Saab vs BMW 320i
Some things are just inevitable truths.
For example, the notion that Elle McPherson could only ever have good looking kids. I don’t think there’s a guy out there on this planet who is so ugly that he could tone down her natural gifts to the point that their combined efforts could be unattractive. To look at, at least. They could be unattractive people, but that’s another story.
Another inevitable truth is that I will never own a BMW. Some things just aren’t in your blood. I was born in Melbourne, Australia, and therefore I have a natural aversion towards Sydney. I support the Carlton Football Club, therefore I hate the Collingwood Football Club. I love Saabs, therefore I will never own a BMW. Some walls just can’t be breached.
But there’s a lot of people who do own BMWs and here in Australia, the single biggest seller is the 320 entry model. So that’s why I requested this particular model for a test drive. I fully realise that you can’t get a 320 in the United States. Actually, you can’t get any 4 cylinder BMW in the US from what I can tell, so you US types might want to stop reading here.
For the rest of us, this is a story about perceived value and why Saab no longer compete well in a market they once set the bar in.
The choices
This is the car I drove yesterday. It’s the 320i Executive model.
The standard 320i gets you a 2.0 litre normally aspirated engine that produces around 150hp and 210Nm of torque. It gets you 16 inch steel wheels, a cloth and leather interior, a five star safety rating and a sliding center armrest that not only works, but also manages to exist without any exposed staples. Add around $5,000 for the Executive model and you get alloy wheels, front fog lights, and an interior lighting package.
BMW have also done a recent upgrade to the standard equipment on the 320 to coincide with the new Mercedes C-class coming out. They’ve added around $5,000 in equipment to the car, including ‘comfort access’ (i.e. a proximity key that make locking and unlocking the car easier), a thru-loading system, rear parking sensors, anti-dazzle mirrors, the aforementioned split center armrest and partial electric seats, too.
In all BMWs here in Australia, you get a choice of numerous interior colors and trims. Want a Barbera Red exterior with Lemon leather and Titanium Matt trims? It’ll look a little silly, but if you choose the Executive model you can have it. There’s five interior leather colors available and four interior trim colors (2 metal, 2 wood).
And that means you’ve got choice.
Enough about the window dressing, though. I’ll get back to the interior later. This is what BMWs are supposed to do best, right?
The drive
There’s good bits and bad bits in this section.
The bad bits were that the optional 17-inch wheels ($1,800) combined with the standard run-flat tyres made the car pick up every little bump in the road and the engine seemed to be out of breath going up almost any incline steeper than a speed hump. But that’s to be expected with the little 4-pot engine and it’s one of the reasons they don’t sell this engine in the US.
The good bit for those who frequent this website and have a liking for BMWs is that maybe, just maybe, I finally got the point about the handling.
These cars go exactly where you point them. I’m no technician so I don’t know if it’s the chassis or the steering - most likely it’s a combination of many things - but the slightest gesture towards a point in the road leads you to that point and there’s very little to suggest that you might head anywhere else. I’m accustomed to a little bit of play in the steering but move the BMW wheel just a millimeter to the left and th car moves a millimeter to the left.
The feeling that you get driving this car is that everything, every panel, part, nut and bolt, has been designed and put together very, very well.
That’s premium for you.
Inside
The fact that it feels like it’s put together well is only part of the story.
This will always be a subjective area, but the quality of the fit and finish and even the precision of the drive doesn’t mean that it’s good. Every car within 99.9% of the population’s reach represents a compromise in one area or another and BMW is no exception.
The car certainly has a purposeful stance about it, for example, but I’m still no fan of the exterior styling. Nor am I a fan of the interior design and given that I place such importance on the interior, the BMW gave me pause for thought in one regard, and bugged the daylights out of me in another.
I’ve already mentioned the various choices available to BMW owners with regard to interior colors. The 320i base model comes with three cloth/leather combinations but choose any model above this base model and you get five leather colors and four trim colors to mix and match - and carpets are colored to suit as well. This is really great in terms of customer choice and this market, it’s a great selling point.
