+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    R. Santos. Jr.
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: R. Santos. Jr.'s Avatar


    Yes | No

    Will the new "retro 2002" be dope or will it suck?

    Greetings 2002-ologists:
    Just a question about the rumored NEW 2002 that is supposed to come out in 2002: Does anybody have any info about what the car will feature? Personally, I hope the car has NO on-board computer, nothing powered electrically, no design that looks like a clone car. ****, I know, Munich ought to just go to their archives and whip out their ORIGINAL 2002 blueprints and copy the car as it was before BUT making improvements in rust prevention. The price should be about $15,000 to $20,000. I know, I'm bored- just dreaming. Any opinion you may have will be entertaining to read. Thanks.


  2. #2
    Frank
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Frank's Avatar


    Yes | No

    Re: Will the new "retro 2002" be dope or will it s

    : Greetings 2002-ologists:
    : Just a question about the rumored NEW 2002 that is supposed to come out in 2002: Does anybody have any info about what the car will feature? Personally, I hope the car has NO on-board computer, nothing powered electrically, no design that looks like a clone car. ****, I know, Munich ought to just go to their archives and whip out their ORIGINAL 2002 blueprints and copy the car as it was before BUT making improvements in rust prevention. The price should be about $15,000 to $20,000. I know, I'm bored- just dreaming. Any opinion you may have will be entertaining to read. Thanks.


    R. Santos,

    Yes, I'd be nice to have a no frills sports sedan made again. But with strict emmisions and safety requirements needed in the US I doubt that BMW could or would ever produce such a car again.

    They may eventually make a 'new" O2 but it will have fuel injection,air bags, most likely a six cylinder and probably alot of electric gizmos standard. It seems almost all new car buyers need these things to play with. Look on the E39 message board and see what I mean. The new 5'er guys spend more time trying to figure out what kind of headlights (xenon?) or stereo they want to install then anything else. Pretty soon all new car buyers --maybe even BMW owners may sink to the level of the riceboys mentality. More exterior tackons the better?

    Ever look at "new" car ads on TV lately? Most promote all the options you can get. Only BMW/Mercedes really talk about the level of perfomance their cars deliver. Lexus,Infinity etc all seem to compare their cars to BMW.

    Regards,
    Frank


  3. #3
    dopey
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: dopey's Avatar


    Yes | No

    Re: Will the new "retro 2002" be dope or will it s

    :


    What's dope? I don't think a BMW can be "dope".

    I hope not.


  4. #4
    mike
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: mike's Avatar


    Yes | No

    2002

    : Greetings 2002-ologists:
    : Just a question about the rumored NEW 2002 that is supposed to come out in 2002: Does anybody have any info about what the car will feature? Personally, I hope the car has NO on-board computer, nothing powered electrically, no design that looks like a clone car. ****, I know, Munich ought to just go to their archives and whip out their ORIGINAL 2002 blueprints and copy the car as it was before BUT making improvements in rust prevention. The price should be about $15,000 to $20,000. I know, I'm bored- just dreaming. Any opinion you may have will be entertaining to read. Thanks.


    It'll never happen. Its not like the 2002 has the widespread following, or previous owner base that the VW Bug had.

    VW's resurrection of the bug is cute, but its hardly the same idea as the original. No German company could bring themselves to build such a simple, bare bones car for the US anymore cause it wouldn't sell enough quantity. That's something that only the Koreans could get away with. Even those get optioned-up.


  5. #5
    the dopeman
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: the dopeman's Avatar


    Yes | No

    Re: Will the new "retro 2002" be dope or will it s

    Personally, I want a dope 2002.

    I want more attention to performance, suspension, lightness, and style. I don't give a damn about cupholders or airbags or power features. I want a fairly stiff ride, a good amount of engine punch, a shortshifter, a 5 or 6 speed, and that '02 nimbleness. The 318ti was pure BS. If BMW is going to associate the new 2002 with the original, they better do it right.

    Oh, and I don't really care for the looks of the newer BMWs (E46, E39), so they better not look to those models for body styling. A successful new '02 will look like no other current BMW; it should make people think about the last time they saw a car that cool. Round tailights are necessary--sorry squaretailers!

