m4's engine sits a whole 2 inches higher than the S65. Embarrassing m4 facts.

[Flamesofgold]

Originally Posted by JoeM3SSII

One more shame fact about the m4 that was kept hidden under the rug and that has come to light: the m4 engine sits a whole 2 inches higher than the S65 in the e92 because of the turbo design.

why would that matter ? well it matters for roll. Basically degrading stability and traction when changing heading direction.

Let's take a look a the extra moment of unwanted roll force that this creates:

First recap S55 (m4) engine weight :
kg / lbs : 205/452

m4 extra roll moment : τ = 2 inches x F

=2 / 12 feet * 205 lbs = +/- 34 lbs.ft

Roll is impacted. This means loading the outside wheels more in turns and further explains why the m4 looses its rear too easily, it's not just the engine torque it's the engine adding its weight 2 inches more above center of gravity. The E92 M3 is superior in that regard. If you look at F1 cars all the weight sit extremely low above ground for the same reason.

Damn you hating.

[New M3]

[Serious]

You're really grasping at straws here

[CognitiveDistortion]

OP:

[///My5UV]

Meh... The only thing I really hate about the F8x are the rear seatbelts are F'ing unusable for a child booster seat... they're buried in the cushion and too far to the outside.

Also the thing is just bigger. My next car might have to be a 1 series and by then my son will be out of the booster anyway.

[Jet335i]

Honestly thought after reading OP this was a sarcastic thread....wow you were serious....

[modkrazy]

Originally Posted by JoeM3SSII

That's is a blanket statement that has little signification. What constitute a performance category is often biased by marketing. One dimensional specs like peak power and torque do not tell anything about throttle response and linearity which improves stability at the limit. The E92 m3 beats the m4 in throttle response, steering feedback among other "performance" categories. In only happens that marketing choose not to show quantifiable data for those, but it's there.

Of course if just comparing lap times then yes the m4 is faster due to forced induction, but the twin turbo that gives that advantages comes with significant drawbacks that IMO are not worth the compromise. The E92 m3 is the better driver's performance car for control, and that elevated m4 engine center of gravity is yet another drawback in the list.

Everyone knows (but not everyone will admit), that the F8x series is a half-measure stop-gap until the next true evolution of the M with more incorporation of the stuff they learned from i. All the "revolutionary" aspects of the F8x, like a bolted-down subframe or carbon fiber driveshaft are all available for <$1000 on the E92. Better brakes and suspension than the stock F8x are also widely available aftermarket. What BMW did very well with the F8x (that they didn't with the E9x), is give you a car that doesn't really need any mods, it's good to go for street or track off the showroom floor (ok, some better pads might be good, but everything else is cosmetic... the turbo swaps people are doing I consider downgrades since they introduce a lot of lag). All the other stuff like speaker engine noise or numb EPS are stumbles at best. Engine height is a pretty specific thing to latch on to, though. Out of all the criticisms I can think about the car, that's not even on my radar.

[roastbeef]

Higher engine = moar roll. Curb hop. Plz keep tires within 1.5psi.

[Raek]

OP literally has the most boring life ever.

[GVIFlyer]

Originally Posted by ///My5UV

Meh... The only thing I really hate about the F8x are the rear seatbelts are F'ing unusable for a child booster seat... they're buried in the cushion and too far to the outside.

Also the thing is just bigger. My next car might have to be a 1 series and by then my son will be out of the booster anyway.

I saw the M2 at a recent auto show. It looked good for $50K. Hook that up with a European delivery and you would be golden.

[Vanmarsenille]

Originally Posted by kb9uwu

too bad the m4 beats the e92 m3 in almost every performance category.

And I still wouldn't trade my E93 for the M4 if you paid me. F8x is a misfire by BMW, partly because it lacks that special X factor,that the E9x M cars have in spades; maybe that's because of the S65, or just the overall package. Newer isn't necessarily better, at least for me. I'll hold onto my E93 until either the new M5, or if that turns up to be like the F8x M cars too, it'll be a 911 C4S probably.

[modkrazy]

Originally Posted by Vanmarsenille

And I still wouldn't trade my E93 for the M4 if you paid me. F8x is a misfire by BMW, partly because it lacks that special X factor,that the E9x M cars have in spades; maybe that's because of the S65, or just the overall package. Newer isn't necessarily better, at least for me. I'll hold onto my E93 until either the new M5, or if that turns up to be like the F8x M cars too, it'll be a 911 C4S probably.

