Cars We Drive! - Page 521

I drive a E86 M Coupe. It fits my golf clubs, my lady, and my helmet for the track. Not much else!

The turbo 4's aren't going anywhere, you should get used to them. They have okay grunt too. You won't be getting to 60mph in less than 7 seconds, but an honest 25mpg mixed AND 30 if you're on the freeway all day is a pretty good feeling too.
The design on the Evoque though, still don't like it. It's plastic-y in a bad way, the design looks like an awkward 7/8ths sized version of what it should be in real life (I'm not a large man, and I've sat inside the Evoque at a car show, it felt like a very small car) and it looks pretty toy considering it has the Range Rover script on the trunk and deck. They get away with calling it a Range Rover by incorporating the all-black greenhouse and a clamshell hood, but there's not much else there. Otherwise it's a generi-faux SUV. Hell, I'd rather have an X3 with the M sport pack over the Evoque, and it'd probably even be a bit cheaper.

R4 Turbo's are great little engines Americans just haven't seen the light yet f.x. A Golf R6 with 400hp does 0-100khp in 3,5sec.

Regarding the Evoque it's a good looking car, but it's just too expensive

Those Evoques look awful to me. Full disclosure, there are very few SUVs that appeal to me, but that one is just awful. Looks like something Mitsubishi might design to look "edgy"

I'd pass then, loud exhausts imply immaturity, racer boy mentality and attract police to pull you over.

Car sounds find as is, I would leave it.

I know I'm bigger than you and I fit in the cockpit okay. I always test the back seat by putting the driver's seat where I want it, then get in behind it. I got in okay, had an okay amount of room, but getting out was a pain.

FWIW, reviews put it above the X3 in most every category. Apparently it's fairly capable off road although not up to LR4/RRS type standards. While she would never take it off road we have some major inclement weather where we live so I like her in a vehicle that is fairly capable.

For me the big deal is still the rear view window (my least favorite looking part of the vehicle too) and the 4 cylinder turbo. When I get it out for a drive the turbo might change my mind but the rear window is bad.

Also, FWIW, I would never put her in an X3. That's a cheap feeling and poorly designed cockpit if you ask me. Actually, most of the BMW line up is a huge disappointment to me when I get behind the wheel. They really tend to have cheap looking dashboards, stereos, electronics and layouts I really dislike.

Poi, most folks prolly don't buy BMW for the stereo or electronics, lol

Gnatty, I never passed any opinion on why people would buy a BMW but I buy (well, lease actually) for the entire package. I agree, there are many reasons people get the cars they do, but I access the entire package and how it fits in with my needs. However, given two cars with equal power train, looks, room and price and suddenly I do think most folks would start paying attention to things like electronics and stereos too.

I'm not saying BMWs are not great cars. I like the looks of many of the cars (not so much the SUVs) and understand some of them are great driving machines. However, I often find their cockpits to be big disappointments and since I'm more likely to be toddling along at 45 mph in rush hour traffic than doing laps at a track or stuffing it into sweepers on deserted highways, the cockpit experience is a huge factor in my personal decision making. This tends to rule BMWs out for me.

Is there a good site that runs through model year changes? Been looking at Panameras and want to see what changed from year-to-year...

Pio, fwiw, BMW cockpits are one of those things you just can't fall in love with instantly on a test drive. Most people do after a few weeks though, it's the way all of the controls fall right where you instinctively want them to, a lot of the backlighting and all of that, coupled with the driver feedback and tactile feel - there's something affirming when you're behind the wheel of a BMW, even if it's a cheap shitbox version or one of the really nice ones. Audis are very attractive interior-wise, but there's nothing beyond the surface there.

Could be. Odds are good I'll never find out but who knows what the future holds?

Glad to see this forum is still alive and well.

Would have to disagree here.

Audi interiors are very nicely fitted, nice ergonomics, materials and they don't rattle and squeak. While the A4 is not a match for the 3 series, the higher lines are much nicer, I don't know if you have any experience driving them. And frankly, the 3 series, A4 and Merc C class are available to anyone with a basic job nowadays, their not exactly luxury cars.

Also, you're comparing cars designed for different audiences. For some lifestyles,a very tight suspension that has the exhaust note piped into the cabin is not attractive. Reliability is also a consideration. So is some of the inflection certain brands bring with them.

I hear you, and I don't disagree. But still, that Rover is just awful to me, it just does it have any redeeming qualities, but good luck whichever you choose!

Oh, and the possible Rover is for Mrs. Piob, not me. The GL sort of has me hooked in terms of size, performance, amenities and cachet I get for the price. I would go for the newest version of the big Rangie but those come fully decked at 110-120k (vs. well equipped GL sticker of 75-80k) or for a well dress Escalade but the Caddy has cultural baggage attached to it I just don't want.