forbes). >> >This simply isn't true. The engineering is fine and quite innovative - the >> >major use of aluminium in some models is ahead of the pack. Their main [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Jaguar is one of the most unreliable cars made, only slightly better >than the Chrysler Sebring (according to Forbes). Is that because it gets confused at being driven on the wrong side of the road? Getting it's bonnet called a hood? It's boot called a trunk? And to crown it all it loses it's engine to a 'motor'! The Chrysler Sebring??? Should have been RWD as all good Chrysles were, Charger, Challenger, Barracuda with REAL engines 440 Cid 426 Hemi etc and even the 318 was a nice little mover............. Sir Hugh of Bognor SignatureRemember. You may honestly belive that you understood everything you thought I said but what you thought you heard wasn't exactly what I said. hsg@h-gee.co.uk hsg@bognor-bill.co.uk bognor-bill@bb-trading-uk.com > Yes, no machine is perfect. In fact, nothing (except G-d) is perfect. > That being said, the following views are mine alone... > > 1. BMW is a nice car, but overpriced and expensive to maintain. Also, > undriveable in the winter without very good snow tires (except for the > AWD XI models). Nonsense. BMWs are no worse to drive in the snow and ice than any other RWD car, and due to the balanced weight distribution, are actually better than some. The "legendary" Volvo 240 was a RWD car and was certainly as bad or worse than current BMWs, even though they came from Scandinavia where the winters are notorious. > They are still rated an enthusiast's car, particularly > known for their exceptional handling. And yet most are sold with > automatic transmissions. because a lot of folks just want the cachet of > owning a bimmer. Yes, they are (were?) an enthusiasts car, no doubt. But they have achieved such a cult status that they are perceived as "luxury" cars by the general public. This doubles edged persona is what has been the downfall of BMW development in my opinion. Because the majority of the car buying public cannot appreciate the superior driving capabilities of a BMW, the design goals have shifted to the more profitable luxury cachet features. The mere inclusion of these features (NAV, PDC, etc.) is a big mistake in my opinion. > On second thought, go out and get that bimmer! Now that I can agree with. But don't do it for the perceived status. Do it for the driving experience. If you can't appreciate that, then don't do it. Signature-Fred W > Nonsense. BMWs are no worse to drive in the snow and ice than any other > RWD car, and due to the balanced weight distribution, are actually > better than some. The "legendary" Volvo 240 was a RWD car and was > certainly as bad or worse than current BMWs, even though they came from > Scandinavia where the winters are notorious. I can attest to that, being Scandinavian and all. My dad used to have one of the Volvo 240, and if you didn't take care how you cornered you would go straight ahead. I usually had to downshift and blip the pedal to have it swing the rear out to recover when that happened. Which was quite often. The car had a turbocharged intercooled B21 engine and was rather fun during summer, but it was during winter it was the most fun. SignatureBBO, BMW '90 318i E30 > > Nonsense. BMWs are no worse to drive in the snow and ice than any other > > RWD car, and due to the balanced weight distribution, are actually [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > -- You have a point about RWD in the snow. But BMW seems to be more prone to winter skidding accidents, at least in the USA. I think that's one reason BMW has introduced all-wheel drive in more of their models, including the 5 Series. Part of the reason may be that these cars come equipped with large wheels and performance tires and have torquey engines, and people in the States are less inclined to put on snows in the winter. I don't think the 50-50 balance makes much difference. > BBO, BMW '90 318i E30 people just don't know how to drive them properly. Rear wheel drive is great if you have some understanding of how it works and any fool who drives in snow without a winter tire is an accident waiting to happen. Depends on how much snow one gets whether it is worth switching. In southern England it snows little and then the snow rarely stays on the ground very long. One just has to drive extra carefully or avoid a journey. DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- > people just don't know how to drive them properly. > Rear wheel drive is great if you have some understanding of how it works > and any fool who drives in snow without a winter tire is an accident > waiting to happen. > You have a point about RWD in the snow. But BMW seems to be more prone > to winter skidding accidents, at least in the USA. I think that's one > reason BMW has introduced all-wheel drive in more of their models, > including the 5 Series. BMWs are more prone to winter skidding accidents for one big reason. All new BMWs are fitted with low-profile, wide section, tires from the factory. Most (all?) of these are all-season. These tires suck in the snow. Then, especially with DSC active, the driver can get themselves going far too fast for the limited traction they have at the time and *crunch*. Take the same car and put a good set of (narrow) winter tires and smaller wheels, turn off the DSC and it becomes a winter warrior. > Part of the reason may be that these cars come equipped with large > wheels and performance tires and have torquey engines, and people in > the States are less inclined to put on snows in the winter. Bingo. Check the tires on *any* car in the snow belt and you will know which drivers truly understand cars. > I don't think the 50-50 balance makes much difference. It does when trying to steer, stop, or control a partial skid, especially on snow. This is why it is such a really bad idea to load a bunch of sand bags in the trunk per the old school wisdom. The heavier rear will be more prone to swap ends with the lighter front once you do lose traction. Think of a dart being thrown through the air. It's pretty hard to keep it going with the heavy end in the back. Signature-Fred W 1) Volvo. That's an urban myth. In European tests Merc almost always cam out on top and BMW was/is way up there, too. Depends on model, of course. 