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)
 
BPM Sport
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      01-02-2011, 10:17 AM   #287
e46e92love
Brigadier General
 
e46e92love's Avatar
 
Drives: e92 ///M3; X3 (wife's)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The East Side of Things

Posts: 3,037
iTrader: (0)

Send a message via AIM to e46e92love
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eau Rouge View Post
For M Philosophy see below




Close, but no cigar for you.



M Philosophy defined (See starting @ 16s)..."M Philosophy is to basically take a production car with all the utility, amenities of a production car, and add to this the performance of a real sports car; almost a race car."


From the same video starting at 5:08 on what M Division wants to deliver to the M driver...and how to bore M drivers...which is where some of us are coming from since everyone else (i.e. the competition) is already doing what M now appears to be prepared to do (i.e. turbocharge ).
That video is the posterchild for what I have been saying forever in mutliple threads. LISTEN TO WHAT THEY ARE SAYING!!!! They are talking about low inertia, high revving engines........that does not describe the N54 which they have "tuned" and palced in the 1M, and it certainly doesn't appear to describe the "rumored" FI I6 coming out for the next Gen ///M3.

Also, note the date of that video.......it was created sometime since the e92 ///M was released, so its not like this is some old philosophy from 20 years ago.

I love how they focus on how the ///M Division is separate from the rest of BMW....BS!!! If it was truly independent it wouldn't be turning out the engines they have (current SAV ///Ms and upcoming ///M5) been....

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.
e46e92love is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-02-2011, 10:30 PM   #288
Pete_vB
Captain
 
Pete_vB's Avatar
 
Drives: '69 GT3, 1M, 912, R32
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, Shenzhen, Oman

Posts: 810
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Levi View Post


The rumoured M3 F32 with FI I6 is a car that would not continue the legend of the M3. It would start a new legend, a very short one.

Going from NA 4.0l V8, 8.400 rpm redline to FI 3.0l/3.5l I6, 7.000 rpm redline is not continuing the legend. Continuing the legend would be a NA 4.5l V8, 9.000 rpm redline.
Nice graphic, but I can't agree with the point. This is like something from Spinal Tap: "But these go to 11... I mean 8300 rpm".
The S2000 motor revs to 9000 RPM, is that better? Or buy a Yamaha that revs to 16,000+...

It's painfully easy to make numbers on a dial- give it a big bore to stroke ratio and voila, you're there. That 9000 rpm V8 you want (100 hp per liter)- they could have done that 15 years ago with one eye closed (95mm bore, 80 mm stroke, done).

Designing a motor that's compact, powerful, responsive and efficient? That's a worthy challenge.

These are the boys that built the motor you love half a decade back, and one assumes they might have learned a little something since then. Maybe give them a little credit.

The mark of true genius is doing things other think are impossible... Let's see what they come up with.
__________________
1M, 1969 Porsche 911 w/ 997 GT3 Cup Motor (435hp & 2,100 lbs)
Pete_vB is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-02-2011, 11:20 PM   #289
malter2.0
Banned
 
Drives: em-funf
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SF Bay Area

Posts: 908
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
SAY NO TO FI!
malter2.0 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-02-2011, 11:50 PM   #290
Erhan
Colonel
 
Erhan's Avatar
 
Drives: Cooper S
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle

Posts: 2,466
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e46e92love View Post
Also, note the date of that video.......it was created sometime since the e92 ///M was released, so its not like this is some old philosophy from 20 years ago.
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..


btw, I agree with you. I'm all in for NA motors.
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan
Erhan is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-02-2011, 11:54 PM   #291
Erhan
Colonel
 
Erhan's Avatar
 
Drives: Cooper S
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle

Posts: 2,466
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete_vB View Post
The S2000 motor revs to 9000 RPM, is that better? Or buy a Yamaha that revs to 16,000+...

It's painfully easy to make numbers on a dial- give it a big bore to stroke ratio and voila, you're there. That 9000 rpm V8 you want (100 hp per liter)- they could have done that 15 years ago with one eye closed (95mm bore, 80 mm stroke, done).

Designing a motor that's compact, powerful, responsive and efficient? That's a worthy challenge.
I don't think he means "let's make it 9k rpm, we don't care what ever the cost is". AFAIK, the point of M engines are they're high revving AND have flat torque curve AND as a result have their max power at (or close to) red line AND they're not terribly inefficient. So when we say next engine should be 9k rpm (or something more than 8.4k rpm) that doesn't mean make it no torque at the low end and have a 10mpg on the freeway...
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan
Erhan is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-02-2011, 11:58 PM   #292
swamp2
Lieutenant General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 10,138
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eau Rouge View Post
Swamp, yes, NA has never been advertised as M Philosophy per se. OTOH, neither has 100bhp/liter. Both aspects greatly lend themselves to promoting the notion that a given motor is special; race car special. However, in practice, M Division has made NA a constant to its motor building program, and if that's all there has been to date for the M3, it makes it a little difficult to attempt to argue that NA has never been part of M Philosophy in practice.


