BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > M3 (E90 / E92 / E93) > General M3 Forum (E90 + E92 + E93)
 
E92 Lighting
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      09-10-2009, 12:42 PM   #265
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,842
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by elp_jc View Post
I can't see BMW going to a V6, and AUTOMOBILE magazine couldn't have said it better: 'Rumor has it BMW is also toying with a twin-turbo V6, which would be lighter and more compact, but those advantages are unlikely to offset shortcomings concerning prestige and heritage'.
I agree. We should find out soon enough .
Ideally this is true, however BMW may be forced into the V6 due to packaging advantages. Of course, that is for a V6 vs. an I6. For a V6 vs. a V8, especially a smaller V8, there would be no real packaging advantage. And for that matter a small V8 would make the turbo plumbing easier with respect to footies comments above. Too bad that's not in the plan. Makes me wonder if BMW are mostly concerned with the message a V8 in the bread-and-butter M car will send as they are increasingly trumpeting the efficient dynamics green message.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBlue371 View Post
What makes you think it means a low redline?
I covered that in an earlier post. I am skeptical that they are developing high revving engines.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 01:05 PM   #266
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

The M3-phile's mantra has always been NA motors with high rev lines equals the pinnacle of motor engineering and development. These same files also considered turbos and V6's the antithesis to everything the M Division stood for. Don't Buy that argument? Just read comments from these same philes on this forum dating back say a year or more. If I remember right, the GT-R is burdened by one of those lame V6's with turbos cheaply bolted to it. I find it fascinating how many of these so called philes now present the exact opposite argument favoring FI and V6s.

Which leads us not to the question of whether FI and the new technology surrounding it is the right choice for the next M3, but whether these so called M3-philes are motivated more by a flashy M badge for adoring eyes than concern over the character of the motor hidden beneath the hood.
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 01:14 PM   #267
elp_jc
Brigadier General
United_States
80
Rep
4,910
Posts

 
Drives: .
Join Date: May 2008
Location: .

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
For a V6 vs. a V8, especially a smaller V8, there would be no real packaging advantage. And for that matter a small V8 would make the turbo plumbing easier with respect to footies comments above. Too bad that's not in the plan. .
There will never be a turbo V8 M3 (IMO) for a simple reason: COST. Plus I doubt BMW would EVER put the same engine architecture on the M3 than M5/M6s, even if smaller and less powerful.

We were damn lucky to get a NA V8. I bet our V8 is one of the most expensive, compact, and better built around, including exotics . I'd never accept swapping my S65 for an F430 engine, even if it was for free. I want it to last more than 50K miles .
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 01:22 PM   #268
southlight
Moderator / European Editor
southlight's Avatar
607
Rep
6,748
Posts

 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
Agreed but as a FI engine it's bloody good, my point was more to show that FI isn't the devil when it comes to hi-performance cars as so many here believe.
Fair enough. Additionally, Audi has the advantage that their heritage doesn't contravene high performance turbo engines...


Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
I'm sure BMW have already thought this one out.

Best not bother South or you'll need a couple of painkillers and a damp towel to rap around your head.
You're right, why should I bother about these things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBlue371 View Post
What makes you think it means a low redline?
BMW used to have quite some problems with the 7,000 rpm redline in the N54. That doesn't mean these problems still do exist, but it does say that it's not as easy as raising the limiter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBlue371 View Post
The article which started this whole thing talks about a high redline, and if you look at some of the recently built turbo engines (McLaren for instance. ) they have a high redline.
Speaking of the McLaren, do we know if that engine has DI?


Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
The M3-phile's mantra has always been NA motors with high rev lines equals the pinnacle of motor engineering and development. These same files also considered turbos and V6's the antithesis to everything the M Division stood for. Don't Buy that argument? Just read comments from these same philes on this forum dating back say a year or more. If I remember right, the GT-R is burdened by one of those lame V6's with turbos cheaply bolted to it. I find it fascinating how many of these so called philes now present the exact opposite argument favoring FI and V6s.
As far as I'm concerned, this has more to do with making the best out of it than with anything else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
Which leads us not to the question of whether FI and the new technology surrounding it is the right choice for the next M3, but whether these so called M3-philes are motivated more by a flashy M badge for adoring eyes than concern over the character of the motor hidden beneath the hood.
The shoe doesn't fit. Ever heard of the factory debadge option available in Europe?


Best regards,
south
__________________
Those forums...WHY NOT?


JOIN THE 6MT CLUB GROUP
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 01:31 PM   #269
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by elp_jc View Post
There will never be a turbo V8 M3 (IMO) for a simple reason: COST. Plus I doubt BMW would EVER put the same engine architecture on the M3 than M5/M6s, even if smaller and less powerful.

We were damn lucky to get a NA V8. I bet our V8 is one of the most expensive, compact, and better built around, including exotics . I'd never accept swapping my S65 for an F430 engine, even if it was for free. I want it to last more than 50K miles .
You do love your BMW. The 4.3 litre flat plane V8 is the epitome of sonic and performance perfection.
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 01:34 PM   #270
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,842
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by elp_jc View Post
There will never be a turbo V8 M3 (IMO) for a simple reason: COST.
Well, I'm not sure that a turbo V8 will be less costly to develop than a turbo V6 though. After all, the V6 will require a new engine altogether. BMW already has V8s.

Quote:
Plus I doubt BMW would EVER put the same engine architecture on the M3 than M5/M6s, even if smaller and less powerful.
Probably not, unfortunately. However, speaking of costs, sharing the same basic engine between multiple cars is a good way to cut down on them.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 01:45 PM   #271
elp_jc
Brigadier General
United_States
80
Rep
4,910
Posts

 
Drives: .
Join Date: May 2008
Location: .

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
The 4.3 litre flat plane V8 is the epitome of sonic and performance perfection.
First, I don't 'love' any car or thing, and have never nor will ever be 'brand loyal' to anything, to set the record straight.
And no, Ferrari is far from 'sonic' perfection to me; I hate that exhaust note (and yes, I know I'm in the minority here ). And there's nothing perfect; even the much improved 458 won't be perfect , but as far as having better comparable performance than the S65, it obviously does. BUT talking about performance while disregarding longevity is not acceptable to me, and THAT's what Ferrari still has to prove. And that's the reason I prefer my S65; there's a balance for everything.
Ferrari is not the best car for the money by a long shot, period. Most people buy it for its 'status'. People without ego problems () would never pay tens of thousands above MSRP, and that includes multimillionaires like Jay Leno. If I had the means, I'd add a GT3 and an R8 V8 to my garage (hate how V10s sound too ), that's it (plus a few motorcycles , but those are cheap by comparison). That'd give me one of each: FF (DD), FR, MR, and RR. Good day.

Last edited by elp_jc; 09-10-2009 at 07:49 PM.
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 01:46 PM   #272
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by elp_jc View Post
Not the sound, at least to me (and yes, I know I'm in the minority here ). And there's nothing perfect; even the much improved 458 won't be perfect , but as far as having better comparable performance than the S65, it obviously do. BUT almost any automaker could make a very powerful engine if you disregard longevity, and THAT's what Ferrari still has to prove. And that's the reason I prefer my S65.
Ferrari is not the best car for the money by a long shot, period. Most people buy it for its 'status'. People without ego problems () would never pay tens of thousands above MSRP, and that includes multimillionaires like Jay Leno.
You are awfully smiley.
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 08:22 PM   #273
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
The M3-phile's mantra has always been NA motors with high rev lines equals the pinnacle of motor engineering and development. These same files also considered turbos and V6's the antithesis to everything the M Division stood for. Don't Buy that argument? Just read comments from these same philes on this forum dating back say a year or more. If I remember right, the GT-R is burdened by one of those lame V6's with turbos cheaply bolted to it. I find it fascinating how many of these so called philes now present the exact opposite argument favoring FI and V6s.