2) Jag. Far better that it was, at least in its later pre-Ford days. A byword for unreliability. Ford poured billions into the factory to get it up to scratch. DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...]2. Volvo. EG, now > they do not do particularly well in crash tests, whereas they were once > the benchmark. [...] > 5. Jaguar is junk.[....] It is now a marquee > of mediocre engineering hiding under nice leather and wood interiors. [...] >1) Volvo. That's an urban myth. In European tests Merc almost always cam >out on top and BMW was/is way up there, too. Depends on model, of course. My Mercury wasn't all that great. >>1) Volvo. That's an urban myth. In European tests Merc almost always cam >>out on top and BMW was/is way up there, too. Depends on model, of course. > >My Mercury wasn't all that great. He was actually referring to Mercedes as if you didn't know! Sir Hugh of Bognor SignatureRemember. You may honestly belive that you understood everything you thought I said but what you thought you heard wasn't exactly what I said. hsg@h-gee.co.uk hsg@bognor-bill.co.uk bognor-bill@bb-trading-uk.com >>>1) Volvo. That's an urban myth. In European tests Merc almost always cam >>>out on top and BMW was/is way up there, too. Depends on model, of course. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Sir Hugh of Bognor I didn't know. How do you abbreviate Mercury in your part of the world. Where I am, a Mercury is called a Merc. Tell me your abbreviation for Mercury and if it's correct I'll start using it. In these parts a Mercedes is called a MB or a Benz. Thanks for your interest though. Yes, he waa referring to Mercedes. In our part of the world (outside USA and in BMW/Merc NGs) the usual abbreviation for Mercedes-Benz in English is MB or Merc). In said world VERY few people own Mercurys, so the confusion would not arise... ;-) DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] > I didn't know. How do you abbreviate Mercury in your part of the > world. Where I am, a Mercury is called a Merc. Tell me your > abbreviation for Mercury and if it's correct I'll start using it. In > these parts a Mercedes is called a MB or a Benz. Thanks for your > interest though. That still doesn't answer my question. How do you abbrereviate Mercury? In fifty years of driving I have heard people say Merc. many times and they were ALWAYS referring to Mercury. BTW I see many more Mercs. on the road than I do Mercedes! Perhaps I live in a poorer part of the world where there aren't as many people who can afford a MB as opposed to a Merc. I'm sure you feel you are correct and aren't going to change your tninking. If you answer my question, I may be willing to change mine. >Yes, he waa referring to Mercedes. In our part of the world (outside USA >and in BMW/Merc NGs) the usual abbreviation for Mercedes-Benz in English is [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >> these parts a Mercedes is called a MB or a Benz. Thanks for your >> interest though. jerri <jerri77@aol.com> wrote in message <19cir1t354ubna7eoc9fr5t7o5th3loc6u@4ax.com>: >That still doesn't answer my question. How do you abbrereviate >Mercury? In fifty years of driving I have heard people say Merc. many [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >to change your tninking. If you answer my question, I may be willing >to change mine. I don't think we give much of a damn what your thinking on abbreviations is. > jerri <jerri77@aol.com> wrote in message ><19cir1t354ubna7eoc9fr5t7o5th3loc6u@4ax.com>: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >I don't think we give much of a damn what your thinking on abbreviations >is. Thanks. You just made my point! > That still doesn't answer my question. How do you abbrereviate > Mercury? In fifty years of driving I have heard people say Merc. many [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to change your tninking. If you answer my question, I may be willing > to change mine. Not sure what pert of the world (U.S.?) you're in, but in the Washington DC suburbs, "Merc" meant Mercury 50 years ago when a Benz sighting was rare, indeed. Now, since Mercedes are much more common on our roads than Mercurys, "Merc" tends to refer to the German marque, not the American. To answer your question, don't abbreviate unless the meaning is very clear to others who may have a different geographical/cultural background. Tom K. >To answer your question, don't abbreviate unless the meaning is very clear >to others who may have a different geographical/cultural background. > >Tom K. That's says it much better than I did. I hope the other posters get the point. I'm sure when someone say Benz or MB just about everybody knows what they mean. That evidently isn't the case when someone says Merc. Thanks for your help. Maybe now we can get back on topic and discuss BMWs. > That still doesn't answer my question. How do you abbrereviate > Mercury? FORD > FORD Found On Road, Dead? Fix Or Repair Daily? SignatureBBO, couldn't help it. I don't understand what this has to do with my "thinking". I