F82 M4 offer enough benefit over the e92 M3 to justify jumping into it?

[mashimarho]

Now with it being $63k, we can make better justifications.

[Nautik]

Originally Posted by KennyPowers

there are completely different tuners for both of those cars, so its not the same companies although there is some overlap. there is also much more incentive to tune turbo'd cars than N/A cars because the gains are much more substantial, therefore the tune is a better bang for the buck and sells better

I believe the m3 will be cracked faster because the tuner market for the m3 is much bigger than the m5. the m3 will sell better, and owners are much more likely to mod their cars. the aftermarket companies know this.

just look at the amount of parts for the e60 m5 vs e9x m3

every time a new car comes out people say the same thing about OMG its gonna be impossible to break the ECU. but guess what, it ALWAYS breaks. always

If it takes too long to break the encryption I'm sure someone will find a way to get the key from BMW ;p

[1cleanm6]

I'm disappointed with the 425 hp. Even if it's under rated.. They should have gone atleast with 465 and underrated it. I don't know how much faster this car will be with 11 more hp and 150 pounds less. Once you get up to speed torque won't be as big as a factor as hp. The dct in the e9x was damn good.. So I don't know how much better they can make that. Regardless I think some people think this will blown the doors off an e9x... I don't think this will be the case. Bmw surprise me... I have an order down however I'm just not sure until there's more information released regarding real life performance numbers.

[rjd598]

Originally Posted by 1cleanm3

I'm disappointed with the 425 hp. Even if it's under rated.. They should have gone atleast with 465 and underrated it. I don't know how much faster this car will be with 11 more hp and 150 pounds less. Once you get up to speed torque won't be as big as a factor as hp. The dct in the e9x was damn good.. So I don't know how much better they can make that. Regardless I think some people think this will blown the doors off an e9x... I don't think this will be the case. Bmw surprise me... I have an order down however I'm just not sure until there's more information released regarding real life performance numbers.

0-60 time is 3.9 with dct versus the e9x which was 4.5 with dct. M said it will lap nurburgring 10 seconds faster than the outgoing m3. Not being a fanboy or unrealistic but just stating the facts. I'm waiting for real world reviews. On paper this car is doing it right IMO but only people like clarkson, Harris, or Lagos will speak the truth.

[dmk08]

Originally Posted by rjd598

0-60 time is 3.9 with dct versus the e9x which was 4.5 with dct. M said it will lap nurburgring 10 seconds faster than the outgoing m3. Not being a fanboy or unrealistic but just stating the facts. I'm waiting for real world reviews. On paper this car is doing it right IMO but only people like clarkson, Harris, or Lagos will speak the truth.

I thought the E92 DCT was tested at 3.9?? I even saw 4.3 for the 6MT previously.

[klammer]

Originally Posted by rjd598

0-60 time is 3.9 with dct versus the e9x which was 4.5 with dct. M said it will lap nurburgring 10 seconds faster than the outgoing m3. Not being a fanboy or unrealistic but just stating the facts. I'm waiting for real world reviews. On paper this car is doing it right IMO but only people like clarkson, Harris, or Lagos will speak the truth.

I think you're confusing "facts" with marketing, assumptions and projections. No offense, but will wait for the testers, not the marketing dept. for the "facts"....

[rjd598]

Originally Posted by dmk08

I thought the E92 DCT was tested at 3.9?? I even saw 4.3 for the 6MT previously.

Those are the quoted times from BMW. If e9x did it in 3.9 then the f8x will be faster as well. BMW always underrates their 0-60 times

[rjd598]

Originally Posted by klammer

I think you're confusing "facts" with marketing, assumptions and projections. No offense, but will wait for the testers, not the marketing dept. for the "facts"....

Hahaha so you're saying BMW M is lying straight through their teeth about a 0-60 time and lap times? You think their marketing department is that stupid? Or do you think the number one valued car brand would be a little smarter when it comes to what they claim about a new car. Why wouldn't those figures be possible? The lower weight and added torque alone should easily be able to accomplish those aspects. Also did you miss my last sentence? The best "testers" are what I mentioned. I'm in the same boat as you I still will take real world reviews over what a paper says

[whats77inaname]

Originally Posted by dmk08

I thought the E92 DCT was tested at 3.9?? I even saw 4.3 for the 6MT previously.

