Does BMW have more fans than Merc & Audi? What do they represent today?

"MegaSuper" (megasuper) 06/05/2015 at 05:49 • Filed to: None

1

30

Respectfully, I don’t “get” BMW. I respect them, I like some of their cars and designs, I honestly don’t dislike them, I’m honestly not bothered by the stereotypes, but how they are reputed confuses me; I’ve never really understood why M cars seem to get more attention than AMG or Audi RS cars in the press/have a bigger following. Out of the German automakers, Audi, Merc, and BMW are probably the most similar (as opposed to VW and Porsche), yet it seems the coverage and fanbase is disproportionately BMW.

For instance, there are so many articles about E30s, but I just don’t see the same enthusiasm for Mercedes 2.5-16 Evolutions, or AMG Hammers, or Audi Ur-Quattros, etc.

I’m not saying BMW doesn’t deserve it, I just don’t understand what pushes them “over the edge” compared to the other two brands. I don’t know why their fans seem to be so much more vocal/wear M-branded clothing and all that compared to AMG or Audi RS.

And I do understand the soul-searching that some current fans seem to be writing about, with the new FWD cars, “GT” bodystyle, the X6M, the i division, etc. I just don’t really know what the brand “stands for” anymore, if that makes any sense. I completely understand they were great in the 90s-early 2000s, but it seems the company went in a different direction after the Bangle/iDrive era.

This is the first time in recent memory that the M3s competitors are actually beating it in comparison tests, AFAIK. I can’t remember if it was CAR, Evo, or Top Gear, but at least one of those expressed disappointment over the new M3/M4, even recommending the M5 over it. They said it just “didn’t feel like an M car” and another one said that the new C63 AMG is better. The Z4, as far as I know, has never really received glowing reviews (neither has the SLK55, don’t get me wrong.) I realize it’s not a driver’s car per se, but as far as I’ve read, the 7 series hasn’t been good in a long time, whereas the S-Class and S-Class Coupe receive nigh-universal praise.

For “special projects” in recent times at least, the Audi R8 is spectacular, AMG-GT has received good reviews, but the Z8 wasn’t well-received (other than those looks!) and the i8 isn’t really on the same level as these other cars. It’s fascinating, but not the equivalent of a theoretical M8. I can’t help but feel that it’ll be a bit overlooked when the new NSX comes out.

I may be wrong here, but is it not true that BMW does the “synthesized engine audio”, whereas AMG and Audi don’t? That’s another reason: as far as my own ears have experienced, current AMG and Audi RS cars sound way better than the M ones.

(This isn’t a complaint about BMW the company, but since when are so many of the “hellaflush/stanced/Import Tuner-style cars BMWs now? Every time I see a car with cut springs that is practically riding on the tires, it’s usually a BMW, not a Civic or something.)

So is it just me, or does BMW sort of have a different, more vocal, more reverential following than Mercedes-Benz and Audi? Sorry if this sounds like a rant, I’m just trying to understand. What do they do better than the other 2? Or is it because the M division has been around for so long? Or is it the “What do you drive?” “Bimmer” “OOOOH FANCY” vs “Mercedes” “LOL TAXICAB” vs “Audi” “Huh who drives those/4WD no fun man” effect?

PG; the scalpel wielder > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 06:04

0

Stronger marketing as drivers cars vs luxury cars. Currently Mercedes has no manuals, and Audi only offers it on their weaker engines. Bmw still makes fun little things like the 2 series, whereas the other 2 dont really. For me personally I love old mercs, but since I want a newish car I’m only really left with the 135i. And hence another fanboy is born

RomeoX > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 06:07

1

To explain why the BMW cars have such a great following, as well as why in certain areas other rivals (especially Audi) are taking off like wildfire, all you need is a simple analogy.

You walk into a crowded mall and go to the food court. Regardless of what is being served, there are two food counters, counter A and counter B. There are 25 people waiting in line for counter A and no one in line for counter B. The sad reality is, you sir or madam, now have over a 90% chance of joining the line for counter A instead of counter B if you are hungry.

