M Boss Kay Segler interviewed about M future

[PKL]

Originally Posted by graider

i think everyone will have to go 4 banger turbo or even 2 banger turbo in the future.

gas price will sky rocket, so there is no other way around it. imagine you are paying double/triple for gas next year, you are not gonna be happy with your m3 gas mileage anymore.

man has a point. everyone on this forum says "if you care about MPG you bought the wrong car" but how will everyone feel if 18 months from now gas costs literally twice as much as it does now?? $100 fill up, maybe more

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by graider

i think everyone will have to go 4 banger turbo or even 2 banger turbo in the future.

A two cylinder engine with a reasonable displacement (0.4L-0.7.5L per cylinder) probably won't be practical in any car weighing more than 3800 lbs. Now, if you couple that with electric motor(s), then I can maybe see it. I think we'll see small displacement 3 cyl and 4 cyl motors instead though.

[graider]

Originally Posted by 330CIZHP

Your interpretation is incorrect.

The clown is calling 7000 rpm "high-revving". Don't expect to be any higher than that.

All of the new 1-M, F10 M5, X5 M and X6 M all have 7000 rpm redlines and turbo engines. That is the biggest joke of the century.

to be fair though, gt2 rs has 7000rpm turbo engine and it is still kick ass.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Serious

The premier BMW sports sedan is only out selling the fat stupid AWD slushbox jacked up $100,000 minivans by ~1500 units annually. [7573 vs. 5860] (convertible m3 sales were excluded because it's performance is so far behind the coupe/sedan)

That part makes no sense whatsoever, FWIW. The fact is that the E93 M3 alone sold almost as many units as the much more practical X5 M. Looks to me like many people are still very much willing to spend the money on a sports car vs. a juiced up people mover. But I guess in your mind the E93 M3 is so bad, it doesn't even deserve mention next to the "fat stupid AWD slushbox minvans". That's some seriously irrational emotion clouding your judgement there. Why spend this much energy being angry about the M3 convertible?

[Serious]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

That part makes no sense whatsoever, FWIW. The fact is that the E93 M3 alone sold almost as many units as the much more practical X5 M. Looks to me like many people are still very much willing to spend the money on a sports car vs. a juiced up people mover. But I guess in your mind the E93 M3 is so bad, it doesn't even deserve mention next to the "fat stupid AWD slushbox minvans". That's some seriously irrational emotion clouding your judgement there. Why spend this much energy being angry about the M3 convertible?

Im not trying to insult your car but the e93 m3 isn't really a sports car. It's really more of a convertible GT considering it's weight, lack of structural rigidity, and overall decrease in performance vs. the coupe/sedan.

My point was the demonstrate that they're are just as many M car buyers looking for jacked up SUV as there are #'s of buyers for the company's most hardcore sports cars... when you consider the grounds M cars were originally based on this statistic is quite shocking.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Serious

Im not trying to insult your car but the e93 m3 isn't really a sports car. It's really more of a convertible GT considering it's weight, lack of structural rigidity, and overall decrease in performance vs. the coupe/sedan.

Well, the performance of th eE93 vs. the E90/E92 isn't really debateable (it is worse, of course), but plenty of folks already classify the M3 in any form as a GT to begin with. In fact, earlier weren't you just berating us all for buying our heavy M3s to begin with? Given that emotional outburst, your decision to single out the E93 as unworthy of comparison to an SUV sounds like a big fat logic failure. I guess I was looking for reason where little was to be found. Anyway, don't sweat the insult part, we get that all the time from fellow enthusiasts. My real motivation in posting was merely to point out that your comparison was flawed at best.

My point was the demonstrate that they're are just as many M car buyers looking for jacked up SUV as there are #'s of buyers for the company's most hardcore sports cars... when you consider the grounds M cars were originally based on this statistic is quite shocking.

