The results almost certainly vary by region (because regional traffic, weather and economic conditions impact who buys what).
Measuring aggressiveness is going to be a measurement of outliers. For everyone weaving through traffic in their BMW without turn signals there's a gray hair putting along. For every Tacoma clogging up the left lane there's a Prius taxi hauling ass to the next fare. I don't think it's a very informative thing to try to measure.
Sorry, but this is both misinformed, and rudimentary "my first car forum" or "import vs domestic in the 1990s" level analysis of vehicle dynamics. To not even attempt to call out a car model or even a brand or generation, and just hand-wave "baseline luxury German cars", and not attempt to specify what type of cornering you're discussing here.
The biggest problem a Tesla would have vs a competitive ICE sport sedan would be mass, which can hurt all vehicle dynamics; likely on the order of 300-400lbs or so (Model 3 LR: ~4k lbs, 330i ~3600lbs, Model S P75 ~4500lbs, 530i ~4000lbs). Of course it's worth noting that none of these vehicles are featherweights, and the extremely low center of gravity of skateboard battery pack vehicles helps them roll vastly less than one would expect, which helps a lot in transitions and steady state cornering.
Regardless, both the Model S and the Model 3 are extremely well-balanced and the 3 is surprisingly nimble and adjustable. The 3 has a ton of grip, turns in sharply and gets out of corners FAST. I haven't driven a Model X so I can't say.
Source: I instruct, I drive on the track, I own 2 BMWs and 1 Tesla, I've driven numerous BMWs and Teslas including the original roadster on the street and on closed courses. And I've been on car forums for decades and seen endless comments like this.
Take a Model 3 on an autocross track or even a windy mountain road. Then take any BMW or Audi priced $10k-$20k lower (and not the boat SUVs) and tell me which one is more fun to drive.
Also, a Roadster is definitely not a "mainstream Tesla." I used that word to specifically exclude the Roadster, as it's $250k and a completely different discussion.
I agree that using the term "dog" was an exaggeration.
> Take a Model 3 on an autocross track or even a windy mountain road
Why should I spend a lot of money to improve the 1% of use cases I don't care about?
My 2 biggest worries when I'm driving a BMW are hitting somebody who is walking through the red light in the rain and looking at his mobile phone, and going into a pothole. I want the car with the best automatic emergency system and the room to improve, and Tesla is far the best in this category.
Ok, I have a Model 3 and I've autocrossed it and driven it on windy mountain roads, and I have done the same with many BMWs including my own.
And the roadster I was referring to was the original one, not the one that, as far as I know, doesn't exist (though, I can't say I pay a lot of attention to Tesla news because the fanboyism is an absolutely toxic combination of .. well, fanboyism, and automotive ignorance).
I don't think the Model 3 is quite as fun as a manual transmission non-turbo 6cyl BMW 3 series. I get a lot of tactile enjoyment from shifting, I enjoy the sounds of a nice engine, and I enjoy the power delivery of an internal combustion engine. Of course, all of these things that I enjoy are actually things that make the vehicle slower compared to a dual clutch or modern automatic, or a boosted engine of a similar size, or an electric motor with no gearbox required to keep the engine near its powerband; they're all anachronisms.
The extra mass of the Tesla is less of a drawback to me over (say) a turbo BMW 3 series automatic, vice comparing that turbo automatic 3er to a manual BMW 3 series without a turbo. None of these cars can really truly be called "nimble", but I'm quite pleased with the balance, cornering ability and especially outright grip of our RWD Model 3 (with Michelin P4s tires replacing the eco crap of course). It's all a sliding scale, but yes, my primary objection is putting the Teslas in a class entirely below all German sedans. On a mountain road I'd happily take the Model 3 over an A4, even if not the "right" BMW 3 series for the road.
I actually laughed out loud when BMW ads showed actors dancing around a car, taking their phone out of the pocket, and having to hold it up to the door handle to unlock the car as an example of how modern and tech-forward the brand is.
I couldn't agree more. It's a shame, too, because BMW used to run some slick ads and seemed to have a sense of humour. In the mid- to late-90s I worked at an online newspaper and BMW ran banner ads on April 1 for a few years, touting fake features such as laser zappers to keep flies off your windscreen etc.
Not sure which ad agency they use now, but this live billboard thing is just damaging to the brand. Creepy, too.
Creepy, but in line with what the car itself phones home. If you thought Tesla was invasive in its remote control and surveilance, BMW is hell-bent on surpassing them.
You own a particular vehicle registration mark as much as you own a particular phone number, and both can reasonably be used to identify an individual (motor database verus telephone database).
I guess it's the "government intends to" given how close to the end of the year is
Of course everything regarding the EU exist is a total mess, now, with just 7 days, 9 hours left - including Christmas Day and Boxing Day - so just 2 working days left - we've been told that there is a new trade deal with the EU, which may or may not be passed into law this year on both the EU and the UK side.
I believe that the appropiate laws and instruments are already in place to roll over GDPR into next year
In the UK private companies are allowed to scan licence plates though, literally every single supermarket car park has AMPR cameras which record when you shop there. There's usually a plaque somewhere that says "by entering this carpark you allow us to use information about you".
Having a warranty is boolean, so can't be personally identifying (though it is personal private information). The license plate is unique to your car, so is personally identifying. Edit: the key term is that it's indirectly identifying: https://gdpr.eu/eu-gdpr-personal-data/
Being "called John Smith, living at 12 High Street and having an interest in titty bars" is a boolean too. I'm not sure I'd want that to leak out though, ..., aw crap.
I was trying to demonstrate that any information can be trivially encoded as booleans -- "my name is John Smilh", "My name is John Brown", ... and so on gives a series of boolean valued statements, and if you know the answer to all of them, then you know the name of the subject. Booleaness is no barrier to information leakage.
But BMW provides the warranty - so they know whether they, as in - BMW UK - cover a car with this licence plate or not. They don't need any information about you at all, they have the information they need on their side - so they definitely don't need to ask anyone for permission to access it.
Depends what the bilboard says. If it says "Hey, BMW EG16WHJ - your warranty is expired!" then yeah, that's probably not ok. But if they detect that a BMW with an expired warranty is stopped near the bilboard and just say "hey, is your BMW warranty expired? Renew today!" then it would be very hard to make an argument against it.
They almost certainly don't, most likely there's some lookup table to find VIN from a license plate. I live in the US but I just looked up my VIN correctly by my license plate on VINcheck.info
Registration # information is public in the UK. You can just scan any vehicle on the road. I don't think ownership info is, but you can get all the detail of the car it belongs to (or is SUPPOSED to belong to).
I suspect they will argue that it doesn't violate laws simply because: the licence plate on your car is public knowledge, they are allowed to scan it with a camera, and since they provide warranty on BMW cars, they own the database that says if that specific car is covered or not. They don't even need to access any of your private information to do this, the two pieces needed are either public(the licence plate) or they own it(knowledge whether that car is covered or not).
Ok, but then I'm genuienly curious - which laws are being broken? Licence plates in the UK can be scanned by automated machines owned by private companies, that's been established many times before. To request the owner data from the DVLA you need their permission - but that's not necessary here, BMW doesn't need to know anything about the owner, so no such request would be made to the DVLA.
Then on the other side, they have a database of cars that they sold and which are still under warranty - again, nothing about owners, none of the silo'ed personal information needs to be accessed at all. If the car is not on the "warranty==true" list, then they show the ad. I assume the ad doesn't display anything like "hey john smith, your warranty is expired!".
>nothing about owners, none of the silo'ed personal information needs to be accessed at all
I mean, they probably don't even have that information for half the cars they scan because the warranty belongs to the car, not the person who bought the car. The warranty is transferred to the new owner if someone sells the car. They will not know the owner of all private used sales and used sales through 3rd party dealers.
But...why does that matter? They know if a car with licence plate "GH13 JFG" is covered under warranty or not, because they know when they sold it. It doesn't matter if since then it got sold several times. I suppose it won't work any more if you put a custom plate on the car, but if you kept the one it was originally registered with then yeah, it doesn't matter if it's second hand or not.
In EU, this would probably still violate GDPR. They need your consent to use any personal data (data about a person) for anything else than the core service they provide.
Can the car license be tracked back to you? If yes, then anything attached to it is still personal. For example subscriptions or maintenance status.
Can they use this information to deny you access to their services if the subscription expires? Yes! Can they call you that it's about to expire? Probably yes. Can they call you about this other service? No way! Can they publicly shame you? I'd sue them.