    Mac
    Alpina 1600 Ti

    : Greetings 2002-ologists:
    : Just a question about the rumored NEW 2002 that is supposed to come out in 2002: Does anybody have any info about what the car will feature? Personally, I hope the car has NO on-board computer, nothing powered electrically, no design that looks like a clone car. ****, I know, Munich ought to just go to their archives and whip out their ORIGINAL 2002 blueprints and copy the car as it was before BUT making improvements in rust prevention. The price should be about $15,000 to $20,000. I know, I'm bored- just dreaming. Any opinion you may have will be entertaining to read. Thanks.


  6. #6
    Dave
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Dave's Avatar


    Yes | No

    Re: Will the new "retro 2002" be dope or will it s

    Oddly enough, I think BMW should take a look at the Neon ACR that was made for a few years.

    As much as I despise the sippy "Hi" campaign Dodge/Chrysler/Plymouth whoever used, they had a great little car in the ACR, with strong factory support. It was a simple, cheap, light car, with good handling and available bolt-ons. I think 150ish hp.

    Can you imagine a lightweight BMW, with a nice 2.0 4 and maybe 140ish hp for under $25K? (I think it would have to be to remain viable). Of course, I can imagine a 2.0 4 with 200 hp, but lets be reasonable here :) BMW needs to make a no-frills car and offer factory support for it.
    And not the factory support where you have to know the janitor in the ///M Division to get parts, but a dedicated unit, like TRD (Toyota Racing Develeopment) or Nismo (the Nissan outfit).

    Will it happen? Who knows. BMW might be trying to play off the nostalgia thing, but they are a conservative company and it might be a big stretch for them to make a low-buck boy racer car.

    I'm still waiting for the REAL Chrysler 300 to re-appear.

    -Dave
    has secret fantasies of 300+hp American land yachts

    : Greetings 2002-ologists:
    : Just a question about the rumored NEW 2002 that is supposed to come out in 2002: Does anybody have any info about what the car will feature? Personally, I hope the car has NO on-board computer, nothing powered electrically, no design that looks like a clone car. ****, I know, Munich ought to just go to their archives and whip out their ORIGINAL 2002 blueprints and copy the car as it was before BUT making improvements in rust prevention. The price should be about $15,000 to $20,000. I know, I'm bored- just dreaming. Any opinion you may have will be entertaining to read. Thanks.


  7. #7
    Lars
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Lars's Avatar


    Yes | No

    It could happen

    I think BMW could have a shot with this. Target it at late-teens and early twenties drivers. 150Bhp is very possible with todays engines. If they put in a in-line 6 I wouldn't mind, but I'd expect at least 200Bhp. I agree with the round taillights.

    It would have to look like the 2002 of today if it had continued production. Single round headlights, small, lightweight and a blast to drive. Maybe one cupholder but none of that other crap they stick on cars today.

    Lars
    75 02
    94 Corsica (piece of crap)


  8. #8
    Rian M.
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Rian M.'s Avatar


    Yes | No

    Re: "retro 2002" - take a lesson from NISSAN

    I totally agree that any new '02 design must have at least one focused eye on the past. Has anyone seen Nissan's Z-concept car? I couldn't believe it - they really did a decent job at creating a shape of what the old-time Z would look like today. So it can be done. I even think they're keeping the same displacement as the 240Z (2.4 'cept it's a four-banger). IMHO, any new '02 has to incorporate the hallmarks - big, round, single headlights, round taillights, boxy shape, a rev-happy 2.0, and kick-*** handling. No gimmicks, no exclusivity, and no optional look-at-me-I-can-go-fast-ugly-*** spoilers!

  9. #9
    milton
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: milton's Avatar


    Yes | No

    NISSAN can't teach Bimmer a thing

    : I totally agree that any new '02 design must have at least one focused eye on the past. Has anyone seen Nissan's Z-concept car? I couldn't believe it - they really did a decent job at creating a shape of what the old-time Z would look like today. So it can be done.

    But, it is butt ugly (can I type that here - guess so) in my eyes. And, I am a former 240Z owner who still loves the early Z cars.

    I even think they're keeping the same displacement as the 240Z (2.4 'cept it's a four-banger).

