New Speculations on the F30 M3 / F32 M3

[Eau Rouge]

Originally Posted by erhanh

Well, honestly, it is a business. Whatever makes money, they'll say that's the best. 5 years later they'll say hybrid is the way. They can even swear that that's always what they wanted to do..

That's exactly the case today whereas such was not the case back in the day when BMW needed to sell a few thousand E30's to legitimize its racing entry. Today, with no need to sell a specific number of units as in the 80's, the emphasis has shifted away from the race car like characteristics to the more everyday, commuter friendly features. Why? Because someone decided that such a move would see demand hit 100k units.

Originally Posted by swamp2

I'll give myself a pat on the back for getting incredibly close to the key point of the actual M "philosophy" without looking it up anywhere online

Being that no one else offered you a pat on the back, I'm delighted that you did so for yourself.

Originally Posted by swamp2

However, I do agree that although not an explicit philosophy, the advertisement that Levi posted (I hadn't actually seen that one before and I do like it!) drives it home that high reving is a key part of what the division has done and done progressively through its evolution.

To be fair, M Philosophy v. 2.0 may be just around the corner in the form of an M3. However, those gearheads in Garching have been known to spring surprises, and for all we know right now, this chit chat about an FI/turbo motor in the F32 may be nothing more than an elaborate smokescreen designed to catch the competition off guard.

Originally Posted by ihyln

The only "M" philosophy is "M"oney. Case in point: 1M Coupe

No one has taken exception to that statement...yet...and neither will I.

Originally Posted by e46e92love

Good points Swamp, in fact I'm not sure they are doing it for EPA or emissions standards.....I think its more about grabbing more market share. Most people are stupid (sorry, its true). So rather than people understanding and appreciating the torque curve and delivery and balance of the e92 they would rather bitch and moan about the lack of torque. People would rather the feel of a lazy torquey engine than a high-revving race engine. People who are convinced a 335i has more torque then an ///M because they have no idea how to shift gears or what power to the wheels means.

Unfortunately, the idiots rule out over the enthusiasts.

Cheers,
e46e92

The overall goal of increasing market share is likely the enabling factor in combination that M badges are popular and the badges also make it easier to increase profit margins.

Originally Posted by erhanh

Agreed. I think in current situation, BMW "needs" to offer two different M3s for the North American market.

I like your thinking and my editing (above) even better. Will it happen? I don't know.

Originally Posted by GoGeo

You are funny.

Originally Posted by erhanh

You're not.

My exact thought when I saw the noob's contribution...ergh...comment.

Originally Posted by e46e92love

It has nothing to do with graphs, we create graphs to prove to people that there is plenty of torque there, they just need to learn how to drive the car......it was never meant to be a lazy man's race car, that is the C63. Its meant to be more of a precision based machine. People are just lazy...lazy.

Cheers,
e46e92

No disagreement here.

A "driver's car" themed tag line instead of "Joy whatever" or "the ultimate driving machine" (one that I never cared for thanks to the ambiguous wording i.e. Is the machine driving you? Do you have to drive the machine?) that identifies what type of individual the car is built to please would ultimately sell many more than just those purchased by the natural target demographic because the world is chock full of posers and individuals that want to belong to some group or another for any number of reasons. By focusing design, sales pitches on individuals who are not necessarily drivers first car owners second the brand, even M Division and, by extension, models, even the M3, are at risk of becoming substantively diluted. Ultimately, those who desire as driver oriented a vehicle as they can get their hands on will go shopping around.

[mb1]

I for one, CARE. No revving, no fun. End of story.

It's kind of like watching a family member die before your eyes (okay I'm being dramatic but....). RIP M.

Originally Posted by gr8000

I love NA, but I am afraid what you say above is true... In other words the FI route is inevitable.

I only hope the end result will be better in all respects, without compromising throtle response, overheating and/or component reliability (as a result of a more complex system).

The high reving feeling & what comes with it such as the sound of a screaming NA engine will most definitely be gone - hopefully these will be the only casualties. I don't know, maybe who cares....

[ruff]

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/01/03/f...er-engine-for/

[Erhan]

Originally Posted by ruff

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/01/03/f...er-engine-for/

I loved his hand gesture

[Eau Rouge]

Originally Posted by ruff

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/01/03/f...er-engine-for/

Luca: "The motors are dis small. My bambino's go kart will pwn the new 4 cylinder Ferrari Formula 1 challenger."

These are sad times for F1 thanks to the let's-create-a-spectacle mentality that has nothing in common with a formula that was once geared to showcase what manufacturers could conceive to pit against each other.