Well, what "probably" happens is that whenever an out-of-warranty car is detected, they show a generic bilboard that says "hey, is your BMW out of warranty? Extend today!".
Like I said, in the UK private companies are explicitly allowed to use AMPR machines to read licence plates(every supermarket in this country will have AMPR machines that record when you come and go). BMW just cross-references that with their own record to see if the car is under warranty or not - but like I said, they probably don't actually identify you in any way on the bilboard.
Here is a simple, troubling scenario with this product. You're going to a professional event with your boss. Each of you is driving their own car and your boss is following you. Now your boss knows you have an expired warranty, which, whether you like it or not, will reflect badly on your professional image. You may think this scenario is far-fetched, but it will happen regularly because people who know each other sometimes drive with each other. The same kind of stuff happens with highly personalized advertising on your laptop. All these things seem inoffensive but seriously violate user privacy and will (for sure) get people in trouble in the end.
The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights stipulates that EU citizens have the right to protection of their personal data. And the fact that you (the driver) have an expired warranty is private data. Period. https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/data...
But surely, BMW also simply knows when they sold that specific car thanks to their own records, no?
Like, imagine you were selling cameras, you sold someone a camera and then they come in to your store 5 years later with the same device - is it ok for you to ask "hey, this device has an expired warranty, would you like to extend it?" - you know this because as a seller, you have to keep a record of every device sold. You don't even need to know the owner or any personal information about them - you just know that the camera in front of you has an expired warranty.
>>
And the fact that you (the driver) have an expired warranty is private data.
Well I think that's where the problem lies. It's not the driver who has an expired warranty - it's the car that does, and there's nothing you can do, EU or not, to prevent BMW from simply knowing that a car they sold at point X only had a warranty for 3 years. They don't need to know anything about the owner at all.
I remembered a product mentioned in the Fetish section of Wired, many years ago, that cited a use-case tailor-made for this. Just found it online [1]; it's the second item in the article. It reads:
__ Action Painting __
Paintball is war, pal, and it demands decisive action, like firing 62-mm paint bombs that turn a 75-foot area into a Jackson Pollock death zone. This bipod-mounted mortar can shoot up to four rounds per minute from its 4-foot aluminum barrel, with consistent aim controlled by traverse and elevation-adjustment screws. The M1A's cardboard-jacket shells contain 20 ounces of nonlethal, water-soluble ordnance in a thin urethane casing that explodes harmlessly on impact. Back in the urban jungle, the 46-pound, CO2-powered cannon doubles as an effective billboard-liberation device.
When I read 'fetish', my mind jumped to some exposure service. For a low fee, we'll monitor numberplates and expose your innermost desires when we think there's nobody else around!
I remember reading an interview with BMW designer that the obnoxiously huge front grills are a nod to the Chinese customers. Chinese customers wanted the drivers in front of them to feel intimidated, as if the car and driver behind wanted to eat them. Other premium brands like Lexus followed with this trend.
Makes sense seeing more and more companies taking china’s market more seriously given opportunity. In 10 years or less China will be the next global hegemony, especially if USD looses its reserve status.
Tangentially related to the comment, but seeing more evidence of companies positioning themselves for such a transition.
Yes, we’re in the midst of some ghastly thrashing that seems unrecoverable. A paranoid person might think that what we are doing to ourselves is being encouraged by some sort of outside force that has a lot to gain if the US implodes. But that can’t be, can it? No, no. Not possible.
Sure thing, Chinese amd American tastes are trashy but European tastes are ohhhh so sophisticated!/s If a European company designs an ugly car it can't possibly be because the enlightened European designers have bad taste, it must be because of those savages in the overseas markets and their nefarious influence.
Not at all Chinese fault other than China being a huge market and companies tailoring one size fits all in order to profit more. This is a bad strategy and will likely please neither market in the end
Wish you read what I said. I'm not blaming the customers, it's the companies that make unsound compromises to 'kill two birds with one stone'. Short term it works but likely to cost them in the long term
In general, sentences of the form "(I heard from (?P<authority figure>.* ) that )?(?P<bogeyman of the year>.* ) is (?P<influencing us in unseen ways>.* )" should be treated with a great deal of suspicion.
(Extra whitespace insertion to bypass HN formatting)
It's fine to object to the increasing size, but the comment claimed that a BMW designer said that the big grilles are because Chinese customers want the driver in front "to feel intimidated, as if the car and driver behind wanted to eat them".
Without a source, this comes across as racist. So far I haven't been able to find such a source. The closest I've found is a quote from the lead designer saying that in Europe people want to blend in, but in the rest of the world they want to stand out, and the design follows that. The China connection seems to be extrapolation by journalists and bloggers (because cars with big grilles are popular in China), and the bit about intimidation seems to be fabricated entirely.
Look through that list, many of those kidney grills are modest deign elements with several of them including separate grills for air intakes. The silly giant kidney grills that most people agree look stupid are really an aberration.
Their US market share peaked in 2014 and their total sales peaked in 2015. I am not going to say their a declining brand, but their 2019 market share is only up to 2010 levels.
I think it was around the premiere of BMW 7 facelift in 2019. I don't care about or follow automotive news but this was so ridiculous that it imprinted in my memory, it could be one of the awful British tabloids though. All I can find in G search right now are modest claims that indeed some design choices of the 2019 facelift were on request of Chinese customers as they are the major client base of this segment.
I've never understood this intimidation strategy/mentality. "ooh big/mean/fast/close car behind me - I had better speed up/get out of the way or..." or what, precisely?
Ram me off of the road? Crash into the back of me? Try and eat me?
I don't know what things are like in China, but there is a saying in the UK: "all mouth and no trousers".
I swapped a front clip on an old shitbox because the meaner looking newer front clip was cheaper than shipping a replacement bumper cover and it reduced the number of people who camp in the left lane in front of me by a solid 10% (pulling that number out of my ass but whatever it is it's a noticeable amount).
Lexus was first with the absurdly large grills with their "Spindle Grill" design around 2014. BMW was next with the 7-Series and X7, followed quickly by Mercedes.
I think such marketing departments are supposed to test their ideas on a sample of potential customers first. It would be interesting to know whether they did it for this marketing campaign, and if so what are the profiles of their customers.
BMW has told Motoring Research its targeted billboard warranty adverts – which are claimed to use number plate registration technology to tailor public adverts to BMW drivers – do not actually draw upon vehicle warranty status.
Rather, only publically available information is used. “There is no personalisation visible on the advert and no vehicle or customer data is stored or retained.”
“No personal identifiable information applicable to GDPR is used in the [Vehicle Detection Technology] process nor does VDT ever have access to any personal data.”
Most likely they figured out that they are about to violate GDPR and altered the code to also show the notice to those who bought the extended warranty. I cannot imagine execs spending so much money on a project to shame both those who bought an extended warranty and those who didn't. In that case you can just put a static printed ad for the warranty.
You can probably guess without using PII. In the UK numberplate info is public, you can look up the make, model year and colour of a car just using it's numberplate, and anyone can do this.
Using that info it would be trivial to detect a BMW car that was older than X years old. Where X is number of years the normal non-extended warranty is. You then just assume that any car older than the non-extended warranty doesn't have an extended warranty and display the advert.
Then the only thing the advert would be giving away is that there is a BMW nearby that older than X years. Which anyone with a pair of eyes could figure out because the numbers of UK numberplates encode the issue year (thus the age of the car), and well, BMW's are pretty easy to identify just by looking at them.
The phrasing around "no vehicle data is stored or retained" implies that they're doing vehicle plate->VIN lookups in their database of cars manufactured and perhaps warranties issued, which as the manufacturer of said car they might well be correct to say that no PII is required. There's a missing piece of anti-targeting marketing legislation here, that GDPR won't cover under PII, even if it is eventually found that their plate lookup is a PII violation:
Can the manufacturer of an object use their privately-held data about the object to target marketing to the bearer/operator/etc. of that object?
Probably, yes, at least until a law is passed or a ruling is issued that states otherwise. The best short-term route of attack here would be on the plate->VIN conversion database, assuming that's what they're using anyways. But long-term, they'll figure out how to use a telephoto lens or LIDAR or paint-embedded QR codes to get VIN numbers somehow, so best to tackle the bigger problem too.
As I just said in another comment - they can figure it out without any private information. Licence plates are public and they are allowed to scan one with a camera, and they provide warranty on all BMW cars, so they know(and have the right to know) if a specific car is covered by them or not. They have all the iformation they need.
