BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > General Automotive (non-BMW) Talk + Photos/Videos
 
PYSPEED
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      11-02-2009, 12:12 PM   #45
BMW F22
Major General
 
BMW F22's Avatar
 
Drives: ///M235i
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Around the Bay

Posts: 8,316
iTrader: (8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterSkiMask View Post
Yes, they are stupid (particularly in the case of the Lexus Hybrids).
Lol I kind of agree since the LExus LS costs like 40k more than the gas version. However, people do care about mileage even if they're driving a $100k+ car. Heck I wish the 335 gets more mileage than it does but whatever.
BMW F22 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 02:12 PM   #46
Project1
Bimmer Love
 
Project1's Avatar
 
Drives: You will figure it out...
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Broadway, NC

Posts: 362
iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Los Angeles View Post
Ding-ding-ding!!!!
Could not agree with you more...sat in the new SHO, really nice if you like cheaply put together feaux-luxury...it doesn't matter how it looks, if the things i have to touch on a daily basis feel cheap, then forget it...
Project1 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 02:45 PM   #47
Guibo
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives:
Join Date: Apr 2008

Posts: 280
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMW E90 View Post
However, people do care about mileage even if they're driving a $100k+ car.
True. Look at Tesla and Fisker. Audi and Porsche are looking into electric and/or hybrid vehicles; Panamera already has stop/start. BMW will be selling a 7-Series hybrid and MB has a hybrid S-Class in Europe. Speaking of which, diesels even in the upper levels of premium brands sell decently there, due to not just lower consumption and C02 and higher regular fuel prices, but because of tax breaks that go along with it. There are some incentives to having more fuel efficient cars in the US too, though less so. People think differently when gas goes up to $4+/gal, however...
Guibo is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 02:55 PM   #48
quagmire
I am Gundam
 
quagmire's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Cadillac ATS 3.6 AWD
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: USA

Posts: 1,157
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Project1 View Post
Could not agree with you more...sat in the new SHO, really nice if you like cheaply put together feaux-luxury...it doesn't matter how it looks, if the things i have to touch on a daily basis feel cheap, then forget it...
What is cheap to you? Are you allowing your BMW get in the way of judging if a car is cheap or not? Going from a BMW interior( though not the best in its respective class, but still better then you would get in a Ford, Toyota, etc) with its leather dash, etc and going to the Taurus which will have a lot more plastic will probably give off the cheap feel.

This is an honest question. I keep on seeing people come on here and say the Taurus, Mustangs, etc interior is cheap and crappy. But, from what perspective are you using? Has your BMW's interior influenced or set your standard of what is a good interior or not? There are a lot of kids here on the board that their BMW is their very first car so I am wondering if having a BMW has messed with their perspective.

Comparing the Taurus to your BMW's interior, yeah the Taurus's interior is cheap. But, the Taurus is not aiming to be a luxury car. It is a mainstream full size family sedan. It is not going to have as nice of interior as a Benz, Audi, or BMW.

So I am just wondering, how do you judge if the interior is cheap or not? Do you compare it to the competition or by what you already drive?

Last edited by quagmire; 11-02-2009 at 03:13 PM.
quagmire is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 03:03 PM   #49
Michael Schott
Major
 
Drives: 2011 328i sedan
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Farmington Hills, MI

Posts: 1,442
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by quagmire View Post
GM started to restructure after 2005...... It just ran out of money to continue its restructuring due to the financial crisis........
Partially correct. If left on its own GM would likely be out of business as it took the government bailout to make them restructure as severely as needed. The embedded GM culture would never see how bad they screwed up. I have a friend deeply involved in the financial restructuring and the reason the Feds fired Wagoner was he did not understand how much change was needed.
Michael Schott is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 03:07 PM   #50
quagmire
I am Gundam
 
quagmire's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Cadillac ATS 3.6 AWD
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: USA

Posts: 1,157
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Schott View Post
Partially correct. If left on its own GM would likely be out of business as it took the government bailout to make them restructure as severely as needed. The embedded GM culture would never see how bad they screwed up. I have a friend deeply involved in the financial restructuring and the reason the Feds fired Wagoner was he did not understand how much change was needed.
Oh I agree, GM's culture needed to change and going through chapter 11 was a necessary step. Just don't like that the media thinks GM started to restructure in 2008, but in reality did in 2005. While Wagoner did not realize how much needed to be changed, he did at least start to restructure.

The only thing Wagoner did that helped GM tremendously was bring in Bob Lutz to replace this idiot.