The company isn't building hardcore sports cars except the M3 GTS. And, lets face it, even if that were available in limiteless quantities it would be easily outsold by every other M vehicle in the lineup. This is true even if you chop the price down to, say, $85k. For proof of that, just look at how few stripped M3s are ordered among the enthusiasts on this forum. Almost no one hear is buying sports cars - we are buying luxury cars, because frankly that's what people expect from BMW since that is how BMW has built their brand in North America.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by shift@red

Pretty sure it didnt. Do you have the link? Best I have seen for it was .98

You cant compare one car with PS2s (Carrera GT) to another with Cup tires (CSL), not apples to apples.

Sport Auto reported 1.4g for the CSL during the Supertest (Cup tires). You're right about the comparison to the CGT being irrelevant as it ran on PS2 (1.35g).


Best regards,
south

[LateBraking]

Originally Posted by Advevo

Autos.sympatico.ca interviewed M division boss Dr. Kay Segler at the 2011 NAIAS in Detroit. They posed some direct questions, many of which our very own members have often asked and are most interested in. Below are their most poignant questions and Dr. Segler's responses.

Q: Where are the lightweight cars?
A: M cars are being thoroughly inspected (every screw and component) for weight reduction generally, but especially from the top areas of the cars.

Q: Bring back high-revving 4-cylinder engines?
A: High revving turbo engines are the new way to go for M.

Q: Will all M cars have single turbocharged engines within 5 years?
A: We never should predict anything because we should be free of dogmas.

Q: Will BMW be returning to F1 racing with the return of turbochargers to Formula 1?
A: We are simply focusing on M cars and touring cars (24 hour races, DTM) - to have a car on the race course which a customer can also drive on the road.

Q: Will there be more special edition M3's in the future (i.e. GTS)?
A: M is always good for surprises. We will do other cars, maybe something within the next 12 months.

Q: Will M always have the manual transmission option?
A: Depends on the car and its character. The double clutch was the decision of M and it was a good decision and we keep that as far as we can.

Q: Will M cars be coming with ceramic brakes option?
A: We are working exactly on it, for the M5's.

Q: Will customer ever have option to delete air conditioning, radio?
A: Depending on the car. GTS comes without air con and radio and you can then add it as options

Q: Every car after the E30 M3 has been heavier and the problem solved with more power. Has M lost its plot?
A: We're working on the lightweight issue, but it's an uphill battle and it's not so easy.

Q: How would an M green car look?
A: We are already in a way green - brake energy regeneration; reduce in the future the M5's emissions by 25-30%. But we will not compromise on the performance of our cars.

The video interview can be found at Autos.sympatico.ca: http://autos.sympatico.ca/features/7...-boss-of-bmw-m

Were these really his responses? Not just a summarization of his responses?

I ask because I am inexplicably irritated after reading the responses.

[03BeastCharmer]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Those engines were certainly achievements for the time they were in production. You mention M3, M5, M6, Z and McLaren models. Well, the three engines I mention in my first paragraph has succeeded each one, and who would honestly want to swap back for the older engine? Oh, except the McLaren - that one now has a 8500 RPM turbo V8. Now there's an engine - even if we use, say, a smaller 3L, 475hp version for example - that would have a perfect home in an F3x m3.

FYI - The E39 M5 S62 engine is actually used by Dinan in the Rolex Prototype cars, as well as by Will Turner in last years M6 and this years M3 Continental race cars. So I'd say it's actually the preferred V8 engine compared to the current M3 engine. The V10 in the last M5 might have had more power, but everyone in racing seems to be using the S62 engine. It may be a decade old, but it's still a monster.

[Serious]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Well, the performance of th eE93 vs. the E90/E92 isn't really debateable (it is worse, of course), but plenty of folks already classify the M3 in any form as a GT to begin with. In fact, earlier weren't you just berating us all for buying our heavy M3s to begin with? Given that emotional outburst, your decision to single out the E93 as unworthy of comparison to an SUV sounds like a big fat logic failure. I guess I was looking for reason where little was to be found. Anyway, don't sweat the insult part, we get that all the time from fellow enthusiasts. My real motivation in posting was merely to point out that your comparison was flawed at best.