You're not wrong about them in theory having all the data they need to identify out of warranty cars. But if they are legitimately identifying out of warranty cars (I suspect they're not), then that doesn't give them the right to publicly broadcast the information to the wider world. Which I suspect is the crux of this issue.
But again, it depends what sort of information is broadcast. If the bilboard says "hey, driver of BMW reg number EK16 WHD, your warranty is expired!" then that's definitely a problem. But if all that happens is a generic BMW warranty bilboard appears whenever an out-of-warranty car drives past "hey, is your BMW warranty expired? Extend today!" then it's probably ok legally.
But in all seriousness, it would be easy to profile the driver. Is it close to dinner time? "Try out the hot new vegan restaurant, het 10% discount when you show your BMW key. 2 miles away, navigate there, Y/N?". Replace vegan with steak, etc, depending on the profile.
Driving to a residential address in an expensive part of town around dinner time? "Last minute dinner party gift idea: blah blah wines. Shop is en-route, navigate there, Y/N?".
With this announcement, I hope that, by by helpfully bringing to people's attention that information such as the warranty status of your car is publicly available [1], BMW will annoy a broader group of people than just BMW owners.
[1] Assuming that they are not outright lying here when they say "only publically available information is used."
This is possible now that Brexit has happened. Whether the UK will need to comply with GDPR or not is dependent on the deal Boris strikes with the EU, if indeed he ever does.
Most EU laws are getting grandfathered in post Brexit, but the UK reserves the right to change them whenever they want. In essence, they've branched off their legal code from the EU bramch and can now commit changes to their orivate UK-only branch.
GDPR rights will most likely get eroded in the UK.
BMW is on their way out. They have really lost their way. This is what happens when you move away from focusing on the product/craftsmanship and let bean counters in control.
In US they are experimenting with locking almost all features of the car behind a subscription model, so the car leaves the factory in nearly "full" spec, but then you need to pay a subscription to unlock features. For instance if you like heated seats, you can pay a fee and have them unlocked for a year. Or a radar-based cruise control, or satellite radio, or sport driving modes - everything will have its own price.
Their argument is that in US, something like 90% of all new BMWs are leased - so it's "great" for customers and for businesses, since you can now lease a BMW for your employee very cheaply in the most "basic" spec, and if they want some extra features they can pay for them themselves.
Obviously, it's horseshit. But that's the argument they are using.
Not only in the US. 15 years ago when aircon wasn't yet standard in Germany, they added it to all cars anyways and just deactivated the controls in software. So you still get decreased mileage from weight and friction for the compressor, increased accident-risk for the gas filling, but have to pay extra to get a bit flipped at your friendly dealer to use it...
exactly why I keep feeding my 4Runner whatever parts it wants. it's too dumb to be turned against me, snitch on my speeding habits, or demand to get oil changes on its own terms like a Dodge Sprinter for ex.
Feed me gas, air, electricity, and 0.05 parts and labor, and off u go.
Yes it can be, but then again there are ways to keep the car longer, I myself drive a 2008 Honda, but at the same time I think it is easy for another 10 years. You should definitely think about taking care of the engine. I hope I can help if I tell you to read about the same transmission fluid for honda https://carfluidsexpert.com/best-transmission-fluid-for-hond... , take a look, I think you will find a lot of universal options. It's worth starting to take care of your car with at least that. I hope I was able to help.
Yes it can be, but then again there are ways to keep the car longer, I myself drive a 2008 Honda, but at the same time I think it is easy for another 10 years. You should definitely think about taking care of the engine. I hope I can help if I tell you to read about the same transmission fluid for honda https://carfluidsexpert.com/best-transmission-fluid-for-hond... , take a look, I think you will find a lot of universal options. It's worth starting to take care of your car with at least that. I hope I was able to help.
Exactly - BMW is the has-been German brand, that you can buy as a 10-20 year old import. It holds no cachet and is harder to maintain and less fuel efficient than other brands with similar features.
Tesla is the brand that people aspire to own, that people snap their eyes towards on the street. In small towns, all of the owners of Teslas are known and prestigious individuals.
Functionally though - Teslas are too big and too fast for old European cities. The Renault Zoe seems to sell well but is still very expensive for mass adoption.
kids are also a pretty good indication. if for some reason my model 3 is not parked where it's usually parked, the kids of the neighbourhood come over and ask where the Tesla is. i'm not joking. nobody ever cared where my previous bmw mini, vw golf or land rover parked.
Teslas fit just fine into European cities, they are no larger than BMWs or a VW Passat, not to mention the humongous SUV "tanks" that seem to be so popular.
Tesla isn't that popular in Europe simply because most are not insane enough to spend 80kEUR for Model S - for that price one can easily have a Porsche or some other real luxury or sports car.
And Model 3 is very overpriced for what it is. 55k EUR? For a compact car with mediocre range? Seriously? You can have a Porsche Cayenne for that price. Or two compacts like Renault Clio or even VW Golf.
That is really only for die hard fans of the brand. Nobody else buys it here. Also, the network of charging stations is much less developed in Europe than in the US and most are paid (and pretty expensive at that!).
Status symbols are cool but most people don't have Silicon Valley salaries here.
That is a very high level observation, although I do not disagree entirely. You should not forget about countries like Norway, the Netherland and Switzerland where people really have valley-like salaries.
EV registration numbers are going thru the roof in Norway and the Netherlands.
Also, the most basic Cayenne costs 100k EUR, at least in Switzerland.
Yes - but only because of massive government subsidies for buying electric cars and installation of charge points in those countries, especially in Norway. And given that Tesla is/was pretty much the only thing on the market in that class, no wonder it is selling a lot there.
E.g. Norway has exempted electric cars from 25% VAT. That's some 20k EUR "discount" on a Model S right there. Plus it has excepted EVs from other taxes levied on gasoline and diesel cars. So no wonder that people are buying these vehicles there, they would be stupid not to.
The issue is not people buying electric cars but Tesla's claimed status as some sort of status symbol.
Heck, I would go electric myself if there was a car on the market I could actually justify buying - i.e. with about double the range of the current offerings, reasonable battery replacement costs (not costing more than the value of the car after 5-7 years - see Nissan Leaf ...) and reasonable price at the dealers (i.e. about half of what they cost today). People aren't stupid, they see the advantages of driving electric - but also can buy only as much as their wallets allow.
Cayenne prices start around 78k EUR in France, VAT and government ecology maluses included. So I doubt that 100k figure from Switzerland which has much lower VAT taxes, unless they have slapped some sort of "gas-guzzler" tax on it there (which wouldn't surprise me).
where I live, most young and educated people don't see anything exclusive in a car. My tech-centric pals drive their old diesel-engines (they had since high-school...) to work and only the people actually working at BMW/Porsche/Mercedes are playing the "lease"-our-stock-game.
This is a weird statement. There's nothing exclusive about the Model 3 or the criminally ugly SUV.
Now, if you meant to say that the Model S is exclusive, you'd be right. Buying one of those puts a person in the exclusive club of people who were too stupid to spend the money on an A8 or a 760 instead.
Edit: An S class would also be a good option. But Heaven help the person who thinks a Model S is in the same league as any of the other $100k cars. Its ride quality is trash. The interior is trash. I've heard plenty of people get defensive about the Model S, but I've never heard anyone mount a real defense of it.
I think the exclusive thing about the Model 3 is the $40k price tag? Sometimes people let little comments like yours slip on this website and I realize how different of a world some people live in
Last time I brought a used car ( from a dealership) , and was immediately inundated with dozens of extended warranty sales calls.
I can't imagine this will be anything positive. Give it a decade and other advertisers will open the gate. File for divorce and dating ads will spam you at an intersection.
I really wish personalized ads were criminalized. Lets go back to contextual (by location of ad) and general ads. The stalker big brother ad industry needs to be stopped.
My children (one is in High School and the other in College) don't get bothered by advertisements as much as me (are they desensitized?). I would rather pay for most of these "free" services if there was an option to simply opt out of having my data harvested.
Agreed, although it will be an uphill battle. We are rapidly outsourcing governance to data brokers who will vigorously defend their core business model. Boycotts are likely a good place to start, at least until public institutions can be reclaimed, if they can be.
I saw an article here where a dating app was actually selling it's data to a broker , and then that data was being resold to the US military.