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f...fall-gm-84774/
quagmire is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 03:11 PM   #51
Michael Schott
Major
 
Drives: 2011 328i sedan
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Farmington Hills, MI

Posts: 1,442
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by quagmire View Post
What is cheap to you? Are you allowing your BMW get in the way of judging if a car is cheap or not? Going from a BMW interior( though not the best in its respective class, but still better then you would get in a Ford, Toyota, etc) with its leather dash, etc and going to the Taurus which will have a lot more plastic will probably give off the cheap feel.

This is an honest question. I keep on seeing people come on here and say the Taurus, Mustangs, etc interior is cheap and crappy. But, from what perspective are you using? Has your BMW's interior influenced or set your standard of what is a good interior or not? There are a lot of kids here on the board that their BMW is there very first car so I am wondering if having a BMW has messed with their perspective.

Comparing the Taurus to your BMW's interior, yeah the Taurus's interior is cheap. But, the Taurus is not aiming to be a luxury car. It is a mainstream full size family sedan. It is not going to have as nice of interior as a Benz, Audi, or BMW.

So I am just wondering, how do you judge if the interior is cheap or not? Do you compare it to the competition or by what you already drive?
Good post. You have to look at these factors in the right context. Size and power wise the SHO competes with the BMW 550i except the Taurus is slightly larger and heavier. Yet the 550i starts at $60K. Of course it's more luxurious and uses higher quality parts. Comparably equipped it's probably over $20K more than the SHO. For the money the Taurus does well.

Thanks, Mike.
Michael Schott is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 03:13 PM   #52
jayely1
Lieutenant Colonel
 
jayely1's Avatar
 
Drives: 335i
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: New Mexico/Illinois

Posts: 1,924
iTrader: (1)

I like how every car these days are getting the fender "chrome piece" getting ridiculous. Its a good thing that American companies are improving, makes the Europeans have to step up!
jayely1 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 03:20 PM   #53
UltimateBMW
Brigadier General
 
UltimateBMW's Avatar
 
Drives: MP4
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: South

Posts: 3,287
iTrader: (0)

After reading through this thread, and seeing it mentioned that the new taurus is cheaper but still comparable, even if in their own mind, to other high end luxury cars. And after hearing all the CTS-V vs. M5 hype with it being near $30k less money is anyone else just fed up that Americans always make the cheaper underdog car? Why didn't GM put the extra $30k (or at least $25k to be competitive) into the car and blow the M5's socks off?

Why isn't the new Taurus a true competitor to these other luxury brands? Whats with all the exceptions and for-instances in their car line ups.

Mind you this is just some random thoughts that ran through my head reading previous posts. So they are most likely wrong/flawed/not fully thought out. I'm just getting tired of American brands using the 'For substantially less money' caveat. Make a true competitor please, improve your quality across the board, and stop being the eco-boxes you've been for the last decade GM/Ford.

(Although, I think Ford is certainly better off than GM atm.)
__________________
UltimateBMW is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 03:26 PM   #54
UltimateBMW
Brigadier General
 
UltimateBMW's Avatar
 
Drives: MP4
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: South

Posts: 3,287
iTrader: (0)

Whats more, I can see the logic in saying that people that want to buy a $60k luxury car would be happier paying only $40k for it's equal. And while this situation is certainly applicable I'd like to point out that people looking to buy a $60k are willing to pay $60k for it. So why not give them the equal of a $90k car for only $60k. Why not make a $90 with the equivalent of a $150k car. etc.

Once again, just conjecture. Part of it might just be my distaste in all the random crap and BS that gets sold and fed to us here so often in all aspects. But it is at least something to think about, if I described it accurately enough.
__________________
UltimateBMW is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 03:52 PM   #55
Project1
Bimmer Love
 
Project1's Avatar
 
Drives: You will figure it out...
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Broadway, NC

Posts: 362
iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by quagmire View Post
What is cheap to you? Are you allowing your BMW get in the way of judging if a car is cheap or not? Going from a BMW interior( though not the best in its respective class, but still better then you would get in a Ford, Toyota, etc) with its leather dash, etc and going to the Taurus which will have a lot more plastic will probably give off the cheap feel.

This is an honest question. I keep on seeing people come on here and say the Taurus, Mustangs, etc interior is cheap and crappy. But, from what perspective are you using? Has your BMW's interior influenced or set your standard of what is a good interior or not? There are a lot of kids here on the board that their BMW is their very first car so I am wondering if having a BMW has messed with their perspective.