Which leads us not to the question of whether FI and the new technology surrounding it is the right choice for the next M3, but whether these so called M3-philes are motivated more by a flashy M badge for adoring eyes than concern over the character of the motor hidden beneath the hood.
There is pretty major hyperbole here. I do not counter with a point that BMW and especially M fanboy-ism doesn't exist. However, to say that M3 and NA engine fans have anywhere claimed the GT-R is burdened with a lame V6 with turbos cheaply bolted to it is absurd. No one ever went that far on this forum.

I think it pretty simple - I like, and I know others do as well, crisp, immediate throttle response. This is a good attribute for feeling/excitement and performance. It is a good reason to be a M fan. Similarly I think serious M3 fans hope and even expect that BMW will be able to maintain some reasonable semblance of quick throttle response in the FI M3.

The massive exaggeration which makes everyone out to be a blind (or uninformed) fanboy always tires me. You can do much better Ruff.
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 10:07 PM   #274
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
There is pretty major hyperbole here. I do not counter with a point that BMW and especially M fanboy-ism doesn't exist. However, to say that M3 and NA engine fans have anywhere claimed the GT-R is burdened with a lame V6 with turbos cheaply bolted to it is absurd. No one ever went that far on this forum.

I think it pretty simple - I like, and I know others do as well, crisp, immediate throttle response. This is a good attribute for feeling/excitement and performance. It is a good reason to be a M fan. Similarly I think serious M3 fans hope and even expect that BMW will be able to maintain some reasonable semblance of quick throttle response in the FI M3.

The massive exaggeration which makes everyone out to be a blind (or uninformed) fanboy always tires me. You can do much better Ruff.
The only massive exaggeration here is your own use of those words.

You conveniently forget that not so long ago, you were stalwart in your defense of of M3's NA motor over the GT-Rs turbo fest. You were thee biggest critic of the GT-R on the forum and continued to try and minimize it's world class turbo-ed performance numbers, despite the facts. You hammered the 335 fanboys for the N54's low red line and lack of throttle response in comparison to the S65. Am I correct in stating that the N54 was developed by the very same company that will build the next M3?

Never thought I would see the day when Swamp would hang up his jacket and argue in support of a V6 turbo charged M3. Surprising transformation my friend.
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 10:47 PM   #275
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBlue371 View Post
''Purists dont take turbo's" well purists don't drive 3800lb sports cars either.
Correct. Mine weighs 2,976 lbs. How about yours?
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 11:12 PM   #276
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBlue371 View Post
An Accord doesn't quite count.
Why not? Sounds a bit snobby.

Besides, a little do diligence on your part would confirm that a 91 Accord is not that porky.
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 11:22 PM   #277
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBlue371 View Post
No snob, but an Accord is hardly a sports car.
Does Porsche make sports cars?
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 11:30 PM   #278
AMOCHOSTO
Major
AMOCHOSTO's Avatar
Canada
16
Rep
1,007
Posts

 
Drives: IB BB E90 M3
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Toronto.

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by elp_jc View Post
First, I don't 'love' any car or thing, and have never nor will ever be 'brand loyal' to anything, to set the record straight.
And no, Ferrari is far from 'sonic' perfection to me; I hate that exhaust note (and yes, I know I'm in the minority here ). And there's nothing perfect; even the much improved 458 won't be perfect , but as far as having better comparable performance than the S65, it obviously does. BUT talking about performance while disregarding longevity is not acceptable to me, and THAT's what Ferrari still has to prove. And that's the reason I prefer my S65; there's a balance for everything.
Ferrari is not the best car for the money by a long shot, period. Most people buy it for its 'status'. People without ego problems () would never pay tens of thousands above MSRP, and that includes multimillionaires like Jay Leno. If I had the means, I'd add a GT3 and an R8 V8 to my garage (hate how V10s sound too ), that's it (plus a few motorcycles , but those are cheap by comparison). That'd give me one of each: FF (DD), FR, MR, and RR. Good day.
I'm not trying to debate wether or not I have an ego problem or not, but I'll buy a Ferrari one day when/if I can ever afford one.

