the american car designer messes up bimmers...

they evoke controversey as noted by this thread and others about the looks on the new Bimmers.

i agree that Benz styling is conservative but then again so is a suit but they are both classy. BMW style is trying to hard to be different. and would you say that the new SLK looks better than the Z4 or that the SL, in terms of looks, is not matched by the Z8 or any other BMW?
 
justin syder said:
they evoke controversey as noted by this thread and others about the looks on the new Bimmers.

i agree that Benz styling is conservative but then again so is a suit but they are both classy. BMW style is trying to hard to be different. and would you say that the new SLK looks better than the Z4 or that the SL, in terms of looks, is not matched by the Z8 or any other BMW?
Thats what they need to be different. If you want my opinion on the new SLK, or SL, Ill give it but I dont think you would like what I think,
 
give it.
 
justin syder said:
If you want to talk about the SLK, you have to talk about image. When the previous SLK was out, its image was entirely ruined by Legally-Blonde-type women who consider their car to be an accessory. With the new SLK, things have changed. The front end certainly does show a lot of SLR in it and the rear looks like a Mercedes should look, with about being too feminine.

The SLK350 certainly does look better than the SLK320 which it replaces. It has much more presense than the older model had. Which has certainly helped the appeal of the SLK. But it has also taken away from the appeal of the SLK. Let me explain. The penis shaped front end will make it odd for any guy to drive it. And lets talk about the overall shape. Its almost as though the designer spent thousands of hours on the SLK's front and then forgot to design the rest of the car. So, it looks out of proportion. All of the exciting bits are at the front end. In the middle and in the rear, there is very little going on. It makes the car look odd. The front makes you expect that there is all of personality to the car but then the rear and mid-section make you think that the car is the Ben Stein of cars. Its so bland.

Now lets go back to that image we were discussing earlier. We can all agree that the new SLK is miles above the old SLK in over all looks. But when I see this car coming in my rear view mirror, I can only amagine a woman driving it. It is still feminine. All the attempts at making it more masculine have helped some, but they have sassy eyebrows and lipstick scattered thoughout the exterior.

The interior is better but it doesnt feel expensive. Again, let me explain. On impressions, it looks fantastic. But when you feel the quality of the materials and dash accessories, you feel like you paid too much. The plastics used look and feel awful. I have better looking plastic on my radio at home. Now it all functions well, but it just doesnt feel expensive.

Not having driven an SLK350/SLK55 AMG (my experiences were at a delear last weekend), these opinions are just first impressions. But from a image stand-point, there isnt much to excite me about the SLK.
 
honestly though, does someone shopping for a luxury roadster even consider the S2000? DB9Vanquish's dad bought a boxster last year, and I dont think he even remotely considered the S2000, it was Boxster, Z4, or TT
 
Well I don't like the Boxster nor the Z4 nor the TT so yeah I think I'd go with an S2000 and save myself some money
 
According to BMW.ca and Honda.ca, a Z4 2.5i starts at $51,800 and a Z4 3.0i starts at $59,900, while the S2000 starts at $50,240. Tell me again how the S2000 doesn't have driveability? Unless you define driveability different that I do....
 
the s2000 is a high strung car. You have to rev the lil 4-cylinder up to 9000 rpm to get any power out of it, but in the Bimmer, the power is lower down and is easier to use. You dont see to many balding 50 year old men driving around reving their convertibles to 9000 rpm :lol:
 
SiR_dude said:
According to BMW.ca and Honda.ca, a Z4 2.5i starts at $51,800 and a Z4 3.0i starts at $59,900, while the S2000 starts at $50,240. Tell me again how the S2000 doesn't have driveability? Unless you define driveability different that I do....
The S2000 has its torque of 162lb.ft. peak at 6500rpm. In the BMW, you have 221lb.ft. at just 3250rpm. If thats not driveablity, please enlighten me as to what is. :wink:
 
i like the BMW styling. chris bangle had to bring some sort of change, and he has done it very well (apart from the 7 series)

the 5 series looks fantastic, as does the 6 series. The Z4 looks great, the new 1 series looks quite good, and i cant wait for the 3 series.
 
I agree. The new looks really grows on you, at least it did on me.
 
MPower said:
SiR_dude said:
According to BMW.ca and Honda.ca, a Z4 2.5i starts at $51,800 and a Z4 3.0i starts at $59,900, while the S2000 starts at $50,240. Tell me again how the S2000 doesn't have driveability? Unless you define driveability different that I do....
The S2000 has its torque of 162lb.ft. peak at 6500rpm. In the BMW, you have 221lb.ft. at just 3250rpm. If thats not driveablity, please enlighten me as to what is. :wink:

Why does S2000's 162lb.ft of torque at 6500rpm make it undrivable? Its not like the car develops 50lb.ft of torque at 3000rpm. The S2000 is reasonably swift in the mid range, and certainly faster than many midsize sedans with a V6 and +200lb.ft. of torque at 3000rpm.
 
yah but u have to rev the shit out of it to use the power, most people dont do that every day.
 
Top