Sat in both last night. First I briefly sat in the perforated nevada comfort seat (car not powered on yet so no AVS). Then I briefly sat in the napa comfort. The napa was WAY softer and "nicer" to the touch. In this brief test I didn't notice much of a difference in their overall comfort level. It seemed muich more of an appearance difference. But it was very brief as I was eager to test drive the one with AVS since that is the one that is otherwise equipped as I want.
I then went on a test drive with the AVS and found them very nice and sufficient, but after thinking about it more (while on the test drive) I am still unsure. The AVS feature seems nice, but very subtle...really hard to tell how much I am going to appreciate the AVS features. It sounds like I will from those who have them...maybe it just takes time to notice how wonderful they are. I do like the fact that they are perforated and can "breathe".
The nevada leather, while more rugged and probably much more durable, still feels somewhat cheap in comparison to the napa to me. The napa seemed much more elegant and cushier (but maybe this "cushiness" was because the one with napa had been broken in...it was an 07 CPO with low mileage). I know this is a BMW and not a Mercedes (thus sportier and firmer seats), but it should still feel and look like the $70k car that it is.
I am probably overanalyzing this. They are both nice...but at a car at this price point and the fact that I do make long drives reasonably often, I want to make sure comfort is optimal.
Do the seats (with nevada in particular) break in and become less firm over time? Is it likely that was the difference in comfort levels as opposed to the grade of leather?
|