Even more alarming , this appeared to target a specific demographic. I dislike online dating for an array of reasons, not being able to control my personal data is the top one.
The only thing you can do is be mindful of how much data you give out.
While it might be the dealership, I get spam-type calls asking me to extend my car's warranty constantly... and they have no idea what car I own. (Turns out they didn't want to give my wife's '99 Saturn a warranty after all!)
The extended warranty folks are getting vehicle registration data from the DMV. Although, I wouldn't put it past a dealer to open a new revenue stream selling customer data too.
(I'm still getting "Your warranty will expire soon!" calls for a 16 year old SUV...)
I used to really like BMWs but they have lost their way in my opinion. Front wheel drive models, charging a subscription for Apple CarPlay, that 4-series grill, increasingly horrific customer service at dealers and foregoing their position as the market leader in handling and dynamics really rub me up the wrong way.
Exactly, they’ve gone for luxury but not as well as MB or Audi who are now eating their lunch. To say nothing of Porsche taking the sportscar and sporty SUV market profits. CarPlay subscription is just offensive.
M2cs or M5c are still by far the best cars in their class. While I'm not a fan of BMW's new design language (think the 4-series, or the iX), nor their move to subscription-based features, it's still my go-to brand. Other (non-exotic) brands are either downsizing (2.0 engine in the new C63 AMG for gods sake) or going fully electric – and I like my v8 rumble in the morning.
Not sure why you're being down-voted, the M2 and the M5 are among the best driver-focused cars being made right now (a dying breed, those driver-focused cars, but that's another discussion), but that still shouldn't excuse BMW for dick moves like this one (I consider it a dick move).
This sounds bad until you realise that over the past 20 years manufacturers switched from cast iron to full aluminium blocks, which have over twice the thermal conductivity.
There's no need for 4.0+ displacements anymore, because they were only there because of the low (tolerable) power density of iron block engines.
Sure, turbos etc. sound like a hack and a hack they are, but the era of V8 rumble is gone for good.
> Sure, turbos etc. sound like a hack and a hack they are, but the era of V8 rumble is gone for good.
tell that to the new c8 corvette.
anyways, the C63 AMG is a $70,000 car. for that price you should be able to get a v8 or at least a v6, even if it makes no sense. lots of cars that are way cheaper still have more than four cylinders.
The value of an engine is not determined by the number of cylinders. You aren't owed a certain number just because you payed a certain amount. An argument can be made that v8+ are capable of being more sonically pleasing, but it ends there.
Can’t speak to the technical argument. I can agree with you that my dads Lexus sc400 from 2000 had a great sound and super smooth driver (v8). That engine was a workhorse... over 500k km and still rocking. The rest of the accessories were falling apart (door handles, leather) but that engine was rock solid.
The value is determined by the customer. An electric motor is, in every respect except its inability to use energy-dense fuels, pretty much perfect. Just not very interesting.
As a toy, an ICE has value. They shouldn't work at all! it's a ridiculous idea. It's quite cool that they do anyway.
I would argue that the station wagon is a great idea. A car like that allows enthusiasts to buy something that isn't completely impractical for most non-enthusiast things.
keep in mind this is a vehicle that starts at $110k. you could buy a nice sports car and a practical family vehicle for that money. I do know a guy that has one and uses it as a daily. he loves it, but he also owns a cayman and a forester, so it's not exactly the "one car that does it all".
2021 Corvette Stingray (6.2l V8), 2021 Dodge Challenger (6.4l V8), 2021 Camaro SS/ZL1 (6.2l V8), 2020 Mustang 5.0, various trucks - there's still plenty of modern car with V8, often even N/A V8s.
People buy cars like that because they like the V8 rumble. I have an older 3.0l N/A I6 BMW (N52), and not because I couldn't have gotten a more feature-loaded Honda for the same price.
Ford recently rolled out a completely new big block v8 engine family for their trucks and vans. OEMs don't do that kind of thing unless they expect to crank them out for 10-20yr.
I think it's important to point out that all those cars come from a country where gasoline is cheap and emissions rules lax. The rest of the world, for the most part, moved on.
Indeed, in my country I'd say a 1.6/1.8 is "standard" and anything over a 2.4 uncommon. Plenty of 1.2s/1.4s around for students and the budget sensitive too, and even some 1.0s (current model Nissan Micra, Honda Civic)
There's no need to pay 10x when you can buy Dacia Logan. Yet people still paying it to get something they don't have in Logan. Big bad engine is one of those features I guess.
I might be a bit biased because my first car was a used M3 e36 back in the 90s. My wife just bought the M5 last year, admittedly one of the best driving experiences in recent years.
welcome to the future, subscription services are what a lot of car makers moving too. if anything one of the first was OnStar which has some monthly fees that will make you wince.
what worries me is that app integration may be a fee based service for some cars.
As for BMW, I owned one and enjoyed it very much but the running commentary on BMW is that you own them only while they are under warranty.
There is a big difference between a BMW or BMW with M sport packet, and a BMW M.
The BMW Ms are actually developed by a different company (the BMW M company, which is different from the BMW company).
For some reason people think of them as being extremely similar, but anybody that has driven a BMW 3xx and a BMW M3 knows that there is a world between them.
Well that's a scam if there ever was one. Who wants a subscription for basic functionality in a car? Might as well buy an iPad and solder it over BMW's control panel.
Interesting. In my Mazda it works really well. The only thing that bothers me is that the car has a no-phone system that is the default, and you always have to switch to Car Play. But Car Play is much, much better, so it would be nice if I could just make it always be on.
The big German car makers go out of their way to reinvent the digital wheel at any opportunity. The next series will have completely different electronics from different cheapest OEMs with a whole new set of bugs in all components and their integration.
In Japan, electronics seem to be more evolutionary and software reuse is practiced more, so while the rotating-car-animation-bling-factor might be lower, bugs are also ironed out over time.
> Who wants a subscription for basic functionality in a car?
I don't get this fundamental objection.
It's just a different way to pay. Either you pay up-front or you pay a subscription. Work out the total cost of ownership (you'll need to estimate how long you likely keep the car either way.) Now take that final figure and either it's worth it to you or it isn't. How that final figure gets paid doesn't seem like a big deal?
For subscriptions they can just change the price at a whim, stop offering your the service whenever they want or change it in a way that you don't want to. When you own / own the license to the software / feature, they can't just pull a fast one as easily.
Wait this seems like an argument for subscription. If the product is changed with an update you don't like, or becomes incompatible with your new phone, or an update to your phone, or stops being useful to you for some other reason, you can stop paying.
If you pay £2k up front for CarPlay as an option and then Apple changes the protocol and you can't use it you're stuck with a lemon you already paid for. As a subscription you can stop paying.
> the product is changed with an update you don't like
Well, you're just left with a 30-50k car with reduced functionality. And, to be honest, CarPlay functionality (or similar) is pretty much fundamental - music, maps - and there's a clear upside of having it integrated with the car (vs. the driver looking down at the phone while driving) and trivial cost (cheaper that developing own software & OS).
The reason I want CarPlay in the first place is because I don't trust carmakers to make good software (borne out of experience!). I'm buying a car to be a car, I want to BYOS (Bring Your Own Software).
Ah right, I might have missed your point, if "subscription" is the only thing you're objecting to.
First, it's obviously a scam. I'm not getting extra value in exchange for money, the product is done. It's even worse than various software subscriptions - at least there your code is continuously being improved and updated to the latest version. Therefore, literally the only reason the company is doing that, is to scam me out of more money.
Second is the trust issue - and I'm not just talking about legal scams - e.g. changing terms and conditions in the future - which could in theory be solved via courts / customer protection laws (but in practice, won't be) but more about the fact that the car company has the ability to disable (parts of) my car! So I wouldn't be buying such a car (asterisk) even if they gave me a "special offer" of $0-forever subscription! They can still change the terms at any point in the future, and it would require massive effort on my part to fix that.
Edit: Having said that, paying $2k up front for CarPlay is also a scam - but at least it makes it easier to estimate the total cost/value of the feature, hence reducing the risk (and mental drag) of owning it...
Edit2: Btw, I have this objection with any "subscription" service... e.g. buying leasehold (subscription) house (although even buying freehold (ownership) house isn't without risk in the UK, you never know who has a preexisting claim on the property...)
(asterisk): assuming other options are available... which is the whole reason we must fight against this, sooner or later... in M$ Office and non-smart TVs, this train has already left the station!
