![]() 10/02/2018 at 12:16 • Filed to: None | ![]() | ![]() |
“ BMW says the two powertrains will yield 0-60 mph times of 5.3 to 5.6 seconds on the 330i xDrive and 330i models, respectively. The M340i, the company says, will do that sprint in roughly 4.2 seconds. Yes, the all-wheel drive 330i model is quicker.”
Um, quicker than what?
I can’t comment on Jalopnik because my account is still kinja’d
![]() 10/02/2018 at 12:19 |
|
The xDrive 330i is quicker than the RWD 330i.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 12:19 |
|
The RWD version? Unless I’m missing something, it’s stated in the excerpt you pulled.
Wording could be better with “Yes AWD is quicker” before the sentence about the 340i but I still get it.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 12:22 |
|
I mean, is he surprised?
I don’t think it’s clear enough.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 12:23 |
|
But it made me think he made a spelling mistake, for instance the S65 is slower than the S63 4matic. So maybe the smaller engine was a bit quicker? I dunno
![]() 10/02/2018 at 12:24 |
|
Quicker than the base 330i - he’s referring to the xDrive as “the all-wheel drive 330i model”. It’s acceptable conversational English, but it’s a little awkward as used, and injecting the line about the M340i makes it muddled.
It is very common for people with engineering backgrounds to have scattershot use of English. Insofar as I avoid that, I’m not the rule.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 12:27 |
|
On being kinja’d, I can get on Oppo everywhere. My work Mac I can’t get on jalopnik, but my personal one I can. Turned off Adblock and reset browser settings too.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 13:00 |
|
I went and read it again. never mind.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 13:02 |
|
Respectively means that the times are listed in the same order as the models, so the 5.3 goes with the xDrive and 5.6 with the standard RWD.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 13:05 |
|
It was kind of odd. Specially since some cars (like the S63 and the s65) have a faster small engine with awd than the larger rwd engine
![]() 10/02/2018 at 13:37 |
|
Yes, it’s yes.
Or perhaps not.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 14:32 |
|
The wording is clunky and could be misinterpreted. By placing the line about the 330i after the sentence about the M340i, he is technically saying the AWD 330i is quicker than the M340i (which is false).
I think he meant to type 340i. There is no purpose in mentioning that the AWD 330i is quicker than the rwd 330i, because that is obvious.
regardless, it isn't very good writing.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 14:38 |
|
Conversationally it is acceptable, but I would argue that the order of the sentences implies a different meaning to his words.
If I tell you that a strawberry tastes better than a banana. Then I tell you that kiwis taste good. Then follow up by saying that “yes, the strawberry tastes better.” The logical conclusion would be that I’m saying the strawberry tastes better than the kiwi.
We have numbers that make his message less muddled, but it still reads as incorrect to me.
I’m hungry
![]() 10/02/2018 at 14:49 |
|
Right. My sense is that he formed the sentence as one complete thought, wanted to add context, and did it badly by breaking up his clausal structure.
I too am hungry.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 14:59 |
|
I think you're right.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 15:00 |
|
Of course I’m right that I’m hungry!
/ambiguity lulz
![]() 10/02/2018 at 15:59 |
|
Bad writing is bad and he should feel bad
![]() 10/02/2018 at 16:32 |
|
Ramblin rover said it was typical of engineers to fuck up language
But Engineers aren’t exmpted from societal norms, or so said my ethics professor.
![]() 10/02/2018 at 22:06 |
|
They’re both right in my humble opinion. Engineers are... typically not my favorite people.