Like the exterior, I’m not a fan of BMW’s interior design, either. I don’t like the silly econometer thingy in the dash nor the fact that my hand kept hitting the gear lever whenever I reached over to adjust the airflow from the HVAC system. Some things you just don’t gel with. For me, there’s nothing offensive about the BMW interior, but I just don’t find it appealing. Also, it’s probably more to do with me and my physique, but I also had trouble getting out of the car, too. But over all, I just prefer Saab’s interior design.
The car is reasonably well equipped, though, with good quality audio equipment, dual zone climate control, rain sensing wipers and a whole slew of safety gear. The comfort access system is a real bonus. Have the proximity key on you and the car will unlock as soon as you put your hand on the door. Get in and you need only hit the ’start’ button to get going, though inserting the key into the slot in the dash is recommended as it keeps the key’s battery charged. Exit the car and you can lock it merely by touching the appropriate area on the door handle. It’s not just gadgetry for the sake of it. It works and is very handy.
That’s the sort of thing that Saab specialised in once.
Another thing I couldn’t help but note about the interior is that whilst the design didn’t appeal to me, the quality of the switchgear and materials in general is undeniable. The engine did nothing for me and the ride felt pretty bumpy on those noisy run-flats, but there was a feeling of quality nonetheless. The interior materials and the general solidity of the car had a lot to do with this.
value
The BMW 320i Executive that I drove yesterday had a base price of $58,500. With a few of the option boxes ticked plus on-road costs the total was around A$73,000.
This is the one point on which Saab currently make up some ground. Add on just a few thousand dollars and you’ll get the Saab 9-3 Sport Sedan in Aero form - including on-road costs. At that level you get a full compliment of equipment and an engine that’ll dance rings around the 320’s rather anemic powerplant as well as is several of its bigger brothers.
That doesn’t stop people buying the 320i, however. Tony B, my dealer-host for the day, indicated that he has no trouble signing people up for cars equipped with the roundel badge, regardless of the cost. And having driven even only the 320 I can see why. For the cashed up buyer who wants a safe, well equipped sedan isn’t concerned with performance, this car will create an impression. It’s good to the touch, is pretty well equipped and gets you from A to B in comfort.
They buy them, of course, for the perceived value in the badge as much as anything else. And that perceived value means good re-sale. It’s a self sustaining cycle to a large degree and one that Saab sorely misses.
bottom line
I love Saabs and after a day in the 320 there’s no reason to change my mind about that. Add in the fact that a A$43,000 Saab will out-perform a $73,000 BMW and my personal preference is reinforced even more.
But there is a reason to get a little angry about the way that Saab have designed such a great car in the 9-3 but haven’t equipped it and built it in such a way as to communicate the same level and feeling of total quality.
The frustrating thing is that for me, at least, the Saab has a lot more character about it. It looks great, is well designed inside and out and I just love the turbocharger - it’s such a huge key to Saab’s identity. What they need, though, is better materials and that overall sense of quality that a true premium car conveys.
Don’t get me wrong, I could own any of the Saab 9-3 range and be perfectly happy with it. For me, the total package at the price is still a fantastic combination.
But the market in general allows itself much more choice and right now, Saab are on the receiving end of a beating in the entry-level premium sector of the market.
Choosing a car shouldn’t be a matter of compulsion borne out of loyalty alone. The car itself should be compelling.
More from this category
- My time in the Hummer H3
- Saab 95 vs Honda Fit
- A little WRX movie
- Subaru WRX - Style isn’t something that comes in a bottle
More from this author
- Saab Owners Convention - wrapping it up with Steve Shannon and the best collection of photos you’ll see
- 25% off two T-shirts during August
- Scorching Saab Seats can Stifle your Swimmers?!
- 9-X BioHybrid to show in Washington Times Car Show
Subscribe to this author
Recent Comments
- J on Saab Owners Convention - wrapping it up with Steve Shannon and the best collection of photos you’ll see
- Ian Glenday on A little more from the Saab Owner’s Convention - photos from SaabUSA
- James on Saab Custom Plates at SOC 2008
- MitchbSC on Scorching Saab Seats can Stifle your Swimmers?!
