Quote:
Originally Posted by CeEl
All of these are in the ‘well, what did you expect’ category GruessGott is mentioning.
|
Guys, my point from an engineer who's designed stuff and reacted to design updates in fleet operations: you're always balancing costs, core design priorities, secondary priorities, financial impact, and legal impact against impact to the user.
In this case
(1.) BMW engineering has designed a great brake (at least on all of my cars) that, yes, has this rocks downside
whether you expected it or not
(2.) My assumption is they've researched a fix and weighed that fix against many factors including severity of impact to the user - the result of the analysis was, keep it as is.
We can quibble whether #2 is a bad assumption ...
Maybe BMW has completely ignored this issue, but that'd be surprising given the volume of noise - much more likely is they researched a fix and decided a legally / technically / financially appropriate fix would be more trouble than it's worth given the impact.
For me, it wouldn't even be worth a drive to the dealer over and frankly I don't want them touching shit on my car, so even if there was one I'd skip it.
Thus, this is 100% a comfort vs performance issue in that we have high performance brakes which have some comfort downsides because no design is perfect (and you didn't pay for perfect, you paid for performance and you get that).
If you buy performance brakes (and you did), you should expect them to perform - if they do, the contract is fulfilled.
If you want perfection, that's what aftermarket is for.