Comparing the Taurus to your BMW's interior, yeah the Taurus's interior is cheap. But, the Taurus is not aiming to be a luxury car. It is a mainstream full size family sedan. It is not going to have as nice of interior as a Benz, Audi, or BMW.

So I am just wondering, how do you judge if the interior is cheap or not? Do you compare it to the competition or by what you already drive?
No, not JUST the Bimmer. I mean, a good interior to me is however European. The know that the extra little touches, and good looking, feeling, material is costly, however, that the little bit of extra cost is worth it for a car that you truly want to be in. Honestly most people buying the American products aren't buying them because they honestly enjoy being in them, they buy them because it is new, practical for their application, and gets them where they want to go. I however choose a car that makes me want to drive somewhere for no reason, that I enjoy being in, and makes me happy.

Don't however get me wrong, I LOVE American cars...as long as they were made before 1975. Other than the technological miracle that is the ZR-1, the new American cars are trash. ALL cheaply made, and not up to what I think (my opinion) the standard should be. I mean look at the CTS-v. Hell of a car, but really, I had the opportunity to drive it, and the performance was excellent. However, the interior was rattly, and felt cheap. That car is NOT cheap, they spent all the money somewhere, but other than in the engine, I don't know where all that money goes. Certainly not on fit and finish. And back to the ZR-1, GM got this one mostly right, but again, for $100,000 can't I at least get SOME kind of nice feeling fabric. I guess that is the end of the rant. I just think they need to step up the interior, and fit n finish game. It's hard to NOT compare them against my other cars, BMW, Maserati, even old VW. The little touches just aren't there.

BTW, this is all just my opinion, and am NOT here to argue. Just state my opinions.
Project1 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 04:50 PM   #56
Michael Schott
Major
 
Drives: 2011 328i sedan
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Farmington Hills, MI

Posts: 1,442
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by UltimateBMW View Post
After reading through this thread, and seeing it mentioned that the new taurus is cheaper but still comparable, even if in their own mind, to other high end luxury cars. And after hearing all the CTS-V vs. M5 hype with it being near $30k less money is anyone else just fed up that Americans always make the cheaper underdog car? Why didn't GM put the extra $30k (or at least $25k to be competitive) into the car and blow the M5's socks off?

Why isn't the new Taurus a true competitor to these other luxury brands? Whats with all the exceptions and for-instances in their car line ups.

Mind you this is just some random thoughts that ran through my head reading previous posts. So they are most likely wrong/flawed/not fully thought out. I'm just getting tired of American brands using the 'For substantially less money' caveat. Make a true competitor please, improve your quality across the board, and stop being the eco-boxes you've been for the last decade GM/Ford.

(Although, I think Ford is certainly better off than GM atm.)
I'd guess the answer is that the market for a $100,000.00 world class Cadillac is much smaller than a slightly less refined one at $70K. Also, I'm not sure the public would go for this as the prestige factor is not there no matter how good the car.

Regarding the Taurus, this car is Ford's bread and butter large sedan. It doesn't and never has competed against the foreign competition. If Ford built it to be world class, the market would be much smaller and their profits would suffer. I'm sure they could make a world class car that would have a Lincoln nameplate but Ford or even Lincoln is not Mercedes, BMW or Lexus in terms of prestige and the public and Ford know that.

Last, this is not the time for an American car company to commit time and effort towards a very expensive niche vehicle.
Michael Schott is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-02-2009, 05:10 PM   #57
UltimateBMW
Brigadier General
 
UltimateBMW's Avatar
 
Drives: MP4
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: South

Posts: 3,287
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Schott View Post
I'd guess the answer is that the market for a $100,000.00 world class Cadillac is much smaller than a slightly less refined one at $70K. Also, I'm not sure the public would go for this as the prestige factor is not there no matter how good the car.

Regarding the Taurus, this car is Ford's bread and butter large sedan. It doesn't and never has competed against the foreign competition. If Ford built it to be world class, the market would be much smaller and their profits would suffer. I'm sure they could make a world class car that would have a Lincoln nameplate but Ford or even Lincoln is not Mercedes, BMW or Lexus in terms of prestige and the public and Ford know that.