The point was to examine the two polar opposites of the M lineup, the coupe and sedan M3 represent the most hardcore M car you can purchase (before the 1M) while the x6m/x5m represent the other spectrum (large fat luxurious autobox suvs).

I left m5/m3 convertible sales out because they are in between the two extremes of buyers.

If the SUV's are selling just as well as the flagship M3, then what does that says about the M divisions future and where do you think their design philosophy will lie given that the SUV's are selling as well as the flagship M3?

[sensi09]

Originally Posted by 03BeastCharmer

FYI - The E39 M5 S62 engine is actually used by Dinan in the Rolex Prototype cars, as well as by Will Turner in last years M6 and this years M3 Continental race cars. So I'd say it's actually the preferred V8 engine compared to the current M3 engine. The V10 in the last M5 might have had more power, but everyone in racing seems to be using the S62 engine. It may be a decade old, but it's still a monster.

Thanks for the post. I was curious about it and it seems that they've been running the that engine for awhile. A search found this little blurb.

"Through the 2009 season, Ganassi ran Lexus engines. They started the 2010 season with Dinan-BMW V8s built on the S62 engine from the E39 M5; when Dinan’s shop has finished the development work on the lower-profile, lighter S65 V8 from the current M3, they will switch to S65s.......Steve Dinan, who has been building the S62 V8 for Grand-Am use since 2003"
http://www.chipganassiracing.com/new...4885&tag_id=21

Not sure about the V8 in the M6 turner is using. Perhaps it's due to series rules or an already developed engine in this case too. Either way, it's pretty cool to see an older engine still seeing development with some of it possibly trickling down to the consumer.

[aus]

There will be no trickle down from the S62. It was used because it was around first. As they article states, they'll start working on the S65 as a replacement. THis was explained in a Roudel article many months ago.

[sensi09]

Is that roundel article available online?

[Eau Rouge]

Originally Posted by Serious

The point was to examine the two polar opposites of the M lineup, the coupe and sedan M3 represent the most hardcore M car you can purchase (before the 1M) while the x6m/x5m represent the other spectrum (large fat luxurious autobox suvs).

I left m5/m3 convertible sales out because they are in between the two extremes of buyers.

If the SUV's are selling just as well as the flagship M3, then what does that says about the M divisions future and where do you think their design philosophy will lie given that the SUV's are selling as well as the flagship M3?

IMO, there's no cause for concern over the long haul.

We may have different takes as to what the sales numbers will mean to M Division's, but FWIW, the sales numbers don't necessarily mean that M Division will move more eggs into the SUV, pardon me, SAV basket. Who is buying the M SUV's? Are the M SUVs being sold to individuals who were already BMW clients? Are the M SUV clients new clients of BMW? Who knows? BMW in all likelihood. Retrospectively, we may in a few years look back at this period of M SUVs and see it as an aberration or one off of sorts much like the V8 in the current M3.

As for the larger picture, the SUV market, my guess is that we will witness a continuation of production of the relatively obese SUV's for a while, perhaps a number of years. However, since I've never regarded the SUV appeal as anything more than a fad in the overall scheme of automobile design, it is inevitable, if my hunch is right, that eventually people will be ready for something different even as the appeal of sedans and coupes remains throughout the SUV craze era.

[Serious]

Originally Posted by Eau Rouge

IMO, there's no cause for concern over the long haul.

We may have different takes as to what the sales numbers will mean to M Division's, but FWIW, the sales numbers don't necessarily mean that M Division will move more eggs into the SUV, pardon me, SAV basket. Who is buying the M SUV's? Are the M SUVs being sold to individuals who were already BMW clients? Are the M SUV clients new clients of BMW? Who knows? BMW in all likelihood. Retrospectively, we may in a few years look back at this period of M SUVs and see it as an aberration or one off of sorts much like the V8 in the current M3.