It would be a mistake to underestimate Luca's ability to effect change.

BTW, since BMW doesn't have a dog in the upcoming F1 fight, one would think that the F1 series would not be a factor in its cylinder count plans.

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by crackberry

you should check out the south park episode named "poor and stupid." it addresses a lot of issues that you are raising with people not understanding the intricacies of race/sport cars, driving well, and not taking time to learn.

Already have.....and laugh my arse off just as hard the first time I saw it.

Cheers,
e46e92

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by Eau Rouge

By focusing design, sales pitches on individuals who are not necessarily drivers first car owners second the brand, even M Division and, by extension, models, even the M3, are at risk of becoming substantively diluted. Ultimately, those who desire as driver oriented a vehicle as they can get their hands on will go shopping around.

BINGO....WE HAVE A WINNER

Tell him what he's won Bob..........a watered down embarrassment to the ///M division

Cheers,
e46e92

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by erhanh

I don't think they're doing it for meeting the emission targets. I don't have knowledge, but the government won't kill all the high power (ie high emission engines). It is against capitalism. That being said, it may (and I think it does) require that the the range of cars has to meet certain (average) mpg. I simply think that BMW is giving up on this. They wanna make more money. Which is fine, it is their company. I will just take my business else where in the future. The Ferrari 458 vs 430 is the best example out there. If a company wants to make a more powerful AND more efficient engine, they can make it.

And with all due respect, BMW is the biggest hypocrite here. They talk about efficieny, and only bring 335d here. Really? Wtf happened to 316d, 318d, 320d, and 325d?

Good post. From what I know this is correct: BMW has to meet a "fleet average consumption" (or emission). With the percentage of M3s (or M3s and M5s for that matter) being so small compared to all other BMWs, along with the decisions from other manufacturers to keep NA or a NA line, I am tending toward the belief that this is all about profit not "big bad governments". I am going to run some numbers to try to see how much M3 mpg affects the entire fleet. I am on vacation though so not spending much time on the computer...

Let's try to get to the bottom of this! Is BMW being forced (perhaps forced for all practical purposes) or is it nothing but greed... We can't continue to say the former unless it really is the case.

[BMW269]

And if it was about costs, I think it is cheaper to bore, stroke, direct inject, lighten the S65 than make a N55 M worthy, unless they just change N55 ECU, like you can do it at AC Schnitzer and put an M badge "Powered by BMW M".

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Good post. From what I know this is correct: BMW has to meet a "fleet average consumption" (or emission). With the percentage of M3s (or M3s and M5s for that matter) being so small compared to all other BMWs, along with the decisions from other manufacturers to keep NA or a NA line, I am tending toward the belief that this is all about profit not "big bad governments". I am going to run some numbers to try to see how much M3 mpg affects the entire fleet. I am on vacation though so not spending much time on the computer...

Let's try to get to the bottom of this! Is BMW being forced (perhaps forced for all practical purposes) or is it nothing but greed... We can't continue to say the former unless it really is the case.

Get out of here SWAMP, if your wife finds you on here while on vacation, we will never have the pleasure of arguing with you again

In all seriousness, I really think this has more to do with lowering production costs of the ///M line while still maintain the same pricing structure, leading to greatly inflated profit margins.

At the end of the day, BMW has made the active choice to ruin the single most defining part of their company for a few extra bucks. I for one, hope this hurts the company in the lopng run so the idiots who made this decision get booted, but again, do to stupid consumers, it won't

Cheers,
e46e92

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by ruff

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/01/03/f...er-engine-for/

The part that leaves me the most confused is that with the current F1 V8 we are only talking about a displacement of 2.4L. And, according to this older autoblog article:

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/06/r...turbo-in-2013/

The speculation is that the new turbo 4 cylinder would be 1.6L. Now, obviously there are lots of technical details we are not privvy too, but I don't understand why you need to drop four cylinders off to lower the displacement 0.8L. Instead, why not just destroke/debore the V8 to around 1.6L and allow them to turbo charge it. It would probably save tens of millions in development across all of the teams involved.

I suppose part of the idea is to limit RPM by forcing a longer stroke than what is currently in use, but they already artificially limit the RPM to 18000 by the rules anyway. It seems to me this is an effort on the part of F1 to cash in on the green movement because a four cylinder in generally thought of as more fuel efficient than a V8. Indeed the article I point to above even says, "BBC Sport reports that the downsized engine is an attempt to mirror the mills used in road cars and increase consumer awareness of fuel conservation." To me that is ridiculous. Gee maybe they should build the F1 cars from a production body shell now too?