gave you the facts; do reread my post. I have no idea what the abbreviation for Ford Mercury is. Like I said "In said world VERY few people own Mercurys". Let me also spell out the meaning of "said": outside USA and in BMW/Merc NGs. I am well aware of the fact that "Merc" can also mean Ford Mercury but... see above... Whilst literacy is not a requirement for NG contributors one does expect posters to at least have a good read of the post to which they are replying. DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- > That still doesn't answer my question. How do you abbrereviate > Mercury? In fifty years of driving I have heard people say Merc. many [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >>> these parts a Mercedes is called a MB or a Benz. Thanks for your >>> interest though. >I don't understand what this has to do with my "thinking". I gave you the >facts; do reread my post. > >I have no idea what the abbreviation for Ford Mercury is. That's my point. >Let me also spell out the meaning of "said": outside USA and in BMW/Merc >NGs. I looked up the defination of "said" and my dictionary didn't mention "USA." BTW this isn't a "BMW/Merc >I am well aware of the fact that "Merc" can also mean Ford Mercury but... >see above... [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] >>>> these parts a Mercedes is called a MB or a Benz. Thanks for your >>>> interest though. >I don't understand what this has to do with my "thinking". I gave you the >facts; do reread my post. > >I have no idea what the abbreviation for Ford Mercury is. That's my point. >Let me also spell out the meaning of "said": outside USA and in BMW/Merc >NGs. My dictionary doesn't agree with you and this isn't a "BMW/Merc NG." It's a BMW NG. >>I am well aware of the fact that "Merc" can also mean Ford Mercury but... >see above... Guess what company put the Merc-O-Matic Transmission in their vehicles? >Whilst literacy is not a requirement for NG contributors one does expect >posters to at least have a good read of the post to which they are replying. I agree 100%. Please follow your suggestion. This is starting to get silly and I won't read any more responses to this off topic subject. Let's get back to BMW. Can we at least agree on what BMW means? Maybe we can argue the meanings of Bimmer And Beemer! IRMC! >DAS > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >>>> these parts a Mercedes is called a MB or a Benz. Thanks for your >>>> interest though. It was silly from the start and you are/were being cussed. I (and you) don't need to know the abbreviation here for a Ford Mercury, which is not the subject of discussion in a BMW or Mercedes or for that matter in most other NGs. The Mercs that are mentioned are normally Mercedes-Benz vehicles and the word might even refer to the parent DC (DaimlerChrysler) Corporation, just so that you don't find another reason to be confused. DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] > This is starting to get silly [...] > It was silly from the start and you are/were being cussed. I (and you) > don't need to know the abbreviation here for a Ford Mercury, which is not > the subject of discussion in a BMW or Mercedes or for that matter in most > other NGs. The Mercs that are mentioned are normally Mercedes-Benz vehicles > and the word might even refer to the parent DC (DaimlerChrysler) > Corporation, just so that you don't find another reason to be confused. I agree, quite silly. But I must admit that before I started to read usenet auto groups I had never, ever heard a Mercedes abbreviated as Merc even though my father owned Benzes as far back as 1968 and my family has never once owned a Mercury. You see, Merc as an abbreviation for Mercury is quite common here in the US. So naturally I too was thrown off until I figured out that all you Euro types were talking about the Daimler Benz and not FoMoCo products. I'm afraid it's just another of those (seemingly endless) US/Euro linguistic differences. Just one more thing to hate us all for... ;-) Signature-Fred W Oh no, just another entry for the British English - US English Dictionary... http://www.peak.org/~jeremy/dictionary/ http://english2american.com/ Vive la difference! BTW, it is not US/Euro... In Europe there are only two English-speaking countries, and one of them is not very big. It is US/CA/UK/IE/AU/NZ/ZA/IN... DAS SignatureFor direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] > I'm afraid it's just another of those (seemingly endless) US/Euro > linguistic differences. Just one more thing to hate us all for... > > ;-) > In Europe there are only two English-speaking countries, and one of > them is not very big. There are 4 in the UK? Of course there is Welsh and the various types of Gaelic, but the main language in all four is English. With variations... Signature*Everyone has a photographic memory. Some don't have film * Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> In Europe there are only two English-speaking countries, and one of >> them is not very big. > >There are 4 in the UK? Of course there is Welsh and the various types of >Gaelic, but the main language in all four is English. With variations... You've obviously never tried to communicate with a Geordie after 8 bottles of Newcastle brown! No way is that English! :o) Dodgy. SignatureMUSHROOMS ARE THE OPIATE OF THE MOOSES Let's not confuse the foreigners with the legal position of England/Wales, Scotland & Northern Ireland, and let's stick to the UK and Eire... :-) DAS SignatureFor direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- >> In Europe there are only two English-speaking countries, and one of >> them is not very big. > > There are 4 in the UK? Of course there is Welsh and the various types of > Gaelic, but the main language in all four is English. With variations... > My 2 cents/pennies worth... > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > engines etc., but just as many if not more similar problems with Honda > / Toyotas etc. No machine is perfect. Yes, no machine is perfect. In fact, nothing (except G-d) is perfect. That being said, the following views are mine alone... 