Having an E93 in the first place is already indication that you're more after intangibles than raw performance stats. Or else we'd all be "driving" GTRs.

I would totally trade my E92 for an M4 if you paid me, and then I would sell the M4 and buy a nice clean E92 (perhaps with a limited paint) and mod the hell out of it, and pocket the difference.

[Vanmarsenille]

Originally Posted by modkrazy

Having an E93 in the first place is already indication that you're more after intangibles than raw performance stats. Or else we'd all be "driving" GTRs.

I would totally trade my E92 for an M4 if you paid me, and then I would sell the M4 and buy a nice clean E92 (perhaps with a limited paint) and mod the hell out of it, and pocket the difference.

Saying that you wouldn't do something if someone paid you is a figure of speech to describe strong feelings against a certain thing, but I think you already knew that. Gee whizz.

[Sandye90m3]

Dude, there is you and there is BMW..

You think BMW would make a worse car as generations go on? That's ridiculous, why would a company make a car that is worse than the predecessor? So silly, that I want to smack you. Think logically.

Also you said throttle response and steering feedback in the E92 is better, making it a better performance car. Both of those things that you mentioned, does not make the car go any faster, it makes it "feel" faster.

In performance, its all about quantitative data, barely anything to do with qualitative.

Having said that, sure the engine is 2" higher, but what about all the other things that BMW changed to compensate. You found one crap thing, and now you are going all ape shit on the new M3.


But one things we have in common is the 8400rpm redline . For the fun of it, to add to the bashing of the new M3, the new M3 is a weak redline. Makes it so much less of a performance car .....

[WhatsADSM]

Originally Posted by GMe90

Good info, OP. I think the e92 M3 was a more dominant car of its time than the M4 is now. But part of that has to do with other manufacturers improving their products, especially the American cars.

This is really the answer.

There is certainly nothing wrong with the current M3/M4 and it is objectively a faster car than an E9x that's for sure. The sad part about it however is that the M3 used to be considerably better than its competitors, in terms of on the track performance, being the "drivers machine", and as the whole package.

The F8x just no longer really has that advantage. The on-track performance is basically the same as its competitors, its definitely not the drivers car (that ironically seems to be reserved for the American ATS-V), and while I do think it is the best overall package that is largely subjective and many would consider it the same as its competitors.

In a nutshell the M3 went from dominating its segment to being an also-ran.

[Beemdog]

As time goes on I am more into the feel and quality of a car than it's performance numbers. I could give a hoot if the car is 4-tenths quicker in the quarter or the lateral g's are .05 higher. Doesn't matter to me if the car does 180 or 202 MPH; not going there anyway. Feel and driving experience and appearance matter a lot, so does fit/finish and reliability. So if a car manufacturer releases something that has better numbers but is less fun to drive (not referring to any specific car here), many of us will look elsewhere.

[Tomislav]

In breaking news, the E92 engine sits higher and weighs more than an E46 M3, so that must make the E46 better.... but hang on, the E46 engine sits higher than an E36, so the E36 must be better.....

When will the madness end!?!?!?!?!

[Shredicus]

Originally Posted by Tomislav

In breaking news, the E92 engine sits higher and weighs more than an E46 M3, so that must make the E46 better.... but hang on, the E46 engine sits higher than an E36, so the E36 must be better.....

When will the madness end!?!?!?!?!

Naw. The m3 V8 weighs 33lbs less and I'm sure the CoG is lower due to V vs inline configuration

[E46M3forRay]

Originally Posted by Beemdog

Some are known to spontaneously jump over roadway center dividers.

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

guys, the reason it jumps curbs is the PSI differences between the rear tires and front tires, so I'm told by a pro driver.

Originally Posted by roastbeef

Higher engine = moar roll. Curb hop. Plz keep tires within 1.5psi.

[Tomislav]

Originally Posted by Shredicus

Naw. The m3 V8 weighs 33lbs less and I'm sure the CoG is lower due to V vs inline configuration

sarcasm dude.....

[1MOREMOD]

It is a disadvantage of the f80 they just overcame it by adding more smug doucheyness in every batch.

[jtodd_fl]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

It is a disadvantage of the f80 they just overcame it by adding more smug doucheyness in every batch.

Adds 25rwhp. The extra ///M badges add 6 more.