As for the larger picture, the SUV market, my guess is that we will witness a continuation of production of the relatively obese SUV's for a while, perhaps a number of years. However, since I've never regarded the SUV appeal as anything more than a fad in the overall scheme of automobile design, it is inevitable, if my hunch is right, that eventually people will be ready for something different even as the appeal of sedans and coupes remains throughout the SUV craze era.

IMO SUV's aren't a fad and in terms of car design will probably outlast the internal combustion engine itself.

By 2015 half the M car lineup will be SAV's or GT's... that should say something.

[EuroCarsOnline]

Originally Posted by southlight

Sport Auto reported 1.4g for the CSL during the Supertest (Cup tires). You're right about the comparison to the CGT being irrelevant as it ran on PS2 (1.35g).


Best regards,
south

Thanks South. I remembered the skid pad numbers, but not the tires. For $448k you'd figure Porsche would include a set of Cup tires.

[SCOTT26]

A bit off topic.

Even still, there are credible reports that Audi will have a sub A4 sedan for the US market, based off of the new Jetta platform.

Yes we have heard that too, interesting though in Germany we have heard of the car being mainly a US volume chaser for Audi which could interpret Audi launching the sedan as a plusher Jetta but follow the same strategy as US Volkswagens and price them competively for the US market.
BMW can not afford to go this direction as BMW insist that their cars must be seen as premium.

To me, to ignore the premium compact sedan market in the US is a grave mistake, and I should like to think it is one BMW will correct in the coming generations. I absolutely would be a prime candidate for a 1 series sedan and/or a 1 series M sedan. I believe that there are a LOT of BMW customers in the US who would absolutely agree. I would implore you to reconsider the premium compact sedan market, especially for North America. If not, Audi will be eating your lunch here by the fistfull with their new Jetta-based A3 sedan.

As laid out above the fleet market for the BMW 3er and 3er Touring in Europe is too valuable to compromise , especially when BMW lead the sector, hence why a BMW might be out of the question ? But what about a MINI sedan?

What is interesting is that I have seen some design sketches relating to a MINI sedan , one that has been given an exciting reception involves interpreting classic MINI design elements into a sedan body.
For example MINI's "reverse cap" roof is painted in a contrasting color but extends to the whole c-pillar allowing the typical MINI floating roof and all-round glasshouse. And the doors , especially at the rear look like being rear hinged. it's a small MINI sedan but utilises it's own MINI-effect it looks recognisable as a MINI but the details are different compared to other MINI family members. So far it has not been approved but many reckon a MINI sedan could be a favorable approach instead of compromising the 3er.

[aus]

Originally Posted by sensi09

Is that roundel article available online?

I don't think so. Roundel just went digital a few months ago, and this article was at least a year ago.
I just don't understand why on a handful of people are CCA members here?

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

A bit off topic.

Yep, thanks for your reply though.

Yes we have heard that too, interesting though in Germany we have heard of the car being mainly a US volume chaser for Audi which could interpret Audi launching the sedan as a plusher Jetta but follow the same strategy as US Volkswagens and price them competively for the US market.
BMW can not afford to go this direction as BMW insist that their cars must be seen as premium.

I don't think this new A3 sedan will be any less premium than the A3 hatchback already on sale here and throughout the world. I agree that part of the strategy is to be able to sell the new Jetta that they really do want to sell in the US (rather than the decontented version we are getting), but cannot because they aren't able to sell enough here and thus can't make any money. Still, I expect that it will have it's own styling and of course all the Audi amenities. I think it will be a hit, especially if they offer a diesel stateside (which I bet they will).

As laid out above the fleet market for the BMW 3er and 3er Touring in Europe is too valuable to compromise , especially when BMW lead the sector, hence why a BMW might be out of the question ?

Sure, but that's not a factor in the US.

But what about a MINI sedan?

...

So far it has not been approved but many reckon a MINI sedan could be a favorable approach instead of compromising the 3er.

That might work too, not a bad idea either. Probably a bit smaller than a 1 series sedan would be though, and also not RWD which means no interest from BMW enthusiasts. Also, definitely means no M model.