[Erhan]

They should also use Hankook V12 tires. Oh, and no more massive wings. Too much drag.

[scottEdog1]

Well,...reading all of this breaks my heart, after driving the 335s the last thing I want from M is FI!



M DIVISION JUST SAY NO TO FI!
Please stay NA, please, please please....

[B R A N D X®]

Originally Posted by e92_m3

That's the most shocking news in your post. The M3 ALWAYS had the manual transmission as standard. Sucks to see that the new F3x M3 won't be available in manual.

Since there is no manual (6-speed) AMG that I know of, BMW //M division seems to be following Mercedes Benz's footsteps when it comes to transmissions.

Rather than following the Silver Star they may be simply following the profiles of their own customers.

As a manual transmission lover, but a DCT convert for this particular car I actually wouldn't be surprised, disappointed, but not surprised if this is true.

I know from the recent poll conducted on this board that the ownership of the two transmissions is nearly a direct 50:50 split by forum members, but I think we are a small sampling of M3 owners. Most likely folks who don't mod their cars have much less interest in reading the M3 boards.

In my region, at least, the two BMW dealers I spoke with said that roughly 95% of the M3's they sold were DCT equipped.

If even 10% are buying the manual equipped M3's then BMW would have a pretty good case for offering DCT only especially if you make the assumption that more and more M buyers will become DCT believers.

Of course after the release of Porsche's 997.2 Carrera rumors were flying around that Porsche would soon (as in next generation) be phasing out manual transmissions in favor of PDK, but I don't see that happening. Again, in my region, almost all of the left over 2010 Porsche inventory consists of PDK cars.

[BMW269]

M3 E30: 16"
M3 E36: 17"
M3 E46: 18" and even 19"
M3 E9X: 19" and also 18"

M3 F3X: 19" standard, 20" optional ???

Nissan GT-R, Ferrari 458 Italia, Ferrari California, Porsche 911 (991), BMW M5 (F10), Audi RS6, Audi RS5, Opel Insignia OPC, now most all high performance cars are getting 20" rims.

Again max sizes:
1 Series E8X: 18"
3 Series E9X: 19"
5 Series E6X: 19"

So I expect for the next generatio nthe same thing:
1 Series F2X: 19"
3 Series F3X: 20"
5 Series F1X: 20"

So, then if the M3 F3X gets 20" optional and the standard will be 19", will 18" no more be offered, just like the RS5?

[mkoesel]

^^^ Are the F10 M5 wheels 20"? If not, don't expect the M3 to get them either. If they are, then there's probably a good chance for the M3 too.

[Justin(OKC)]

Originally Posted by Levi

M3 E30: 16"
M3 E36: 17"
M3 E46: 18" and even 19"
M3 E9X: 19" and also 18"

M3 F3X: 19" standard, 20" optional ???

Nissan GT-R, Ferrari 458 Italia, Ferrari California, Porsche 911 (991), BMW M5 (F10), Audi RS6, Audi RS5, Opel Insignia OPC, now most all high performance cars are getting 20" rims.

Again max sizes:
1 Series E8X: 18"
3 Series E9X: 19"
5 Series E6X: 19"

So I expect for the next generatio nthe same thing:
1 Series F2X: 19"
3 Series F3X: 20"
5 Series F1X: 20"

So, then if the M3 F3X gets 20" optional and the standard will be 19", will 18" no more be offered, just like the RS5?

Just a slight correction:

M3 E30: 15"

[piloto]

Originally Posted by B R A N D X®

Rather than following the Silver Star they may be simply following the profiles of their own customers.

As a manual transmission lover, but a DCT convert for this particular car I actually wouldn't be surprised, disappointed, but not surprised if this is true.

And this is why I ordered mine with a 6MT. I love the DCT (BMW programmed it right and made it sporty, unlike VW did with the DSG where they tried to have it mimmick a slushbox auto), but I have a hunch that the next time around, I won't have the choice, so 6MT it is for now.

I do wish that all manufacturers will keep offering manuals, but a trip to any showroom will prove that almost all are available in auto. You'd be hard pressed to find 6MT M3s on the lot here in socal. I've only run across two, out of the dozens that I've seen.

[BMW269]

New

[PKL]

Originally Posted by Levi

New

Is this for real???

[Erhan]

Originally Posted by PKL

Is this for real???

Probably not. He keeps putting some numbers in every thread for imaginary cars

[w00tw00t]

i know it will never happen but wouldn't it be amazing if they put the new M5 TT V8 into the new M3!!