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)
 
Strasse Wheels
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      06-20-2009, 04:54 AM   #133
bigjae1976
That's what she said...
bigjae1976's Avatar
82
Rep
5,617
Posts

 
Drives: 11 E90 M3 Individual
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Milwaukee, WI

iTrader: (12)

Garage List
2004 BMW M3  [4.50]
2011 BMW E90 M3  [5.00]
2013 BMW 328i  [5.00]
This is where GM > BMW. They have a car with a 430hp V8 that gets 26mpg on the highway without turbochargers.

I just can't imagine the M3 getting down to 3000 lbs. What makes the M3 so popular is the combination of utility and performance. But the M brand is always evolving...I'm still anxiously waiting to see what BMW will come up with!
__________________


Sponsored by Momentum BMW #593...We Bleed BMW BLUE!
Appreciate 0
      06-20-2009, 04:56 AM   #134
MrHarris
yodog
MrHarris's Avatar
United_States
77
Rep
5,037
Posts

 
Drives: '86 Corolla
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Diamond Bar, Ca

iTrader: (5)

Garage List
2009 BMW  [5.00]
Send a message via AIM to MrHarris
F30... sounds like a fighter jet.
__________________

2009 E92 M3 | Alpine White | Black Extended | Advan RS | Turner Test Pipes | Dinan Axle-Back | OETuning | Eibach Springs | UUC SSK | VRS Front Lip | VRS Type I Diffuser | Matte Black | RPi Scoops | MS Filter | Yokohama AD08 | F1 Pinnacle
Special Thanks: Gintani | OETuning | eAs
Appreciate 0
      06-22-2009, 06:44 PM   #135
The CSL
For the love of ///M3
The CSL's Avatar
United Kingdom
7
Rep
660
Posts

 
Drives: Peugeot 306 XSI 16v
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Plymouth, UK

iTrader: (0)

They can do what they like with the aspiration, but a V6 is mental.

So it can be placed further back, but then it also sits wider across the nose and like they said, weighs more than an I6 would, so any benefits are cancelled out. The V6 in my Dad's S-Type is extremely wide, for example.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      06-22-2009, 07:37 PM   #136
Lemans_Blue_M
Automotive Industry Insider
Lemans_Blue_M's Avatar
United_States
19
Rep
1,948
Posts

 
Drives: Lemans Blue M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by The CSL View Post
They can do what they like with the aspiration, but a V6 is mental.

So it can be placed further back, but then it also sits wider across the nose and like they said, weighs more than an I6 would, so any benefits are cancelled out. The V6 in my Dad's S-Type is extremely wide, for example.
It will weigh LESS than a straight six with the same displacement, not more...

That's the primary reason they are considering a V6 in the next generation M3.
__________________
The best is yet to come...
Appreciate 0
      06-22-2009, 08:00 PM   #137
elp_jc
Brigadier General
United_States
79
Rep
4,910
Posts

 
Drives: .
Join Date: May 2008
Location: .

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemans_Blue_M View Post
It will weigh LESS than a straight six with the same displacement, not more...
If that's the case, difference would be awfully close IMO, assuming both configurations are all aluminum. A V6 needs 4 cams, but are shorter than the 2 on an I6. You also need 2 heads vs 1. I think the only reason for a V6 is car needs a shorter nose, saving weight there, but the engines themselves would probably weight the same.

As it was commented, I can't imagine a smaller M3, especially with a shorter hood; it'd look like a Honda Civic . I'm not going to buy the new generation regardless, but am very curious what BMW will do about the next M3. Unfortunately, we're not going to know for a while. Take care.
Appreciate 0
      06-22-2009, 10:43 PM   #138
Lemans_Blue_M
Automotive Industry Insider
Lemans_Blue_M's Avatar
United_States
19
Rep
1,948
Posts

 
Drives: Lemans Blue M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by elp_jc View Post
If that's the case, difference would be awfully close IMO, assuming both configurations are all aluminum. A V6 needs 4 cams, but are shorter than the 2 on an I6. You also need 2 heads vs 1. I think the only reason for a V6 is car needs a shorter nose, saving weight there, but the engines themselves would probably weight the same.

