Ferrari Mailing List: Re: [NFC] 2003 BMW M5?

[Dennis Liu (BigHeadDennis]

Obscure and irrelevant?

Brian, you wrote, "the cars are too heavy for a manual".  Dave Craig and I
took that to mean you were saying that a manual transmission could not
handle a car that heavy.  That is clearly not true, because (a) lots of
manual transmissions are available on heavier vehicles, even luxury ones,
and (b) Mercedes itself offers a manual transmission on an equally heavy
E-class itself.

Ok, so now Brian doesn't mean that, or Dave and I misinterpreted his
statement.  Rather, he meant to say something along the lines of, "heavy
performance sedans perform better with automatic transmissions than with
manual transmissions."  

Well, I don't agree with that either.

What we all agree on, perhaps, is that Americans certainly (and Europeans
gradually) are transitioning to automatic transmissions, especially for
large luxury sedans.  That's pretty much accepted fact.

But there is still a market for sports sedans that come with manual
transmissions, and BMW is the king of that market.

BMW originally launched the M5 and M6 with the SMG as the only transmission,
because it is a *SEVEN-SPEED*, manual, and BMW decided that having a stick
shift among 7 forward gears (and one reverse) was just too many - too much
room, so to speak, for a missed-shift and kablammo.

But due to FURIOUS DEMAND from enthusiasts, BMW relented and will, for 2007,
offer M5s and M6s with *SIX-SPEED* manual transmissions.

So, clearly, there IS a market, as proven by the fact that BMW is going to
the great expense of engineering a new gearbox and federalizing it, just to
satisfy that demand.  Enthusiasts like us spoke out - we WANT a manual
transmission in our big luxury SPORT sedan, damn it.

So, why doesn't MB do it?  

BECAUSE ONLY WUSSIES AND GIRLS DRIVE AMGs, THAT'S WHY!  :-P  :-P  :-P  

(they don't do it because MB doesn't have the following that BMW does.  I'll
wager that when the Panamera comes out, it'll be available with both a
tiptronic/DSG and a regular stick.  MB?  Forget it.  Around here, AMGs are
driven by eurotrash girls hanging out on Newbury street, spending daddy's
money while showing up to class at Boston University every once in awhile.
(you know, the kind of girls that Lashdeep likes to date)  <grin>

Vty,

--Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian E. Buxton [mailto:BrianBuxton [at] BuxtonMotorsports.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 1:53 PM
To: BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net
Cc: 'The FerrariList'
Subject: Re: [Ferrari] [NFC] 2003 BMW M5?

I agree - but there must be something in the water - every time I am posting
something you guys want to come back with some obscure, irrelevant
comparison as a counter argument.  We were talking about 450+ horsepower
performance sedans from AMG, NOT dump trucks or cloth interiored 6 cyl.
stripper e-classes that are used for taxis (which behave completely
differently than the high hp. versions).  If the AMG versions were fun to
drive, reliable and marketable (as you stated), don't you guys think they
would build them?  Why do you think they didn't sell manual trans. SL's and
SLK's for very long in the US?  Why don't they have manual trans S-class
cars?  Because the cars are too heavy, don't drive well and the buyers of
those cars don't want to buy a large, heavy but fast luxo-barge with a
manual.  Why do you think BMW was only offering the M5's with SMG's at
first?  Because they were cheaper to build?  BUT, if the reason Mercedes
does not sell manual trans. AMG models here in the states is because of
market demand, I am also curious as to why you think they don't offer them
in Europe either?  If there is a market there then the reason must be
something other than that alone.

Mr.Wuss




Dennis Liu wrote:

