"Boy, I Really Want A Front-Drive BMW", Said Nobody: Paris 2012 Live Shots

This is the bean counter argument. Hey people can't tell - we can make an extra buck selling cheaper shit for the same price. But there are two basic issues with it.. 1) I think most people CAN tell. They just think that BMW drives better they don't know WHY it does. 2) The people that can tell will tell other people. Hey Danica what do you think of my new car? Eh - that FWD thing - I guess its just as good as a Honda. So you run the risk of diluting your brand. That's a big deal when your tagline is the ultimate driving machine. It's not 'hey this car feels slighly perkier then all the other appliances because of the stiffer shocks.' The ultimate driving machine is RWD or rear biased AWD (if it has alot of power). The ultimate driving machine cannot be FWD. Think about other industries - should Leica start making crap lenses because most people can't tell them from a Tamron? Should B&W start selling cheap speakers at target because most people can't tell the difference between proper bass and boomy crap? Hell no. Same goes for BMW..

CelticPete.... All things considered, it certainly would not be my best desire to see FWD anywhere near the BMW image. But economics are as they are. And you have hit a key issue with their marketing slogan, "The Ultimate Driving Machine". (Which I never liked - reeks of triumphalism: "Freud am Fahren" (Joy in Driving) in the original German was far more modest and flexible. Besides, of all small road cars, would not Porsche realistically be the "ultimate" driving machine?) But, given that BMW is going to stay with "ultimate", can they parlay that into the Ultimate FWD Driving Machine, in the MINI sense? Can they advertise that concept as something applicable to FWD? After all, for the past several years, how can the BMW X3 and X5 be "ultimate" driving machines since they are SUV's? ANS: those vehicles do surprisingly well in cornering and handling despite their bulk, and everyone seems to understand that within the paradigm of SUV-vehilces, they are "ultimate" by comparison, --- except perhaps for the Porsche Cayenne!) So, maybe BMW can come up with something that is more than "just as good as a Honda", and beats the VW GTI hot hatch as well...who knows? (BTW: as far as "ultimate " goes, I think it's commonly recognized that the GTI may be at or near the top of of the hot hatch pecking order: correct me if that is wrong, so beating the GTI would be a tall order. Or, sadly, maybe BMW is going to give up "ultimate" in reality, and not even try.) -----------

It's not about bean counting. It's about CAFE now and in the future. The purest way to reduce energy consumption is to tax it and to let the market decide what to do about it. That in itself would be a slight problem for BMW, but when governments decide to manipulate supply instead, it puts undiversified, performance-oriented automakers at risk. It is what it is.

Strippo... What is the difference between manipulating a reduction in fuel consumption by taxing fuels, or manipulating a reduction in fuel consumption by artificially restricting fuel supply? As long as "governments" have any control over economic factors, there is no "purity". Let the markets decide, period. That is economic purity. If somebody wants a gas-guzzler car and can pay for it, that's his business. If we as a planet have a billion cars that guzzle, and begin to run out of petroleum as a result, then the price will go up automatically, other fuel sources become viable, and civilization moves on. One day, when we are on the hydrogen economy 100-200 years from now (or whenever), we will look back on the carefree and quaint petroleum era with a sense of the nostalgic past, and wonder why we didn't use more oil to produce polymers and pharmaceuticals. But that is the nature of free enterprise, among nations as well as individuals. ---------