1. BMW is a nice car, but overpriced and expensive to maintain. Also, undriveable in the winter without very good snow tires (except for the AWD XI models). They are still rated an enthusiast's car, particularly known for their exceptional handling. And yet most are sold with automatic transmissions. because a lot of folks just want the cachet of owning a bimmer. 2. Volvo used to be known as "the car for people who hate cars". That is, folks who did not care that much about driving per se, but wanted safety, reliability, and longevity. The 240 was a legend on all three counts, but Ford has unraveled a lot of what Volvo stood for. EG, now they do not do particularly well in crash tests, whereas they were once the benchmark. Still good cars, but not what they used to be. 3. Saab has been eviscerated by GM. The only things left are the signature grill and the key in the console. All of the great individualistic design is gone, all of the quirky but loveable Saabisms are history. A very sad story. Buy a Saab today and you are getting a gussied-up Opel, or an overpriced Suburu. But, thanks to the durability of Saabs, there are a lot of pre-GM examples still out there that are real bargains. In its heyday (the 70's and early 80's), Saab was every bit as good as BMW (but in a different way). 4. Mercedes-Benz is now a mediocrity, after its fusion with the brain-dead Chrysler Corporation. They now make $100K cars that match Yugo and Renault for reliability problems. 5. Jaguar is junk. It used to be the country club car for English lords and ladies (and those aspiring to be such). It is now a marquee of mediocre engineering hiding under nice leather and wood interiors. 6. American cars are pathetic. The country that invented automotive mass production now can't seem to make cars that appeal to its home market. Very depressing. 7.Asian cars will rule. So get used to their unique combination of reliability, gee-whiz gimmickry, and anime styling. It's here for keeps. Sob. On second thought, go out and get that bimmer! > > I'd X out BMW as an option. > > Why bother reading this group, then? Because I still *own* one. And the main reason I still own it is because I feel I've invested too much into it to let it go at its current market value. -- Cliff > After driving Subarus, Toyotas, Hondas and yes - a Chevy, all my life, I'm > finally at the point that I can afford (and want) to step up to a new [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > 1. Does BMW ever run "specials" on new car purchases - ie - rebates, etc? > Is there any "better" time to buy? Any buying tips? Generally, no. BMW doesn't have a holdback, so there's no hidden profit for the dealer. They occasionally offer an incentive to buy a model that is being replaced ($4K on an E39 as it was being phased out for the E60). Large dealerships in large markets can typically offer a better price break than small ones. Best I've heard of was $1500 over invoice. > 2. Do BMW's generally require Premium gas? If so, what are the practical > consequences of running mid-grade or regular? Engine Damage or just > less-than-optimal performance? (By less-than optimal, I mean just normal > tooling ariound town - no redlining). BMW's are tuned for 91 octane. You can run regular or mid grade then the EMU will modify the engine's performance. You'll probably noticed poorer gas mileage as well. If you're trying to pinch pennies in operating costs, I'd recommend a Honda or Toyota. Any savings you realize in running cheaper gas will be far outweighed by the preventive maintenance program when you exceed you 50K/4 years of "free" maintenance. > 3. I don't have a garage, but parking is off-street, so how well do BMW > bodies hold up? (I live in Central Virginia). OK, but paint tends to be somewhat brittle and chip prone. If you share the road with lots of gravel trucks and folks that go offroad and then back on, clear paint protection would be a wise investment. > Can't think of anything else to ask right now. Any help with these > questions would be appreciated. > After driving Subarus, Toyotas, Hondas and yes - a Chevy, all my life, > I'm finally at the point that I can afford (and want) to step up to a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > 1. Does BMW ever run "specials" on new car purchases - ie - rebates, > etc? Is there any "better" time to buy? Any buying tips? No. Just negotiate the best deal you can. No specials, rebates or such stuff. > 2. Do BMW's generally require Premium gas? Some, not all. Mostly the higher performance models. > If so, what are the > practical consequences of running mid-grade or regular? Engine Damage > or just less-than-optimal performance? less than optimum. The ECU will retard the ignition if it senses and pinging. > (By less-than optimal, I mean > just normal tooling ariound town - no redlining). Why not redlining? It's there for a reason you know... > 3. I don't have a garage, but parking is off-street, so how well do BMW > bodies hold up? (I live in Central Virginia). Fine. Virginia weather is mild. > Can't think of anything else to ask right now. Any help with these > questions would be appreciated. I do not personally consider BMWs as "luxury" cars, though I suppose the 7 series is and the later 5 series qualify. They are more like European