I mean, why not pay a subscription for a knife? You're getting "extra value" from it every time you use it!
Just, no. By "extra" value I mean "extra extra" value - in case of software, new features & updates (which, of course, could also bring no extra value to you, but they do at least in theory).
Btw, I'm not objecting to choice. You want to avoid paying up-front cost for your knives, buy subscription instead? Be my guest! But if the company is forcing you to do this, then it's obviously a good (profitable) deal for them, and a bad deal (scam) for you.
You're moving the goal post here. Obviously you can buy a different brand of car. This subscription stuff smells of anti-consumer intent to keep milking them. I think there should be legislation to prevent such things.
It seems like you're trying to catch this guy out for cognitive dissonance but I'm not seeing it.
CarPlay is offered in perfectly functional forms in the market right now for a reasonable upfront price that people will pay for a known feature set.
A subscription arguably can make the product less valuable, because of uncertainty about continuing support, changes to the subscription model or software, and an unknown price that will likely end up being higher than the flat fee offered by competitors.
This isn't cognitive dissonance, it's worry that BMW might pull a bait and switch.
A ceiling on the price? Now granted this is a BMW, so I wouldn’t dare own it outside of the warranty period, but I usually keep a car 10-15 years. So the longer I keep the car, the more this feature with a low, fixed cost, costs? Screw that.
So just factor that into your equation. Some people would prefer a ceiling, some flexibility. The point is it isn't obviously and inherently a 'scam.' It's just a different way to price and pay for things.
A subscription is only worthwhile if it reduces the up front purchase price. This being BMW, you know that won’t be the case; you’ll be stuck paying full price for the car and paying a monthly fee for a feature that comes standard on much cheaper cars.
Consumers would be more willing to accept that from a budget brand, not a luxury brand.
BMW charged $80/yr for a feature that used to cost $300 total. They since reversed it and now offer the feature for free (i.e. back into the initial cost) due to backlash.
Can confirm. Used to work for FCA in uconnect V2X. There is was no need to process diagnostic features in cloud as the TBM unit has enough capability to process it in the car and display. But the business decided to move processing to cloud and charge premium for monthly subscriptions.
I don't understand why this perfectly valid comment is getting downvoted.
It is not like BMW sold the item and only then decided to start charging. When you buy it is up to you to understand all the up front and delayed cost. Most people prefer delayed costs.
Without sarcasm, I think cars as a subscription has some interesting possibility and I wouldn't object to it. Land Rover has a new subscription product but doesn't seem to have a lot of momentum behind it. You pay a monthly fee that isn't more than if you financed the whole car at the moment, and you can keep getting new vehicles and absolutely everything (servicing etc) is covered because they're motivated to keep re-sale value extremely high because re-selling it is their problem.
I think software, cars, etc, as a service is somewhat liberating and I'm in favour of it.
I don't think you can typically lease a different car every month. I kinda wish you could. I would definitely pay to try a car for a full month before buying it.
Actually you sorta can. I know Volvo has/had a program where you pay something like $1k/month, including insurance, and you can swap out cars twice a month or something like that. I believe some other manufacturers did the same thing.
Through an altruistic lens this seems like a good idea. But realistically economy driven by quarterly reports I see this devolving into a dystopian tail really quickly.
I don't think Land Rover can get it done. However Apple and/or Tesla might have the fandom to pull something like this off.
However electric seat heaters are obviously not something that should be a "thing". Cars and software have been leased for ages. It's the same thing as "a subscription"
People don't need new vehicles constantly. They buy one that fits their usage and personality and become familiar with it while they keep it for years. What is the purpose of switching out so often? Especially with the limited choice of a single make like Land Rover? How many different SUVs are you going to drive and why?
A heated seat subscription makes sense when they sell the car to you as if it didn't have heated seats and are allowing you to purchase them at a later date, much like how Tesla's rear heated seats can be bought long after the purchase of the vehicle. It allows the manufacturer to decrease MSRP $x amount (for Tesla, $300) while also saving money on the back-end by not having to handle more part choices being involved in the manufacturing processes.
The same generally applies for Carplay but it makes less sense given carplay is easy to integrate, only needs to be done once, and is then-on maintained by Apple/Google (for Android Auto), and the measly subscription cost for Carplay most certainly wasn't considered when determining MSRP. The same probably applies for the heated seats argument (did BMW really take into account the subscription costs when determining MSRP), with Tesla probably being the only manufacturer actually doing this since they already take into account things like FSD being unavailable on SR+ Model 3's and no EAP on SR Model 3's, even though all models have the same sensors and cameras and HW3 (although non-plus SR models are no longer being produced, so I'm not sure if they ever got hw2.5 or hw3 included).
No, I don't want to "subscribe" to everything. Only bean counters think that. I don't mind subscribing to a music service because they have constant royalty fees, new music, etc and it's a classic "thing". Heated seats are a functionality that once paid for should be yours if you paid for the option. They aren't coming out every year and replacing the heating coils with newer fancier coils, it's a freakin' heater. It also sets a horrible precedent.
How are they foregoing their position as the market leader in handling and dynamics? They’re still miles ahead of Audis where it feels as if the transmission and the engine are fighting vs each other especially in 50 engines, and Mercedes where it feels you’re driving a barge rather than a car.
Marginally so, under certain use cases. Unfortunately, it suddenly becomes worse when you want to steer AND accelerate. And, much like AWD, it can give you a sense of confidence in your ability to move that is not matched by your ability to stop.
If you live somewhere that snow matters, get good tires.
My reality disagrees. I live in a place with a lot of snow, and pretty much see cars that have sliden off the highway every week. All of them are BMWs. And they are all required by law to have winter tires at least.
Winter tires do help, but there is a huge difference between RWD with good tires and 4 wheel drive (notice also that 4WD and AWD is not the same thing, and there are also different qualities).
(it just so happen that here, BMWs are the most popular rear wheel drive cars)
Until you have to go up a hill, or steer and drive in several inches of slush. I guess it's marginally more stupid proof if you floor it at a dumb time but that seems like needless optimization of the worst case while totally tanking the average case. With the weight distribution and electronic controls available in modern vehicles FWD has no meaningful benefit other than cost.
... and lower weight, and no tunnel, and more boot space. If anything, it's RWD which struggles to maintain its significance and show its benefits outside of sports. Modern platforms can make the front wheels turn and spin at the same time without much fuss, with driving characteristics determined by other factors.
Weight is a wash. We're talking like a cumulative 100lb by integrating the front diff with the transmission and losing the drive shaft. Tunnel is nice but most cars still don't have a flat floor because they stick a tunnel in there for exhaust and the floor-pan is likely shared at least in part with an AWD crossover that puts a drive shaft there and it's usually important enough for floor rigidity so they don't omit it on the FWD models.
>Modern platforms can make the front wheels turn and spin at the same time without much fuss
Yeah they can prevent you from losing traction but you're fundamentally at a disadvantage to RWD because no matter how you cut it you're trying to spread the front traction budget thinner. Everything that makes RWD desirable for the track also makes it desirable for consumer A to B duty.
Don't get me wrong, FWD is great for bringing 0% no money down economy cars to the masses and creating bottom dollar van chassis for employees to abuse but even at its best it's still never going to make varsity in any context where performance actually matters
there's an argument to be made that understeer is probably the better failure mode for a poor driver.
anyways, most commuters are probably not approaching the limits of grip while accelerating through corners. most people I know have trouble remembering not to brake through turns. the implications of weight transfer during acceleration for a FWD vehicle are much more noticeable during daily driving. it's especially sad to see with all these 200+ hp hot hatches. they have pretty good power to weight ratios on paper but they just can't put it down. a moderately quick start at an intersection in anything other than ideal conditions results in wheel spin every time.
> Don't get me wrong, FWD is great for bringing 0% no money down economy cars to the masses and creating bottom dollar van chassis for employees to abuse but even at its best it's still never going to make varsity in any context where performance actually matters
It's exaggerated. At least 90% of car drivers aren't "performance actually matters".
Are there realistically any cases on public roads where performance actually matters? All typical cars can reach maximum highway speed. At that point it's only a matter of how comfortable that experience is. Comfort and performance may be personal preference, but "actually matters" as in, makes a real difference? Don't think so.
Not sure why BMW gets so much negativity. The past models of BMW were really boring. The design wasn't extraordinary that it could compete with Audi or Mercedes.
But the new design of the iX and 4er models are very beautiful. I must say the new grills really appeal to me.