Originally Posted by rjd598

Those are the quoted times from BMW. If e9x did it in 3.9 then the f8x will be faster as well. BMW always underrates their 0-60 times

Car and Driver used a DCT equipped E92 M3 in 2011 and cracked 3.9.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M3

So if the F80 does it in 3.9, it's a wash. If it does it faster, unless it's by 4 tenths or so, a full exhaust and tuned E9X will probably run with it. And a s/c'ed E9X will still run away from an F80.

Originally Posted by Nautik

If it takes too long to break the encryption I'm sure someone will find a way to get the key from BMW ;p

As I said before, given the inability of anyone to crack the F10 ECUs as of yet, the tuning margin for the F80 is going to be slim. Get the key from BMW? All they have to do is push another, and then the process starts all over again. The cost of a s/c'ed, full exhaust E9X is still a hell of a lot cheaper than a F80. Personally, after I s/c, I'm staying with the E90. Full price on a depreciating asset? I'll let someone else take that bet.

Originally Posted by BobS

My point is.... don't surprised if other names like AMS jump into the tuning scene on the new turbo M3/M4. The M platform is more desirable to tuners and should have a lot of companies concentrating on it. The m5 is more of a niche car and IMO shouldn't be used as a good comparison for how fast a tune is available for the new s55

Looking at iND's build thread, AMS is already on the BMW scene (F10). They, along w/iND and ESS, are collaborating on that F10 build. Those 3 companies are all throwing considerable resources behind attempts to crack the dual Siemen's ECUs, and the only result so far is 1 broken ECU due to someone trying to crack it w/iND waiting for a replacement (they have been waiting over 2 months now).

Although I can appreciate their attempts, stuff is encrypted for a reason. I don't think a lot of people understand how difficult this is to do. Unless they know someone @ BMW or the NSA, this is going to be a long journey. Here's a little math behind the science.

http://security.stackexchange.com/qu...rsa-encryption

[rjd598]

Originally Posted by whats77inaname

Car and Driver used a DCT equipped E92 M3 in 2011 and cracked 3.9.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M3

So if the F80 does it in 3.9, it's a wash. If it does it faster, unless it's by 4 tenths or so, an full exhaust and tuned E9X will probably run with it. And a s/c'ed E9X will still run away from an F80.

As I said before, given the inability of anyone to crack the F10 ECUs as of yet, the tuning margin for the F80 is going to be slim. The cost of a s/c'ed, full exhaust E9X is still a hell of a lot cheaper than a F80. Personally, after I s/c, I'm staying with the E90. Full price on a depreciating asset? I'll let someone else take that bet.

You're missing the point lol I'm comparing claimed times from BMW. You're taking real world numbers and comparing to factory numbers. From BMW it is 3.9 versus 4.5. BMW ha ALWAYS underrated their 0-60 times. The f8x will do less than 3.9 unless they decided to completely change their outlook on 0-60 times and how they list them. Remember apples to apples

[dmk08]

Originally Posted by rjd598

You're missing the point lol I'm comparing claimed times from BMW. You're taking real world numbers and comparing to factory numbers. From BMW it is 3.9 versus 4.5. BMW ha ALWAYS underrated their 0-60 times. The f8x will do less than 3.9 unless they decided to completely change their outlook on 0-60 times and how they list them. Remember apples to apples

I would guess w/ the extra torque and lighter weight the F80 may crack a 3.7-3.8 in DCT form. Should be interesting to see. I can't see much higher in RWD without some real wide tires.

I'm on the fence right now to SC the new E92 or put down my deposit on an F80.

[rjd598]

Originally Posted by dmk08

I would guess w/ the extra torque and lighter weight the F80 may crack a 3.7-3.8 in DCT form. Should be interesting to see. I can't see much higher in RWD without some real wide tires.

I'm on the fence right now to SC the new E92 or put down my deposit on an F80.