Now, how does this refer back to cars? Most people, (not all, but a whole lot of them) will actually know very little about cars, but will read up on them on online forums and from magazines. From here, the legend of the BMW and especially the M3 is born. It has been featured as one of Car and Driver’s Top 10 cars since 1992. BMW’s have been featured on Motor Trend articles more often than any other brand since 1986 and you constantly have countless other productions ranting and raving the praises for the BMW brand (and especially the M3).

The irony is, car companies can be slightly insecure and emotional. So, when you have editors who constantly praise your cars, the car manufacturer is more likely to keep showering said editors with press cars. And the cycle continues.

Now, in my area of New York city, the new “gold standard” seems to be drifting away from BMW and it’s complete inability to handle the war torn environment that is Manhattan potholes, and people are going for the “more luxurious and softer ride that is Audi or the Mercedes S550.” Do either of these cars handle potholes any better, the Mercedes by a slim margin, but the Audis are just as bad... BUT, since they are everywhere, it creates the persona that it is a “city car that is manageable” and people wind up attending counter A (Audi) instead of counter B (BMW) because everyone else is there.

Mattbob > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 06:22

1

TL;DR... Mercs don’t do manuals, and Audis have complicated engines that blow up and take your wallet with them. They all make good cars, but that’s the impression I get.

Axial > Mattbob 06/05/2015 at 06:34

1

Engines that blow up and take your wallet with them

Make good cars

I Like Corollas > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 06:47

1

I think it has to do with BMW making the more driver-oriented cars in each class. Even the new M3/M4 and M5, which are no longer so driver-oriented, are avaliable with MT and RWD, which has almost dissapeared in the Merc’s and Audi’s catalog. Of course, they do abominations (to some people) like the X6M and 5 GT, but they keep making great driver’s car like the M235i. And wait for the M2.

It’s not perfect, or as good as it used to be, but I at least like it more than what the other two can offer.

TwinCharged - Is Now UK Opponaut > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 07:18

2

I believe it’s probably because BMW has usually focused on the driving aspect of cars, making them performance benchmarks. Ever since the E30, people have always held it in high regard because it was the super coupe of its day and BMW continued making cars that were good to drive throughout its life and hasn’t really stopped since. This idea of good drivability has become its trademark. Indeed, I would argue that Mercedes should’ve had the same reverence for its reliability and quality had it not been for the disastrous 90s-00s era when quality went straight down the toilet. Audis were known for their Quattro rally cars and...that’s about it. Sure, the TT was ridiculously popular but that was only because it was a fashion icon, not a driving icon. Audis were also questionably reliable (timing chain I’m looking at you). And also both BMW and Mercedes have existed longer as a singular brand than Audi, which only came into existence under its own name in the late 60s.

BMWs were generally more fashionable for the affluent youth than Mercs, especially during the 80s when money flowed like wine. Mercs were seen as old money, for governments and heads of state. BMWs were bought by those who made just made big bucks in finance and cars like the 635CSi sold well despite the gut-wrenching price of £95,000 (US$100,000+) because it was a capable performance car that also saw great success in touring car racing (ignoring the fact that Jaguar did beat them with the XJS in 1982). In fact, BMW has had a habit of selling cars by capitalising on their racing success - the 3.0 CSL “Batmobile” was a successful racecar and BMW decided to sell it to the public in the middle of the 1973 Oil Crisis, sporting a price tag that was bigger than the most expensive Aston Martin. And did they sell? Yup.

jkm7680 > PG; the scalpel wielder 06/05/2015 at 07:39

0

R8. That’s why you’re wrong.

Leon711 > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 07:40

2

I’d say that Audi and Mercedes both have more fans than BMW, since BMW only has one.

BloodlessWeevil > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 07:40

0

I think it’s because you hang out with people who like sports cars. Don’t get me wrong, Audi and Mercedes have a long history in the performance world, but they have primarily been middle of the road and luxury manufacturers respectively. BMW has always been a performance marque. It makes sense that people who highly value performance (or want to give that impression) would gravitate to BMW over Mercedes or Audi.

jkm7680 > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 07:44

0

I personally think that BMW used to be in the lead of both Mercedes and Audi at around 2005, but they slowly lost their reigns to Audi as their designs started to get boring and repetitive. They don’t do anything particularly better than the other two, all they’re doing now is making cars that compete with each other and taming them irresponsibly. Mercedes only offers their cars in so many colors and hasn’t exactly made anything particularly exciting to me personally in years. The G Wagon is the only Mercedes that I would willingly drive.

