|
For me the point is not the gas guzzler tax. That is a one time bill that is paid for and done with....good bye and good riddance. The point is, BMWs disingenuous practice of cooking the numbers and false advertising proclaiming to the world their efficient dynamics, blah blah blah. The M3 is dynamic but is frankly one of the most inefficient high performance engines available, especially given the newness of it's motor development.
IMO, BMW made a major mistake in not developing DFI for the M3's 4 litre. I know it is a high revving motor and a difficult engineering achievement, but they could have done it rather than going the cost saving route by basically lopping off 2 cylinders from the V10. I would have been willing to wait 6 more months for DFI development and would have gladly payed a couple thousand more for the R&D to enjoy it's benefits, one of which would of been a nice bump in horsepower. BMW have done a great job with the DFI 335 power plant, which is clearly one of the most powerful, yet fuel efficient motors in it's class. BMW has always been known for their power to efficiency ratio of their engines, that is a major reason why I have been so enamored with their power plants for so long.
This philosophy started to change with the development of the V10. Horsepower and red line were all that mattered at the expense of torque and fuel efficiency.
To make the argument that if one can afford a 70 k car then one can afford the gas is ridiculous on so many levels. It totally misses the point. I may be alone on this but when I compare high performance power plants, I compare horsepower, torque, weight, efficiency and red line. High scores in all areas is what separates great engineering from good engineering.
|