performance sedans (and coupes). That is why I buy them, for the performance and driving experience, not for any "luxury" features, and especially not for and "prestige factor". If you are looking for luxury and prestige, and do not really care so much about the driving experience then I would recommend the Infinity or Lexus. Signature-Fred W Agreed. They (and similar Mercs and Audis) are as common as muck on German roads, and almost so in Britain. Not luxury, just nice cars. DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] > I do not personally consider BMWs as "luxury" cars, though I suppose the 7 > series is and the later 5 series qualify. They are more like European > performance sedans (and coupes). [...] > Agreed. They (and similar Mercs and Audis) are as common as muck on German > roads, and almost so in Britain. Not luxury, just nice cars. > > DAS In the UK at least, BMW supply some models with less than base model specs - the "ES" (extra spartan?) I believe they take a base model and take things off of it. These are certainly not luxury cars. These days many manufacturers are providing equipment the same or better than BMW provides. I think you have to be BMW die-hard to only consider BMW these days. Dealers suck in general and paying a premium to get crappy service leaves a bad taste in your mouth. In the UK the 3-series outsells the Ford sector equivalent the Mondeo so in a way the Ford is more exclusive. I would have no problem however recommending a several year old 5 or 7 series as a "cheap" luxury car. You can get parts and servicing at non-BMW locations and drive around in something that only cost you ford money. > In the UK at least, BMW supply some models with less than base model > specs - the "ES" (extra spartan?) I believe they take a base model > and take things off of it. These are certainly not luxury cars. These > days many manufacturers are providing equipment the same or better than > BMW provides. I don't think 'luxury' necessarily means equipment levels otherwise the very worst Asian maker could be considered a luxury car maker when compared to a base BMW. To me it's to do with the tactile feel of driving the vehicle. And this doesn't change with a BMW regardless of the level of trim and toys. Signature*If a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled? Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. > I don't think 'luxury' necessarily means equipment levels otherwise the > very worst Asian maker could be considered a luxury car maker when > compared to a base BMW. > To me it's to do with the tactile feel of driving the vehicle. And this > doesn't change with a BMW regardless of the level of trim and toys. Luxury: 1. Something inessential but conducive to pleasure and comfort. 2. Something expensive or hard to obtain. 3. Sumptuous living or surroundings: lives in luxury. Asian car makers have been making more luxurious small-midsize cars as standard than BMW have for decades. However, people usually think of large cars when it comes to luxury like the BMW 7 series, mercedes or lexus limos and of course these all come with creature comforts. > > I don't think 'luxury' necessarily means equipment levels otherwise the > > very worst Asian maker could be considered a luxury car maker when > > compared to a base BMW. > > To me it's to do with the tactile feel of driving the vehicle. And this > > doesn't change with a BMW regardless of the level of trim and toys. > Luxury: > 1. Something inessential but conducive to pleasure and comfort. > 2. Something expensive or hard to obtain. > 3. Sumptuous living or surroundings: lives in luxury. I'd go for 'enjoyable but not essential thing' - Collins English Dictionary. > Asian car makers have been making more luxurious small-midsize cars as > standard than BMW have for decades. However, people usually think of > large cars when it comes to luxury like the BMW 7 series, mercedes or > lexus limos and of course these all come with creature comforts. It's one of these phrases taken over by the ad man? Signature*Drugs may lead to nowhere, but at least it's the scenic route * Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. > Asian car makers have been making more luxurious small-midsize cars as > standard than BMW have for decades. However, people usually think of > large cars when it comes to luxury like the BMW 7 series, mercedes or > lexus limos and of course these all come with creature comforts. Utterly laughable to suggest asian cars can even begin to hold a candle to the likes of a BMW, or a Honda or Toyota, for refinement, ride comfort, handling, quality feel of any part of the vehicle you care to mention, seat comfort, handling, durability ...... yada... yada... yada. Asian cars OK if you want a cheap reliable run-about, which lots of people do. >>Asian car makers have been making more luxurious small-midsize cars as >>standard than BMW have for decades. However, people usually think of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Asian cars OK if you want a cheap reliable run-about, which lots of > people do. I want some of whatever you're smoking... Hondas and Toyotas *ARE* Asian cars. Signature-Fred W > > Asian cars OK if you want a cheap reliable run-about, which lots of > > people do. > I want some of whatever you're smoking... > Hondas and Toyotas *ARE* Asian cars. They are, but more normally referred to as Japanese. By Asian I meant things like Kia and Hyundia. Even Daewoo. Oops. Chevrolet? Signature*I have my own little world - but it's OK...they know me here* Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. Wait until Cherry/Chery start shipping cars out of China. At the reported $12-15K for a fully loaded "luxuary" car, all