Mattbob > Axial 06/05/2015 at 07:44

0

It’s all relative.

PG; the scalpel wielder > jkm7680 06/05/2015 at 07:46

0

true, but not accessible by the majority and I thought the new one is auto-only?

jkm7680 > PG; the scalpel wielder 06/05/2015 at 07:49

0

Yup, it may come along later though. It’s what people are buying though, not what we demand sadly. The S4, S5, TT, A4 do and the S3 has a good possibility of it though.

PG; the scalpel wielder > jkm7680 06/05/2015 at 07:52

0

at the end of the day, for me personally, coming from a Honda I have nightmares about bmw reliability. I think anything from audi would actually give me a stroke

[highly personal opinion]

jkm7680 > PG; the scalpel wielder 06/05/2015 at 07:55

0

They aren’t even that unreliable.

MultiplaOrgasms > Axial 06/05/2015 at 08:12

0

Ferrari

Mazda RX models

Top Fuel Dragster

Anything Chrysler

I lied. All Chryslers are rubbish

Wobbles the Mind > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 08:16

0

BMW enthusiasts have always had a great web presence. Add that with the 3-series defining the luxury compact segment (which used to be the entry level) and it makes sense.

3-series fighter, 911 fighter, Tesla fighter, and Ferrari beater are segments. You either love the fighter or the one they are fighting. There’s no other option!

Axial > MultiplaOrgasms 06/05/2015 at 08:16

0

I never called any of those good, here. :p

MegaSuper > I Like Corollas 06/05/2015 at 08:20

1

Thank you!

All of these are great replies, but I think yours is the best “TL;DR”, haha!

In a nutshell:

Audi, BMW, Mercedes = +10 points for making fast, desirable, luxurious, or just great cars.

Audi, BMW, Mercedes = -10 points for making 93219823842 variants, some of which look like abominations.

BMW = +1 point for RWD+Manual combo.

So they’re all more or less equal, BMW has that edge because of that “link to the past” / their racing heritage. Got it!

The Ghost of Oppo > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 08:22

0

Saying there are a ton of articles on e30s and barely any on Quattros is comparing apples to oranges my friend.

MultiplaOrgasms > Axial 06/05/2015 at 08:26

0

Fucking Camry driver.

MegaSuper > BloodlessWeevil 06/05/2015 at 08:27

0

Sorry if this sounds stupid, but what do you mean specifically when you say “has always been a performance marque” ? Are you referring to how the E30 was a very raw, stripped-out M car versus today’s, which some people just see as “The nicest 3-series” ?

I don’t know much about their older models; was the 2002 or the first 5 series really intended to be more sporting than an E-Class?

I ask because, I of course totally get it when people say “I’d rather have an M3 than a C63” or vice versa.

But when people say, “Oh man…that 228i…such an amazing driver’s car.” I don’t really get what they’re referring to. Are ALL BMWs built with the priority being performance? When I hear “Performance marque” I think of something like Lotus where everything is for the benefit of the car, and hence, to reduce unwanted variables, there aren’t that many engine choices.

MegaSuper > jkm7680 06/05/2015 at 08:31

1

I totally agree, although I’d go a bit further and say that the “repetitive” designs argument extends to all 3. C-Class looks just like an S-Class from behind, Top Gear Magazine called Audi styling the “Photocopier styling department” hahaha. That’s one of the reasons I posed this question; I don’t understand how in just a few years the attitudes (in my area at least I guess) went from: “Hahaha German cars are what your boss drives, BO-RING!” to “They look so amazing, they’re so cool, didn’t you see that guy down the street who chopped his suspension? So cool, man. Best cars in the world.”

MegaSuper > TwinCharged - Is Now UK Opponaut 06/05/2015 at 08:32

0

WOW, thank you for this history lesson! More than an Aston? W…Wow. I never knew this. That’s mind-blowing.