Won't argue with you and you make sense. Like I said we won't really know until this car is placed in the proper hands. I just wish BMW would hurry up and give it to them since we are all so anxious to see if this car is worthy or not

[klammer]

Originally Posted by rjd598

Hahaha so you're saying BMW M is lying straight through their teeth about a 0-60 time and lap times? You think their marketing department is that stupid? Or do you think the number one valued car brand would be a little smarter when it comes to what they claim about a new car. Why wouldn't those figures be possible? The lower weight and added torque alone should easily be able to accomplish those aspects. Also did you miss my last sentence? The best "testers" are what I mentioned. I'm in the same boat as you I still will take real world reviews over what a paper says

Lying??? Wow, way to make the jump. I guess we just have different ideas of "facts". People's opinions and ideas of where things should or ought to be are not facts. I'm not saying they're wrong or misstating, just think theres a difference. 2+2=4 is a fact, the rest is conjecture and we're still debating the the actual 0-60 times for the E9x M, which hardly seems factual, as well as the ring time discussions that popped up on the "don't drive a gt3" thread. Think we may have data points around which we can make assumptions about overall performance, but throwing around the word "fact" in this instance does that word a great injustice. My .02

[rjd598]

Originally Posted by klammer

Lying??? Wow, way to make the jump. I guess we just have different ideas of "facts". People's opinions and ideas of where things should or ought to be are not facts. I'm not saying they're wrong or misstating, just think theres a difference. 2+2=4 is a fact, the rest is conjecture and we're still debating the the actual 0-60 times for the E9x M, which hardly seems factual, as well as the ring time discussions that popped up on the "don't drive a gt3" thread. Think we may have data points around which we can make assumptions about overall performance, but throwing around the word "fact" in this instance does that word a great injustice. My .02

you're right technically those times aren't facts, but they are going to be right at those numbers and most likely better. so let's not call them facts but the real point here is i don't bmw is going to come out and say our car can do a 10 and it can only perform at an 8. i mean they could but let's just see how well their customers, reputation, and stock holders feel about that.

[klammer]

Originally Posted by rjd598

you're right technically those times aren't facts, but they are going to be right at those numbers and most likely better. so let's not call them facts but the real point here is i don't bmw is going to come out and say our car can do a 10 and it can only perform at an 8. i mean they could but let's just see how well their customers, reputation, and stock holders feel about that.

Agreed

[whats77inaname]

Originally Posted by rjd598

You're missing the point lol I'm comparing claimed times from BMW. You're taking real world numbers and comparing to factory numbers. From BMW it is 3.9 versus 4.5. BMW ha ALWAYS underrated their 0-60 times. The f8x will do less than 3.9 unless they decided to completely change their outlook on 0-60 times and how they list them. Remember apples to apples

I understand, and BMW originally listed 4.5 (DCT) and 4.7 (6MT) as those times. So even if they're 5 tenths offs, I'm hard pressed to believe the F8X will hit 60 in 3.4 seconds.

For your consideration, I submit this:

BMW lists the F10 M5 0-60 @ 3.6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M5
Car and Driver pulled a 3.7 http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ad-test-review
MotorTrend pulled a 3.7 http://www.bmwblog.com/2012/03/22/mo...n-3-7-seconds/

AFAIK, the M3 has never been faster than the M5 b/c they know M5 drivers expect that for the premium over the M3, they had better run faster than an M3. Why would they suddenly reverse course on this long-standing tradition?

[rjd598]

Originally Posted by whats77inaname

I understand, and BMW originally listed 4.5 (DCT) and 4.7 (6MT) as those times. So even if they're 5 tenths offs, I'm hard pressed to believe the F8X will hit 60 in 3.4 seconds.

For your consideration, I submit this:

BMW lists the F10 M5 0-60 @ 3.6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M5
Car and Driver pulled a 3.7 http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ad-test-review

AFAIK, the M3 has never been faster than the M5. I would imagine this will carry over to the new generation, over-estimation or not.

Good to know. Time will only tell

[Koldun]

Originally Posted by KennyPowers

there are completely different tuners for both of those cars, so its not the same companies although there is some overlap. there is also much more incentive to tune turbo'd cars than N/A cars because the gains are much more substantial, therefore the tune is a better bang for the buck and sells better

I believe the m3 will be cracked faster because the tuner market for the m3 is much bigger than the m5. the m3 will sell better, and owners are much more likely to mod their cars. the aftermarket companies know this.

just look at the amount of parts for the e60 m5 vs e9x m3

every time a new car comes out people say the same thing about OMG its gonna be impossible to break the ECU. but guess what, it ALWAYS breaks. always

Your premise is logical, but when it is the actual established tuners (Evolve, ESS, etc. have all said this) are saying that the new ECU will be extremely difficult to crack, you have to take them at their word. The M3 tuner market is bigger than for the M5, but that mainly means more vendors of cosmetic crap. Both markets are tiny in the grand scheme of things. The same companies tune both cars. Unless you're saying new tuners will pop up, which is possible, but would you want to be the $70K guinea pig car for an untested company and brand new engine?

