Motor Trend article on the new M2

[patsbimmer1]

Snap said:

5-60 ftw

0-60-0

[B C]

5-60-0

[wally509]

Hi guys, thanks for taking the time/effort to respond and not just having the mods ban the “crotchety middle aged guy” for voicing an unpopular opinion on the e21.

You guys are lucky to live in an age when cars consistently get faster, more efficient, better handling more reliable, etc.  It wasn’t always like that.  There was a period of time when emissions regulations were outpacing fuel control and catalyzing technologies and that happens to be the period of time being discussed.  The corner really didn’t get turned on that one until the standards sort of leveled off and multi point fully computer controlled fuel injection (such as motronic) became commonplace.  This was after the e21 was done.  There were also goofy safety standards such as the “minimum bumper height requirement” which forced many of the European manufacturers to unwilling raise ride heights to somewhat amusing levels just to get the bumpers up to height so the cars could be sold in the U.S..

I realize convincing people the e21 was a worthy successor to the ’02 is a lost cause.  It just irritates me that because TODAY people prefer the ’02, means BACK THEN the e21 was a “dud”.  Quite to contrary is true, the e21 and the e28s were hits and excellent cars I might add…exactly, precisely what that company needed at that time to move it from that “niche” manufacturer teetering on bankruptcy once (or more) every ten years or so to a long term solvent major.

The significant preference of the ’02 over the e21 today is very easy to explain.  The ’02 has “crossed the bridge” into old car status and old car=cool car for whatever reason(s).  Proof?  How many of those 9/10 people would take a roundie over a square light ’02?  Old looking=cool, older looking=cooler.  The e21 is stuck in that dissed / doldrums ‘80s malaise, by no real fault of it’s own.

“Sales figures mean nothing” – wow, not really sure where you’re going with that one.  Automobiles are designed, engineered and manufactured for one reason and one reason only…to be sold.  I think it’s interesting you bring up the Chrysler K car and what a horrible vehicle that was given it was named “car of the year” by the writers of the same magazine that started all this.  Do you remember Lee Iacocca being on national TV thanking the U.S. taxpayers for that huge loan which they were only able to pay back because of profits of the…oh never mind.

“It wasn’t a developmental leap forward in any way” – again, wow, not really sure where you’re going with that one.  I have a fair amount of technical literature from BMW, mostly what they sent after the purchase of the e21 but also some from when I worked for BMWNA as a technical rep for the regional auto shows that will contradict that.  If I could find all that crap, which I know I still have somewhere, I could give you a list as long as your arm.  Most of it being things you can’t really see, which is obviously part of the problem.  But what difference would all that typing make?  None…y’all are going to believe what you want to believe and just beat me down saying that’s all sales fluff.  You can keep going back to performance, but in reality the difference was within the margin of error of the testing and I don’t think they ever made an ’02 that could meet the later crash and emissions standards the e21 could (and did) to do a real apples to apples comparison.

BMW was making huge leaps forward in exterior styling, interior styling (focusing on real ergonomics for the first time), reliability, manufacturing quality, fuel efficiency and safety in that time period and the e21 shared in a majority of those.  I brought up “compared to other cars” and you came back with that wasn’t what the original article was about.  Yes, I understand that, however it gives you (and should have given the MT author) a good indication of the design parameters auto manufacturers were required to work within in a given time period…those being forced on them by governmental regulations, technical/manufacturing limitations or economic conditions, etc.  Given all they had to work with and within, the e21s and e28s were really kick ass cars.  Other manufacturers scrambled to catch up.

As you probably can tell, I was really into BMWs in that time period.  The lucky bastard that I am even got to go tour the factory and see the “tea cup” (which they apparently now refer to as the “salad bowl”) back in 1984.  Owned e21s and e28s.  I tuned out about the time of the e36, they had me and then they lost me.  Now I am sort of coming back with an '82 e21 and an e92 daily driver.

Wally509, forum novelist...

[B C]

Wally, I appreciate your insight and perspective, very valid points which I can agree with. The ride height thing is something I was not aware of and makes a lot of sense for the stock ride height of an e21.  I hope the fact that some on here see the e21 as a dud doesn't anger you as much as it may seem like from reading your post. If I had a valve for everytime someone crapped on an M20, i'd have an M50 swap.

[m42b32]

I hope you don't think I was crapping on the e21, I actually really like them! I seriously considered swapping my m42 into an e21 when I hit a deer in my e30 but decided to fix my car instead.

[i_love_cars]

Hey Wally nobody is going to tell you not to have an opinion and ban you for having a legitimate discourse. 