As it was commented, I can't imagine a smaller M3, especially with a shorter hood; it'd look like a Honda Civic . I'm not going to buy the new generation regardless, but am very curious what BMW will do about the next M3. Unfortunately, we're not going to know for a while. Take care.
Actually you can't make a larger (reliable) inline-six engine without adding both hight and length to that type of engine configuration. The adjacent cylinders are simply too close together. If you built the block out of Aluminum (instead of cast iron), the engine would be much larger than the S54B32 engine in the E46 M3. (assuming at least a 3.5-liter displacement engine for durability) That would place even more weight past the plane the front axle. (the worst possible place to add weight) It would then be nearly impossible to maintain the M3's famous 50/50 weight distribution legacy with a larger inline-six cylinder engine. (with cast iron turbos and steel exhaust piping hanging off it)

Not to mention the space constraints on the exhaust manifold side of the motor. I don't think many of you guys understand how difficult it is to twin-turbocharge an inline-six engine with all that exhaust plumbing in such a small area. The 335i is a pain in the arse to work on, because there is virtually no room on the passenger side of the car. Not to mention the weight balance of a 335i would be magnified in an M3 with larger turbos and larger diameter piping to get the same amount of power we have now.

So the weight would be skewed from the passenger side to the driver side, and the front of the car to the rear. Now you are really taxing your engineering resources to balance out the car because of the engine.

That's Not practical nor cost efficient...

The only practical solution...is the V6 engine.

It is the only engine configuration that guarantees you both symmetry and weight balance. (front, rear, left, right)

Another thing...

You guys are always making the same repetitive arguments...

I have owned every M3 since the E30 S14, and these "discussions" always end up the same way...

"If BMW [insert criticism here], I'll never buy another M3"

The 'anti' this or 'anti' that crowd quickly chimes in on how terrible the NEXT generation M3 will be...and that the BMW executives have gone off the deep end. (what a shocker)

I really wish you guys would wise up, and realize that these people work very hard to build us some pretty amazing cars. Take a deep breath, and reserve judgment until the new car is built. A few of you sound like elitist snobs. I mean seriously...take it down a notch before some of you hyperventilate.

BMW has market forces (and government regulations), that simply cannot be avoided. This can push them into becoming more practical, rather than throwing caution to the wind. BMW is going in another direction out of pure necessity. Nothing more, nothing less.

By the way...this is the same stuff I heard in 2004, 2005, and 2006 when rumors leaked out about BMW using a V8 engine in the next generation M3. (look how that turned out)

You should have heard all the b1tching and griping back then...

It looks like history is once again repeating itself...
__________________
The best is yet to come...
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 10:29 AM   #139
e46e92love
Brigadier General
e46e92love's Avatar
United_States
37
Rep
3,059
Posts

 
Drives: e92 ///M3; X3 (wife's)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The East Side of Things

iTrader: (0)

Send a message via AIM to e46e92love
Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek View Post
In the interview of the M-Division chief that I read, he said the car would maintain the same hp-weight ratio, but would be many hundreds of pounds lighter. He made a point to say it would have less power, but would maintain the same hp-weight ratio. The weight loss would be in areas that would matter, and he believed would make it a net performance upgrade from the current M3.
PG,

Do you think the next //M3 will be a low revving FI car or do you think they might find a way to develop a high-revver with FI? If the former, would you buy one? Would really love to hear your .02 on the issue.....