You're just having early adopter jitters, I'm sure your new car will be awesome. The torque, gas mileage, and updated interior will make it a great daily driver. Sure, the lack of more GTR/Stingray-like numbers is disappointing, but you've been trying to get out of the mod habit, and this car is better than the outgoing model in every performance benchmark without you having to mod a thing. Don't worry! Be happy!

[Cingulus]

I have to say that I am really looking forward to the new platform. On paper as this thread started the F80 looks like a great step in the right direction, less weight, more torque and better stopping power. We won't know about steering feel and suspension dynamics until it is out. I love my E90, it is paid for, and it will always have a place in my garage, however the new M3/M4 will be a great new car.

[Black Gold]

Originally Posted by Koldun

Your premise is logical, but when it is the actual established tuners (Evolve, ESS, etc. have all said this) are saying that the new ECU will be extremely difficult to crack, you have to take them at their word. The M3 tuner market is bigger than for the M5, but that mainly means more vendors of cosmetic crap. Both markets are tiny in the grand scheme of things. The same companies tune both cars. Unless you're saying new tuners will pop up, which is possible, but would you want to be the $70K guinea pig car for an untested company and brand new engine?

You're just having early adopter jitters, I'm sure your new car will be awesome. The torque, gas mileage, and updated interior will make it a great daily driver. Sure, the lack of more GTR/Stingray-like numbers is disappointing, but you've been trying to get out of the mod habit, and this car is better than the outgoing model in every performance benchmark without you having to mod a thing. Don't worry! Be happy!

haha, not sure what part of my post made you think I was nervous about the new one

I saw them in person last night at the Houston auto show and my expectations were exceeded.

I have no concerns about the performance of this car, I think it will be spectacular. FWIW I think the m3 will be neck and neck with the stingray in straight line speed

As far as tuning, they said the same thing about the n54, which was cracked. I don't personally care about the tunes being released any time soon, the car will be extremely quick stock. BMW says it will be basically identical to the m5, which I have driven. If its that powerful, all a tune is going to do is get me put in jail faster haha (though I still will be tempted, no doubt!)

This m3 will continue the M tradition of taking these cars to the next level, just like they did with the e9x over the e46 in terms of outright performance.

[Brosef]

Originally Posted by KennyPowers

haha, not sure what part of my post made you think I was nervous about the new one

I saw them in person last night at the Houston auto show and my expectations were exceeded.

I have no concerns about the performance of this car, I think it will be spectacular. FWIW I think the m3 will be neck and neck with the stingray in straight line speed

As far as tuning, they said the same thing about the n54, which was cracked. I don't personally care about the tunes being released any time soon, the car will be extremely quick stock. BMW says it will be basically identical to the m5, which I have driven. If its that powerful, all a tune is going to do is get me put in jail faster haha (though I still will be tempted, no doubt!)

This m3 will continue the M tradition of taking these cars to the next level, just like they did with the e9x over the e46 in terms of outright performance.

agreed. I'm looking forward to driving the new car. while I would have preferred even just a repeat of the S65, I'm not gonna bitch about it and I'm looking forward to the new motor and a different experience. my JB3 tuned N54 was an absolute beast and fun in different ways, so I have no doubt that this motor will tickle my vagina in its own way.

[Black Gold]

Originally Posted by Brosef

agreed. I'm looking forward to driving the new car. while I would have preferred even just a repeat of the S65, I'm not gonna bitch about it and I'm looking forward to the new motor and a different experience. my JB3 tuned N54 was an absolute beast and fun in different ways, so I have no doubt that this motor will tickle my vagina in its own way.

right on, good attitude.

I prefer turbo engines unless the car is really lightweight and more of a weekend / track car. so im excited about the turbo. I think the motor will feel like a smoother version of the old mezger motor in my 997TT which was a beast in the midrange and up top.

I plan to use my car for track and DD, so the turbo is a great fit and great fun (for me). but to others, not so much.