|
|
07-07-2007, 01:13 PM | #1 |
Banned
23
Rep 1,356
Posts |
Has the //M Division failed us...?
Hello,
I've been reserve in my judgement of the new M3 because I was hoping that even after the press release there was somethng more, an "intangable" that wasn't on paper that made this //M so special. I'm starting to loose faith. I know all the technology that went into making the M and I am personally a tech-junkie, but alot of it doesnt translate well to what I percieve an M3 to be. Light & Agile. I do not like the concept of a L O N G E R BMW. Plus the car looks cosmetically too fat, without the actual wheels dictating it's shoulders. I think BMW could've made fundemental strides to keep the M3 more Porsche like, so that you feel like your a Pilot and not just a driver. (AKA e30) They made great strides in using a V8 thats was lighter than the previous inline-6, but at what cost...? 420 horses seems somewhat anemic for this pedigree of an icon, even though this car can rev quickly and has very long legs you still have to drive (rev) it hard to get any work done. The meager sub 300 ft-lb's of torque is what I'm unhappy about. With such little torque the actual M3's performance numbers really don't distance itself from last years CSL. Why doesnt the M3 have Direct Fuel Injection (DFI)..? I know the answer to this, offcoarse, Because next years model will go DFI and add about 10% more HP/TQ along with improved fuel economy. This really frightens me. Even the Venrable Porsche is going DFI and we all know how resistant to change the PAG group is. This illustrates that BMW is looking forward to their own "improved" version, the CSL instead of making a difinitive benchmark car that takes it's competitiojn head on. First and formost, this is an M3 I think BMW made an awsome engine, its just misplaced. I think the engineers went toooo oversquare with the engine and reducing the rev-limit by 600rpm's to gain more torque through the powerband would've been a better decision.... I know this is long winded, I just feel BMW's M division could've made a better powerplant without 8 butterfly's and put more technology into the drivertrain. I like the idea of a racy, high reving engine, but this cars performance numbers show it's lacking TORQUE. Also, BMW could've used alot more Carbon fibre and lessed the weight of the car substatially. Made it shorter with a fighterpilot cockpit and not some innovative airy, open Izod styled for tennis moms type of feeling I get. Audi or Porsche still have the right "feeling". Which, coincidentally has a much more driver-centric interior and not the feeling I'm on the deck of some yaught. I'm a driver, not a Sailor, so why does BMW insist on designing their interior with Sailboat ques..? All that and I guess i didn't say much. -Garrett |
07-07-2007, 01:18 PM | #2 |
For the love of ///M3
19
Rep 660
Posts |
The reason M is talking so much about the M3, is because they know they've had to act on internal pressure and make sure this M3 is a big hit and that means dumbing down, because sadly, the typical M3 buyer doesn't car for anything other than that badge. Don't jump on me, we aren't the typical M3 buyer any more, those days died with the 3.2 Evo, when they started to become more popular and plusher inside.
The CSL will be the true M3 and the M department are acknowledging that this early because they know us enthusiasts will realise that.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 01:21 PM | #3 |
New Member
2
Rep 14
Posts |
M3 = not enough torque but good handling
RS4 = better power and torque but heavy and not as good of a handling C63 AMG = heaviest but most power and worst handling compared to the other two I am confused... might pull out my deposit and just get the 335i or the 1 series |
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 01:28 PM | #4 | |
O! So Sour!!
549
Rep 15,615
Posts
Drives: Fast 240z / Slow M3
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: 'Merica!
|
Quote:
As of now ill hold out for the E92 M, we still have awhile to go before its debut so i guess ill just sit tight and wait. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 02:08 PM | #6 |
Commander in Chief
35
Rep 1,034
Posts |
When I read threads like this it further confirms that most people don't buy a car based on their own preferences, but merely follow the impressions of a handful of magazine articles or to fit a particular image.
Between E90post and M3post, there are several posts from people about to switch to MB or Audi over magazine articles. The M3 hasn't even been released. At least try the car out for yourself before you pass judgment on the car.