- blix on At the SOC08 - one man’s account
- Swade on Pacific Northwest Saab Meetup - An update
- sam on Scorching Saab Seats can Stifle your Swimmers?!
- zippy on Pacific Northwest Saab Meetup - An update
- zippy on Scorching Saab Seats can Stifle your Swimmers?!
- Kroum on Scorching Saab Seats can Stifle your Swimmers?!
Nice review couldn’t agree with you more.I love my 93 but going over a bump I can feel and hear things rattling. In a BMW everything sounds solid and has that nice insulated sound while going over a bump.I don’t know why saab can’t emulate this as my moms caddy sts has the same feeling as the BMW.
Great review Swade, you should get a job as a ‘journo’ at one of the big car magazines.
You hit the nail on the head - Saab’s only real problem is quality. The price difference in OZ is quite drastic and I certainly wouldn’t be stumping up such a huge amount of extra cash for the BMW badge but here in Canada a BMW323i (with a 2.5L 6 cylinder producing 200bhp) costs exactly the same as a 9-3 2.0T. The thing that I love about Saab is the turbo as it turns an interesting car into one that puts a smile on my face - they just cost too much to lease. And now that Lexus has reduced the price of their IS250 to make it $4000 cheaper than both cars I am hoping for some realigning of prices soon.
Although I want that interior to be as comfortable and stylish as possible there is no way I would choose a 3 series over a 9-3. The benefits of turbo charging outweigh any issues in the interior.
That being said, the choice of interior colours in BMW is almost overwhelming. SAAB would do well however to offer just a little more customisation than it currently does. If you look at the new 9-3 everything matches if you order the black leather interior. If you go for parchment then you still have large amounts of black trim everywhere.
Now BMW is not really a competitor for SAAB but a company like Volvo could be. Volvo’s new interiors look really smart and premium. You have quite a few choices of colour for the leather and wood/metal trim. Everything is coordinated, looks modern and high quality. Not having driven one i couldn’t comment on ergonomics. However, it would appear that Volvo is ahead of SAAB’s new interiors.
SAAB has the performance but is just slightly behind the competition on the interior.
Well Swade, I’ve only met you once and that’s enough after reading this magnificent editorial to say that you are my soul mate. Your words are mine too as I would never own a Teutonic B unless there was some unprecedented conditions to force me in to that. But I have to add that I’ve never met a B or even an A or M owner that boast their pride of ownership on the quality of the interior and in the rest of the car. If anything is the snobbish side and status symbolism rather than how well these vehicles are made, powerful, handling etc etc. Overall one big point in OZ for B ownership is the RWD which is why their re-sell value is not heavily contested as there are not that many options out there. The A brand big selling point is the AWD options which only has Subaru to compete against. From your summary report it also confirms what I’ve written many times before which is how sheep followers and dumb owners of the B brand are when they pay this kind of money for this kind vehicles . On the performance front even a Mitsubishi Magna will leave your loan car for dead and when you have a family of teens getting in to adulthood it must be an embarrassment going up the hills or in situations when the car needs to perform. I don’t believe that it is just the quality that is hindering Saab as there are other cars that don’t sell well on just their good or bad quality. To me it points back at the overall marketing of the Teutonic cars that have not just heralded the quality of their standards but the trending and ownership value that they’ve pushed is what it makes them so desirable . To the average John Smith that is coming up in the world, is cashed up and wants to show their neighborhood that he’s made it in life the last car show room he’ll go to will be Saab and or Volvo. The choices will be in order to the M, B + A showrooms and nowhere else. All the rest are 2nd rate. How come Saab does not have such a big image inferiority complex in the UK for example ??? Maybe we need to become more poshy and be more up tight to be successful ???
And btw, despite your dislike of Sydney we like it when you drop by. When are you coming back ???