    From what I read, it doesn't sound like it will qualify as a sports car this time around. What happened to the all aluminum, dual sidedraft 6 that made those cars so silky?

    IMHO, any new '02 has to incorporate the hallmarks - big, round, single headlights, round taillights, boxy shape, a rev-happy 2.0, and kick-*** handling. No gimmicks, no exclusivity, and no optional look-at-me-I-can-go-fast-ugly-*** spoilers!

    Here is where I depart from almost everyone on this list. When the '02 was conceived back in '67 very few companies had a handle on aerodynamics. I love the boxy and aerodynamically inefficient design of my 2002 and wouldn't trade it for the world - but lets face it, I'm one of those crazy '02 guys and there aren't too many of us die hards left (how often do you notice '02ers "moving up" to later model bimmers?).

    I actually think it would be pretty foolish to mimick the inefficiencies of the old design. I believe that the spirit of the '02 lies in the fact that it had independent rear suspension from birth, a world class 4 banger for its day, seating for 3.5 adults, fuel injection as of 1971 (europe at least), understated and classy design, etc.

    Point is that it was a leading edge design. That's why BMW AG is so well off today. It was a long lived concept. And, for the most part, almost any post '02 bimmer design has stayed true to this principle (there are a couple of exceptions, but I won't name names). In other words it is a recipe for success.

    I bought my first '02 in 1988 as a toy. It quickly replaced my brand new 1987 Honda CRX Si as my daily driver. BMW 1975 technology ran circles around Hondas 1987 technology (no surprise to us), and I was hooked.

    And, I want to preface this as an opinion that all are allowed (expected even) to disagree with - round lights are appropriate for classic, sexy, but innefficient lines. They don't fit in well on modern efficient cars like 2002s . Just look at the rear panel of the C5 corvette - but careful, you might just turn to stone on the spot.

    The lesson from Nissan is to avoid the factory rebuild program (have they sold 10 yet?), even though that would be the only way to satisfy us fanatics - we still wouldn't buy them - we'd restore and build them for ourselves.

    A new 2002 should have the following qualities to stay true to its ancestors. It should be very lightweight, its motor should be powerful and uncluttered to the degree possible (we've got to be able to get at spark plugs, fuel filters etc.), it should grab the road and refuse to let go, and finally, it should be affordable. In other words, a BMW sports car with seating for an extra two people.

    I wouldn't be too upset if they just badget the 2.8 and M coupes as 2002s after putting them on a little diet and making a little extra room for passengers. In fact, that would be ideal IMHO. A contraversial cosmetic appeal with unquestionable performance. If you have ever read the early reviews of the 2002, you will note striking similarities to the reviews of the new Coupes. And, that my friends is my $1.02

    I would not spend $20K for a modern replica of my 2002 (unless I had the joy of building it myself - sheepish ). I would honestly expect more, much more from a brand new car. And, I don't mind if the 2002 costs a little more than the bottom of the rung bimmer - the 2002 did cost more than the 1600s anyway.

    Milton


  10. #10
    milton
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: milton's Avatar


    Yes | No

    One more thing - quantified performance desires

    And, my performance benchmark would be the ability to toast the BS (SCCA AutoX class) Miata's in low speed driving competition. If they fail to meet this mark, the car will be doomed. If they put in a 6, they better be able to whip up on AS, but BS would be a good target class for the '02.

    Our '02s run in ES which is substantially slower than BS (depending on the driver of course). The Neon Dave refered to is a DS car - an easy mark even for current 2002s.

    Milton


  11. #11
    Rian M.
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Rian M.'s Avatar


    Yes | No

    Re: NISSAN can't teach Bimmer a thing

    : But, it is butt ugly (can I type that here - guess so) in my eyes. And, I am a former 240Z owner who still loves the early Z cars.

    : From what I read, it doesn't sound like it will qualify as a sports car this time around. What happened to the all aluminum, dual sidedraft 6 that made those cars so silky?

    I agree but I think it's a more intelligent decision for cash-strapped Nissan to develop a four.