For M Philosophy see below




Close, but no cigar for you.



M Philosophy defined (See starting @ 16s)..."M Philosophy is to basically take a production car with all the utility, amenities of a production car, and add to this the performance of a real sports car; almost a race car."


From the same video starting at 5:08 on what M Division wants to deliver to the M driver...and how to bore M drivers...which is where some of us are coming from since everyone else (i.e. the competition) is already doing what M now appears to be prepared to do (i.e. turbocharge ).
Quote:
Originally Posted by e46e92love View Post
That video is the posterchild for what I have been saying forever in mutliple threads. LISTEN TO WHAT THEY ARE SAYING!!!! They are talking about low inertia, high revving engines........that does not describe the N54 which they have "tuned" and palced in the 1M, and it certainly doesn't appear to describe the "rumored" FI I6 coming out for the next Gen ///M3.

Also, note the date of that video.......it was created sometime since the e92 ///M was released, so its not like this is some old philosophy from 20 years ago.

I love how they focus on how the ///M Division is separate from the rest of BMW....BS!!! If it was truly independent it wouldn't be turning out the engines they have (current SAV ///Ms and upcoming ///M5) been....

Cheers,
e46e92
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

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.

On your specs though Levi, you are simply dreaming. You're fully aware of that right?

Ruff: You should have described that post. I almost did not click on it. Very interesting. Makes an empirical point that engine downsizing is not actually delivering real world fuel efficiency gains. It is worth noting though that in some cases the EPA figures are definitely improved. As much as it is unfortunate, the EPA ratings are what matter for meeting US regulations.

This leads to the question...

We've all said it, and everyone seems to know it, but is it true? "M is going FI due to government regulation".

Is the volume of M vehicles high enough (or perhaps it is soon going to be high enough) that BMW would be substantially hurt purely from tariffs/penalties/etc. associated with continuing to produce high EPA/EU fuel efficiency vehicles (specifically slight improvements of existing NA M engines perhaps by adding DI)? Companies like Porsche, Ferrari and Lamborghini continue to produce all or some models that have low efficiency. Of course I am not saying you can make many direct comparisons there in terms of price, volumes nor the cars themselves but those companies are certainly mostly ignoring the need for big changes in emissions or efficiency. That being said even these folks are working on efficiency. Despite more power and more weight the new 458 Italia is more fuel efficient than the F430.

I'm keenly interested to know if BMW really "has" to go FI or perhaps the changes have as much to do with saving money on engines as they do on "big bad governments" with too much regulation. This might take some really detailed knowledge about US and EU legislation on fuel efficiency and carbon emissions specifically targeted at the automobile industry.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK |
| Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors |
| Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels |
| XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit |
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 12:21 AM   #293
Erhan
Colonel
 
Erhan's Avatar
 
Drives: Cooper S
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle

Posts: 2,466
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
I'm keenly interested to know if BMW really "has" to go FI or perhaps the changes have as much to do with saving money on engines as they do on "big bad governments" with too much regulation. This might take some really detailed knowledge about US and EU legislation on fuel efficiency and carbon emissions specifically targeted at the automobile industry.
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?
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan
Erhan is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 01:40 AM   #294
Pete_vB
Captain
 
Pete_vB's Avatar
 
Drives: '69 GT3, 1M, 912, R32
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, Shenzhen, Oman

Posts: 810
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by erhanh View Post
I don't think he means "let's make it 9k rpm, we don't care what ever the cost is". AFAIK, the point of M engines are they're high revving AND have flat torque curve AND as a result have their max power at (or close to) red line AND they're not terribly inefficient. So when we say next engine should be 9k rpm (or something more than 8.4k rpm) that doesn't mean make it no torque at the low end and have a 10mpg on the freeway...
Again, all of the above is easy and cheap; you're simply roughly doubling the motor honda made 10+ years ago with the S2000, or increasing the bore and reducing the stoke of the V8 M3. No peaks, not terrible fuel economy, etc- all well understood. And from a technical point of view pretty boring.

What's tricky, and what's out of the experience base of most here, is an appreciation of efficiency and brake specific fuel consumption. I've attached a map of a turbo diesel motor; this is basically a map of how much power a motor produces for a given amount of fuel, with lower numbers (grey) being better.

Normally aspirated motors can have reasonably high BSFC in one area of the chart, but fuel consumption increases dramatically to either side. As a motor rarely runs in the "sweet spot" (wide open throttle @1800 RPM in the chart below) they rarely if ever achieve the efficiency they are capable of. Much of the fuel is wasted simply overcoming the friction of the spinning motor.

Turbos tend to have much wider peaks in maps like the below, allowing them to average much more energy per unit fuel. For those that understand engine technology the choice is clear- for a given amount of CO2/ fuel you can choose NA, or you can choose FI and make around 25% more power. Regulations have forced BMW to be concerned with fuel economy (if rising fuel prices hadn't already already), and hence they have no choice but to move towards FI, Luddites be damned. For a given amount of emissions/ fuel it simply allows them to deliver much more power. I'm sure they would prefer not to; it will result in more complex motors, where it sounds like simply raising the redline is enough to keep the "fans" happy. However they will also be more modern, advanced and to my eyes better motors. If they do it right, which is what the real question is in my mind. If they skimp and figure they can make their power targets without putting their best foot forwards I think they will get the message loud and clear, and M3 sales have already been slipping.

Another point- many here think "race" motors should be normally aspirated, but that's a view highly skewed by marketing. F1 will soon return to FI, following drag cars, WRC, the turbo cars of Group C (also concerned with fuel economy; the C stands for consumption) and indeed most race cars this side of carburetted nascar. A good FI motor can be very, very good; much higher power to weight ratio vs NA, more torque, better economy, etc. BMW has some of the best engine designers in the world- again I look forward to seeing what they come up with it the engineers are given free reign.
Attached Images
 
__________________
1M, 1969 Porsche 911 w/ 997 GT3 Cup Motor (435hp & 2,100 lbs)
Pete_vB is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 03:40 AM   #295
crackberry
Major
 
crackberry's Avatar
 
Drives: Porsche Carrera GTS (997.2)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: southern california

Posts: 1,003
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Levi View Post

BMW M will do everything to make the M3 F32 desirable:
-RS5 details, seats, beauty
-C AMG aggressivity
-M5 comfort
-911 price
But in the end, it will lack one vital thing: a TRUE Motorpsorts engine.



The rumoured M3 F32 with FI I6 is a car that would not continue the legend of the M3. It would start a new legend, a very short one.
How is pricing the m3 80k+ a desirable trait? iono about you but id much rather pay less and save money...unless im reading your post wrong.

other than that, i completely agree with everything you said. if rumors are true, they will start a new "legend" that might end shortly because customers might be jumping ship. i guess we'll see what happens.
crackberry is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 09:21 AM   #296
gr8000
Major
 
gr8000's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3 - DCT
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Athens, Greece

Posts: 1,170
iTrader: (0)

Send a message via AIM to gr8000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete_vB View Post
Again, all of the above is easy and cheap; you're simply roughly doubling the motor honda made 10+ years ago with the S2000, or increasing the bore and reducing the stoke of the V8 M3. No peaks, not terrible fuel economy, etc- all well understood. And from a technical point of view pretty boring.

What's tricky, and what's out of the experience base of most here, is an appreciation of efficiency and brake specific fuel consumption. I've attached a map of a turbo diesel motor; this is basically a map of how much power a motor produces for a given amount of fuel, with lower numbers (grey) being better.

Normally aspirated motors can have reasonably high BSFC in one area of the chart, but fuel consumption increases dramatically to either side. As a motor rarely runs in the "sweet spot" (wide open throttle @1800 RPM in the chart below) they rarely if ever achieve the efficiency they are capable of. Much of the fuel is wasted simply overcoming the friction of the spinning motor.

Turbos tend to have much wider peaks in maps like the below, allowing them to average much more energy per unit fuel. For those that understand engine technology the choice is clear- for a given amount of CO2/ fuel you can choose NA, or you can choose FI and make around 25% more power. Regulations have forced BMW to be concerned with fuel economy (if rising fuel prices hadn't already already), and hence they have no choice but to move towards FI, Luddites be damned. For a given amount of emissions/ fuel it simply allows them to deliver much more power. I'm sure they would prefer not to; it will result in more complex motors, where it sounds like simply raising the redline is enough to keep the "fans" happy. However they will also be more modern, advanced and to my eyes better motors. If they do it right, which is what the real question is in my mind. If they skimp and figure they can make their power targets without putting their best foot forwards I think they will get the message loud and clear, and M3 sales have already been slipping.