Here’s where it gets really scary for Saab. In the US, the fwd, 255hp 9-3 MSRP’s at $35,900 base. On the other hand, the rwd, 300hp (and more like 330hp) BMW 335i has a base MSRP of $38,900. So for your extra $3000 you get 45 more horsepower, an exponentially more refined chassis and interior, and that’s before you touch the appeal that the roundel has on consumers.
So Swade, imagine that 320i you drove, but with 150 more horsepower, two more cylinders, twin turbos, and direct injection, a tighter, more precise suspension and a nicer interior for only $3k more than the fwd 9-3 Aero. As a prospective Saab customer with no loyalty to the brand, what reason do you have to buy the Saab over the BMW other than price? Everyone knows that the only cars that compete on price are the ones that have nothing else going for them, do you want to see Saab become the “premium” equivalent of Hyundai, Daewoo, or Kia?
Factor in the equally excellent Infiniti G sedan, along with the oldy-but-goody A4, the striking new IS sedan, the impeccably refined Acura TL, and the eye-catching new CTS and it’s a wonder how Saab even manages to sell cars at all…
The only other brand I can think of that’s as poorly represented in this segment is Volvo who doesn’t really have a car in that segment unless you count the poor old S60 that’s now almost as old as the 9-5.
Common Swade, you know the reason people buy bog std 320’s is solely down to brand perception. It’s the result of decades of consistent marketing and competent engineering. It’s not because a 320 is a good car, it’s because the M3, even 328 are great cars as were the top 3 series sized BMW’s back to the 70’s, even the 2002. I know what BMW stands for and it’s not a bog standard 3 Series. But the halo effect means even the most humble model sells.
What does Saab mean? I’m pretty sure its current owners don’t know as they’ve flipped several times over the years. It was the sporty luxury brand, then the sporty brand while Cadillac did luxury (!), then Cadillac got sporty (!) while Saab did badge engineered Opels, even Subarus and Chevys. Meanwhile BMW sailed along making more & more money doing what BMW does and leaving it’s mistakes for other brands like Rover!
Back in the 60’s when he was working on the Fiat 130 Dante Giacosa was asked if this car, a big V6 luxury sedan, would enable Fiat to compete with Mercedes. He said “It must be borne in mind that the Mercedes is the result of continuous refinement of a model that has remained unchanged for many years”. Will GM ever give Saab a chance, and the resources, just to be Saab?
Robin’s points are spot on especially when in the early days of the Turbo adoption no one was doing what Saab did. I am a true follower because of this fact above all and all the rest of the uniqueness, good design etc etc. One point to add too is that Saab still commands one (if not the) of the highest repetitiveness of customers staying with the brand. This has been a fact for decades by now. Why not boast on this fact and hammer this to the market ??? The one and strongest facts from the Teutonic brands is the continuous message they’ve concentrated on ie prestige and status. Saab could emulate this with the performance, safety and repetitive customers. Isn’t that worth publicizing ???
Nice one Swade.
You never sat in the thing long enough though - to discover thr truly terrible seats that are short in the squab base, flat and lacking lumbar support- but then it was a lower model. You have to pay extra for ’sports’ seats that come anywhere near the Saab seat.
It steers nicely becaude it has a light front end with that 4 pot motor- and rear drive gives excellent steering in such situations.
The run flats and big alloys are even more of a problem in the UK- where the roads are often of Zimbabwean standard. Tump, wobble, clatter, crash, thump being the soundtrack via teh suspension turrets and steering rack.
The run flats have very stiff side walls and the rubebr is hard compound- hence the rough ride even without silly ‘footballers wives’ alloys.
Did you load the BMW up with 4 occupants and all their clobber- I don’t think so. Of you had, you would know that nicely finished it may be, but that 4 pot Beemer is a wheezing donkey when you try to overtake something when more than one occupant is on board.
Saab has it beaten there.
Which is where of course BMW’s wonderful, creamy 6 pot silken turbines come into their own.
If Saab could have been bothered to upgrade the leather and plastic in the new 93, it would have been a class winner. I went in a new 07 model with 3K on the clock - sagging, rumpled leather, scratched fake alloy interior trim, shiny plastics and one big let down for me.
