theglobeandmail.com
BMW M5 Touring: A Case of Automotive Excess?
This article reviews the BMW M5 Touring, highlighting its blend of sports car performance and family-friendly practicality, while questioning the trend of over-engineered vehicles and suggesting simpler designs might be preferable, contrasting it with other models like the M2 and M240i.
- How does the comparison between the BMW M2 and M240i illustrate the potential drawbacks of excessive performance features in a road car?
- The article compares the M5 Touring to excessive novelty food items at the CNE, highlighting how "more" isn't always better. This excess manifests in overwhelming features and settings, compromising the driving experience despite impressive performance capabilities. The comparison extends to other BMW models, contrasting the M2's raw power with the M240i's superior practicality for daily driving.
- What are the immediate trade-offs between performance and practicality in the BMW M5 Touring, and what does this reveal about current trends in automotive design?
- The BMW M5 Touring, priced at \$149,534, attempts to combine a sports car, station wagon, plug-in hybrid, and high-speed vehicle, resulting in a complex machine with both strengths and weaknesses. Its practicality is evident in its spacious trunk and 50km electric range, while its performance shines on twisty roads. However, its numerous driving modes and features can be overwhelming.
- Considering the author's critique of automotive excess, what potential future trends in car design could emerge from a renewed focus on simplicity and core functionality?
- The author suggests a trend towards automotive over-engineering, arguing that simpler, less expensive cars might be preferable. This is exemplified by their preference for the M240i over the M2 and highlights a growing concern that excessive features and performance often detract from the overall driving experience and value. Future car designs may benefit from focusing on core functionality and ease of use.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The narrative frames the excess of features in modern cars negatively, using analogies to excessive carnival food to illustrate its drawbacks. This framing predisposes the reader to view more features as inherently undesirable, overlooking potential benefits or the preference of certain drivers for highly equipped vehicles. The author's personal preference for less is presented as a universal truth.
Language Bias
The language used is largely descriptive, but the author uses words like "gloop", "sick-inducing", and "indigestion-inducing" to create a negative association with cars having many features. This loaded language influences reader perception. The use of "bloodied-minded determination" to describe the engineering is positive, but is subjective and arguably not neutral.
Bias by Omission
The review focuses heavily on personal opinions and driving experiences with specific BMW models, neglecting broader market trends or comparisons with competitors outside the BMW lineup. While this provides a vivid account, it omits crucial context for readers seeking a comprehensive understanding of the luxury car market.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy between "more" and "less" in car features, neglecting the possibility that a balance between performance and practicality is achievable. The author contrasts the excess of features in some cars with the supposed simplicity of others, but doesn't explore car models that successfully integrate many features without feeling overwhelming.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article critiques the trend of car manufacturers adding excessive features and power to vehicles, advocating for a more sustainable approach with less resource consumption and reduced environmental impact. This aligns with SDG 12 which promotes responsible consumption and production patterns to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation.