One of our volunteers turned up yesterday in his new company car - a BMW 2 series -218d model.
A sort of Golf but higher up roof type car - not quite an MPV, not quite a Mokka type.
Was parked up in car park so couldn't really see the overall profile shape but I remember when I would have been able to tell you every single new car on the road.
I didn't even know a 2 series existed!
www.bmw.co.uk/en_GB/new-vehicles/2/activetourer/2014-update/models-specification.html
Turns out its Sunday name is an "Active Tourer"
|
>> One of our volunteers turned up yesterday in his new company car
Wow! Can I come and volunteer for your outfit?
|
Sunday name?
Bizarre piece of naming by BMW, meaning that there are now two unrelated 2s: this FWD 'Active Tourer' (presumably a Passive Tourer is a caravan) and the RWD two-door that used to be the 1 coupé. I know they've sort of done this before by putting a hatchback body on the 7 and calling it a 5GT, but this takes the confusion a step further.
|
>> 'Active Tourer' (presumably a Passive Tourer is a caravan)
Skoda sells a version of the Yeti named the "Outdoor".
So where else would you use it then??
Last edited by: Dave_C220CDI on Wed 4 Feb 15 at 16:36
|
>>Wow! Can I come and volunteer for your outfit?
Sadly the company car is provided by his employer..........
|
There's a few around our way (not far from the Rolls Royce factory). I always assume that the number I see is inversely proportional to the rate at which they sell - models that sell well will be given out in smaller numbers to employees than those that are harder to shift! Though in the case of a newly launched model I guess the desire to get some low mileage nearly new models into the dealer network might also be a reason ;-)
It's an odd looking car, but no worse than many people carriers. The biggest issue I have, since its a BMW, is that it's front wheel drive :-( Though also available in 4WD I think in some markets?
|
I'd heard of it, but only in a discussion about how odd it looks.
Presumably it's pretty similar to Mercedes B Class? A car I thought would sell well but doesn't seem to have really caught on in the UK.
|
|
My best friend is considering buying one at the moment. He currently runs an X5, bought new on an 06 plate. It now has over 200,000 completely trouble free miles on it. He lives out in the sticks, access to his tiny village, hamlet is a better description, is via sometime flooded country lanes in both directions. It is probably worth very little now, and his only other consideration is an X3. I think the latter is probably best given his circumstances.
|
|
I like the BMW 2. I like the looks, its slightly more upright stance and seating, the size and versatility is just about perfect for me.
|
|
I wouldn't recommend a current model X3 to any friends based upon our experience. Our previous 2006 model (assembled in Europe) was far superior to the bloated American chud which is the 2011-onwards version. And the dealer proved to be a twit too.
|
|
My brother had the previous model X3 that is built in the US. He had lots of problems. And some parts were on order from the US and took ages to arrive. But he has replaced it with the new model. It's cleaner and has more standard options - so works out cheaper for BIK.
|
|
I think the biggest problem with the B, in its original form at least, is that it wasn't very good. The A was even worse, but I suspect a lot of MB owners bought them untried for their wives (yes, I know!) on the strength of the badge. (It has to be something like that because I can't imagine test-driving one, getting out afterwards and saying, "I'd like one just like this, please.") The B had to sell as a family car on its own merits, and it didn't really have enough of those. Ask our Avant about his.
|
^ I mean his B, of course, not his merits. ^
};---)
|
SWMBO and I had a test drive in a 2-series Active Tourer a few weeks ago: although we said we were just interested and weren't thinking of replacing the Octavia till 2016, we were still able to take it our on our own.
It was a 218i with the 3-cylinder 1.5 petrol engine (so should be 215i). I'd have liked a little more power and if I can afford it I'd go for the 220i which will be brought in later this year. But otherwise it was very impressive: higher off the ground but not so high that you have to climb in - so just right as we get older! It was comfortable and versatile, and there was a feeling of quality and of something that will last. That's important for us as we're retired and it may have to.
If I go back to an automatic, good as the Octavia (my third) is, I'm not sure I'd trust a VW Group DSG over more than about 3 years.
"Ask our Avant about his." B-class that is!! - well remembered, WdB! In fairness, if I'd been doing a lower mileage and gone for the B200 petrol, I might have been a lot happier. The diesel, coupled with CVT, was truly awful: sluggish as well as noisy. And it was a really oppressive noise, just like a London taxi. Otherwise it was comfortable and roomy, but I suspect that even the petrol version wouldn't have been fun to drive.
