Has M dropped the ball?

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by T Bone

Rock the RS4.....

given the publish spec of the engine, it is going to cream the RS4 in straightline and around a race track....

This friggin Atmospheric engine has the same damn torque curve as a turbo motor....how damn impressive is that?

Assuming they get the gearing right (7 speed hint hint)....the new M3 will be even faster than the E39 M5 which is faster than the RS4....

No worries now.....on the motor side. worried about weight and tranny.

+1. All the skeptics need to relax. Sure the torque PEAK value came up less than I thought for sure (by a little only) but the big surprise for me the that torque curve as well. Massive area under the curve! Torque curve begins a lower rpms and is nice and flat across a HUGE rpm range (amazing because on the face of it it does not seem like the engine is much innovation beyond the M5). However if you scale the M5 torque curve the M3, liter for liter is WAY BETTER . So pleased about the redline as well . This engine breathes at high rpm like an F430!

[esquire]

i don't share your same sense of panic or concern. we should all be thoroughly impressed that the car has that high of a redline, is producing such a flat torque line, and they managed to actually reduce the weight despite adding two cylinders. i'm impressed.

[M3onTwomps]

Originally Posted by 888

Based on engine info and spec, I’m starting to get very nervous about the power on the new M3. I was expecting something out of this world and not just another car to fill the gap between the 335 and M5. I currently drive an M5 and to be quite honest it is a lovely car but compromised. Just the other day I was given a massive lesson by a CLS 63 in a strait line and when we got to the corners he was even faster. I ordered the M3 because of what I was expecting now it looks like I might just have to stick to the M5. The M3 must not just be better than the RS4 it MUST be much better with no debate, that’s what we waited for and expect! Is it possible that M have panicked and dropped the ball because of the RS4?? I hope BMW reads these comments, it took the "others" for ever to catch-up to the E46 now it looks like BMW is playing catch-up. Is it to soon to panic?

Answer to your last question: Yes. Get a grip, man.

[TheDreamer]

Again, these comparisons are moot. Of course you can find an MB faster than a BMW, you can also pay about 100 thousand dollars more for a performance gain that is marginal compared to the price.

MB is for executives or people that like faster straight line acceleration

BMW is the ultimate drivers car.

I believe all your worries shall dissipate the first time you cut through that hairpin turn like a knife cuts through butter.

For the price, its going to be unbeatable as a full package.

[335d coupe]

Look: I really like the new M3. And I lurve the 8400 RPM redline!! BUT. My S54-engined Z4MR (please ignore my forum name - I chopped my 335d coupe in after 2 months for another - my second - Z4MR.....) has 105.6hp/litre. The new M3 has 105hp/litre...... Also, my 3246cc S54 engine has 269lbft (0.083lbft/cc). The new 3999cc M3 has 295lbft (0.074lbft/cc - OR 12% LESS lbft/cc than the S54.....). So where - after over SIX YEARS - is the progress?? All I'm hoping is that - as appears to have been the case with the 335i - BMW are playing the power and torque claims down a bit.

Mike

[uhaulball]

Originally Posted by brandonlowe

Unfortunately , overspeculating runs rampant on boards like this. I cannot wait to hear that engine wailing at 8000rpm +! Yeah, the torque is a little low, but you can't have high revs , high hp, and high torque in this price range.

co6

[ilmor]

Of course, a new model RS4 will be coming out...based on a new A4 design which is being introduced this September. So, the new M3 will need to compete with the new RS4...whatever that will be. M3 needs to raise the bar high. Basically, though...it will still be a BMW M3, and to tell you the truth, 420 HP in a 3 series will be plenty for me!!!

[BevoRules]

Sorry if I have missed it already but has anyone actually heard when will BMW release the specs? if the first ones are indeed going to get rolled out in euroland by sept/oct, then wouldn't they need to release the specs sometime over the next one or two months?