I will stand against what I perceive here as a notion that we're all just hipsters thinking "older = cooler" and how the 80's may be considered "older" but that they just get glazed over. In my old car flipping phase I've owned a couple of Ferrari 308 GTS cars from 1978, 1983 Porsche whale tail, any number of early 80's Lotus Esprits, TVR 280i, RX-7, and the list goes on - some of them drove decently in their own right, but the aesthetics of the era just never did it for me. Again, i say this because I've owned probably more sports cars of 1978 through most of the 80's than anyone who even had a driver's license back then. I have years of first-hand experience owning, fixing, and driving cars of the era to understand their merits and shortcomings. The subjective side of that, however, I can't answer for everyone. 

I want a 2002 because I feel that the body lines of the car and the stature of it just screams BMW purity. The E21 had some traces of that but the unfortunate design cues / themes of the era took their toll on the car. I would agree that in terms of aesthetics, it's just a victim of the times. Looking at the newest BMWs of today, they look completely nondescript and they don't have the classy look of some of the older models. I can't fully express that because it's just part of what makes me personally tick for a certain type of car. When I look at a 2002 I think "yes. BMW." And that varies for everyone, of course. Hell, half the reason I love my 135i so much is because it's the odd-duck out of the modern BMW crowd in a sea of completely nondescript BMW models. It still has some swooping lines that I feel are too modern but honestly the way the car perches itself at certain angles really reminds me of how I feel when I look at a 2002. Just a taught, compact car with a stance that combines class with desire to drive. 

I would never fault anyone for driving an E21. I would never look at someone rolling up to a BMW meet in an E21 and say "wow, you really made a poor choice." Putting everything else aside, I just plain don't really like the way it looks compared to some other BMWs. I know a lot of people think my 135i is stupid, and I can't think of a single time where I run into people at car shows who end up explaining to me why they wouldn't buy one, lol. But if we all liked and drove the same car, there would be no real purpose in having meets/shows other than to circle jerk. 

Snapsby McUndersteerington, I think we should change Wally's title to "Forum Novelist"

[wally509]

Sorry guys, that EXTRA LONG post wasn't intended to sound angry or be a flame of any sort.  I'll try not to do that anymore.

I know where all that literature is and I'm going to go in the attic and dig it out the next time I'm there just because I'm curious myself now.  I didn't keep it handy because I never in a million years ever thought the e21, given what I witnessed and participated in in period, would ever be looked down on in such a manner.  It was just sort of a shock I guess.  After reading that article, I did send it to a few of my friends who were also really into cars in the late 70's/early80's time period, some heavy into BMWs, others not.  They all had the same thought I did, that guy is smoking crack and should have done a little more research on that period of time.  But whatever, like I said earlier, it's a lost cause.

Snap, I believe that minimum height requirement went away in 1986, the same year the sealed beam headlights did IIRC and the mandatory high mount 3rd brake light came in.

I don't understand how the m20 could be crapped on being another terribly important piece of the BMW puzzle.  I can remember when the e30 first came out with the M10, my parents neighbor bought one of the very first ones.  I went for a ride and remember thinking "this thing isn't any faster than the 320i".  This e30 thing is a COMPLETE DUD (LOL!).  Actually, I thought the e30 was a much improved car in styling, finish, interior design and comfort/NVH (just like the e21 was over the '02 albeit not the styling leap the e21 was over the '02), you know, all the things important to an automotive design in addition to performance...then the m20 powered e30's came on line in the U.S. and filled in that last piece.

I_love_cars, thanks, it's obvious you've been around cars of that '80s era enough to understand that living in todays world of nearly perfect, infallible cars, looking back and judging one from the '80s...well you sorta had to be there or been surrounded by them as you did to be accurate in your judgments.  Just wait, 20 years from now you'll be reading some article in a major auto magazine written by some guy not even born in 2011 saying the 135i was a turd.  It will raise your blood pressure and you'll post up on a forum and a bunch of other people of similar age to the author will tell you the 135i was a flop because of it's mundane styling, etc.

Later guys,

Wally

[i_love_cars]

ahahahah hey man, I'm already having to put up with people calling the 135i a turd    it's all good, and to be honest I know exactly what you mean about being surrounded - more like being inundated in the broader space and culture at the time of the era.

[GunMetalGrey]

Snap said:

If I had a valve for every time someone crapped on an M20, i'd have an M50 swap. 

This is amazing

[wally509]

Snap said:

Wally, I appreciate your insight and perspective, very valid points which I can agree with. The ride height thing is something I was not aware of and makes a lot of sense for the stock ride height of an e21.  I hope the fact that some on here see the e21 as a dud doesn't anger you as much as it may seem like from reading your post. If I had a valve for everytime someone crapped on an M20, i'd have an M50 swap. 

Snap,

I don't know for an absolute fact they were doing that on the US e21's.  I do know there was such a requirement and other European manufacturers were raising ride height to meet the height.  I also know there was an article in Bimmer Magazine about how to make your 320i handle, one of the mods was to use euro 323i springs and it was noted that lowered the ride height ~3/4" with a stiffer rate.  The strut housings are different between the 320i and 323i, so take that FWIW.

Thanks,
Wally