It was my fault for not demanding a longer test drive. The attraction was that it was £100 a month cheaper than having another A4 Avant. Doing a high mileage, I preferred, and still do, to buy new: but I do see the logic in what WdB and others do, buying a higher-class car a few years old.
Last edited by: Avant on Wed 4 Feb 15 at 18:45
|
|
I find it strange that BMW making FWD cars!
|
|
Plenty of experience though....millions of Minis !
|
>> Plenty of experience though....millions of Minis !
And the 2 series Active Tourer and the current Mini share a lot of chassis, engine and other components.
|
Mini was acquired by BMW.
Over several decades BMW advocated their RWD cars were "Ultimate Driving Machines".
Going for FWD will cannibalize their RWD sales IMHO. Browsing thru many other motoring forums, this is not looked at a positive angle by car enthusiasts. They think introducing FWDs, BMW has diluted their unique selling position.
|
|
BMW might feel rwd is important, but it seems from press reports that BMW owners are not aware which end is driven.
|
|
Isn't there a video somewhere of a BMW driver with snow chains on the front wheels of a 3 series?
|
>> BMW might feel rwd is important, but it seems from press reports that BMW owners are not aware which end is driven.
Which proves how successful BMW is in their marketing :-)
OT: Don't know why my thread appeared at bottom even though I hit Reply on above post.
Last edited by: movilogo on Mon 9 Feb 15 at 12:38
|
>> OT: Don't know why my thread appeared at bottom even though I hit Reply on
>> above post.
Because ON had already replied.
|
|
Must be something to do with the badge. Obviously the "technical" details not penetrating the brain of the consumers:)
|
This vehicle will blend into the car park along with every other anonymous looking faux by faux/SUV.
I have every respect however for BMW marketeering bods who continue to create a vehicle for a 'lifestyle' that potential purchaser's didn't even know they had.
|
"...every respect however for BMW marketeering bods..."
By any stretch of the imagination, it's a remarkable achievement to turn a hacked-about Chrysler Neon into the ultimate fashion accessory, sorry, "ultimate driving machine" :-)
|
>> By any stretch of the imagination, it's a remarkable achievement to turn a hacked-about Chrysler
>> Neon into the ultimate fashion accessory, sorry, "ultimate driving machine" :-)
I could only google links to the MINI, but not the Neon - any more info on that Gromit?
|
|
All I can gleam from that is that both the first gen MINI one shared the Tritec engine with the Neon.
|
Indeed they did. Tritec was a joint operation between Chrysler and BMW set up in Curitiba in Brazil.
Quite an impressive place although the business side wasswas a box of frogs.
|
>> Quite an impressive place although the business side wasswas a box of frogs.
>>
And from someone who bought one of the first BMW MINIs, the engine itself was a bag of nails!!
Last edited by: PeterS on Mon 9 Feb 15 at 15:00
|
As you can imagine an engine factory tie up between Chrysler and BMW became problematic when Merc and Chrysler joined.
I worked on the setup of Tritec and the merger - interesting times.
|
|
IIRC the theory postulated at the time for such the MINI being lumbered with such a rubbish engine was that the car itself was basically designed by Rover, and engineered around the 'K' series engine I think. When BMW dumped Rover but kept the MINI design they needed another engine quickly. As they didn't have an engine suitable for transverse installation in the MINI, and presumably their immediate competitors weren't keen on supplying. Hence the Chysler tie up. Though of course that could have been part of the conspiracy theory behind BMWs intentions for Rover all along... ;-)
|
I don't believe Rover had much of a hand in designing the original Mini. It was well made. I agree the engine was a let down. But was it designed with the K series engine in mind? BMW remember had all RWD cars so no engine/transmission for transverse mount designs. They needed an engine from somewhere that's for sure.
