new m3 engine

[ruff]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

In practice its not - agreed. I am merely saying that, from a marketing point of view, at some point you can no longer make a case that people should pony up $20,000 more for a car only to have to give up peak torque. It really does not matter if it is significant in real world driving or not - the marketplace will decide what matters with their pocketbook. If the marketplace did not matter, we would not have needed the V8; the I6 works plenty good enough.

Mkoesel,
I agree. Sadly, I have heard the marketing department at BMW has more say than the engineers who build and test the engines when it comes to horsepower and torque numbers. Look at the 335 specs by BMW on the N54vs what has been dynoed. I don't understand why BMW didn't just say it's 4.0 liter had 305 lb of torque to trump the 335. Maybe BMW likes to Whip Audi and Porsche on the track with a car that is underrated. I hope this is the case with the M3, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by GregMM

According to EVO, the M3 engine is more of a technological marvel compared to the RS4 engine: where the RS4 relies on FSI direct injection to achieve peek HP at 7800 RPM, the smaller M3 engine will reach its peak at 8300 RPM. The shorter stroke (72.5mm) relative to its bore of 92.0mm is what gives the M3 engine its character and the 295lb ft torque is available from 3900 RPM. Though the Audi has more torque, 85% of the M3 peak output torque is sustained over the first 6300 RPM band. Pretty impressive in my book.

Peak torque arrives at 3,600 according to this chart. You are right that it's not the peak number that is critical for most driving but how it is spread across the power band.

[LACA335i]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFavourite

should have put twin turbos on the v8

If m3 have a v8 turbo.. man it is going to be passing the M5 series.. If they want everything to be on each level they have to raise the bar for hp and tq. dont you guys think ?

[2m3]

Originally Posted by GregMM

According to EVO, the M3 engine is more of a technological marvel compared to the RS4 engine: where the RS4 relies on FSI direct injection to achieve peek HP at 7800 RPM, the smaller M3 engine will reach its peak at 8300 RPM. The shorter stroke (72.5mm) relative to its bore of 92.0mm is what gives the M3 engine its character and the 295lb ft torque is available from 3900 RPM. Though the Audi has more torque, 85% of the M3 peak output torque is sustained over the first 6300 RPM band. Pretty impressive in my book.

85% of M3 torque is available between 2000 rpm and 8300 rpm, not over the first 6300 rpm band.

[Caravello]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

In practice its not - agreed. I am merely saying that, from a marketing point of view, at some point you can no longer make a case that people should pony up $20,000 more for a car only to have to give up peak torque. It really does not matter if it is significant in real world driving or not - the marketplace will decide what matters with their pocketbook. If the marketplace did not matter, we would not have needed the V8; the I6 works plenty good enough.

That's a good point, but at the same time M3 drivers probably come in two types: people like me who just love how the car drives and feels on the road coupled with the good looks and BMW rep for quality; and those who buy it b/c they see it as a status symbol and would also be open to a variety of competing makes. When competing for the second group, people who need to be convinced and sold in other words, then this lack of specs on paper will probably dampen their enthusiasm. Over time at least, especially when cars with better specs are coming out all the time.

I don't want the M3 to become only an enthusiast's car, only b/c it will alter how the company makes the car in the future and in what quantity. But at the same time, part of the pleasure of the M3 is that its torque is not overbearing and is more subtle and graceful in its power and speed. Perhaps for marketing purposes, they should just get the torque over 300. Because the gap between 420 hp and 295 lbs of torque, if you do not intutively understand what that means in terms of driving dynamics, just seems pretty weak. I agree with you there. Getting the torque to 300 or 320 would just probably be enough to make it seem less weak, to the casual buyer I mean.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Caravello

That's a good point, but at the same time M3 drivers probably come in two types: people like me who just love how the car drives and feels on the road coupled with the good looks and BMW rep for quality; and those who buy it b/c they see it as a status symbol and would also be open to a variety of competing makes. When competing for the second group, people who need to be convinced and sold in other words, then this lack of specs on paper will probably dampen their enthusiasm. Over time at least, especially when cars with better specs are coming out all the time.

I guess my answer to that is that I disagree with your partioning since I don't fall firmly into either camp. I definitely love how the car drives, but I am just as certainly open to other makes. BMW has to offer the products that represent the best value to me to keep me as a customer. If not, I will happily look elsewhere.