    : Here is where I depart from almost everyone on this list. When the '02 was conceived back in '67 very few companies had a handle on aerodynamics. I love the boxy and aerodynamically inefficient design of my 2002 and wouldn't trade it for the world - but lets face it, I'm one of those crazy '02 guys and there aren't too many of us die hards left (how often do you notice '02ers "moving up" to later model bimmers?).

    Are you kidding? Open your eyes - classic imports and the like are very desirable vehicles nowadays! I've seen junk (not when new, of course) like late 70s Honda Civics fetch prices past the $2K mark (CDN). Bringing back styling cues from 60s and 70s is a marketer's dream...

    : I actually think it would be pretty foolish to mimick the inefficiencies of the old design.

    From a design standpoint - yes. From a marketing perspective - no. The automotive industry is waking up to the fact that the company with the best engineers wins. Look at iMac for example. Pretty design sells.

    : Point is that it was a leading edge design. That's why BMW AG is so well off today. It was a long lived concept. And, for the most part, almost any post '02 bimmer design has stayed true to this principle (there are a couple of exceptions, but I won't name names). In other words it is a recipe for success.

    Absolutely.

    : And, I want to preface this as an opinion that all are allowed (expected even) to disagree with - round lights are appropriate for classic, sexy, but innefficient lines. They don't fit in well on modern efficient cars like 2002s . Just look at the rear panel of the C5 corvette - but careful, you might just turn to stone on the spot.

    If designers could make the round lights work (a feat, I admit) they would capture a hallmark of the old design - even if the rest of the car was modern.

    : The lesson from Nissan is to avoid the factory rebuild program (have they sold 10 yet?), even though that would be the only way to satisfy us fanatics - we still wouldn't buy them - we'd restore and build them for ourselves.

    No kidding... what a flop. But I do think the new Z will meet with at least some success. It'll have the shape, but most of all it'll have the name - it's Coke-classic all over again (240SX being New Coke? - ugh, brutal analogy).

    : I wouldn't be too upset if they just badget the 2.8 and M coupes as 2002s after putting them on a little diet and making a little extra room for passengers. In fact, that would be ideal IMHO. A contraversial cosmetic appeal with unquestionable performance. If you have ever read the early reviews of the 2002, you will note striking similarities to the reviews of the new Coupes. And, that my friends is my $1.02

    : I would not spend $20K for a modern replica of my 2002 (unless I had the joy of building it myself - sheepish ). I would honestly expect more, much more from a brand new car. And, I don't mind if the 2002 costs a little more than the bottom of the rung bimmer - the 2002 did cost more than the 1600s anyway.

    I get the feeling that you just want BMW to develop a wholly new car and cast upon it characteristics the 2002 had back in its day and slap a few 2002 badges on it. I'd rather they just didn't bother if that's the case. IMHO, when it comes down to it - they should leave the Bug, Z, and especially the 2002 alone. It sort of supports my theory that there are no new ideas out there anymore (BTW, how many ways can you mold an SUV? Saw Isuzu's new product...)

    R.


  12. #12
    dahveed
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: dahveed's Avatar


    Yes | No

    Re: Will the new "retro 2002" be dope or will it s

    I, for one, would gladly purchase a "new" 2002, made from the original tooling (66-73 body, roundtailights), from the BMW factory. It would be nice to have an unmolested car with which to modify as I please. It would be even cooler if they badged some as 1600s despite the 2.0 liter powertrain--that would be really cool. I think they would have problems selling them as older vehicles, as obviously they couldn't be sold as new ones.

    I wish they still sold complete tubs from the factory, I'd have a stack of them in a warehouse.

    I remember seeing a brochure for a company that was selling refurbished/NOS (new old stock) Datsun 510s in either the late 70s or early '80s. I think they only sold the one "example/demo" car they made!

    Dave
    68 1600s
    74 Lotus Elite

    : Greetings 2002-ologists:
    : Just a question about the rumored NEW 2002 that is supposed to come out in 2002: Does anybody have any info about what the car will feature? Personally, I hope the car has NO on-board computer, nothing powered electrically, no design that looks like a clone car. ****, I know, Munich ought to just go to their archives and whip out their ORIGINAL 2002 blueprints and copy the car as it was before BUT making improvements in rust prevention. The price should be about $15,000 to $20,000. I know, I'm bored- just dreaming. Any opinion you may have will be entertaining to read. Thanks.