The only surprise after the success of the first Mini was the second generation used engines from a joint venture with PSA. Surely the numbers sold justified using the engine factory retained after selling Rover sooner than they did.
|
The Rover conspirists would have it that Rover engineers designed the MINi, only for it to be kept by BMW when the business was carved up... ;-)
And to be fair, as one who bought an early one I'd believe that! I think the customers did the last bits of testing, in true Austin Rover style!! 2 gearbox recalls and a power steering fault in the first 12 months smacks of AR at its best. There was one other recall on ours as well - can't remember what for now. I do remember delivery being delayed by 3 months because of a shortage of xenon headlights. They priced the option at either £250 or £350 - can't remember which, and as a result take up was very high :) Again, more an AR planning issue than BMW I'd suggest ;-)
On a more serious note, I struggle to believe that the Chrysler engine option was planned from the beginning - it was an absolute dog of an engine; unrefined, uneconomical and not even that powerful.
|
>> On a more serious note, I struggle to believe that the Chrysler engine option was planned from the beginning
When did the Mini arrive on the market?
|
>>
>> When did the Mini arrive on the market?
>>
The earliest MINIs in the UK are on 'Y' plates, which ran from March to September 2001. There aren't many, which leads me to think it was probably late summer 2001
|
|
When we were establishing the Tritec plant we knew that it would be providing the Mini and Neon engines - I think that was 1997, but it might have been 1998.
|
|
Interesting. It seems as though the MINI launched in July 2001, so I assume that pretty much everything was locked down design/engineering wise by late 1999 at the latest. That being the case, 1997/98 seems quite late for such a major component as an engine, but I'm not an expert...
Last edited by: PeterS on Mon 9 Feb 15 at 21:36
|
Not really. The decisions as to where it would be made were made and known in 97/98.
That is quite different and later than designing the engine and toolset.
My point was that that particular engine was a known fact in 97 or so. No doubt Longbridge was a significant factor in deciding toake it in Brazil.
|
Understood, though BMWs Hams Hall engine plant did open in 2000, the year Rover 75 production was shifted from Cowley to Longbridge despite work having started for MINI production there... All fuel for the conspiracy theorists!
I reckon it was a pure commercial decision however. The MINI was actually designed / engineered by Rover engineers after all and as a result, in true AR / BL style was unprofitable at the proposed sales price!! So cost cutting required, and a quick fix was an engine built in Brazil ;-)
Even then the MINI one launched at £10,300 (no options) rather than a headline grabbing sub £10k. Though pretty much he every one left the showroom with 4 figures worth of options. I remember well that our Cooper version (list price £11,600) actually cost £14,500 with no discounts available! And that wasn't even going overboard... No leather, no sunroof, no metallic paint...
:-)
|
|
There was a lot to it, and it was a commercial decision, but iirc fear of Longbridge was significant.
|
>> There was a lot to it, and it was a commercial decision, but iirc fear
>> of Longbridge was significant.
>>
Fear of what about it? Reputation in the sense of marketing the car*, in an organisational issue with LB or something else?
IE, it's the new mini made in LB, it must be crap.
|
For a rose tinted view of the design and engineering behind the MINI this is worth a read
www.aronline.co.uk/blogs/cars/mini-bmw/mini-2/the-cars-mini-development-history/
The reality is probably somewhat different, but everyone likes a good conspiracy theory ... ;-)
|
"the engine itself was a bag of nails"
A former colleague who also had one reckoned the automatic gearbox wasn't much better.
And yes, it was the Chrysler derived engines in the Mk1 I was referring to. It still intrigues me that buyers couldn't get enough of the MINI when they could barely give away Chryslers (except Voyagers of course - despite their leaf springs - which had nothing to do with the Blairs being seen in one...!)
|
>> Indeed they did. Tritec was a joint operation between Chrysler and BMW set up in Curitiba in Brazil.
But AFAIK engines in new MINI are all new, so pretty tenuous link, if that's all there is? (Just curious, not having a go!)
Last edited by: Focusless on Mon 9 Feb 15 at 15:01
|
|
Indeed, I don't think the MINI has had that engine since its first iteration. Last version was some sort of PSA tie up I think, and now a brand new BMW unit.
|
|
And in between the Toyota 1.4 diesel engine, quite a selection of engines.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 9 Feb 15 at 15:04
|
|
Saw one today....bit tall for my liking. Saw an X4 - what a god-ugly car, sounded like a tractor....BMW should hang their heads in shame.
|
|
I think the X4 is so so looking, as is the 1 series which gets a cosmetic facelift this Spring. Doesn't say much about my taste, although I think the M4 convertible is just luvly.
|
BMW - 2 series - Zero