It seems that the new design causes a similar reaction as Mercedes SUV design of GLE and GLC (Coupe). Mercedes took a new approach and got a lot of negative comments. But ultimately they set a new trend and their SUV's were a huge success.
whoever in BMW, who thought this Public shaming "ads" might increase sales should be given salesperson of the year (add in marketing mozart if you wish)
coming soon, near the traffic lights.
"a smart bill board showing your debt and dues pending to the entire fckng world"
"hello there, yes, you on the red honda civic with number plate xxxx, how are things going on in your bed? last night you searched for it and we are here to help"
how the heck did we end up here, this makes targeted ads look like god send, and here I was thinking targeted ads were the worst to happen in tech :( ..
> "a smart bill board showing your debt and dues pending to the entire fckng world"
The "showing debt" thing I think already happens in China, too lazy to search for the exact reference right now but I remember reading something of the sorts not too long ago. Creepy as hell.
Later edit: Found a quick reference (among many others, I guess): "Chinese debtors shamed with broadcast of names and faces on giant screens on May 1 holiday" [1]
The people doing the “car warranty” phone scam are making more money and didn’t have to do any ML or image recognition R&D. In fact, their profit margin might be better because they don’t pay out ... they have zero post-acquisition costs!
This shows a bug in capitalism: The scammers work less hard to make more money and will go out of business still in denial.
350 comments
[ 4.5 ms ] story [ 274 ms ] threadThis claim is disputed.
You may find the full article on some Russian mirror website. I don't know whether HN allows us to name it.
https://www.petrolprices.com/news/bmw-drivers-the-most-disli...
Measuring aggressiveness is going to be a measurement of outliers. For everyone weaving through traffic in their BMW without turn signals there's a gray hair putting along. For every Tacoma clogging up the left lane there's a Prius taxi hauling ass to the next fare. I don't think it's a very informative thing to try to measure.
I drive a tiny little french thing with a chainsaw engine so probably not my market anyway.
For people that look at cars as status symbols, sure. Also maybe for people that think straightline performance is all that matters.
All mainstream Tesla's are dogs around turns compared to even baseline luxury German cars.
The biggest problem a Tesla would have vs a competitive ICE sport sedan would be mass, which can hurt all vehicle dynamics; likely on the order of 300-400lbs or so (Model 3 LR: ~4k lbs, 330i ~3600lbs, Model S P75 ~4500lbs, 530i ~4000lbs). Of course it's worth noting that none of these vehicles are featherweights, and the extremely low center of gravity of skateboard battery pack vehicles helps them roll vastly less than one would expect, which helps a lot in transitions and steady state cornering.
Regardless, both the Model S and the Model 3 are extremely well-balanced and the 3 is surprisingly nimble and adjustable. The 3 has a ton of grip, turns in sharply and gets out of corners FAST. I haven't driven a Model X so I can't say.
Source: I instruct, I drive on the track, I own 2 BMWs and 1 Tesla, I've driven numerous BMWs and Teslas including the original roadster on the street and on closed courses. And I've been on car forums for decades and seen endless comments like this.
Also, a Roadster is definitely not a "mainstream Tesla." I used that word to specifically exclude the Roadster, as it's $250k and a completely different discussion.
I agree that using the term "dog" was an exaggeration.
Why should I spend a lot of money to improve the 1% of use cases I don't care about?
My 2 biggest worries when I'm driving a BMW are hitting somebody who is walking through the red light in the rain and looking at his mobile phone, and going into a pothole. I want the car with the best automatic emergency system and the room to improve, and Tesla is far the best in this category.
And the roadster I was referring to was the original one, not the one that, as far as I know, doesn't exist (though, I can't say I pay a lot of attention to Tesla news because the fanboyism is an absolutely toxic combination of .. well, fanboyism, and automotive ignorance).
I don't think the Model 3 is quite as fun as a manual transmission non-turbo 6cyl BMW 3 series. I get a lot of tactile enjoyment from shifting, I enjoy the sounds of a nice engine, and I enjoy the power delivery of an internal combustion engine. Of course, all of these things that I enjoy are actually things that make the vehicle slower compared to a dual clutch or modern automatic, or a boosted engine of a similar size, or an electric motor with no gearbox required to keep the engine near its powerband; they're all anachronisms.
The extra mass of the Tesla is less of a drawback to me over (say) a turbo BMW 3 series automatic, vice comparing that turbo automatic 3er to a manual BMW 3 series without a turbo. None of these cars can really truly be called "nimble", but I'm quite pleased with the balance, cornering ability and especially outright grip of our RWD Model 3 (with Michelin P4s tires replacing the eco crap of course). It's all a sliding scale, but yes, my primary objection is putting the Teslas in a class entirely below all German sedans. On a mountain road I'd happily take the Model 3 over an A4, even if not the "right" BMW 3 series for the road.
Not sure which ad agency they use now, but this live billboard thing is just damaging to the brand. Creepy, too.
I don't buy stuff from companies run by idiots.
You own a particular vehicle registration mark as much as you own a particular phone number, and both can reasonably be used to identify an individual (motor database verus telephone database).
> The Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018), which currently supplements and tailors the GDPR within the UK, will continue to apply.
> The provisions of the GDPR will be incorporated directly into UK law from the end of the transition period, to sit alongside the DPA 2018.
https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/data-protection-at-the-...
You should only be allowed to control your own PII if you can afford a $1000 Apple product. Everyone else is fair game.
Of course everything regarding the EU exist is a total mess, now, with just 7 days, 9 hours left - including Christmas Day and Boxing Day - so just 2 working days left - we've been told that there is a new trade deal with the EU, which may or may not be passed into law this year on both the EU and the UK side.
I believe that the appropiate laws and instruments are already in place to roll over GDPR into next year
I think PII according to GDPR is something you can go back to identify a person.
This exists and it’s a very profitable business:
https://www.engadget.com/2019-09-17-repo-drivers-scan-licens...
I think it’s about $20 per query to track a known plate.
The issue is them broadcasting in a Billboard that a BMW nearby doesn't have warranty.
Here's what the UK DVL say: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/286454/response/69598...
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/286454/response/69598...
They probably would if you write them.
Then on the other side, they have a database of cars that they sold and which are still under warranty - again, nothing about owners, none of the silo'ed personal information needs to be accessed at all. If the car is not on the "warranty==true" list, then they show the ad. I assume the ad doesn't display anything like "hey john smith, your warranty is expired!".
I mean, they probably don't even have that information for half the cars they scan because the warranty belongs to the car, not the person who bought the car. The warranty is transferred to the new owner if someone sells the car. They will not know the owner of all private used sales and used sales through 3rd party dealers.
Can the car license be tracked back to you? If yes, then anything attached to it is still personal. For example subscriptions or maintenance status.
Can they use this information to deny you access to their services if the subscription expires? Yes! Can they call you that it's about to expire? Probably yes. Can they call you about this other service? No way! Can they publicly shame you? I'd sue them.
Like I said, in the UK private companies are explicitly allowed to use AMPR machines to read licence plates(every supermarket in this country will have AMPR machines that record when you come and go). BMW just cross-references that with their own record to see if the car is under warranty or not - but like I said, they probably don't actually identify you in any way on the bilboard.
But surely, BMW also simply knows when they sold that specific car thanks to their own records, no?
Like, imagine you were selling cameras, you sold someone a camera and then they come in to your store 5 years later with the same device - is it ok for you to ask "hey, this device has an expired warranty, would you like to extend it?" - you know this because as a seller, you have to keep a record of every device sold. You don't even need to know the owner or any personal information about them - you just know that the camera in front of you has an expired warranty.
>> And the fact that you (the driver) have an expired warranty is private data.
Well I think that's where the problem lies. It's not the driver who has an expired warranty - it's the car that does, and there's nothing you can do, EU or not, to prevent BMW from simply knowing that a car they sold at point X only had a warranty for 3 years. They don't need to know anything about the owner at all.
__ Action Painting __
Paintball is war, pal, and it demands decisive action, like firing 62-mm paint bombs that turn a 75-foot area into a Jackson Pollock death zone. This bipod-mounted mortar can shoot up to four rounds per minute from its 4-foot aluminum barrel, with consistent aim controlled by traverse and elevation-adjustment screws. The M1A's cardboard-jacket shells contain 20 ounces of nonlethal, water-soluble ordnance in a thin urethane casing that explodes harmlessly on impact. Back in the urban jungle, the 46-pound, CO2-powered cannon doubles as an effective billboard-liberation device.