As it is, all your points are valid.
Great article Swade- hope GM are reading
Joe, I know quite a few Saab, BM, Audi and Merc owners and believe me, the badge was not the big consideration.
My wife hates the image of the 3 series. I got her to drive one (I had a 9-3 so there was no reason to own two) and she was hooked - on the drive and performance of the two litre diesel. Similarly a friend was looking for a premium saloon. After losing £8k in a year I could not send him to Saab so I showed him a BM and an Audi. Same thing, one drive and hooked on the BM. I would contend that Swade is correct and that Saab need to raise their game on interiors.
I agree there are wannabes who buy a badge but the field at this level is pehaps the most competative in the world.
VW figured out years ago that if the bits you saw and touched felt quality then buyers thought the rest of the product was just as well built. Its easy to whine about all the idiots who buy German and Japanese cars for the badge and if only they were as smart as us they would buy a Saab. I think people need to get real about what the public want from their cars.
I agree with Alex too. A large nuber of cars are leased in the UK and in most cases the Saab is more expensive. Factor in that the 320i inthe UK now has a 170bhp 4 cylinder engine and the base model Audi has an FSI turbo four with 160bhp and you can see why Saab are staring to struggle.
One thing about BMW is that they really understand their brand image.
I’ve known a couple of people who worked at BMW headquarters, and the impression I got was that they have a full-time army that does nothing but obsess about “BMW-ness.”
What that gives you is doors that make a distinctive BMW sound when you close them, but start to sag after three years. The money that was spent on the “thunk” was saved on the hinges.
You also get a very modern and efficient looking interior that hides a wiring loom from a 1950’s mad scientist’s lair.
They get away with it because the ideal BMW customer leases a new car every three years. There is nothing sadder than a BMW after the warranty has run out.
BMW fact: in North America, the typical BMW buyer will spend his or her last dollar financing their car. This means that they buy the most expensive car that their bank will let them have. Subaru owners, on the other hand, typically only spend half of what they could.
Somehow SAAB has to convince those badge shoppers who are dead set on a BMW, Audi, MB, etc to test drive a SAAB. This used to be the norm but it is no longer - SAAB has lost the perception that they are a credible peer to those manufacturers. This is purely GM’s mismanagement of the brand and dilution of it through abominations like the SAABlazer and SAABaru. It seems for SAAB it’s a race against time - can they get enough quality product out and convince enough people to give it a serious look before GM gives up?
…most of the Bimmers sold in Europe are “Turbos” (turbo charged Diesels). Thus, most of the customers in Europe drive BMW “Turbos”. They even may buy a BMW TTdi. I also read that BMW will use the Peugoet Turbo patrol already screwed into the BMW MINI.
As I wrote before, Saab could not penetrate the company car market as wished. But there BMW makes alomst all it´s money. Hardly any BMW is sold to private consumers in Europe (just the 100 serie). I rather see Saab as a alternative buy to VW, Fiat, Kia etc. in Europe (and Holden, Ford and Toyota in Aussiland).
Of course all car in a certain segement are the same and just differ technical here and there 1 or 2%. But consumers desire BMWs out of emotional reason. Thus different depreciation.
As we know depreciation is the most important
issue.
Beside this, the most important point for me is that BMWs are made orininally as BMW. Whereas a Saab is just a Vauxhall/Opel derivate. This industrial policy works fine with Skoda/VW/ Audi. Not with Saab. We could ask why.
Anyway, as already mentioned Saab should put more emphasis on the interior.
BMW makes a 4 cyl?
Why can’t we have this is the US? When will people realize Americans aren’t looking for 6-8 cyls. anymore.
Get past stereotypes, people.
joemama, swade has written the perfectly balanced peice on this and while i have decided against buying the 9-3 at this stage, he has nailed it in relation to the 320 BMW.
Trust me is reminds you of the gutless 4cyl of old. Harder to believe is that BMW won’t replace it with the far better jointly -developed 2.0 found in the 1 series and mini.