Ferrari has been my favorite car company and my favorite F1 team since I was 10 and earning a Ferrari is one of my life's goals.

The M3 has a sweet sounding engine for sure, but for me Ferrari V12s and the Lambo V10 and 12s are the shizzle!
__________________
E90 Interlagos Blue, (Winter Beater) Bamboo Beige, M-Drive, EDC, PDC, USB 6MT.
Mods to date; Curb rash, Scraped front spoiler, Installed RAC Monolite RG63 Silver
1984 Porsche 911 Carrera Coupe (ROW)

Appreciate 0
      09-10-2009, 11:38 PM   #279
SlammedR8
Brigadier General
SlammedR8's Avatar
Canada
121
Rep
4,937
Posts

 
Drives: 2010 Audi R8 V10 +2013 Audi S4
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (2)

Send a message via MSN to SlammedR8
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
Does Porsche make sports cars?
I would love to see where you are taking this, so Ill bite the bullet on this one,


Yes, Porsche does make sports car ?


(whats the point of this question )
__________________
2010 Audi R8 V10 Coupe 6MT-White on Red
GMG Exhaust | H&R Springs | H&R Spacers | Carbonio Intake | UniTronic ECU Upgrade| 15% Tints/50% Windshield|LED License Plate
2013 Range Rover Sport-Black on Black
Stock with 15% Tint & 50% Windshield
Appreciate 0
      09-11-2009, 12:19 AM   #280
aus
Major General
118
Rep
7,419
Posts

 
Drives: Odysse
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Seal Beach, CA

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by slammedm3 View Post
I would love to see where you are taking this, so Ill bite the bullet on this one,


Yes, Porsche does make sports car ?


(whats the point of this question )
__________________
Let me get this straight... You are swapping out parts designed by some of the top engineers in the world because some guys sponsored by a company told you it's "better??" But when you ask the same guy about tracking, "oh no, I have a kid now" or "I just detailed my car." or "i just got new tires."
Appreciate 0
      09-11-2009, 12:25 AM   #281
spicoli024
Lieutenant
spicoli024's Avatar
United_States
5
Rep
405
Posts

 
Drives: '06 ZCP M3
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Houston, TX

iTrader: (0)

Jesus ruff, what the hell are you talking about, really?
__________________
///M3
Appreciate 0
      09-11-2009, 02:37 AM   #282
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
The only massive exaggeration here is your own use of those words.

You conveniently forget that not so long ago, you were stalwart in your defense of of M3's NA motor over the GT-Rs turbo fest. You were thee biggest critic of the GT-R on the forum and continued to try and minimize it's world class turbo-ed performance numbers, despite the facts. You hammered the 335 fanboys for the N54's low red line and lack of throttle response in comparison to the S65. Am I correct in stating that the N54 was developed by the very same company that will build the next M3?

Never thought I would see the day when Swamp would hang up his jacket and argue in support of a V6 turbo charged M3. Surprising transformation my friend.
No, period.

Come on now, this is simply too much. This could not be further from the truth. I never even bothered comparing the GT-R to the M3 from an engine perspective. I have argued that the M3, even price independent is personally a better choice for me. I have also argued vehemently that the GT-R is a technological tour de force. The engine itself is nice, but not nearly as special as the chassis, tranny, AWD and traction control systems. What I have been overtly critical of is Nissans under rating of the GT-R and the lengths to which they went to obtain the N'Ring times they did.