[1] https://www.wired.com/2000/03/fetish-127/
Edited to add the words "that cited a use-case tailor-made for this".
Tangentially related to the comment, but seeing more evidence of companies positioning themselves for such a transition.
Oddly, the same adjective is frequently used.
In general, sentences of the form "(I heard from (?P<authority figure>.* ) that )?(?P<bogeyman of the year>.* ) is (?P<influencing us in unseen ways>.* )" should be treated with a great deal of suspicion.
(Extra whitespace insertion to bypass HN formatting)
Without a source, this comes across as racist. So far I haven't been able to find such a source. The closest I've found is a quote from the lead designer saying that in Europe people want to blend in, but in the rest of the world they want to stand out, and the design follows that. The China connection seems to be extrapolation by journalists and bloggers (because cars with big grilles are popular in China), and the bit about intimidation seems to be fabricated entirely.
Their US market share peaked in 2014 and their total sales peaked in 2015. I am not going to say their a declining brand, but their 2019 market share is only up to 2010 levels.
Ram me off of the road? Crash into the back of me? Try and eat me?
I don't know what things are like in China, but there is a saying in the UK: "all mouth and no trousers".
I swapped a front clip on an old shitbox because the meaner looking newer front clip was cheaper than shipping a replacement bumper cover and it reduced the number of people who camp in the left lane in front of me by a solid 10% (pulling that number out of my ass but whatever it is it's a noticeable amount).
Charlie Miller demoed remote hacking on a jeep while on the highway, and being hacked is now a lesser fear to me than being shamed:
https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-hig...
https://www.motoringresearch.com/car-news/bmw-targeted-warra...
BMW has told Motoring Research its targeted billboard warranty adverts – which are claimed to use number plate registration technology to tailor public adverts to BMW drivers – do not actually draw upon vehicle warranty status.
Rather, only publically available information is used. “There is no personalisation visible on the advert and no vehicle or customer data is stored or retained.”
“No personal identifiable information applicable to GDPR is used in the [Vehicle Detection Technology] process nor does VDT ever have access to any personal data.”
Using that info it would be trivial to detect a BMW car that was older than X years old. Where X is number of years the normal non-extended warranty is. You then just assume that any car older than the non-extended warranty doesn't have an extended warranty and display the advert.
Then the only thing the advert would be giving away is that there is a BMW nearby that older than X years. Which anyone with a pair of eyes could figure out because the numbers of UK numberplates encode the issue year (thus the age of the car), and well, BMW's are pretty easy to identify just by looking at them.
Can the manufacturer of an object use their privately-held data about the object to target marketing to the bearer/operator/etc. of that object?
Probably, yes, at least until a law is passed or a ruling is issued that states otherwise. The best short-term route of attack here would be on the plate->VIN conversion database, assuming that's what they're using anyways. But long-term, they'll figure out how to use a telephoto lens or LIDAR or paint-embedded QR codes to get VIN numbers somehow, so best to tackle the bigger problem too.
But in all seriousness, it would be easy to profile the driver. Is it close to dinner time? "Try out the hot new vegan restaurant, het 10% discount when you show your BMW key. 2 miles away, navigate there, Y/N?". Replace vegan with steak, etc, depending on the profile.
Driving to a residential address in an expensive part of town around dinner time? "Last minute dinner party gift idea: blah blah wines. Shop is en-route, navigate there, Y/N?".
My name is in the phone book, therefore public.
It is also personally identifiable information and protected by European law.
That said, processing this data is legal, but you are missing an important distinction in your logic as it relates to data protection laws.
Whether courts agree that broadcasting this information is legal.. we shall see.
CCTV cameras that record public areas need to be registered with ICO.
[1] Assuming that they are not outright lying here when they say "only publically available information is used."
https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/data-protection-at-the-...
That said, apparently they've just reached a deal, and the transition period ends in 7 days, so lets see what they decided about with data protection.
GDPR rights will most likely get eroded in the UK.
(They charge an annual fee for access to car play, for instance)
Their argument is that in US, something like 90% of all new BMWs are leased - so it's "great" for customers and for businesses, since you can now lease a BMW for your employee very cheaply in the most "basic" spec, and if they want some extra features they can pay for them themselves.
Obviously, it's horseshit. But that's the argument they are using.
https://jalopnik.com/bmws-new-feature-subscription-plan-idea...
Feed me gas, air, electricity, and 0.05 parts and labor, and off u go.
Tesla is the brand that people aspire to own, that people snap their eyes towards on the street. In small towns, all of the owners of Teslas are known and prestigious individuals.
Functionally though - Teslas are too big and too fast for old European cities. The Renault Zoe seems to sell well but is still very expensive for mass adoption.
Tesla isn't that popular in Europe simply because most are not insane enough to spend 80kEUR for Model S - for that price one can easily have a Porsche or some other real luxury or sports car.
And Model 3 is very overpriced for what it is. 55k EUR? For a compact car with mediocre range? Seriously? You can have a Porsche Cayenne for that price. Or two compacts like Renault Clio or even VW Golf.
That is really only for die hard fans of the brand. Nobody else buys it here. Also, the network of charging stations is much less developed in Europe than in the US and most are paid (and pretty expensive at that!).
Status symbols are cool but most people don't have Silicon Valley salaries here.
E.g. Norway has exempted electric cars from 25% VAT. That's some 20k EUR "discount" on a Model S right there. Plus it has excepted EVs from other taxes levied on gasoline and diesel cars. So no wonder that people are buying these vehicles there, they would be stupid not to.
The issue is not people buying electric cars but Tesla's claimed status as some sort of status symbol.
Heck, I would go electric myself if there was a car on the market I could actually justify buying - i.e. with about double the range of the current offerings, reasonable battery replacement costs (not costing more than the value of the car after 5-7 years - see Nissan Leaf ...) and reasonable price at the dealers (i.e. about half of what they cost today). People aren't stupid, they see the advantages of driving electric - but also can buy only as much as their wallets allow.
Cayenne prices start around 78k EUR in France, VAT and government ecology maluses included. So I doubt that 100k figure from Switzerland which has much lower VAT taxes, unless they have slapped some sort of "gas-guzzler" tax on it there (which wouldn't surprise me).
Now, if you meant to say that the Model S is exclusive, you'd be right. Buying one of those puts a person in the exclusive club of people who were too stupid to spend the money on an A8 or a 760 instead.
Edit: An S class would also be a good option. But Heaven help the person who thinks a Model S is in the same league as any of the other $100k cars. Its ride quality is trash. The interior is trash. I've heard plenty of people get defensive about the Model S, but I've never heard anyone mount a real defense of it.
I can't imagine this will be anything positive. Give it a decade and other advertisers will open the gate. File for divorce and dating ads will spam you at an intersection.
Even more alarming , this appeared to target a specific demographic. I dislike online dating for an array of reasons, not being able to control my personal data is the top one.
The only thing you can do is be mindful of how much data you give out.
> The only thing you can do is be mindful of how much data you give out.
This is important, but I don't think it's all we can do.
(I'm still getting "Your warranty will expire soon!" calls for a 16 year old SUV...)
This sounds bad until you realise that over the past 20 years manufacturers switched from cast iron to full aluminium blocks, which have over twice the thermal conductivity.
There's no need for 4.0+ displacements anymore, because they were only there because of the low (tolerable) power density of iron block engines.
Sure, turbos etc. sound like a hack and a hack they are, but the era of V8 rumble is gone for good.
All this will be replaced by electric anyway.
tell that to the new c8 corvette.
anyways, the C63 AMG is a $70,000 car. for that price you should be able to get a v8 or at least a v6, even if it makes no sense. lots of cars that are way cheaper still have more than four cylinders.
As a toy, an ICE has value. They shouldn't work at all! it's a ridiculous idea. It's quite cool that they do anyway.
People buy cars like that because they like the V8 rumble. I have an older 3.0l N/A I6 BMW (N52), and not because I couldn't have gotten a more feature-loaded Honda for the same price.
what worries me is that app integration may be a fee based service for some cars.
As for BMW, I owned one and enjoyed it very much but the running commentary on BMW is that you own them only while they are under warranty.
The BMW Ms are actually developed by a different company (the BMW M company, which is different from the BMW company).
For some reason people think of them as being extremely similar, but anybody that has driven a BMW 3xx and a BMW M3 knows that there is a world between them.