the other companies are going to be hurting! "bfd" <bfd853@yahoo.com> haute in die Tasten: > Wait until Cherry/Chery start shipping cars out of China. At the > reported $12-15K for a fully loaded "luxuary" car, all the other > companies are going to be hurting! It depends. When Renault started to sell its romanian made Dacia Logan in Germany (a small 4 door sedan based on the Renault Clio) for only 7.500 Euros (which is some 30% less than the price of comparable cars and half the price of a VW Golf in standard configuration), people thought this would be a major threat for western car makers. Now the distributor of Logan in germany reports a very low demand for the car. IMHO the low price of this 3rd world cars is caused by two things: 1. lack of technological refinement and 2. low labor cost. The result is a car which costs as much as a four year old used western car, but is not better in any aspect than this car either. So why bother with a shitty Dacia Logan, if you could have an used Golf for the same money? Some buyers may like the prestige of buying a "new car", but the prestige of a new Dacia is close to zero, because everybody knows that it is the cheapest car around. Situation may be totally different in eastern Europe. There a new Dacia probably is a Chick Collector of some kind;-) This yera the first Chinese made car hit the German market. It is called "Landwind" and it is based on a late '80s Isuzu/Opel SUV design. German automobile club ADAC performed a crash test with this car and came to the conclusion: "the worst crash test result since the beginning of our crash test activities." I do not have any respect for chinese automobiles. If they want my respect, they need to launch better cars than this POS. I think it will be a long way until a chinese made car will be a real competitor for a BMW. Honda and Lexus needed decades to come into this position, and it required not only superb engineering but also participation in Formula 1 racing etc. Let's wait and see. Frank Signatureplease replace spam-muelleimer with fk-newsgroups for e-mail contact Citroen - Made in Trance >"bfd" <bfd853@yahoo.com> haute in die Tasten: > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > >Frank The Chinese have bought ROVER - I wait for results! Sir Hugh of Bognor SignatureRemember. You may honestly belive that you understood everything you thought I said but what you thought you heard wasn't exactly what I said. hsg@h-gee.co.uk hsg@bognor-bill.co.uk bognor-bill@bb-trading-uk.com >>>Asian car makers have been making more luxurious small-midsize cars as >>>standard than BMW have for decades. However, people usually think of [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Hondas and Toyotas *ARE* Asian cars. Damn, you beat me too it! Dodgy. SignatureMUSHROOMS ARE THE OPIATE OF THE MOOSES Because for most people the price of a new one of those (bigger BMWs, Mercs) is a luxury. Or running costs. Hence smaller BMWs, Mercs, Audis and not particularly 'luxurious' esp in Germany. DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] However, people usually think of > large cars when it comes to luxury like the BMW 7 series, mercedes or > lexus limos and of course these all come with creature comforts. I think the key is to drive one. IF you can't tell the difference between a BMW and Audi/Mercedes/Acura/Lexus/Infiniti, then get yourself one of those. BMW use to require a very stringent maintenance program. (i.e., flush brake fluid and coolant every 2 years; change differential and transmission fluids every 30,000 miles). But with the advent of "free" maintenance and "lifetime" fluids, those intervals have been greatly extended. If you're the type that gets a new car every couple of years/100,000 or less miles, then it doesn't matter. If you like to keep your car for a long time, then it does make a difference. Bottom line - drive one and see if you like it. If not, get something else! > After driving Subarus, Toyotas, Hondas and yes - a Chevy, all my life, > I'm finally at the point that I can afford (and want) to step up to a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > or just less-than-optimal performance? (By less-than optimal, I mean > just normal tooling ariound town - no redlining). I ran my '94 3 Series on mid-grade for about 120,000 miles. No wories. I'm on my second car now, and use mid-grade in it as well. > 3. I don't have a garage, but parking is off-street, so how well do BMW > bodies hold up? (I live in Central Virginia). > > Can't think of anything else to ask right now. Any help with these > questions would be appreciated. >After driving Subarus, Toyotas, Hondas and yes - a Chevy, all my life, >I'm finally at the point that I can afford (and want) to step up to a [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >3. I don't have a garage, but parking is off-street, so how well do BMW >bodies hold up? (I live in Central Virginia). Pretty good, I have a black/black which has no show of age and is in factory condition. >Can't think of anything else to ask right now. Any help with these >questions would be appreciated. BMW's are awsome cars, they are luxury and sports cars all rolled into one. In a well maintained BMW you will get well over 300,000 miles. But, they are not cars you can just beat on like a Lexuses. If you know alittle bit about cars and buy your self a reset tool so you can change your own oil and do your own dignostics, and maintance, you wont be able to beat a BMW. Good luck! ! Depends on what you mean by luxury. Smaller BMWs are ceratinly not "luxury" in European eyes (nor are similar cars from other brands such as Audi and Merc). All depends on options selected as well. See another part of this