Similarly goes the 335. I have lots of praise for the car. I even briefly considered buying one. The vehement argument I have made here in the forum in comparing the M3 vs the 335i is that you can not spend less than the price difference between the cars on modding the 335i and get a car that will outperform the M3 everywhere. I have complimented the 335i engine by saying BMW did a good job of hiding the turbos and minimizing lag but they certainly have not eliminated it. I do personally prefer the high reving and instant throttle response of the M3s engine over the 335i and over many other FI engines but I never made much of this point at all, neither through repetition nor through vigor.

Last but not least I have never come out in favor nor support of a FI V6 for the M3. I have said I have great confidence in the M division to continue to make wonderful cars, nothing more.

So in short EVERYTHING you have said above is utterly and absolutely false. I directly challenge you to provide any proof of those accusations (and quotes with context, not some silly partial sentence out of context). I'll go so far as to say the accusations above are outright lies. Put up or shut up. Your memory has completely failed you here.

Lastly, I stick to my post calling you on your hyperbole. It's plain for anyone to see.
Appreciate 0
      09-11-2009, 03:11 AM   #283
M3_WC
Colonel
29
Rep
2,242
Posts

 
Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBlue371 View Post
Blah blah, blah blah blah, blah.


Who cares? Its going to happen and the M3 will be a better car because of it. The article (the same ''credible source'' which your basing your entire tantrum on) talks about retaining a high red line, and recent developments have taken throttle response to another level on turbo cars.
Hopefully the M-division can do a turbo M3 that can go more than 5 laps without a limp mode. 335i can be a pain in the ass to track.
Appreciate 0
      09-11-2009, 05:29 AM   #284
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,842
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
Correct. Mine weighs 2,976 lbs. How about yours?
So you finally got the Cayman S? Did you get PDK?

Pics, pics, pics!
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
      09-11-2009, 06:26 AM   #285
footie
Major General
footie's Avatar
No_Country
155
Rep
7,507
Posts

 
Drives: ????????????
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: BMW M3 will get a V6TT

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 M3  [0.00]
I'm with swamp on this one ruff. I have probably debated the GTR with him more than anyone else and I can't recall any negative comments regarding the engine. Maybe a claim that the engines don't produce the quoted figures instead producing more than that but apart from that I can't think of anything.

As for the 335i I honestly don't know, I would say that swamp prefers the throttle response of the M3 and considers that N/A is the only way to go but whether he openly doesn't rate turbo engine is something I haven't read in his posts.

BMW are in a catch 22 with the next M3, do they run with an inline 6 turbo unit which will please those purists that believe no M3 should have a Vee engine knowing that is will be compromised with such a setup or do they build the best turbo engine they can which must be a Vee and to hell what people think, letting the performance speak for itself.
Appreciate 0
      09-11-2009, 07:45 AM   #286
zuggerat89
Still waiting...
zuggerat89's Avatar
United_States
10
Rep
888
Posts

 
Drives: OGV
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Monmouth County, NJ

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
BMW are in a catch 22 with the next M3, do they run with an inline 6 turbo unit which will please those purists that believe no M3 should have a Vee engine knowing that is will be compromised with such a setup or do they build the best turbo engine they can which must be a Vee and to hell what people think, letting the performance speak for itself.
I'm glad I'm not on that engine development team, haha. Tradition means a lot, but so does the advancement of performance. I hate to continually make an example of the same company but Porsche comes to mind immediately.

They have a strict tradition and certain things have come to be expected from them. When they switched from air cooled to water cooled engines people were furious. Lots of Porschphiles say, yeah their cars are good but they just arent the same.

BMW has these same traditions, it's going to be a big huge deal when they break with tradition. Now I think moving from Inlines to V configuration is a way bigger change than simply moving from air to water cooled engines, but still it is the same ideology.

If a porsche isn't a porsche, then what really is it? What would people say if Porsche said, you know what we are done with boxer engines? The same can be said for BMW.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:55 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST