Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SCOTT26
Do we have to keep repeating the reasons for changing philosophy involves adapting to legislation,market trends and customer requirements?
M went Turbo because of incoming legislation in both Europe and The USA in order to have a fleet average across the range.
The only reason to accommodate these targets was by resorting to Turbo charging.
M went with X model SAVs because the market was changing, the customers wanted them and today with second generation X5M and X6M they make up the volume of BMW M sales. And not just for BMW but high performance SUVs are a big market impossible to ignore. There will be further expansion at BMW with the arrival of the first X3M and X4M. More crucially is that BMW identified an opening especially in Europe were tax penalty bear heavy on high performance SUVs with the arrival of the M Performance X5 and X6M50d models.
|
It has nothing to do with adapting to the market. Many of us get that and totally agree with what Bmw has done, otherwise it would end up like Mazda.
But to imply your companies past products are bad in order to somehow highlight the new ones, especially when most of us know they weren't bad, makes you look foolish at best. A liar at worst.
I really wouldn't be surprised at this point for you or someone to fish out an engineer to tell us that all the old n/a bmw engines were crap.
Again. All for change. The world is always changing and bmw has handled it masterfully. But coming on here and saying things that don't jive with many of our real life experiences doesn't help your case.