Quote:
Originally Posted by adc
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmack123
Point is that the idea that SUVs can't perform like performance sedans is nonsense, figured you'd be able to figure that out. You do realize the XM will be > $180k correct? Therefore it will likely stand a good chance of having M3-level performance. And in this price range, customers are not exactly price sensitive, so the cost relative to performance is irrelevant, what really matters is absolute performance capability.
By the way, a lower-lighter vehicle lacks UTILITY, which is something you "purists" seem to forget. Unless you are competing professionally with your M car (which no one is), utility will always have a value. Why the hell would I car about getting a car with FAR less utility for a second or two on the track when I am not using the vehicle to compete? Makes literally zero sense.
|
My 4 door sedan has all the utility I need, and I don’t sacrifice anything to have it. I take it to various race tracks because it is absolutely nuts and incredible fun, some of the most you can have with your pants on. I don’t race, I don’t win any trophies, but I am getting tremendous adrenalin hits by driving it, and I’m developing into a much better driver than I ever was. It is the very exemplification of having the cake and eating it too.
On the other hand you talk about the utility of your X5, that’s great. But what does it do to give you a $hit-eating grin a mile wide? I’m curious. |
Admittedly I think it does somewhat depend on the context. I understand the desire to have a sedan with the best possible advantages if one doesn't value the utility of an SUV, but sorry, your sedan doesn't provide anywhere the utility of an X5, XM etc. In terms of performance in the context of versatility, sedans are obsolete. Which is why almost no one drives sedans anymore except the most enthusiastic drivers. And that's absolutely fine, but doesn't change the fact that performance SUVs are legit.