Cheers,
e46e92
__________________

"...it's not about the money and not about the brand of the car, it's about handling,performance and passion......And that, no other car has all together like an M3........when you talk about the most complete car the M is invincible." --Tony Kanaan.
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 10:43 AM   #140
e46e92love
Brigadier General
e46e92love's Avatar
United_States
37
Rep
3,059
Posts

 
Drives: e92 ///M3; X3 (wife's)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The East Side of Things

iTrader: (0)

Send a message via AIM to e46e92love
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemans_Blue_M View Post
BMW has market forces (and government regulations), that simply cannot be avoided. This can push them into becoming more practical, rather than throwing caution to the wind. BMW is going in another direction out of pure necessity. Nothing more, nothing less.

By the way...this is the same stuff I heard in 2004, 2005, and 2006 when rumors leaked out about BMW using a V8 engine in the next generation M3. (look how that turned out)

You should have heard all the b1tching and griping back then...

It looks like history is once again repeating itself...
Goverment regulations? They didn't seem to stop them from producing a //M SUV that is definitely not getting gas mileage that will avoid regulations, nor a new 7-series that now invokes a gas guzzler.

Seriously, don't quote "regulations" as being a reason when little of BMWs actions point in that direction.

Cheers,
e46e92
__________________

"...it's not about the money and not about the brand of the car, it's about handling,performance and passion......And that, no other car has all together like an M3........when you talk about the most complete car the M is invincible." --Tony Kanaan.
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 11:23 AM   #141
Eau Rouge
Captain
Eau Rouge's Avatar
United_States
14
Rep
985
Posts

 
Drives: 2012 E92 M3
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida's Emerald Coast

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2012 BMW E92 M3  [4.50]
Quote:
Originally Posted by e46e92love View Post
Goverment regulations? They didn't seem to stop them from producing a //M SUV that is definitely not getting gas mileage that will avoid regulations, nor a new 7-series that now invokes a gas guzzler.

Seriously, don't quote "regulations" as being a reason when little of BMWs actions point in that direction.

Cheers,
e46e92
He is right about the role of regulations in BMW's decisionmaking. You just chose to overlook the arrival of the 1-Series while instead looking at the relative road hog M/SUV model.

A marque such as BMW is not going to turn its back on a market niches such as the SUV segment or the full size luxury sedan that is hugely profitable. As long as individuals are willing and able to pony up the $$ for the upscale models, a demand and supply driven corporation is going to produce the goods to supply the demand.

One would think that someone in BMW would have a strategic vision that would simultaneously enable the business to comply with the totality of future regulations and keep people like us happy with their offerings. So, in my opinion, with one eye on the inevitable requirement that a manufacturer's product lineup must meet a specific numerical fuel efficiency average, BMW is expanding its lineup of relative fuel misers (think 1-series, diesels, FI) which will create MPG/efficiency room for the company to have production options regarding which relatively ineffecient models it deems most worthy of producing. BTW, no, BMW does not pay me rather I pay them when I purchase their cars.

The red tape that is the body of regulations covering the production of automobiles is massive. Have a look. Frequently, Regulations = Weight Increase, and always equate to production cost increases which means we pay more to get out the door.

http://www.business.gov/industries/automotive/
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 11:26 AM   #142
Eau Rouge
Captain
Eau Rouge's Avatar
United_States
14
Rep
985
Posts

 
Drives: 2012 E92 M3
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida's Emerald Coast

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2012 BMW E92 M3  [4.50]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemans_Blue_M View Post
Actually you can't make a larger (reliable) inline-six engine without adding both hight and length to that type of engine configuration. The adjacent cylinders are simply too close together. If you built the block out of Aluminum (instead of cast iron), the engine would be much larger than the S54B32 engine in the E46 M3. (assuming at least a 3.5-liter displacement engine for durability) That would place even more weight past the plane the front axle. (the worst possible place to add weight) It would then be nearly impossible to maintain the M3's famous 50/50 weight distribution legacy with a larger inline-six cylinder engine. (with cast iron turbos and steel exhaust piping hanging off it)

Not to mention the space constraints on the exhaust manifold side of the motor. I don't think many of you guys understand how difficult it is to twin-turbocharge an inline-six engine with all that exhaust plumbing in such a small area. The 335i is a pain in the arse to work on, because there is virtually no room on the passenger side of the car. Not to mention the weight balance of a 335i would be magnified in an M3 with larger turbos and larger diameter piping to get the same amount of power we have now.