thread. DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] > BMW's are awsome cars, they are luxury and sports cars all rolled into > one. [...] >>After driving Subarus, Toyotas, Hondas and yes - a Chevy, all my life, >>I'm finally at the point that I can afford (and want) to step up to a [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > your own dignostics, and maintance, you wont be able to beat a BMW. Good luck! > ! Thanks to all for your responses. Wow! Lots of responses! Luxury and Sports car rolled into one sounds good! I'm sure that other lines/mfrs are considered more luxurious than BMW, but remember -- my experience has been Toyota, Honda, Subaru, Chevy and Ford (forgot about that last one in my original post). One question -- I frequently hear about "performance", "well-engineered" etc, when it comes to BMW. Would anyone care to elaborate on exactly what that means to them? Note: I haven't test-driven a BMW yet, but plan to. Thanks! It is subjective. It means different things to different people. I was in your situation before. I drove all the contenders, but when I finally drove the BMW I stopped test driving and bought it. As a matter of fact I went from a Lexus dealer to a BMW dealer the same afternoon. No comparison, to me, between the Lexus and the BMW. >>>After driving Subarus, Toyotas, Hondas and yes - a Chevy, all my life, >>>I'm finally at the point that I can afford (and want) to step up to a new [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > > Thanks! BMW engines rev freely and sound wonderfull right to the red line.. 7000rpm on petrol engines and 4800 rpm for the Euro diesels (thats high for a diesel). I drive a diesel and even this manages to sound good (nothing like as good as a 6 cylinder though!), loves to be worked hard and pulls like a 330i despite being a lowly(?) 163hp 320d. It's a class leader. I have owned my first BMW for 6-7 weeks now after Nissans and Mitsubishi's over the last 10+ years. Well-engineered to me means the quality feel of every component, the materials used and the tactile sweet feel of every "click" of lever and switch. The gear shift is smooth and precise, I have caught myself changing gear just to marvel at the feel of it (OK I know, I know, I'm sad!) When you close the door or trunk there is a wonderfull "chunk" sound, not a tinny clang. After a couple of weeks of ownership it hit me that everyone who designed this car put a hell of a lot of thought into every detail in making it as refined as can be. It feels "luxurious" and sporty without the need for a heap of silly electronic gadgets which you won't care about when your are flying round a corner at 10, 20 or 30mph faster than every other car you've driven with your wife complaining that you are in a hurry and why are you going so slow (yes, really! it's happen to me.) Look around BMW news groups and chat boards long enough and you will find people who after owning all sorts of other cars are now on their 3rd, 4th 5th, 6th BMW in a row. Sorry to "wax lyrical" >One question -- I frequently hear about "performance", "well-engineered" >etc, when it comes to BMW. Would anyone care to elaborate on exactly >what that means to them? Important to me, is the fact that they just do it right. They don't make FWD cars. FWD is cheap and fills a market niche, but BMW does not sink so low. They don't make V6 engines. Most companies make the inferior V6 because it's cheaper - they can share tooling with a V8 and/or turn it sideways and share it with a FWD car. BMW makes the proper design decisions that result in the best-performing car. >>One question -- I frequently hear about "performance", "well-engineered" >>etc, when it comes to BMW. Would anyone care to elaborate on exactly [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >BMW makes the proper design decisions that result in the >best-performing car. I wouldn't change a word. Perhaps its the way cars are percieved in the UK, but I do consider Japanese cars to be in a class of their own quite seperate from the "Asian" car makes that Dave listed. > They are, but more normally referred to as Japanese. By Asian I meant > things like Kia and Hyundia. Japanese cars are great, owned Nissans and Mitsibishis for years before getting the BMW. I still say they don't quite match up to the premium European brands for luxury/build quality/engineering, though their reliability is beyond question. > Even Daewoo. Oops. Chevrolet? Lol, Chevrolet entered the UK market with re-badged Daewoos recently, got to be one of the stupidest car marketing moves in history. No one is fooled Chevrolet, we really don't need any more cheap car's to choose from. I think I have seen 2 or 3 Chevies ever here. Bring something new, good, competative and appealing to a European market and Chevy might get somewhere. > They don't make FWD cars. FWD is cheap and fills a market niche, but > BMW does not sink so low. But they do with their Mini. Also a premium priced product. Think you're being unfair about FWD. Although I prefer RWD, FWD offers a much better package in a small car. You only have to look at the 1 Series to realise this. Since the current Mini is let down by poor engines, it will be interesting to see how the new version with better ones compares to the 1 Series. Signature*Hard work pays off in the future. Laziness pays off now * Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> They don't make FWD cars. FWD is cheap and fills a market niche, but >> BMW does not sink so low. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Since the current Mini is let down by poor engines, it will be interesting >to see how the new version with better ones compares to the 1 Series. A chap I work with has the new cooper S, he opened the bonnet (hood) for me to have a look... Or more accurate he lifted up the entire front of the car! Wings, headlamps, they all go up! All I can say is God help anyone who want to do home servicing on one of those! It's all stuffed in there like my holiday suitcase! Dodgy. SignatureMUSHROOMS ARE THE OPIATE OF THE MOOSES > >Since the current Mini is let down by poor engines, it will be interesting > >to see how the new version with better ones compares to the 1 Series. > A chap I work with has the new cooper S, he opened the bonnet (hood) > for me to have a look... Or more accurate he lifted up the entire > front of the car! Wings, headlamps, they all go up! > All I can say is God help anyone who want to do home servicing on one > of those! It's all stuffed in there like my holiday suitcase! So was the original Mini - changing and setting points was a pain as was just changing a fan belt. And some hoses. And you had to do these rather more often. ;-) Signature*We are born naked, wet, and hungry. Then things get worse. Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> >Since the current Mini is let down by poor engines, it will be interesting >> >to see how the new version with better ones compares to the 1 Series. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >just changing a fan belt. And some hoses. And you had to do these rather >more often. ;-) Having had a "real" mini, I'd rather work on that than the new one... Even if I did have to put a marigold over the dizzy cap when it rained! I could barely see the oil filter on the new mini, let alone touch it! Dodgy. SignatureMUSHROOMS ARE THE OPIATE OF THE MOOSES >> They don't make FWD cars. FWD is cheap and fills a market niche, but >> BMW does not sink so low. > >But they do with their Mini. Mini's not BMW. > Mini's not BMW. Urmmm, the new model Mini's are. In the UK you see a "Mini" section attached to the BMW dealership. >> Mini's not BMW. > >Urmmm, the new model Mini's are. Urmmm, no, they are not. >In the UK you see a "Mini" section >attached to the BMW dealership. Irrelevant. > >> Mini's not BMW. > > > >Urmmm, the new model Mini's are. > Urmmm, no, they are not. Who makes them and owns them, then? Ford? Signature*A nest isn't empty until all their stuff is out of the attic Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> >> Mini's not BMW. >> > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Who makes them and owns them, then? Ford? Irrelevant. > >> >> Mini's not BMW. > >> > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > >Who makes them and owns them, then? Ford? > Irrelevant. You must be a marketing man's dream... Signature*Organized Crime Is Alive And Well; It's Called Auto Insurance. * Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> >> >> Mini's not BMW. >> >> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >You must be a marketing man's dream... Really? I guess those RWD platforms are a pure illusion of marketing. I guess the reality is that the Mini is every bit the car as the "more expensive BMW's", which only sell for higher prices due to marketing or "badge engineering". Mini's are not BMW's. A Mini driver is in fact incorrect if he claims to be driving a BMW. Mini's are lesser cars, built to a lesser standard. I can't believe that anyone needs this explained to them. > Really? I guess those RWD platforms are a pure illusion of marketing. > I guess the reality is that the Mini is every bit the car as the "more > expensive BMW's", which only sell for higher prices due to marketing > or "badge engineering". So this means a 1 Series BMW isn't a real BMW because it costs less than a 7 Series? Hint. The Mini is a premium priced product in its class in exactly the same way as every other BMW. Signature*You can't have everything, where would you put it? Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> Really? I guess those RWD platforms are a pure illusion of marketing. >> I guess the reality is that the Mini is every bit the car as the "more [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >So this means a 1 Series BMW isn't a real BMW because it costs less than a >7 Series? Dave, I never thought badly of you, but if you persist in this stupidity, I'll be forced to change my mind. >Hint. The Mini is a premium priced product in its class in exactly the >same way as every other BMW. Mini's are not BMW's. > >> Really? I guess those RWD platforms are a pure illusion of > >> marketing. I guess the reality is that the Mini is every bit the car [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >So this means a 1 Series BMW isn't a real BMW because it costs less > >than a 7 Series? > Dave, I never thought badly of you, but if you persist in this > stupidity, I'll be forced to change my mind. > >Hint. The Mini is a premium priced product in its class in exactly the > >same way as every other BMW. > Mini's are not BMW's. I never thought badly of you but if you persist in this apostrophe abuse I'll be forced to change my mind. Signature*Santa's helpers are subordinate clauses.* Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> Mini's are not BMW's. > >I never thought badly of you but if you persist in this apostrophe abuse >I'll be forced to change my mind. Its very common in the colonie's for some to indulge in such abuse's when using apostrophe's....or not using them when requirement's dictate. Dontcha just love it? > > Mini's are not BMW's. Since I'm posting I might as well say that I tend to agree with this point of view. > I never thought badly of you but if you persist in this apostrophe abuse > I'll be forced to change my mind. I think the jury is out on |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message