[DaleHeinz]

Originally Posted by Sportstick

4 door cars outsell 2 door cars. New 3 Series is getting larger and likely more expensive. Some may not like the execution (FWD), but the market position among CLA, A3, S40 makes a good business case.

Fair point. I just look at it like a restaurant with a lot of choices. The more items you see on the menu, the less chance there is of them being quality dishes. Jack of all trades, master of none. I'm just worried they'll fall victim to what some other manufacturers have. Spread too thin with high quantity of choices, thus development and quality of each suffers. Instead of pushing out a quality product, they soon become ok with pushing out a decent product because they have to.

[Sportstick]

Originally Posted by DaleHeinz

Fair point. I just look at it like a restaurant with a lot of choices. The more items you see on the menu, the less chance there is of them being quality dishes. Jack of all trades, master of none. I'm just worried they'll fall victim to what some other manufacturers have. Spread too thin with high quantity of choices, thus development and quality of each suffers. Instead of pushing out a quality product, they soon become ok with pushing out a decent product because they have to.

Also a very fair point. The reason this can be managed as a lower risk is platform sharing. If FWD, the 2 GC is likely another UKL variant, with the basics already developed...powertrain, suspension, brakes, electrical architecture, HVAC, etc. The primary task is stamping a new set of sheetmetal, and programming the framing area of the plant to accomodate them, which isn't that challenging (unless you're Tesla, trying to launch the Model 3) On a 1 to 10 scale of difficulty for an established automaker, launching what we call a "top hat" variant of an existing program is about a 2. Developing a new vehicle on a new platform is the much larger task, so for each new model, we need to look at its basis to assess risk. Using your restaurant analogy, it's more like adding meatloaf to the menu after already serving meatballs.

[DaleHeinz]

Originally Posted by Sportstick

Also a very fair point. The reason this can be managed as a lower risk is platform sharing. If FWD, the 2 GC is likely another UKL variant, with the basics already developed...powertrain, suspension, brakes, electrical architecture, HVAC, etc. The primary task is stamping a new set of sheetmetal, and programming the framing area of the plant to accomodate them, which isn't that challenging (unless you're Tesla, trying to launch the Model 3) On a 1 to 10 scale of difficulty for an established automaker, launching what we call a "top hat" variant of an existing program is about a 2. Developing a new vehicle on a new platform is the much larger task, so for each new model, we need to look at its basis to assess risk. Using your restaurant analogy, it's more like adding meatloaf to the menu after already serving meatballs.

Ahhh, the old meatloaf/meatball analogy. Lol. Seriously though. Yeah. I see your point. I think it boils down to the fact that I just really don't like the grand coupe in any series and just don't want to see the 2 series become the same thing. I'm pretty proud to own the car and it feels like more of a drivers car than they have made in years. Seeing a 2 series GC gives me nausea. To each their own.