Last, this is not the time for an American car company to commit time and effort towards a very expensive niche vehicle.
I think you might of missed the message I was trying to convey. Perhap the numbers I was using were too big to avoid mixing topics. The price is semantics. It could be brought down to the $30k to $45k market and its still the same thing. The American brands try to meet or do what looks like they meet the competition and then boast how their price is so much lower. Why aren't they matching price and trying to excel their products.
__________________
UltimateBMW is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-03-2009, 10:48 AM   #58
Michael Schott
Major
 
Drives: 2011 328i sedan
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Farmington Hills, MI

Posts: 1,442
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by UltimateBMW View Post
I think you might of missed the message I was trying to convey. Perhap the numbers I was using were too big to avoid mixing topics. The price is semantics. It could be brought down to the $30k to $45k market and its still the same thing. The American brands try to meet or do what looks like they meet the competition and then boast how their price is so much lower. Why aren't they matching price and trying to excel their products.
I think the answer is brand perception. The market for these vehicles is very sensitive to brand image. Lets say Ford makes a compact RWD car that directly competes with the BMW 3 series in every way. Loaded it's $50K like the 335. I think the market would still perceive the BMW as a better car because BMW is a known entity in this class and Ford has no history of world class sport sedans. Now if the Ford had equal handling and a great engine but with lower budget interior quality than the BMW and cost $10K less, the market would eat it up. I think that's the answer if I'm understanding your question.
Michael Schott is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-09-2009, 03:10 PM   #59
ChrisV
7er
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Drives: 1998 BMW 740iL
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Pikesville, MD

Posts: 410
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
1998 740iL  [3.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltimateBMW View Post
After reading through this thread, and seeing it mentioned that the new taurus is cheaper but still comparable, even if in their own mind, to other high end luxury cars. And after hearing all the CTS-V vs. M5 hype with it being near $30k less money is anyone else just fed up that Americans always make the cheaper underdog car? Why didn't GM put the extra $30k (or at least $25k to be competitive) into the car and blow the M5's socks off?

Why isn't the new Taurus a true competitor to these other luxury brands? Whats with all the exceptions and for-instances in their car line ups.

Mind you this is just some random thoughts that ran through my head reading previous posts. So they are most likely wrong/flawed/not fully thought out. I'm just getting tired of American brands using the 'For substantially less money' caveat. Make a true competitor please, improve your quality across the board, and stop being the eco-boxes you've been for the last decade GM/Ford.

(Although, I think Ford is certainly better off than GM atm.)
Some answers for you:

1) How big is the market for expensive cars worldwide vs cheaper cars? Where do large companies make their bread and butter?

That's right. NOT expensive cars.

2) when every car is an expensive car, how many people will buy a new one? Are you so jaded that you think everyone makes $100k a year?

3) Cars in America are a way of life for every economic level, and a lot of American thought is anti-royalty and anti-classism, especially in the 3000 mile wide section in the middle of the country, vs the coastal cities. Europe has always treated the automobile as a luxury item. With nations sometimes as small as states in the US, cities that are close together and have been populated for a thousand years+, multi-generational households, and few people actually NEEDING cars to effect a living, as well as centuries of fuedal society to impose a class system (that while it may no longer be official, still resonates in the various cultures), car manufacturers are more able to aim for the luxury market and charge more for their cars.

4)OTOH, how many entry level European cars do we see in the US? BMW wont' even sell it's base level cars here with cloth seats and tiny diesel engines. We dont' se basicl European cars like Pugeots and Cirtroens, Seats and Skodas. Why? becasue it's not cost effective to import them to the US as the price would rise so much as to make them uncompetetive with the already more costly luxury cars due to lack of content/refinement, and uncompetetive with the identically equipped and quality cheap Domestic cars due to that price difference.

How many Skodas are as nice inside as an Audi? They are both from the same company, but you don't expect the Skoda Octavia to be as nice as an A4. Why? Because they aren't priced the same and are for people who don't want to spend on the A4.


So, the US gets only the higher content, and higher priced cars from Europe that don't sell very many units in comparison. The best way to compete with those cars is to do it on value, not try to go after a small market with identical level cars. It's better to go after the larger market that consists of people that won't/can't spend the money.

Cars like the Taurus and the new Malibu are as nice and priced about the same as anything in their class from Japan, too (and Japanese companies, incedentally, did the same thing: build in content for the dollar: think Lexus LS400 vs Mercedes as a prime example).

Again, the basic idea is that spending money for the sake of spending money is not something we, as a whole, think is valuable (and why we give the bling bling crowd such a bad time). If you can get the same for less, why is that a bad thing? Leave the "get the same for more" to the niche makers.
__________________
1998 740iL

ChrisV is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-09-2009, 03:13 PM   #60
ChrisV
7er
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Drives: 1998 BMW 740iL
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Pikesville, MD

Posts: 410
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
1998 740iL  [3.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptack View Post
Better? Do you mean as an overall car including the ability to retain it's value. Please name such a Ford.