Another point- many here think "race" motors should be normally aspirated, but that's a view highly skewed by marketing. F1 will soon return to FI, following drag cars, WRC, the turbo cars of Group C (also concerned with fuel economy; the C stands for consumption) and indeed most race cars this side of carburetted nascar. A good FI motor can be very, very good; much higher power to weight ratio vs NA, more torque, better economy, etc. BMW has some of the best engine designers in the world- again I look forward to seeing what they come up with it the engineers are given free reign.
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....
gr8000 is offline   Greece
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 09:50 AM   #297
ihyln
Banned
 
Drives: M3post sucks
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: M3post sucks

Posts: 3,385
iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2008 M3  [0.00]
2002 530i  [0.00]
Send a message via AIM to ihyln
The only "M" philosophy is "M"oney. Case in point: 1M Coupe
ihyln is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 03:21 PM   #298
e46e92love
Brigadier General
 
e46e92love's Avatar
 
Drives: e92 ///M3; X3 (wife's)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The East Side of Things

Posts: 3,037
iTrader: (0)

Send a message via AIM to e46e92love
Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
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

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.

On your specs though Levi, you are simply dreaming. You're fully aware of that right?

Ruff: You should have described that post. I almost did not click on it. Very interesting. Makes an empirical point that engine downsizing is not actually delivering real world fuel efficiency gains. It is worth noting though that in some cases the EPA figures are definitely improved. As much as it is unfortunate, the EPA ratings are what matter for meeting US regulations.

This leads to the question...

We've all said it, and everyone seems to know it, but is it true? "M is going FI due to government regulation".

Is the volume of M vehicles high enough (or perhaps it is soon going to be high enough) that BMW would be substantially hurt purely from tariffs/penalties/etc. associated with continuing to produce high EPA/EU fuel efficiency vehicles (specifically slight improvements of existing NA M engines perhaps by adding DI)? Companies like Porsche, Ferrari and Lamborghini continue to produce all or some models that have low efficiency. Of course I am not saying you can make many direct comparisons there in terms of price, volumes nor the cars themselves but those companies are certainly mostly ignoring the need for big changes in emissions or efficiency. That being said even these folks are working on efficiency. Despite more power and more weight the new 458 Italia is more fuel efficient than the F430.

I'm keenly interested to know if BMW really "has" to go FI or perhaps the changes have as much to do with saving money on engines as they do on "big bad governments" with too much regulation. This might take some really detailed knowledge about US and EU legislation on fuel efficiency and carbon emissions specifically targeted at the automobile industry.
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
__________________

"...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.
e46e92love is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 03:55 PM   #299
crackberry
Major
 
crackberry's Avatar
 
Drives: Porsche Carrera GTS (997.2)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: southern california

Posts: 1,003
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ihyln View Post
The only "M" philosophy is "M"oney. Case in point: 1M Coupe
Quote:
Originally Posted by e46e92love View Post
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
both are pretty spot on the money. but to be fair, how can most people understand those graphs when so many people in this country stop at Algebra 2 or have never taken physics? im sure most CA's dont even know what a torque graph is let alone what torgue is.

oh well, what can you do? too many of those kind of people around.

Last edited by crackberry; 01-03-2011 at 05:20 PM.
crackberry is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 04:17 PM   #300
Levi
Brigadier General
 
Levi's Avatar
 
Drives: Alfa Romeo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Germany

Posts: 3,206
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by crackberry View Post
How is pricing the m3 80k+ a desirable trait? iono about you but id much rather pay less and save money...unless im reading your post wrong.

other than that, i completely agree with everything you said. if rumors are true, they will start a new "legend" that might end shortly because customers might be jumping ship. i guess we'll see what happens.

Why a would pay such price it because I want something good, and it seems BMW can't anymore do anything slightly better without asking alot more: ex:
-BMW Z4 sDrive35is
-BMW M3 GTS

I would pay more for a worthy M3 than less for an M3 built as a 1M.


Back to efficiency: I do understand the regulations and M needs to lower emissions, but is it really necessary to go FI for M, if there is the new sub-brand BMW i coming, that is just done for this?

Then remember the 1 Series Tii Concept?
Why can't BMW use Tii badge for sporty/tuned cars with FI, and for M badge continue using NA engines?

Swamp yes I am dreaming, but if BMW M wanted, they could do it, also for the 911 (not 911 S or 911 Turbo) price. It is not impossible for them. I all this includes better millage. I mean Ferrari could do it with the 458 Italia, and Prosche is going to do it with the new 911 (991). And BMW is known for building the "best" engines.
Levi is offline   Germany
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 04:32 PM   #301
Levi
Brigadier General
 
Levi's Avatar
 
Drives: Alfa Romeo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Germany

Posts: 3,206
iTrader: (0)

One advise I can give to BMW M:

Build the next M3 F32 as Lexus built the LF-A ! (except for the price)
Levi is offline   Germany
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 04:34 PM   #302
acodoes
Above the Below
 
Drives: 2010 CL65 AMG
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Saint Louis

Posts: 11
iTrader: (0)

cool
acodoes is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 04:43 PM   #303
Erhan
Colonel
 
Erhan's Avatar
 
Drives: Cooper S
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle

Posts: 2,466
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e46e92love View Post
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.