__________________
2008 BMW 535i Space Gray, Black Leather, Dark Bamboo Trim| Sport Automatic with Paddles | Sport Package
2008 BMW M5 (gone, but not forgotten) Space Gray, Silverstone Merino Leather, Madeira Walnut Wood Trim | 7speed SMG | All options Mods: Corsa Exhaust | RPI Ram Air Intake | H&R Sport Springs | Rogue Engineering 12mm spacers |
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 02:14 PM | #7 | |
Private
1
Rep 60
Posts |
Quote:
For first time M3 buyers, going for the M3 and not waiting for the CSL might make sense, and may/will find the car very rewarding. But for those who's had a taste of and owned an E46 M3, they may be get disappointed with the latest iteration and may want to wait for the CSL. Either wait for it, or test drive both M3 and C63 before even plunking down serious $$$. I think in terms of reliability and cost of ownership, car reviews can provide you solid data to go with. But for performance and driving satisfaction, I would trust only my own experience after actually driving the vehicle. Cheers! |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 02:23 PM | #8 |
Banned
23
Rep 1,356
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 02:23 PM | #9 |
Private First Class
7
Rep 172
Posts |
The problem is that if the enthisiasts abandon the M3, the posers will too. I think catering an enthusiast car to a casual market will be a disaster. Those who want the M3, be it for the badge or for the performance, will buy it anyways regardless how sharp the steering is or how rigid the suspension is. Where as if they soften it up, the enthusiasts will desert it, but it won't gain the Lexus crowd people either.
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 02:35 PM | #10 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
20
Rep 1,504
Posts |
Quote:
It's nice to read what others think who have driven it so far, but until we drive it for ourselves it's just entertainment. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 02:37 PM | #11 |
Lieutenant Colonel
20
Rep 1,504
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 02:44 PM | #12 |
Member
36
Rep 505
Posts |
It's sad how so many people can be swayed by a couple of bad reviews! Where's your autonomy? The E92 M3 is a much better car than what's sitting in 95% of your garages. While you guys sit around for another 3 years bitching and crying and waiting for the "real M3"(CSL), I'll be out enjoying what's here now.
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 02:53 PM | #13 | |
Major
75
Rep 1,288
Posts |
Finally some logic in this thread...... !
Quoting my rant: Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 03:09 PM | #14 |
Second Lieutenant
3
Rep 256
Posts |
I'm so sick and tired of people complaining about the 'lack of torque' from this new M3. you want torque? buy a corvette. low rpm torque is not what the M3 is about, never has it been, never will it be. it's about sustaining that torque all the way up to a screaming 8400rpm.
do you think F1 cars are lacking in torque? they only make around 280 ft/lbs torque but they make it at almost 18,000rpm effectively putting down almost 800hp...and please spare me the 'i can't believe you're comparing an M3 to an F1 car' discussion. what people also fail to realize is that the huge range in RPMs available in the new M3 allows BMW M to mate the engine with very aggressive gearing. gearing multiplies torque. i think it was on here that i read that the new M3's gearing enables it to have more torque than a c6 z06 when multiplied out. i haven't actually multiplied this out but i would definitely not be surprised that it would be true. gearing is the very reason that the e60 M5 has been able to beat cars that they seemingly should not beat - gallardo, 360 modena, etc. with all that being said i have to be honest and say that i'm not impressed with the recent reviews on the e92 m3. but reviews mean little to me without hard numbers. i'm just hoping that the performance numbers that come out for it aren't as disappointing.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 03:14 PM | #15 | |
Expect the Unusual
257
Rep 1,344
Posts |
Quote:
Audi RS5 Audi S5 Audi RS6 Audi TT (yeah, I'm considering it even though it's no M3) BMW E92 M3 BMW 335i w/PROCEDE Porsche Cayman S Probably could knock out all the test drives in one day. Visit the Audi dealership, then BMW, then Porsche. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 03:24 PM | #16 | |
O! So Sour!!
549
Rep 15,615
Posts
Drives: Fast 240z / Slow M3
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: 'Merica!
|
Quote:
Im sick and tired of hearing Procede this, Procede that...if ya'll wanna talk about Procede then lets see what Procede has to offer for the M3 when it comes out and then we'll talk. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 03:49 PM | #17 |
Expect the Unusual
257
Rep 1,344
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 04:04 PM | #18 |
For the love of ///M3
19
Rep 660
Posts |
Where on a test drive are you likely to experience the outer reaches of the M3's repertoire? Perhaps those who aren't happy with it at the moment are letting the people who've taken it to limits and know their onions let them know that they might not enjoy the car at the sort of levels they'd like to drive it?
Christ, we aren't all happy to accept whatever M throws at us and willing to crown it as the new messiah.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2007, 06:51 PM | #19 | |
Private First Class
1
Rep 188
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
'05 X5/3.0 Sport (E53)
'03 540i/6 M-Sport (E39) '91 325i/5 Sport Package (E30) BMWCCA #360858 SCCA# 374179 NASA # 128290 |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|