The BMW Club of Southern Alberta and the Northern Alberta BMW Club are hosting an advanced driving school exclusively for ladies at Race City Motorsport Park on Saturday July 16, 2011. The school will provide participants with classroom instruction, on track exercises, and full lapping experience on the full road course.
The fun and thrill of driving in a performance situation does not mean that you have to be sitting behind the wheel of an open-wheel race car. The BMW Club of Canada (BMWCC) offers many opportunities to experience the thrill of driving your own vehicle (BMW or otherwise) at or near the limit under safe and controlled conditions.
The purpose of the BWMCC Advanced Driving Schools is to instruct students in the art of advanced driving technique. Even if you have attended our schools or attended other similar schools in the past, there is always more to learn and experience. Through our Advanced Driving Schools, expect to polish your driving skills through excellent one-on-one, in-car instruction on a closed-road track. In-car instruction is supplemented by classroom sessions and specific skills are further reinforced by exercises on the skid pad.
Membership at either the Northern or Southern Alberta BMW club is mandatory to participate in this event. Registration fee is $325, and helmets are required. Helmets will be available for rental for $20. For more information on this event contact the event registrar Bruce Borstmayer at borstmayer@bmwcsa.ca or register online.
We knew BMW’s 1-Series would sell well as soon as we saw it. Arguably more attractive than the 3 and certainly more economical to purchase, the 1 is also the seeming spiritual successor to the now legendary 2002.
German carmaker BMW expects its rejuvenated model lineup to deliver a bounce in profits this year but remains cautious, not least because of fears that a fast-growing Chinese market could suddenly screech to a halt.
A few weeks ago we posted Audi’s “Friendly Competition” ad spot where they made fun of BMW by pointing out they always fall short when compared to Audi’s vehicles. Today we have BMW’s response. You can judge for yourself if this was a great response, but in our opinion we think Audi wins this round.
It appears that Audi is resuming its marketing war against BMW. If you recall, during the first round the two automakers took jabs at each other in magazine ads which progressed to the large “checkmate” billboard ads. Now, Audi restarts the war with its latest punch. I can’t wait to see how BMW responds.
The 1.4L twin-charged TSI motor earned 354 points (just 4 more than BMW’s 3.0L Twin Turbo) to capture the Engine of The Year award for 2009. The VW victory prevented a 3 year sweep of the award by BMW and comes at a perfect time as many people are increasingly looking for smaller engines with better fuel economy. The engine also took home the award for Green Engine of the Year and won the 1.0L to 1.4L category.
International Engine of The Year
Volkswagen 1.4-litre TSI Twincharger (VW Golf, Touran, Tiguan, Jetta)
Best New Engine of The Year
Porsche 3.8-litre flat six (911)
Green Engine of The Year
Volkswagen 1.4-litre TSI Twincharger (VW Golf, Touran, Tiguan, Jetta)
After the story of a Calgary BMW dealership whose staff members took out a highly modified M3 for a joyride was posted on our forums, many users came out and shared their own horror stories with Calgary BMW and the BMW Gallery which are run by the same owners.
Jaymez wrote:
Hmmmm not good at all… When i serviced my m3 there , I could smell burnt tires inside the car… I wasnt to happy about that…
A third party repair shop wrote:
We do service on a lot of BMW’s because customers refuse to take their BMW’s to Calgary BMW
E36M3 wrote:
Calgary BMW is a terrible BMW dealership. I unfortunately bought a car there last year and I cannot believe how inept my salesperson was. Needless to say, it is the last car I will ever buy there.
Their service department is also terrible. Just this week we had an issue with a car there and they did nothing to resolve it properly.. they screwed up and could seemingly care less.
badlivertt wrote:
I brought my X5 in for a routine check. There were 2 pucks of skoal straight in the cupholder. They were not there when I got my car back. I was quite unhappy when everyone just laughed about it when I asked.
To be fair, there were a couple friends of Calgary BMW and here they are. I do agree that it is unfair to judge an entire dealership because of the action of individual staff members but I also believe that a dealership needs to take some sort of responsibility.
R-Audi wrote:
Although tighter controls at the dealer could have prevented this, some of you are acting like every single person in the dealership personally took out Rages car for a spin.
I know Calgary BMW has had its fair share of problems in the past.. I dont really feel its neccessary to paint the whole dealership a certain color because one lousy person took the car out for a joyride.
Sorath wrote:
It really isnt the dealerships fault. i mean, anyone who has access to the keys can take the car and take it for a spin.
What do you think? If you have a story involving either Calgary BMW dealerships, please share by posting a response to this blog post or share it on our forums! Lets get both good and bad experiences so people can make their own judgement on how the BMW dealerships are in Calgary. Please don’t make anything up as we don’t want another car dealership threatening to file a class action lawsuit against us!
Angela Ta Leaves Court, Found Not Guilty on All Charges
In January of last year a 6-year-old, Jenna Chang was killed and her mother Ye Qiao was seriously injured while in a crosswalk near the University of Calgary. Even though a vehicle was already stopped in front of the crosswalk, a black BMW driven by Angela Ta failed to stop and hit the two pedestrians. Ta was charged with three traffic violations, careless driving, failing to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk and passing a vehicle stopped for a pedestrian in a crosswalk.
On Monday, she was found not guilty on all three charges because of a simple technicality. The Judge in the case, Catherine Skene ruled that Ta did not have enough time to stop:
“Based on the evidence and testimony that I did have before me,” wrote Skene, “there is evidence to suggest that the two pedestrians stepped off the sidewalk and/or curb, onto the roadway — specifically westbound 32nd Avenue into the path of Ta’s vehicle when Ta’s vehicle was so close that it was impracticable for the driver to yield the right of way.”
What a load of bullshit! There was a vehicle already stopped at the crosswalk, and every driver is expected to at least slow down before proceeding through, which Ta did not do. Even her passenger testified that he saw the pedestrians after “bending down” to adjust the air vents. Ta should have seen the pedestrians on the side of the road before they were even crossing and stopped (like the other vehicle did).
The Crown argued this point and said Ta should have seen the pair at the side of the road before they entered the crosswalk. However, the law states that you must yield to pedestrians who are in a crosswalk. The technicality that I mentioned earlier is that a crosswalk is the area between the two big white lines on the road. You see, when Jenna Chang and her mother were standing on the side of the road drivers like Angela Ta are not required to yield to them because they are not in the crosswalk.
That explains the not guilty verdict for failing to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk and passing a vehicle stopped for a pedestrian in a crosswalk. The last charge of careless driving was easily beat because independent witnesses testified that Ta was driving under the 60 km/h speed limit on a straight road with both hands on the wheel (uhh… yeah, right).
Ta now still has to go through a civil trial where she will likely be found at fault. Judge Catherine Skene wrote in her decision:
“Civil liability and negligence law and a civil trial judge or jury may consider the Crown’s submissions more persuasive and impose or imply a duty of care on an operator of a vehicle for the safety of pedestrians, depending on the circumstances of the case and the facts proven during the trial”
In other words, there will not be any technicalities to get you off in civil court!