So the weight would be skewed from the passenger side to the driver side, and the front of the car to the rear. Now you are really taxing your engineering resources to balance out the car because of the engine.

That's Not practical nor cost efficient...

The only practical solution...is the V6 engine.

It is the only engine configuration that guarantees you both symmetry and weight balance. (front, rear, left, right)

Another thing...

You guys are always making the same repetitive arguments...

I have owned every M3 since the E30 S14, and these "discussions" always end up the same way...

"If BMW [insert criticism here], I'll never buy another M3"

The 'anti' this or 'anti' that crowd quickly chimes in on how terrible the NEXT generation M3 will be...and that the BMW executives have gone off the deep end. (what a shocker)

I really wish you guys would wise up, and realize that these people work very hard to build us some pretty amazing cars. Take a deep breath, and reserve judgment until the new car is built. A few of you sound like elitist snobs. I mean seriously...take it down a notch before some of you hyperventilate.

BMW has market forces (and government regulations), that simply cannot be avoided. This can push them into becoming more practical, rather than throwing caution to the wind. BMW is going in another direction out of pure necessity. Nothing more, nothing less.

By the way...this is the same stuff I heard in 2004, 2005, and 2006 when rumors leaked out about BMW using a V8 engine in the next generation M3. (look how that turned out)

You should have heard all the b1tching and griping back then...

It looks like history is once again repeating itself...
Indeed!

FWIW, excellent post, am in total agreement.
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 02:19 PM   #143
The CSL
For the love of ///M3
The CSL's Avatar
United Kingdom
7
Rep
660
Posts

 
Drives: Peugeot 306 XSI 16v
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Plymouth, UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemans_Blue_M View Post
It will weigh LESS than a straight six with the same displacement, not more...

That's the primary reason they are considering a V6 in the next generation M3.
The article on page one states BMW's traditional configuration would weigh less.

__________________
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 03:09 PM   #144
Lemans_Blue_M
Automotive Industry Insider
Lemans_Blue_M's Avatar
United_States
19
Rep
1,948
Posts

 
Drives: Lemans Blue M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by The CSL View Post
The article on page one states BMW's traditional configuration would weigh less.

I saw that article and I respectfully disagree with the author's assesment...

I believe a 3.5-liter 'ish' reinforced Inline-six block built for forced induction will be heavier...and here's why...

The 3.0-liter 335i Inline-six block is substantially heavier than the 3.0 liter Inline-six cylinder block for the regular 3-series cars. (while being exactly the same displacement) The 'regular' 3-series 3.0 liter engines use Magnesium to lighten things up...while the 335i block simply CAN'T use this material. (it would never hold up long term) That means you have to use MORE aluminum to get the job done. So while it's lighter, you have to use more material overall to make sure it holds up.

Inline-six engines REQUIRE more substantial build construction (material thickness) to maintain their balance and structural integrity. Cylinder pressures (with close proximity) will likely reach 1800-2000psi at WOT. (under boost) You are risking gasket failure if you don't move the cylinders farther apart.

But in order to do this...you have to make the block wider, longer and taller.(which adds even more weight)

Not to mention the unique coolant passages that need to be designed into the block to dissipate the intense heat generated by forcing copious amounts of compressed air into the engine. The 335i has a history of overheating problems associated with it's ability to cool the engine down. If built out of Aluminum, the new M3 inline-six engine would require more 'shoring up' than an All-Aluminum 90 degree V6 (wedge) engine of the same displacement. This is due to the advantageous layout of the six individual cylinders.

N/A might be a different story...

Regardless, the weight of an Inline-six engine + the turbocharged components will = weight in all the wrong places.

The reason BMW choose a heavier CAST IRON block for the 3.2liter S54B32, is because it could be made more compact.