And steve, (wade) good honest balanced peice with a bit of fair opinion thrown in.
joemama, swade has written the perfectly balanced peice on this and while i have decided against buying the 9-3 at this stage, he has nailed it in relation to the 320 BMW.
Trust me, it reminds you of the gutless 4cyl of old. Harder to believe is that BMW won’t replace it with the far better jointly -developed 2.0 found in the 1 series and mini.
And steve, (wade) good honest balanced peice with a bit of fair opinion thrown in.
As a former e30 BMW owner (’85 325e, ‘89 325is, and I drive my dad’s ‘89 M3 occasionally), I’m glad to hear that you appreciate the handling Swade! Now, imagine the feel of a BMW that was actually designed to handle well (i.e. one that’s not the bargain basement setup.)
When I drove a BMW, there were other BMW owners who would start conversations about the cars at a gas station, or in a parking lot. Those were the ones who like the car itself. There were plenty of people who liked the badge more than the car. I’ve said it before, but the thing that I disliked most about my BMW was the badge. People automatically assumed I was a spoiled prick for owning one. I was told to my face that very thing by someone who’d just explained that his stereo cost more than my car (he didn’t know what I paid for my car, so the look on his face was classic when I told him - US$4,000).
While I think that BMW has lost it’s way a bit over the last few years with ever-heavier cars, I still think they deliver a great driving experience. Will I buy one? Not a new one. But I doubt if I’ll buy a new anything in the foreseeable future.
I am amazed at the difference in price there in Oz. I knew that different markets were different, but that’s a huge discrepancy. (I wouldn’t ever pay that difference!)
As to the seats, I haven’t sat in a BMW newer than a ‘98 and can’t comment on the seats that Swade sat in, but the sport seats in my e30s are the second-best seats I’ve ever sat in (for 12+ hours at a time on multiple occasions). Second only the my 9000 Aero seats. And yes, I’ve driven other Saabs (9000S, ‘97 900SE, ‘01 9-5).
Nice piece Swade. And some good comments.
~P
I live in the U.S. and fortunately I didn’t take your advice and stop reading this review. Very well written and interesting. Though we don’t have any 4-cylinder BMWs here in the U.S. a lot of the other info was applicable.
You mention the smart keyless locking systems and such. I was thinking about this the other day regarding what would be ideal in the next-gen Saabs and here’s the idea I had (I think a lot about mundane subjects as you can see…):
I’d like to see the next-gen Saabs eliminate not just the keyed ignition switch, but dispense with any silly start/stop button altogether (personally, I see start/stop buttons as an unnecessary novelty). Not only would this save money in not having to install any button but it would free-up room in the center console for other facilities (window switches, proper heated/chilled cupholder, whatever…).
Here’s how my idea would work: the driver would have a keyfob with a built-in RFID chip which when in proximity of the car would unlock the doors of the car (of course, it’d have to only be when the driver’s within less than a meter or so of the car). The driver would get into the car and in the case of a manual transmission-equipped car the car would automatically start when the driver has both grasped the steering wheel and pushed the clutch pedal in.
The steering wheel would have a flexible circuit board-style strip switch embedded in it and the action of activating this switch by grasping the steering wheel and pushing the clutch in would start the car. Then the driver would put the car in gear and begin driving. What would tell the car to turn off would be to put the car into reverse and let-go of the steering wheel.
In an automatic transmission-equipped car what would turn the car on would be both grasping the steering wheel and moving the gearshift out of “Park”. Similarly, moving the gearshift into “Park” and letting-go of the steering wheel would turn the car off.
You may worry about children getting into the car and starting it, but the fact that they don’t have the keyfob in proximity of the car would prevent the car from starting.
This whole scenario would make the car more natural to drive. It’s just about removing the entire step of turning the car on and off. The car would just “know” you’re ready to use it and turn on, and then it would just “know” when you’re done using it and turn off.
