BMW Sales strong but E89 -16%
- Thread starter original guvnor
- Start date
pvr said:
You really do talk bollocks sometimes pvr. :roll:
My zed cost me £25k and for that money I really can't think of anything else that would have been any better as a daily driver with great looks and 3 years warranty!?
You can't compare the 2.0 zed to a Boxster as the zed is over £7k cheaper, but compared to the SLK and TT it's head and shoulders above them in my opinion.
If I had the money I would choose a Cayman, but having said that when I go to see customers and have site visits I get loads of comments about 'must be making too much money' if I was in a Porsche that it would be even worse.
I had an e85, now have an e89 and I love it. Love the fact I can park it anywhere in all weathers but still drop the roof...its also big enough to fit all the kitesurfing gear into. Best of both worlds In my opinion.
Also, although the 35is is not badged as an M it's just as quick....who cares about the badge?
Sent from my SM-P605 using Tapatalk
Also, although the 35is is not badged as an M it's just as quick....who cares about the badge?
Sent from my SM-P605 using Tapatalk
I drove a mates slk back down from Scotland earlier this year, great to look at and a nice drive but the interior feels and looks really cheap. The Diesel engine just wasn't right for a car like that either.
I think the pure white interior on the e89 is one of the nicest interiors I've seen on a car.
I think the pure white interior on the e89 is one of the nicest interiors I've seen on a car.
benjy_a said:
You're new aren't yo ben? :lol: You will learn that there are certain M owners on here that think their car is the be all and end all. Now, I'm not knocking the M as I think its a great car but there are others on here that love their car and couldn't give a s**t that your old M gives you a hard on every time you get in it.
I do like a bit of banter on this forum but the M snobbery really boils my piss!
This thread isn't about M versus E89. It's simply about the fact that the E89 has been a sales disaster for whatever reason.
So whether it's good or bad, better than a TT/SLK or not, a Boxster competitor or not, people aren't buying them. So my original premise was correct - that BMW got this car wrong.
I also think that Zermatt's comment about lack of E85 owners upgrading in any numbers suggest that it might have alienated more existing customers than it did recruit new ones.
So whether it's good or bad, better than a TT/SLK or not, a Boxster competitor or not, people aren't buying them. So my original premise was correct - that BMW got this car wrong.
I also think that Zermatt's comment about lack of E85 owners upgrading in any numbers suggest that it might have alienated more existing customers than it did recruit new ones.
TitanTim said:
Problem is, there aren't many of you Tim :wink:
you dont hear that very often
original guvnor said:
Exactly. It's ok saying that they didn't get it wrong if you are one of the ones that bought one but bmw are in it to make money and they haven't had the sales on the E89 that they should have. So yes, it does look like they did get it wrong.
The E89 isn't a future classic and because it isn't a stupidly expensive car compared to some, it should have sold more.
It's a shame.
I'd have another tho but bigger engine if I did.
TitanTim said:
Exactly, and what are you other people on the e89 forum driving?
I can see that for the e85 drivers among us an improvement on the slk isn't what you want, I also think that there were a lot of people prejudiced against the z4 after the hardcore e85.
It's a shame it wasn't a more successful model for bmw, but only if it stops them making a new model.
I, for one, am very happy with the car
What BMW SHOULD have done is release a true e89 'M' model by putting the M3 V8 in there. Some tighter suspension, no RFTs, new bonnet, M-DCT, FIXED roof.... That would have been one LEGENDARY car.
A true iconic sportscar that would have done wonders for their image. Instead they invested in putting in 4 cyl engines into the Z. Interesting that it did not boost sales.
I for one would have traded in my 35is for one in an instant even though here in Oz it probably would have cost around $160k+ and that is saying something as there is a lot of cars in the $150k - 200k bracket that are very very good!
And by the way the SLK looks crap from several angles and the interior is cheap. I really wanted to like it too as I already have a C250 coupe. Was considering either a C63 or SLK55 decided the SLK was not an upgrade. C63 Black Series is what I want but over here they are going for over $250k USED. Some guy even wants $450k for one! Porsche Cayman was interesting -like the look and quality- but didn't do it for me - felt slower in a straight line than my tuned 35is esp. without the torque. Again not a significant enough upgrade.
A true iconic sportscar that would have done wonders for their image. Instead they invested in putting in 4 cyl engines into the Z. Interesting that it did not boost sales.
I for one would have traded in my 35is for one in an instant even though here in Oz it probably would have cost around $160k+ and that is saying something as there is a lot of cars in the $150k - 200k bracket that are very very good!
And by the way the SLK looks crap from several angles and the interior is cheap. I really wanted to like it too as I already have a C250 coupe. Was considering either a C63 or SLK55 decided the SLK was not an upgrade. C63 Black Series is what I want but over here they are going for over $250k USED. Some guy even wants $450k for one! Porsche Cayman was interesting -like the look and quality- but didn't do it for me - felt slower in a straight line than my tuned 35is esp. without the torque. Again not a significant enough upgrade.