So they went with it, even though it was heavier than building it out of Aluminum. The Aluminum block would have caused the design of the car to change. (longer and taller than they wanted) The weight balance of the car would have suffered as a result.
__________________
The best is yet to come...
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 03:27 PM   #145
mav
Private
mav's Avatar
United_States
2
Rep
63
Posts

 
Drives: M Coupe, A4
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles, Miami

iTrader: (0)

Thanks to government regulations and environmentalists, BMW will be going backwards with their next generation M cars. Thankfully the next gen M3 won't be here for another 3 to 4 years. Enjoy your M cars now while you can.
__________________
2007 BMW Z4 M Coupé E86
2010 Audi A4 Saloon B8
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 03:54 PM   #146
BMW M Power Mexico
Second Lieutenant
BMW M Power Mexico's Avatar
Mexico
11
Rep
221
Posts

 
Drives: '05 E46 M3, '08 E60 M5, '11 1M
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: South

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemans_Blue_M View Post
It looks like history is once again repeating itself...
Thanks for a great well-reasoned post. I mostly agree with you about waiting to see what BMW ends up delivering.

The aspect that worries me most is keeping the linear torque and world-class throttle response that makes current & previous M cars such a joy to drive, especially on the track. I track my cars and believe that no other car is a better all-arounder than an M3.

An important part of that greatness is the engine which works wonders at the track. You can very finely control instantly the amount of power the car is putting to the ground. The engine responds to inputs in a linear - excellent - immediate - way.

No turbo I have ever driven comes close in this regard. New "low lag" designs are an improvement but still far from the throttle response of an M engine.

I've driven the 335i, 135i, X6 3.5i, new TT 750i and also Audis with VAGs 2.0 liter TT motor. All nice but definitely a step behind an M engine in this regard.

Throttle response and linear power delivery is my main concern. I don't care that much if they decide to go to a V6 for packaging reasons. If M loses these qualities they might push me into a P-car. I hope they can pull it off as I love the brand.
__________________
BMW Car Club de México
¡Estás Invitado!
http://bmwclub.org.mx
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 05:29 PM   #147
elp_jc
Brigadier General
United_States
79
Rep
4,910
Posts

 
Drives: .
Join Date: May 2008
Location: .

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemans_Blue_M View Post
Take a deep breath, and reserve judgment until the new car is built. A few of you sound like elitist snobs. I mean seriously...take it down a notch before some of you hyperventilate.
You need to follow your own advice man . At least in my case, I'll never buy a FI car, be it a BMW, Porsche, or whatever else. Nothing elitist about that; just personal preference.

As far as an all-aluminum I6 having to be larger than the S54 iron block, you're absolutely correct. And I also agree it'd be simply too large, so by process of elimination, seems like the V6 rumor will be true indeed. Later.
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 05:49 PM   #148
Advevo
Captain
47
Rep
914
Posts

 
Drives: White 1M
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Country where the taxes are too high!!

iTrader: (0)

Bmw mexico

exactly my thoughts couldn t agree more.

I have driven lots of turbo s even on trackdays. All overheating and turbo s broke down, turbo lag etc etc.

I love the ///M brand because of there engine s and throttle response and nice balance of the car. Only the weight of the car is the negative part.

But if they go turbo and the throttle response isn t like it is now. I buy a me a GT3. That s not because i am a big fan of porsche but for me it s the only solution then.

Let s just hope they build just one high rev ///M atmo engine for us trackday enthusiasts. And all the big ///M trucks can have those turbo s.
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 06:32 PM   #149
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,838
Posts

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

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemans_Blue_M View Post
The only practical solution...is the V6 engine.

It is the only engine configuration that guarantees you both symmetry and weight balance. (front, rear, left, right)
If you want 6 cylinders, the yes. Or an H6 I suppose (which is basically a 180 degree V6).