Well that's a scam if there ever was one. Who wants a subscription for basic functionality in a car? Might as well buy an iPad and solder it over BMW's control panel.
In Japan, electronics seem to be more evolutionary and software reuse is practiced more, so while the rotating-car-animation-bling-factor might be lower, bugs are also ironed out over time.
I don't get this fundamental objection.
It's just a different way to pay. Either you pay up-front or you pay a subscription. Work out the total cost of ownership (you'll need to estimate how long you likely keep the car either way.) Now take that final figure and either it's worth it to you or it isn't. How that final figure gets paid doesn't seem like a big deal?
If you pay £2k up front for CarPlay as an option and then Apple changes the protocol and you can't use it you're stuck with a lemon you already paid for. As a subscription you can stop paying.
Well, you're just left with a 30-50k car with reduced functionality. And, to be honest, CarPlay functionality (or similar) is pretty much fundamental - music, maps - and there's a clear upside of having it integrated with the car (vs. the driver looking down at the phone while driving) and trivial cost (cheaper that developing own software & OS).
The reason I want CarPlay in the first place is because I don't trust carmakers to make good software (borne out of experience!). I'm buying a car to be a car, I want to BYOS (Bring Your Own Software).
So what is the upside to paying up front?
First, it's obviously a scam. I'm not getting extra value in exchange for money, the product is done. It's even worse than various software subscriptions - at least there your code is continuously being improved and updated to the latest version. Therefore, literally the only reason the company is doing that, is to scam me out of more money.
Second is the trust issue - and I'm not just talking about legal scams - e.g. changing terms and conditions in the future - which could in theory be solved via courts / customer protection laws (but in practice, won't be) but more about the fact that the car company has the ability to disable (parts of) my car! So I wouldn't be buying such a car (asterisk) even if they gave me a "special offer" of $0-forever subscription! They can still change the terms at any point in the future, and it would require massive effort on my part to fix that.
Edit: Having said that, paying $2k up front for CarPlay is also a scam - but at least it makes it easier to estimate the total cost/value of the feature, hence reducing the risk (and mental drag) of owning it...
Edit2: Btw, I have this objection with any "subscription" service... e.g. buying leasehold (subscription) house (although even buying freehold (ownership) house isn't without risk in the UK, you never know who has a preexisting claim on the property...)
(asterisk): assuming other options are available... which is the whole reason we must fight against this, sooner or later... in M$ Office and non-smart TVs, this train has already left the station!
Wait, if you're not getting extra value from the product every extra month you use it, then stop paying the subscription! That's the beauty of it!
Just, no. By "extra" value I mean "extra extra" value - in case of software, new features & updates (which, of course, could also bring no extra value to you, but they do at least in theory).
Btw, I'm not objecting to choice. You want to avoid paying up-front cost for your knives, buy subscription instead? Be my guest! But if the company is forcing you to do this, then it's obviously a good (profitable) deal for them, and a bad deal (scam) for you.
I'm really not sure anyone is forced to drive a BMW, are they.
> But if the company is forcing you to do this, then it's obviously a good (profitable) deal for them, and a bad deal (scam) for you.
I think this is unnecessarily cynical.
CarPlay is offered in perfectly functional forms in the market right now for a reasonable upfront price that people will pay for a known feature set.
A subscription arguably can make the product less valuable, because of uncertainty about continuing support, changes to the subscription model or software, and an unknown price that will likely end up being higher than the flat fee offered by competitors.
This isn't cognitive dissonance, it's worry that BMW might pull a bait and switch.
And anyway, confidence in Apple is justifiably higher.
A ceiling on the price? Now granted this is a BMW, so I wouldn’t dare own it outside of the warranty period, but I usually keep a car 10-15 years. So the longer I keep the car, the more this feature with a low, fixed cost, costs? Screw that.
So just factor that into your equation. Some people would prefer a ceiling, some flexibility. The point is it isn't obviously and inherently a 'scam.' It's just a different way to price and pay for things.
For myself, and it seems like pretty much everyone except for yourself, it definitely is. ;)
But, point taken. Only ~95% of people seem to consider it a scam, and an obvious one. ;)
Consumers would be more willing to accept that from a budget brand, not a luxury brand.
It is not like BMW sold the item and only then decided to start charging. When you buy it is up to you to understand all the up front and delayed cost. Most people prefer delayed costs.
I think software, cars, etc, as a service is somewhat liberating and I'm in favour of it.
Land Rover already do leasing - their subscription is a different product.
I don't think Land Rover can get it done. However Apple and/or Tesla might have the fandom to pull something like this off.
Makes no sense and really transparently benefits the company over the actual "owner" of the car. Why would I ever buy something like that.
The same generally applies for Carplay but it makes less sense given carplay is easy to integrate, only needs to be done once, and is then-on maintained by Apple/Google (for Android Auto), and the measly subscription cost for Carplay most certainly wasn't considered when determining MSRP. The same probably applies for the heated seats argument (did BMW really take into account the subscription costs when determining MSRP), with Tesla probably being the only manufacturer actually doing this since they already take into account things like FSD being unavailable on SR+ Model 3's and no EAP on SR Model 3's, even though all models have the same sensors and cameras and HW3 (although non-plus SR models are no longer being produced, so I'm not sure if they ever got hw2.5 or hw3 included).
Better for driving on snow, if you're at a place where that matters.
If you live somewhere that snow matters, get good tires.
My reality disagrees. I live in a place with a lot of snow, and pretty much see cars that have sliden off the highway every week. All of them are BMWs. And they are all required by law to have winter tires at least.
Winter tires do help, but there is a huge difference between RWD with good tires and 4 wheel drive (notice also that 4WD and AWD is not the same thing, and there are also different qualities).
(it just so happen that here, BMWs are the most popular rear wheel drive cars)
Until you have to go up a hill, or steer and drive in several inches of slush. I guess it's marginally more stupid proof if you floor it at a dumb time but that seems like needless optimization of the worst case while totally tanking the average case. With the weight distribution and electronic controls available in modern vehicles FWD has no meaningful benefit other than cost.
... and lower weight, and no tunnel, and more boot space. If anything, it's RWD which struggles to maintain its significance and show its benefits outside of sports. Modern platforms can make the front wheels turn and spin at the same time without much fuss, with driving characteristics determined by other factors.
>Modern platforms can make the front wheels turn and spin at the same time without much fuss
Yeah they can prevent you from losing traction but you're fundamentally at a disadvantage to RWD because no matter how you cut it you're trying to spread the front traction budget thinner. Everything that makes RWD desirable for the track also makes it desirable for consumer A to B duty.
Don't get me wrong, FWD is great for bringing 0% no money down economy cars to the masses and creating bottom dollar van chassis for employees to abuse but even at its best it's still never going to make varsity in any context where performance actually matters
anyways, most commuters are probably not approaching the limits of grip while accelerating through corners. most people I know have trouble remembering not to brake through turns. the implications of weight transfer during acceleration for a FWD vehicle are much more noticeable during daily driving. it's especially sad to see with all these 200+ hp hot hatches. they have pretty good power to weight ratios on paper but they just can't put it down. a moderately quick start at an intersection in anything other than ideal conditions results in wheel spin every time.
Also I'm pretty sure most of the rwd drivers I see on the side of the road up the local mountain thought they are not poor drivers until the last 2s.
It's exaggerated. At least 90% of car drivers aren't "performance actually matters".
But the new design of the iX and 4er models are very beautiful. I must say the new grills really appeal to me.
It seems that the new design causes a similar reaction as Mercedes SUV design of GLE and GLC (Coupe). Mercedes took a new approach and got a lot of negative comments. But ultimately they set a new trend and their SUV's were a huge success.
coming soon, near the traffic lights.
"a smart bill board showing your debt and dues pending to the entire fckng world"
"hello there, yes, you on the red honda civic with number plate xxxx, how are things going on in your bed? last night you searched for it and we are here to help"
how the heck did we end up here, this makes targeted ads look like god send, and here I was thinking targeted ads were the worst to happen in tech :( ..
The "showing debt" thing I think already happens in China, too lazy to search for the exact reference right now but I remember reading something of the sorts not too long ago. Creepy as hell.
Later edit: Found a quick reference (among many others, I guess): "Chinese debtors shamed with broadcast of names and faces on giant screens on May 1 holiday" [1]
[1] https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2144690/chin...
This shows a bug in capitalism: The scammers work less hard to make more money and will go out of business still in denial.
Do they do any market research on how their products are used?