[bobbyd1961]

Originally Posted by Advevo

Autos.sympatico.ca interviewed M division boss Dr. Kay Segler at the 2011 NAIAS in Detroit. They posed some direct questions, many of which our very own members have often asked and are most interested in. Below are their most poignant questions and Dr. Segler's responses.

Q: Where are the lightweight cars?
A: M cars are being thoroughly inspected (every screw and component) for weight reduction generally, but especially from the top areas of the cars.

Q: Bring back high-revving 4-cylinder engines?
A: High revving turbo engines are the new way to go for M.

Q: Will all M cars have single turbocharged engines within 5 years?
A: We never should predict anything because we should be free of dogmas.

Q: Will BMW be returning to F1 racing with the return of turbochargers to Formula 1?
A: We are simply focusing on M cars and touring cars (24 hour races, DTM) - to have a car on the race course which a customer can also drive on the road.

Q: Will there be more special edition M3's in the future (i.e. GTS)?
A: M is always good for surprises. We will do other cars, maybe something within the next 12 months.

Q: Will M always have the manual transmission option?
A: Depends on the car and its character. The double clutch was the decision of M and it was a good decision and we keep that as far as we can.

Q: Will M cars be coming with ceramic brakes option?
A: We are working exactly on it, for the M5's.

Q: Will customer ever have option to delete air conditioning, radio?
A: Depending on the car. GTS comes without air con and radio and you can then add it as options

Q: Every car after the E30 M3 has been heavier and the problem solved with more power. Has M lost its plot?
A: We're working on the lightweight issue, but it's an uphill battle and it's not so easy.

Q: How would an M green car look?
A: We are already in a way green - brake energy regeneration; reduce in the future the M5's emissions by 25-30%. But we will not compromise on the performance of our cars.

The video interview can be found at Autos.sympatico.ca: http://autos.sympatico.ca/features/7...-boss-of-bmw-m

how about a 3000lb 500hp 0-60 in 3.5 seconds top speed 200mph that seats 5 M3? oh and gets 30mpg highway. all for 75 grand

[Erhan]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

That might work too, not a bad idea either. Probably a bit smaller than a 1 series sedan would be though, and also not RWD which means no interest from BMW enthusiasts. Also, definitely means no M model.

isn't BMW already considering FWD 1 series?

[Eau Rouge]

Originally Posted by Serious

IMO SUV's aren't a fad and in terms of car design will probably outlast the internal combustion engine itself.

By 2015 half the M car lineup will be SAV's or GT's... that should say something.

Exactly. As I said, "perhaps a number of years" that goes beyond the length of in-the-pipeline of production plans. It'a probably a century or two too early to speak of the demise of the internal combustion engine or at least until we have affordable transportation that needs off the ground air space for our commute to work.

The biggest hurdle that SAVs have to overcome to become regarded as an acceptable staple model to societies are the negative perceptions associated with them that are not also associated with sedans, coupes, verts, wagons, pickups. Two of the major negatives include...Too big to see around, over and (often) through), relative fuel inefficiency while owners and drivers of SUVs are, fairly on unfairly, regarded by many as something other than what some of the SUV drivers -- those to whom what others think of them does matter -- would prefer. Of course, there are those who simply don't care what others think of them driving an SUV. It is the latter group of SUV drivers that many would think suitable to be poster boys and girls for all that some think of SUVs and their owners/drivers. To me, let the opinions be and let whomever drive whatever on a whim basis. Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing. I am simply noting that society is anything if not uniform, and that poses a problem for the SUV where achieving a welcome status on the par of coupes, sedans, etc.., is the subject.

Manufacturers are not immune to feeling the heat for making models that are deemed socially irresponsible by some. I wish manufacturers would not cave to the holier-than-thou critics at large. However, if BMW is willing to nix normally aspirated from the venerable M3 that is far more integral to BMW's heritage than any SUVs gracing its fleet these days in its quest to underline its committment to efficient dynamics, no BMW SUV is off limits to the axe.