Autocar review of the 6er

[MEnthusiast]

http://bimmer.roadfly.org/bmw/forums...4078290&page=1

[Gustav]

I see after a short glance that Bangle gets some heat. I would almost say I rank the 6-series in the same designdepartement as the 7-series E65 and the E60 5-series looks way nicer. I have to see the 6 in reality at first however to state my final judgement.

Luckily the 5-series is looking better day by day (esp. with larger wheels such as Hartge or AC-Schnitzer) and I cannot sya that about the 7-series.

[MEnthusiast]

The way I hear it from a friend who I think knows a lot- BMW locked in the design of the 7 and 6 before the 5. And we know they refined the design of the 5 several times (which is why it was delayed from the market by ~8 months).

I have mixed feelings on all their new cars. As a matter of fact, there is a good chance the M6 I was thinking about will not find its way into my garage.

What will?





this is another georgeous car from the pen of Henrik Fisker. And it seems AM is very serious about producing a world class vehicle from their hiring more engineers (some from BMW even) and building a new factory. I am very hopeful for the AMV8 and I have lost my excitement on the next generation M5 and M6. I dont think I am alone either.

[blue max]

Now that's the look of a proper GT coupe!

No wierd lines to "get used to", no explanations necessary.

[mumbasic]

Sure the AM looks sexy, a Maserati GT looks also sexy. But where you get more for your money? I think with a M6 you will have much much more.

The same it is with a Porsche, so many people say an AM looks so beautifull but then they buy a Porsche.

Adnan

[BobRod]

One look at a beautiful woman and you instantly know. No thinking, no getting used to. The same for cars. The AMV8 and the Alfa Brera are two very beautiful cars that have instant appeal.......to me.

[CharlieMax]

BobRod:

Amen

Exactlly my opinion.

[bernhtp]

For some reason, many appear to overlook the practical and functional issues involved in design. Some of the sleekness (and beautify) of a car works in the opposite direction of practical considerations of leg/head room, trunk space, weight distribution, ergonomics, etc. For example, take the much criticized 745 butt (bum for you east ponders). It has a big rear, it seems, because people wanted lots of rear seat and trunk space. Given the resultant high trunk line, BMW designers apparently tried to optically diminish this big butt look with its staggered taillight lines. I’m not sure how well they accomplished this given the copious criticism, but I must admit that its look has really grown on me.

Given that I drive/use a car infinitely more than I look at it parked, the functional considerations are paramount to me. This became clearer when I recently got a free loaner SL 500 with a hotel room. When the valet brought it out, I was immediately impressed with its beauty and eagerly anticipated using it for several days. However, I ultimately wound up hating the car because it just didn’t work for me. For example, while the convertible hard top looks great, it consumes virtually the entire trunk forcing me to put even small bags in the back seat. Speaking of the back seat, it is completely useless for people despite the fact that the car is rather large. The size along with the hard top make it very heavy, and it really feels heavy when driving it. The engine, while torquey, was disappointing in the power and performance department where it counts. The Nav screen was small and not very usable. There are many more nits, but I’ll stop there.

I naturally compared it to my ’02 M3 convertible that is faster, has a real trunk that works, even has a back seat that takes my three kids to school every day, is faster, handles far better, has a functional Nav, etc. Oh, and it costs several tens of thousands of dollars less. While the SL 500 is a beauty, it is deficient in virtually all other respects to my lowly M3.

Conclusion: Hope that your neighbor buys the SL 500 and parks it outside; you get the BMW.

Tom

[markf]

Bern has similar thoughts to me,the Aston is stunning and will be a fantastic drive ,but I looked at the db7 vantage before getting the porker and I just couldn't see me driving it every day ,plus the interior with ford parts is just really naff.The Astons are cars to have as a second car like a ferrari,whereas the Porsche and an m6 will be useable daily tools.
The Autocar review is interesting ,they were even more abusive of the 5 looks which i find more understanding to be honest as all the ones ive sen on the road are awful,to me it looks worse than the pictures,the only saving grace for BMW is that the a6 is old and the e-class is nothing special.
Anyway both vehicles as i keep saying are really colour dependant as Black seems to hide a lot of the styling mistakes.
I think a black m6 with tinted windows is going to look the bees knees .There's also a new porsche turbo out soon but my kids are growing out of the back of this one so I won't be going down that route.