But what's wrong with a V8? If they want less displacement, that's fine then they can just debore and/or destroke it.
__________________
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
      06-23-2009, 06:39 PM   #150
e46e92love
Brigadier General
e46e92love's Avatar
United_States
37
Rep
3,059
Posts

 
Drives: e92 ///M3; X3 (wife's)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The East Side of Things

iTrader: (0)

Send a message via AIM to e46e92love
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eau Rouge View Post
He is right about the role of regulations in BMW's decisionmaking. You just chose to overlook the arrival of the 1-Series while instead looking at the relative road hog M/SUV model.
I doubt BMW released the 1-series here in the U.S. because of regulations; I would think it was to meet perceived (and now we know actual) demand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMW M Power Mexico View Post
Thanks for a great well-reasoned post. I mostly agree with you about waiting to see what BMW ends up delivering.

The aspect that worries me most is keeping the linear torque and world-class throttle response that makes current & previous M cars such a joy to drive, especially on the track. I track my cars and believe that no other car is a better all-arounder than an M3.

An important part of that greatness is the engine which works wonders at the track. You can very finely control instantly the amount of power the car is putting to the ground. The engine responds to inputs in a linear - excellent - immediate - way.

No turbo I have ever driven comes close in this regard. New "low lag" designs are an improvement but still far from the throttle response of an M engine.

I've driven the 335i, 135i, X6 3.5i, new TT 750i and also Audis with VAGs 2.0 liter TT motor. All nice but definitely a step behind an M engine in this regard.

Throttle response and linear power delivery is my main concern. I don't care that much if they decide to go to a V6 for packaging reasons. If M loses these qualities they might push me into a P-car. I hope they can pull it off as I love the brand.
+1

Cheers,
e46e92
__________________

"...it's not about the money and not about the brand of the car, it's about handling,performance and passion......And that, no other car has all together like an M3........when you talk about the most complete car the M is invincible." --Tony Kanaan.
Appreciate 0
      06-23-2009, 08:59 PM   #151
Eau Rouge
Captain
Eau Rouge's Avatar
United_States
14
Rep
985
Posts

 
Drives: 2012 E92 M3
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida's Emerald Coast

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2012 BMW E92 M3  [4.50]
Quote:
Originally Posted by e46e92love View Post
I doubt BMW released the 1-series here in the U.S. because of regulations; I would think it was to meet perceived (and now we know actual) demand.


Cheers,
e46e92
"Kill two with one stone" goes the old adage.
Appreciate 0
      08-26-2009, 11:39 AM   #152
335lvr
Major
335lvr's Avatar
United_States
15
Rep
1,441
Posts

 
Drives: E92
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: California

iTrader: (4)

Any more info on this? I thought for sure they'd go twin turbo V8, why re-tool a whole new engine. Is there that much weight savings?
__________________
"I'm not sure what the price difference is, but the BMW feels $15,000 better." -Edmunds, 2007
Appreciate 0
      08-26-2009, 11:57 AM   #153
GregW / Oregon
Commander-In-Chief
United_States
136
Rep
7,640
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 M4 Coupe, 2012 ML350
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Lake Oswego, OR

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by 335lvr View Post
Any more info on this? I thought for sure they'd go twin turbo V8, why re-tool a whole new engine. Is there that much weight savings?
I doubt there will be anything but rumors for some time. The main advantage of the six is fuel economy,not weight.
__________________

Greg Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA
2015 M4 Coupe - Silverstone/Sakhir/CF
2012 ML350
Appreciate 0
      08-26-2009, 01:03 PM   #154
drivendriver
Second Lieutenant
drivendriver's Avatar
2
Rep
269
Posts

 
Drives: 2010 E83 X3
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Alexandria, VA

iTrader: (0)

Read the latest issue of EVO (latest for the US--probably last month's issue for the UK). There's an article at the end about BMW's future plans. It covers the eco-friendly sports car concept and other things. They seem very confident that the next M3 will have a twin-turbo V6. Or was it a twin-turbo I6? I can't remember now, haha. I only read the article very quickly at Barnes & Noble. Somebody should check it out.
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 05:53 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