Unfortunately, the idiots rule out over the enthusiasts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crackberry View Post
both are pretty spot on the money. but to fair, how can most people understand those graphs when so many people in this country stop at Algebra 2 or have never taken physics? im sure most CA's dont even know what a torque graph is let alone what torgue is.
Agreed. I think in current situation, BMW "needs" to offer two different M3s.

One for people who want it just because it is an M and with all the bells and whistles. This car can be as a heavy as it wants, it can even be turbo. This is more like a C63 AMG competitor.

The other should be for enthusiast who wants light cars with high revving NA engines with some of the tech goodies. This car won't be as comfy and luxorious as the first model. It won't have massaging seats or even power seats. It'll come with BMW performance seats, performance exhaust etc. It can have nav, ac etc. It won't be as stripped as GTS, since that's kinda against what an M car is (ie, it should be daily driveable).

Both these cars will share as many components as possible (obviously including the chasis, frame, body, major exterior and interior bits and pieces). Not sure how much it will effect the R&D and testing. But hey, at the end of the day, they may sell more cars this way. I seriously believe they can steal 911 drivers if they offer a enthusiast version of the M3.

Last edited by Erhan; 01-03-2011 at 04:46 PM. Reason: spelling...
Erhan is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 04:53 PM   #304
GoGeo
Private
 
Drives: 135
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Southwest

Posts: 93
iTrader: (0)

You are funny.

Quote:
Originally Posted by erhanh View Post
The other should be for enthusiast who wants light cars with high revving NA engines with some of the tech goodies. This car won't be as comfy and luxorious as the first model. It won't have massaging seats or even power seats. It'll come with BMW performance seats, performance exhaust etc. It can have nav, ac etc. It won't be as stripped as GTS, since that's kinda against what an M car is (ie, it should be daily driveable).

Both these cars will share as many components as possible (obviously including the chasis, frame, body, major exterior and interior bits and pieces). Not sure how much it will effect the R&D and testing. But hey, at the end of the day, they may sell more cars this way. I seriously believe they can steal 911 drivers if they offer a enthusiast version of the M3.
GoGeo is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 04:59 PM   #305
Levi
Brigadier General
 
Levi's Avatar
 
Drives: Alfa Romeo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Germany

Posts: 3,206
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by erhanh View Post
Agreed. I think in current situation, BMW "needs" to offer two different M3s.
That is what I hope:

BMW 3 Series < BMW 3 Series Tii (FI) < BMW 3 Series M (NA) < BMW 3 Series M CSL (NA HARDCORE)
Levi is offline   Germany
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 05:02 PM   #306
Erhan
Colonel
 
Erhan's Avatar
 
Drives: Cooper S
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle

Posts: 2,466
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoGeo View Post
You are funny.
You're not.
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan
Erhan is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 05:18 PM   #307
e46e92love
Brigadier General
 
e46e92love's Avatar
 
Drives: e92 ///M3; X3 (wife's)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The East Side of Things

Posts: 3,037
iTrader: (0)

Send a message via AIM to e46e92love
Quote:
Originally Posted by crackberry View Post
both are pretty spot on the money. but to fair, how can most people understand those graphs when so many people in this country stop at Algebra 2 or have never taken physics? im sure most CA's dont even know what a torque graph is let alone what torgue is.

oh well, what can you do? too many of those kind of people around.
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
__________________

"...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.
e46e92love is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      01-03-2011, 05:57 PM   #308
crackberry
Major
 
crackberry's Avatar
 
Drives: Porsche Carrera GTS (997.2)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: southern california

Posts: 1,003
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e46e92love View Post
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
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.
crackberry is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
2013 bmw m3, 2013 m3, 2014 bmw m3, 2014 m3, bmw f30 m3, bmw f32 m3, bmw f80, bmw f80 forum, bmw f80 forums, bmw f80 m3, bmw f80 m3 sedan, bmw m3 f30, bmw m3 f32, f30 bmw m3, f30 m3, f32 bmw m3, f80, f80 forum, f80 forums, f80 m3, f80 m3 forum, f80 m3 forums, f80 m3 sedan, m3 f80, new bmw m3, next bmw m3

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 10:36 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