Ability to retain value? A BMW owner commenting on another marques ability to retain value?

Hello! Look at 7 series prices lately? Top of the line, best of everything BMW has. Loses half it's value in the first two years. Mercerdes S class is not far behind. When I bought my 740iL at 8 years old, it was only a tenth of the price it had new!

Thank God I never bought a BMW new...
__________________
1998 740iL

ChrisV is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-09-2009, 04:00 PM   #61
ptack
Brigadier General
 
ptack's Avatar
 
Drives: 135i
Join Date: May 2008
Location: NJ

Posts: 4,238
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 135i  [3.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltimateBMW View Post
After reading through this thread, and seeing it mentioned that the new taurus is cheaper but still comparable, even if in their own mind, to other high end luxury cars. And after hearing all the CTS-V vs. M5 hype with it being near $30k less money is anyone else just fed up that Americans always make the cheaper underdog car? Why didn't GM put the extra $30k (or at least $25k to be competitive) into the car and blow the M5's socks off?

Why isn't the new Taurus a true competitor to these other luxury brands? Whats with all the exceptions and for-instances in their car line ups.

Mind you this is just some random thoughts that ran through my head reading previous posts. So they are most likely wrong/flawed/not fully thought out. I'm just getting tired of American brands using the 'For substantially less money' caveat. Make a true competitor please, improve your quality across the board, and stop being the eco-boxes you've been for the last decade GM/Ford.

(Although, I think Ford is certainly better off than GM atm.)

Ah, Ford isn't talking to BMW owners (who they probably doubt would willingly move to a Ford), they're talking to the slightly less affluent middle America that would like to be able to buy a BMW or Mercedes. They very much want to convince their bread and butter buyers that a Taurus is almost as good and a much better value. It's all marketting. Time will tell if the hype will move the product. I think they'd stand a much better chance if the car didn't look so boring.
__________________
135i, SGM, Coral, Sport Package, Auto, Premium Hifi, USB/ipod, Apex EC-7s, PPK Stage II
ptack is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-09-2009, 04:10 PM   #62
lyndon_h
Lieutenant Colonel
 
lyndon_h's Avatar
 
Drives: e90
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Madagascar

Posts: 1,920
iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ptack View Post
I think they'd stand a much better chance if the car didn't look so boring.
I understand where you are coming from, but think about the cars that sell ~200k cars/year (Camry, Accord, Civic, etc). They are all pretty boring looking. Cars in this segment that are mass sellers are pretty boring. I'm not sure what the reasoning is behind this, but i bet it has something to do with no wanting to burn out the looks too quickly for a car that you will see 40times/day.
lyndon_h is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-12-2009, 04:41 AM   #63
ihatepotholes
Enlisted Member
 
Drives: infiniti M45
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: China

Posts: 39
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by EpicE90 View Post
Have you actually seen the new Taurus? Why is it so absurd that Ford has started producing good products that they're proud of ,and they are trying to reach out to consumers who may be in the market for similar cars produced by their competitors? Whether or not that video is edited and whatever. It is a good comparison. Paint is really important , and as a car detailer I can say that Lexus does have some of the thinnest paint in the industry, they seem to be very vulnerable to environmental debris and such. All the video displays is that Ford is taking a big step up in the quality of their vehicles, and what you get for the price. Whats wrong with that?

epic fail, you must have not been or even touched a LS460 before.
ihatepotholes is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-12-2009, 04:57 AM   #64
sokdo
Lieutenant
 
sokdo's Avatar
 
Drives: 335i E92
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Fullerton, CA

Posts: 582
iTrader: (0)

If they've got your attention, then their marketing department has done their job. If they're making you discuss about it then they need a raise.
sokdo is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-12-2009, 07:19 AM   #65
lyndon_h
Lieutenant Colonel
 
lyndon_h's Avatar
 
Drives: e90
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Madagascar

Posts: 1,920
iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sokdo View Post
If they've got your attention, then their marketing department has done their job. If they're making you discuss about it then they need a raise.
BINGO
lyndon_h is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-12-2009, 09:24 AM   #66
graider
Colonel
 
graider's Avatar
 
Drives: py/kiwi e46 m3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: toronto

Posts: 2,408
iTrader: (0)

not feeling the look
graider is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:51 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST