Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh
It used to be that BMW interiors were sparse and to-the-point of assisting in the activity, should I dare say enhancing the "art" of driving. So my angle with any sports sedan is the interior should enhance the activity and art of driving. That means comfortable, supporting seats, good sightlines, simple and informative gauges, and ergonomic controls.
The previous gen ATS (only gen - LOL) arrived at the near introduction of the F30. I drove both cars extensively. The ATS was heads above the F30 in terms of being a (ultimate) driving machine. When I espoused the driving dynamics of the ATS on this forum 8 years ago, most of the feedback was (mimicking the auto mags), "Yeah, but the interior sucks". I didn't find the ATS interior any better nor any worse than the F30 for the purpose of driving the car very well. Of course, it was styled differently, used different materials, and the Cadillac CUE was a touch screen-based system when it is obvious a stationary mouse user interface is a much better solution for a moving vehicle. But I find any type of screen-based user interface pointless in an automobile. I like to drive and not scroll through my phone, even if it is stuck in the dashboard. The magazines even tried to convince readers the ATS windows were too small, even after they originally said from their years-earlier first assessments that the sightlines out of the car were good.
What was better than the F30 was the ATS chassis, brakes, steering, and dynamics. So if one is a Roundel Hound and doesn't really give a shit about driving dynamics and prefers driving an iPhone, then the BMW wins for you. If you care about driving dynamics, then an ATS was the winner. I'm sure the same is still the case with the current line up between BMW and Cadillac. But surely the interior of the Cadillac, without even physically experiencing it, "sucks".
Based on my idea for the function of the interior, the E30 was the best car interior I've experienced. Simple, attractive, driver oriented, and effective at interfacing with the chassis. "Form follows function"
|
I bought my ATS in 2014 (year old), and it was for the reasons you stated above plus the lower initial price and the long term lower maintenance/repair costs. I've now had it for almost 7 years and very few problems, it has a basic 320 hp V-6, and I think the chances of an expensive problem are extremely low. My plan is to keep it as a basic daily driver and buy an additional weekend car. I don't see enough benefit in my near perfect 65k mile car to write a $50k check (plus trade) on a new car.
My favorite is coming to this forum to learn more about how the BMW (Ultimate Driving Machine) has the better interior and how important this should be to me.