-Hook'em

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by 335d coupe

Look: I really like the new M3. And I lurve the 8400 RPM redline!! BUT. My S54-engined Z4MR (please ignore my forum name - I chopped my 335d coupe in after 2 months for another - my second - Z4MR.....) has 105.6hp/litre. The new M3 has 105hp/litre...... Also, my 3246cc S54 engine has 269lbft (0.083lbft/cc). The new 3999cc M3 has 295lbft (0.074lbft/cc - OR 12% LESS lbft/cc than the S54.....). So where - after over SIX YEARS - is the progress?? All I'm hoping is that - as appears to have been the case with the 335i - BMW are playing the power and torque claims down a bit.

Mike

See the torque curve, it is as flat as a turbo motor.....

This motor is going to haunt Audi, MB, Lexus......

This motor more advanced over the S54 as the S85 is over the S62

[sajakh]

Does anyone find it odd and/or interesting that direct injection technology (more HP/mpg) is not being adopted for this engine? It is obviously in the 335i engine and in the new crop of porsche engines, not to mention the audi rs4.

Doing some more research, did you know the new AMG 6.3L NA engine that Merc is using for everything with AMG in it is 3 kilo LIGHTER than this new engine. Now I don't if they are measured the same (accesories,etc), but it does pose any interesting question . . . 510 hp/469 lbs-ft torque

http://www.ae-plus.com/Technology&#3...AMG%206.3l.htm

Just for comparison, similar detailed site on the new engine.

http://www.worldcarfans.com/print.cf...2.001/lang/eng

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by sajakh

Does anyone find it odd and/or interesting that direct injection technology (more HP/mpg) is not being adopted for this engine? It is obviously in the 335i engine and in the new crop of porsche engines, not to mention the audi rs4.

Doing some more research, did you know the new AMG 6.3L NA engine that Merc is using for everything with AMG in it is 3 kilo LIGHTER than this new engine. Now I don't if they are measured the same (accesories,etc), but it does pose any interesting question . . . 510 hp/469 lbs-ft torque

http://www.ae-plus.com/Technology&#3...AMG%206.3l.htm

Just for comparison, similar detailed site on the new engine.

http://www.worldcarfans.com/print.cf...2.001/lang/eng

The real benchmark is the Chevrolet LS7.....

There are tax penalities for displacement in many countries, this is why BMW is under 4.0L for the V8 and 5.0L for the V10.

But I don't think this is solely driving their decisions.....it is the desire to beat 100 hp / liter benchmark - this shows BMW's engineering talents.

You can hide mediocre engineering with displacement or forced induction. If you give BMW the displacement of the LS7 and AMG motors, we would be in into 600+hp territory.

[Ghost Rider]

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=4998

I think the last paragraph of this Road & Track article sums it up best:

When the next calendar year arrives, if you sense something speeding by you amid a shriek of high engine revs, don't try to chase it. It's not a bird or a plane. It'll be the new M3, and chances are, you're not going to catch it.

[888]

Originally Posted by M3onTwomps

Answer to your last question: Yes. Get a grip, man.

If you have nothing of substance to contribute then rather observe. The idea of these forums is to generate debate and sometimes play devils advocate to keep the manufactures honest. I don’t appreciate your tone especially considering we are fellow M enthusiasts.

[ajj]

c'mon guys..lets try and be a little bit more intelligent about this. it hurts me that eveyone is sooo concerned about the torque peak..again..it seems like a silly "mine is bigger than yours" argument. the torque peak is a lot less important than the actual torque curve.

would you rather have ridiculously high torque for a few seconds/rpms, or good torque throughout your entire rpm range.. swamp is right..one of the flattest torque curves ever seen on a vehicle of this calibre and the BMW M engineers know this. Area under the curve or integral value is high(representing power~ 420 hp), but it looks like they've decided to spread the power out pretty evenly rather than focusing it in one rpm range...a great tactic which will give great accelaration numbers no doubt. sure it won't be as "punchy" or jerky, but believe me it will be fast. i personally prefer the flatter torque curves bc you get the "floating/flying" feeling as you accelerate, rather than the pin you back in your seat feeling...again preference...and there are better cars if you want the latter. peace brothers..can't wait till september!

[888]

from: http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_sh..._m3/index.html

To save you the time to look up that engine's numbers, we'll make those inevitable comparisons for you:

1. Last year we marveled that Audi squeezed 420 horsepower out of only 4.2 liters. BMW has now squeezed the same amount out of only 4.0.