[MEnthusiast]

where do you get more for your $- its debatable

guestimates on price:

M6: $88,000
AMV8: $100,000
M6 Cabrio: $95,000
AMV8 Cabrio: $115,000

Power and Weight and PTR

M6: 500bhp, ~3,650lbs, 0.137 HP/lb
M6 Cab: ~3,900lbs, 0.128 HP/lb

AMV8: ~400bhp, >3,307lbs, 0.121 HP/lb
AMV8 Cabrio: ~3,400lbs, 0.12 HP/lb

E39 M5: 396bhp, 4024lbs, 0.098 HP/lb

Bottom line on power to weight- all are fast cars with numbers better than what we are used to today.

The AMV8 takes the course of light weight, with more aluminum construction than the 6 has.

As to comparing to pervious model AMs, even the Vanquish- throw it all out. They are starting over with a brand new factory for the AMV8 (btw- that probably wont be its actual name when they do the production car).

There are to be almost NO shared parts with any other product owned by Ford. There may be a few, but it would be impossible for most to find them. And NO shared interior bits. they are building the AMV8 to be a Porsche 911 competitor and to be a "high volume" Aston, with hoped for sales of ~5,000 units/ year.

If you notice, the AM cabrio will have a small weight penalty as opposed to the usual 2-300lb weight gain for most cars. The reason why- it is designed from the ground up to be a cabrio- so you lose the weight of the roof and gain the weight of the cab top and its mechanism. Imagine: a car where the coupe and cab have the same rigidity. Sounds kind of like the Z8- if they had made a Z8 coupe that is. I wonder where they got the idea to build like that...

Given this, I think we can assume only one thing with how it will drive and what the fit and finish will be: we dont know. Speculation is fun sport, and I speculate that it will be fantastic, but the fact remains: speculation based on any Aston ever made prior to the AMV8 is meaningless.

of course, you can say with the E63 you get active suspension, active steering, 4 seats vs. 2 in the AMV8, idrive, new look style, etc. So who is to say who gets "more for the money". That becomes a bit subjective in this price territory. For me, the fog of the automotive future is beginning to thin out and unfortunately it looks unlikely that there will be a new M car there, it looks more and more likely that it will be the AMV8.

Tom,
you know I had the exact same experience with a SL500: just not for me.

But I disagree a little on the new design. I think its all about shock value- if you will: they have adopted a more Versace look to the previous Armani look they had. The trunk could have been made to hold all that volume without the strange tacked on look. Also- at what point does BMW say: hey, we make SPORT SEDANS, and if we cant fit 4 golf bags in the trunk, thats OK, because we make the most enjoyable driving sedan there is. There are always compromises. For example, the 7 drives great, but you now have to deal with idrive. If I could choose between smaller trunk and no idrive, it would be done in a flash- smaller trunk. I can live with that compromise. You can see this forced design in the standard wheelbase 7- it doesnt look right- but the long wheel base model helps to streach it out, and that looks better. If the car had too much mass to look right as a standard wheelbase car, then dont build it that way, or redesign it.

[mumbasic]

When I say getting moe for the money it is for sure for everyone a different calculation.

Here is mine:

Take all these factors and give them some weight function (like in mathematics)

- all day use
- accelartion
- end speed (only in Germany important)
- the time to drive one round in Hockenheim (30 km from my town away)
- consumption
- can you use it in winter
- where is the next dealer/serice center
- how many experience does the company have in producing cars
- functionality you need (business man - navigation and trunk, yuppie ..., family man ...)
- how does it fit to your image
- do you like the interiour/exteriour
- selling price for e.g. after 3 years
- insurance
- ....

and after calculating all this things you can decide which cars fits better to your portemonaise (bank account)

For me it seems that a M6 will give me much more then my 996 tt is giving and he gives me much more then a Ferrari or AM can give to me. I don´t want to talk about Mercedes.

Adnan

[bernhtp]

Jerry,

I won't argue auto aesthetics with you. Too much of it appears purely subjective aside from the functional aspects I mentioned. However, it is of relatively little importance to me anyway because as I've said, I'm on the inside. My pleasure is derived from my interaction with the car and its capabilities to thrill me, comfort me, entertain me, etc. Of significantly less importance are the opinions of others looking at it from the outside and how they reflect to/on me.

re: "speculation based on any Aston ever made prior to the AMV8 is meaningless."

I disagree. While past behavior is not always a perfect predictor of future behavior, it is the best one we have. It is my experience with BMW that makes me look at them first. Similarly, while AM has a reputation for interesting designs aimed at those seeking something unique, they haven't historically had the quality, features, and service relative to price I desire.

Tom