  13. #13
    Jeremiah
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Jeremiah's Avatar


    Yes | No

    The 2002 body lines and shape is efficient.

    The 02 gets good gas miles for what it yields in other ways than aerodynamics. Like it's efficient engine, lightness, and others.

    Actually, I believe the shape of the '02 to be efficient in some ways. Though less resistance is not what you get from the 2002, you do get more control. Like the aircraft, I believe the lines of the 2002 keep it in a solid path forward and more than I understand. The nose keeps it stuck to the road and less affected by side winds. That is felt because the 02 is light and maybe a little too high and soft if you are getting the car blown sideways.
    This is all theory. I think though some further understanding of precise aerodynamics and wind currents could further uncover the genius that we are all subconciously aware of in the 2002 body.
    Jeremiah Grover


  14. #14
    Frank
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Frank's Avatar


    Yes | No

    Re: The 2002 body lines and shape is efficient.

    : The 02 gets good gas miles for what it yields in other ways than aerodynamics. Like it's efficient engine, lightness, and others.

    : Actually, I believe the shape of the '02 to be efficient in some ways. Though less resistance is not what you get from the 2002, you do get more control. Like the aircraft, I believe the lines of the 2002 keep it in a solid path forward and more than I understand. The nose keeps it stuck to the road and less affected by side winds. That is felt because the 02 is light and maybe a little too high and soft if you are getting the car blown sideways.
    : This is all theory. I think though some further understanding of precise aerodynamics and wind currents could further uncover the genius that we are all subconciously aware of in the 2002 body.
    : Jeremiah Grover

    Jeremiah,

    You've obviously never lived in a area w/strong winds! Where I live(in the Gorge, on the WA & OR border along the Columbia river) the winds in the winter/summer can reach speeds in excess of 40 knots consistantly! The old 02' really gets blown around a lot especially by sidewinds. But that doesn't detract too much from the fun of driving one. :-)

    Frank


  15. #15
    Rian M.
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: Rian M.'s Avatar


    Yes | No

    oops - I meant to say

    The automotive industry is waking up to the fact that the company with the best engineers DOESN'T ALWAYS win. Look at iMac for example. Pretty design sells.

  16. #16
    chris king
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: chris king's Avatar


    Yes | No

    Re: NISSAN can't teach Bimmer a thing

    you know, it is interesting, this nissan/bmw thing. remember the SE-R? my girlfriend has one, and for a "non-car" person who likes a sporty drive but doesn't want to tinker around with anything more than routine maintenance, it's a winner....and stolen right off the '02 rack. the ad campaigns even played with this notion (even though it is a WWD car).

    problem is, part of what makes an '02 an '02 is that boxy shape. it doesn't work anymore, because nissan got the last bit of mileage out of that market with the SE-R.....now everything but a volvo is basically round-school (but that C-70 coupe convertible IS a bad mo-fo, for a WWD car) i guess i just dunno anymore (sigh).

    chris king
    '74tii
    former 533i
    former 535is


  17. #17
    chris king
    Guest
    Location
    , ,
    Member No: chris king's Avatar


    Yes | No

    Re: Will the new "retro 2002" be dope or will it s

    dope is "all good"...."phat"...."bad"....not bad meaing bad but bad meaning good......

    chris king
    '74tii


+ Reply to Thread


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Topics for Discussion so the board will not "suck"
    By Collin in forum Jaguar XK8, XKR Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-12-2001, 03:30 AM
  2. Anyone in Dallas with the "retro" fit steering?
    By dax-330ci in forum BMW 3 Series Forum (E46)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-16-2001, 09:14 AM
  3. Beewang taiwanese for "I suck" (nt)
    By Mike in forum BMW 5 Series Forum (E39)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-29-2001, 09:22 AM
  4. "Dope Wars" .....off topic, but very addicting....
    By SAFROLE in forum BMW M3 E46M3 (2001 - 2005)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-23-2001, 11:43 AM
  5. 75*, sunny and RETRO is screaming "Drive Me"......
    By RETRO in forum BMW Z3 Roadster Forum & M Roadster Forum (E36, E37)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-30-2001, 01:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
1e2 Forum