Also, after all that I wanted to point-out that it seems all premium cars are now coming with rain-sensing wipers as standard. I even saw a (not-so-premium) Hyundai commercial on TV touting its rain-sensing wipers recently. I think the more a car does automatically the better. You may argue (rightly so) that more complexity means less reliability as there’s more to go wrong, but there’s a reason people pay more money for a “premium” car. If it rains, why should my car wait for me to turn on the wipers? Similarly, if I get into my car and put it in gear, it should know to turn itself on. Why require a keyswitch turn or a button press?
Grip -
Very interesting concepts … overall I like the idea.
The 2 little issues I find with the system are:
The trigger to start should also include “foot firmly on Brake” and for that matter the auto should definately stay in “park” for startup …
The other issue is the RFID and unauthorized drivers (including children) … my car has 2 drivers, and my wife often would have her keys with her in her purse … how do you prevent that RFID from being the unwitting trigger from the passenger seat?
Just my 2 cents.
I like the thoughts,
chaaalie: I don’t necessarily have an answer to your question. I guess only to say that as it is now with a traditional keyswitch a child can always get hold of his/her parent’s keys and start the car.
The fact that the child would have to simultaneously grasp the steering wheel, depress the clutch and/or brake pedal, and shift gear (a triple-interlocked system) would keep all but the tallest youngsters from starting the car. There is no such thing as a fool-proof system.
The only issue I have with my own idea that remains unresolved in my head would be if there’s a mechanical malfunction with the car, collision-related or otherwise, and the car cannot be shifted into reverse (in the case of a manual transmission) or Park (in the case of an automatic transmission) there’s no way to turn-off the car. Maybe this is a problem one of the design geniuses at Saab could solve.
chaaalie: in addition, my proposed Saab system would be safer than BMW’s (or any other auto manufacturer’s) in that it is triple-interlocked.
How do you start the car in the BMW? All you need is the key somewhere in the car (with its embedded RFID chip) and push a button.
The scenario you mention of your wife having her key in her purse and the child starting the car would be much more of a threat in a current “start button”-equipped car than in my proposed Saab system. Besides, a parent would be negligent to leave their purse with key in it in the car with an unattended child.
wow some good ideas coming out of this….. however I’ve got a couple of points…
With this triple interlocking idea, safety would be improved but it would also confuse the driver alot, especially if they drove lots of different cars. Also on the childproofing thing, in most cars now you need to push the brake or clutch (not being a regular driver and a learner i forget) anyway, so this is also a problem for the child in that they couldnt reach this (I guess and presume).
I do however like the idea of a heated cupholder… that would be a useful thing to have.
ON the ideas front, I think I have a good 1, at the moment adaptive mirrors seem to be the thing (they divert light from lights behind by tinting the mirror slightly). I think this could also work for the windscreen, if some of it was tinted ( the top half/ third) in this method then it would provide and sun shade for when the sun is low in the sky, but it would not completely cut the light off, not making the car dark. I think this would have something to do with polarisation of material (like the glasses which react to light) but further than that I don’t have any other information, seeing as I havent learnt further than that….. any thoughts?
Dan9-1: The Chrysler Sebring has heated/chilled cupholders. I’m sure there are other vehicles, I just don’t know about them. They work on the thermoelectric effect.
I’m not sure how the auto-dimming mirrors work, but I think that they simply have a little electric motor in them that tilts the mirror, much like when you manually adjust your rear view mirror at night. As for polarizing the windshield, this is a good idea except that many states have laws against any kind of tint in the windshield. My ‘85 900T has a tint strip at the front of the windshield that was factory-installed as far as I know though.
I have had the electrochromatically-tinting car windows on my list of wants for quite some time. They have them for homes now. You can control how much tint with a switch.
Nice review Swade. My only question is how hard did you rev the engine? I’ve been given 320s as courtesy cars a few times in the past year and my initial thoughts were that they were completely gutless. Then I really put my foot down and it was a different story. Not unlike a Subaru actually. If you didn’t get it out towards the redline try it next time.
Still, the torque from a Saab turbo is more enjoyable and practical anyday.