2. Last year we couldn't believe the Audi V-8 revved to 8250 rpm. BMW's dyno chart doesn't stop until 8400.

3. Last year we thought it was amazing that the RS4's power peak was at a lofty 7800 rpm. That seems like peanuts, now - the M3's engine makes peak power at 8300.

4. Last year we all oohed and aahed that the RS4's V-8 makes 90 percent of its peak torque over a 5350-rpm range. (From 2250 to 7600 rpm). Now, BMW's V-8 adds 400 rpm to that already unbelievable spread - it does the same from 2500 to 8250 rpm.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by 888

To save you the time to look up that engine's numbers, we'll make those inevitable comparisons for you:

Good comparo. Although the Audi motor was not as impressive in the absolute sense (to me anyway) as Ferrari's 4.3L V8 was when it came out a few years ago. 490hp and 340ft-lb from 4.3L is nothing short of astonishing for a road going car. Of course, an F430 will cost you 3 RS4's or M3's so in the relative sense we had better expect it will have better engine tech. Hell the engine itself probably cost 60k to replace.

Also, does anyone remember the M3 GTR racecar? Not a street legal car to be sure, but 470hp and (if I recall) over 320ft-lb from a 4L motor is an accomplishment as well. To bad they only built 10 of them homolongated for street use and, in the process castrated the motor to a measely 350hp. Plus that car cost even more than an F430. I can imagine all 10 are stored in climate controlled garages never to see the light of day again.

[ajj]

....at least the guys at automobile know what theyre talking about.

[adamr]

Have to admit audi has really up-ed their game with the RS4 ... i certianly do hope the E9x M3 is better ... it has to be faster than the RS4 and at a competetive price with the RS4 ... around R620k ... difficult one for BMW engineers and marketing to pull off id say ... and if it comes with the CF roof its gonna be over R700k ... and if thats the case, the RS4 at R622k will be a wiser buy ... guess we will just have to wait and see

[888]

Originally Posted by adamr

Have to admit audi has really up-ed their game with the RS4 ... i certianly do hope the E9x M3 is better ... it has to be faster than the RS4 and at a competetive price with the RS4 ... around R620k ... difficult one for BMW engineers and marketing to pull off id say ... and if it comes with the CF roof its gonna be over R700k ... and if thats the case, the RS4 at R622k will be a wiser buy ... guess we will just have to wait and see

My dealer told me that the c/f roof will be std and the s/r with sheet metal roof a no cost option. The M3 will cost around R630k std.

[M3onTwomps]

Originally Posted by 888

If you have nothing of substance to contribute then rather observe. The idea of these forums is to generate debate and sometimes play devils advocate to keep the manufactures honest. I don’t appreciate your tone especially considering we are fellow M enthusiasts.

You asked a question. I answered it.

Yes, it is too early to panic. Cry me a river.

Over-generalization and overreacting are running rampant here. We haven't even seen any performance or pricing numbers.

It's too early to panic. Plain and simple.

I couldn't care less if you don't like my tone. The truth hurts sometimes.

[uhaulball]

M didnt drop the ball, the rest of the opponents just caught up pace with it, some may be even overtaking it.

[Driv3r]

Originally Posted by 888

Based on engine info and spec, I’m starting to get very nervous about the power on the new M3. I was expecting something out of this world and not just another car to fill the gap between the 335 and M5. I currently drive an M5 and to be quite honest it is a lovely car but compromised. Just the other day I was given a massive lesson by a CLS 63 in a strait line and when we got to the corners he was even faster. I ordered the M3 because of what I was expecting now it looks like I might just have to stick to the M5. The M3 must not just be better than the RS4 it MUST be much better with no debate, that’s what we waited for and expect! Is it possible that M have panicked and dropped the ball because of the RS4?? I hope BMW reads these comments, it took the "others" for ever to catch-up to the E46 now it looks like BMW is playing catch-up. Is it to soon to panic?

Damn, you must be a really shitty driver to have a CLS AMG beat you on the twisties....