Snooder87 > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 08:43

0

It’s because BMW made a name for themselves and marketed themselves heavily as an enthusiast brand.

Sure, mercedes and audi offered some models for the enthusiast, but BMW made it part of their corporate image. It’s like porsche. No matter how many Macans and Cayennes they sell, porsche will always market themselves as the people who make the 911.

A lot goes into building that image, and it’s not just the cars. The commercials are important, what apparel you sell is important. What articles and interviews you push to journalists is important. Sponsoring sports car clubs is important.

I just got a new Cadillac ATS and I went to see what apparel they offered. I’d originally planned to get a BMW, and I’m totally the sort of douche who would get the bmw jacket and cap and driving gloves and sign up a membership with BMWCCA. Guess what, ain’t none of that with Caddy. The car is just as nice, but the lifestyle feel isn’t there.

GUYMANDUDE > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 08:59

0

Pick a road racing series and BMW probably has some factory support there. BTCC for example, has only BMW represented of the 3. England is a huge market. E30 E36 both are cheap readily available and have all the bolt on parts you can want. Or you can buy some used m parts from eBay for your 325 on the cheap. The bmw’s have more options for bolt on parts and all the development has already been done. Also BMWCCA sponsors autocross and track days in my area. It seems like BMW is more committed to sports cars and performance driving than the other 2 brands. That being said, the C63 AMG would be the ultimate daily driver IMO.

FromCanadaWithLove > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 09:02

0

My reasoning for going with BMW (2 Series) was the simple RWD, 50/50 balance. Their N55 engine is one of my favourite engines on the market, and proportionally, the car nailed it.

With the M235i in Canada, the options you can choose don’t change the performance of the car, they just put more tech in it. That meant that I wasn’t missing out on the fanciest suspension or extra horsepower by getting the base model, which is cool. The S3 wasn’t out when I picked up my 2, but the CLA AMG was. I don’t really have a concrete answer as to why I didn’t test it, but it’s a combination of the price (in my area, the CLA costs more than a similarly equipped 2), the performance (based on reviews, probably a mistake on my part), the styling (ew), and questions I had about the longevity of a super-turbo’d 4 cylinder. I’ve had turbos fail on me (in a VW), and it’s not a fun thing to have to fix.

BloodlessWeevil > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 09:50

0

Not stupid at all. You just need to understand that the definition of a “luxury” car has changed in the past few decades. In the case of BMW, the cars did not change, the adjectives did. They still make sports cars, but if you put leather on it, you have to call it a “luxury” car (it’s a law or something... Yes, that was sarcasm.)

In my mind, luxury is not about stripped out or fully loaded. Gizmos and gadgets that will be obsolete or break in a few years don’t make a luxury car. Comfort and quality do (this is not a comment on build quality or reliability for any of them.) I consider most of the current lineup for all three to be stiff, cramped, and uncomfortable sports cars. It’s all relative though, I like big classic American cars.

E92M3 > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 11:41

0

I’ll try to explain, but you owe it to yourself to go drive one of each. That’s the best way to understand it. AMG’s are fun GT cars. Loads of power, but not the best handling. They’re great for burnouts, and maybe some drifting. Audi makes some great cars too. Just don’t expect to have any fun with them. At the limit they understeer sooo bad. BMW makes the best balanced cars. You can have fun in a 228, or an M4. Watch the Top Gear M3 vs C63 vs RS5 video. They sum it up well. All are great choices if you just want to drive to work in a fast luxury car, and never plan to do any trackdays.

TwinCharged - Is Now UK Opponaut > MegaSuper 06/05/2015 at 14:58

0

Indeed. Back in ‘73, a CSL would’ve cost you £7,500 or about £180,000 which is around US$260,000 in today’s money. BMW does have a habit of doing this - with the E46 M3 CSL, they jacked that price up from £35,000 to £60,000. And did customers complain? Of course not, because the E46 CSL was genuinely an incredible car to drive. Of course today, it’s fairly outclassed because around a track, even a little M235i can keep up with it.