>Dude, what are you smokin'?  The "cars are too heavy for a manual"?  
>Brian, MB *sells* cheap e-class sedans in other parts of the world WITH 
>a *MANUAL TRANSMISSION*.  While the AMG may be a few pounds heavier 
>than an E300, the reason MB doesn't sell them here with an automatic is 
>not because of the car's WEIGHT.  Rather, it's a function of market 
>demand - there aren't enough buyers for an E55 with a manual 
>transmission, because, well, MB buyers are girls!!!!  BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
>
>Seriously, MB took a look at the market, decided that a small % of E55 
>sales would be with a manual, and concluded that it wouldn't be worth the
effort.
>True for almost its entire range here in the US (MB used to offer a 
>manual in the SLK, dunno if they still do).
>
>As opposed to BMW, which offers a manual transmission in the 3-series, 
>5-series, 6-series, X3, X5, Z4 roadster and coupe, not to mention the Z8.
>And all of its M cars too (yeah, the new M5 and M6 are getting real 
>6-speed manuals).
>
>That's because real men (and women) who know how to drive and 
>appreciate the feel of a perfectly timed heel-toe downshift will always 
>enjoy driving a sports car (or a sport sedan) with a manual 
>transmission.  Whereas girls drive MBs.  :-)
>
>Kidding aside, go back and reread what I wrote.  I did not say that 
>automatic trannies suck, simply that if I'm buying something that's a 
>sports car, or a sports sedan, or even has pretentions of being such, 
>***I WANT A MANUAL***.  Heck, I've OWNED a couple of big German cars 
>with automatics, and I've LOVED them.  And I've driven a variety of 
>AMGs, and they sure were fun when you stepped on the gas.  But as a 
>whole, they were soft, HEAVY, and blech.  I will probably always own a 
>big German sedan, but I acknowledge that it is what it is - a big heavy 
>sedan that's well suited for an automatic, perfect for sitting in traffic
and hauling the family around.
>
>But if I wanted a SPORTS SEDAN with 500hp that SHOULD be fun to drive, 
>I'm going to get one with a stick.  You wuss!  :-)
>
>Vty,
>
>--Dennis
>
>
>________________________________
>
>From: Brian E. Buxton [mailto:BrianBuxton [at] BuxtonMotorsports.com]
>Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:39 PM
>To: BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net
>Cc: The FerrariList
>Subject: Re: [Ferrari] [NFC] 2003 BMW M5?
>
>
>I may be a wuss, but have you driven one?  Mercedes new 5 and 7 speed 
>trannies are *excellent,* and the cars are too heavy for a manual.
>
>Brian
>
>
>Dennis Liu wrote:
>
>
>       Brian Buxton wrote:
>       
>         
>
>               The M5 is a great car ... I am more of a Mercedes-Benz
person and
>                   
>
>       personally would opt for an 03 E55 AMG with 469 hp. & 516 ft.-lb.
>torque for
>       about the same money.  But an M5 is a great way to haul 4 people 
>around in
>       comfort, safety and speed!  I think the price seems a bit high for
the
>       mileage, although the warranty is a plus that cannot easily be 
>duplicated in
>       the aftermarket ... but for just a few dollars more I can 
>       get you about 38K LESS miles!
>http://www.buxtonmotorsports.com/10.php
>       
>       ====================
>       
>       Ah, BMW v MB.  Another classic battle.  My $0.02 - the AMGs are for 
>girls
>       (and no, I don't mean females, I mean __GIRLS__).  Awesome concept, 
>forever
>       hobbled by that slushbox automatic transmission.  I think the most 
>beautiful
>       German sedan available now is the CLS, and I'd LOVE to have a CLS55,

>but
>       ain't no way - not if I can only get an automatic.
>       
>       Now, don't get me wrong, I have nothing against automatics per se.
>It's
>       just that if I'm buying a sports car, or even a big sedan that's 
>ostensibly
>       sporty in nature, then I want a damn manual transmission.  I love my

>740iL
>       with the auto, and I'm thinking about buying another one (or even a 
>750).
>       But I'm not going to get the "M" version with an automatic.  I don't

>even
>       like the SMG versions.  Heck, that's why the current M5 has been on
my 
>sh*t
>       list, because the BMW SMG tranny bites it, big time.  And why I've 
>been
>       waiting and waiting and waiting for my 430, with a manual 6-speed
(who 
>knows
>       if I'll EVER get one).
>       
>       Bottom line, the AMG is just plain ridiculous.  What's the point of 
>all that
>       power and stiff suspension if you can't enjoy driving the dang thing

>because
>       of the slushbox?  Might as well get the E500/E550 (or CLS550) and
save 
>$15k.
>       You'll still have every bit as much fun.
>       
>       AMG, Brian?  You wuss.  :-P
>       
>       Vty,
>       
>       --Dennis
>       
>         
>
>
>
>
>  
>

--
Brian E. Buxton

President, Buxton Motorsports, Inc .
www.BuxtonMotorsports.com
(812) 476-2281 x 209
Member ThaList.com

Managing Partner, Private Label Chauffeur Services www.PrivateLabelLimo.com 

President, Brian Buxton Enterprises, Inc.
Nationwide Enclosed Auto Transportation
www.BuxtonMotorsports.com/storage-transportation.php 

Founder & Past President
SO. IN Region PCA
www.pca.org/soi