New E92 M3 Not Hitting the Mark

[E46M3]

Hmmm, so far not that good with many of these early reviews. There seems to be a bit of diappointment in this car given the very high bar BMW set with the classic E46.

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/first_drive.php?sid=841&page=1

http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/FirstDrives/BMW-M3-4.0-V8/226432/

Ouch, no reading between the lines necassary with this one:

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...topanel..1 .*

"Its 4.0-liter V8 is quiet ? possibly too quiet ? and settles to a lazy, subdued burble"

"you can't help wondering whether in the switch to eight cylinders, some of the classic BMW character has been lost. Even M Power's Richter admits, "Deciding to replace the six with the V8 was a difficult decision."

"The tantalizing, hard-edged bark of the old M3 six that teased and cajoled is no more. And the M3 is poorer for it."

"This is an exceptionally able car that's blessed with a superbly executed engine, but there can be no denying that some of the guttural appeal of the old car has been lost. Or at least the guttural appeal of the fully optioned M3 that enthusiasts remember. The 2008 BMW M3 might have the grunt to challenge the Porsche 911, but it doesn't quite have the finesse or the emotive appeal. Indeed, you end up wondering whether it's worth paying such a premium over the brilliant BMW 335i coupe.

Clearly, some of M Power's engineers are thinking the same thoughts. They let slip that a lighter, harder-edged M3 CSL is already in development."


I don't recall the E46 having these kinds of reviews. In almost every review I have now read there seems to be a hint of disappointment and BMW perhaps already knew they may have dropped the ball on this one a little. Hence the urgency of bringing out the CSL sooner rather than later.

I'm definately keeping my E46 for a long time......for the looks alone!!

[565]

I don't recall the E46 having these kinds of reviews.

Memories tend to be fonder than reality.? The E46 was no pure driving experience either.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/6568/the-middleweights-compact-adrenaline-delivery-systems-page3.html

"A hormone-injected 3-series BMW sounds as if it would be a frisky, flingable sportster. In fact, the M3 feels heavy and reserved. Steering effort increases very little as you bite into a turn. Some drivers read that as ?effort too low.? All agree that communication is a bit aloof. The M3 also needs more turning of the wheel than the others, so direction changes seem less eager. The clutch is a workout. Some of us complained mildly about the driving position; for example, the left-foot rest seems too close to the driver relative to the pedals.

The cloth bucket seat, with numerous mechanical adjusters including one for height, seemed rather stingy at the $50-thou mark, but it?s very effective at holding the driver in place when the scenery starts to blur. On the skidpad, grip topped all the others at 0.87 g. This car is reliable for its understeer, and it?s not at all twitchy as you probe for its limits. It always feels trusty, but hardly spirited.

Don?t expect the famous BMW ride. Few road cars are as stiff-legged as this. And the seat is alive with vibrations at interstate speeds."



And then there was the first drive in 2000 when the memory of the E36 M3 was still fresh in their minds.

http://www.caranddriver.com/previews/3124/bmw-m3.html

The new M3 retains its knife-edged turn-in and flat cornering attitude, but it has picked up a couple of bad habits. The first is a ride that's more punishing than the last model's, which managed to feel both firm and compliant. It isn't uncomfortable, but we sense that the new car bounds around more than the previous model. Second, the new car keeps the rear end so well planted that only the front tires slide in the turns. Yep, it understeers -- badly. Considering how much we loved the old car's neutral handling -- you could call up under- or oversteer at will -- the realization of this trait almost brought tears to our eyes, but the fact remains that without some major driver heroics, the M3's rear end stays emphatically put. Our test car was a European model with 19-inch tires that will not be available stateside, so perhaps the U.S. model with 18-inch tires will feel different. Understeer is a safe, if unexciting handling trait, and the new car masks its speed as well as the old.

[Raza]

I want an E36 four door. 

[ChrisV]

And when the M3 went to 6 cyl from 4 cyl it was also criticized for being too civilized and less focused. After the E30, the M3 stopped being a race car in street clothes. Complaining that the new one is simply more of the same is silly. But that's how little magazine journalists seem to remember of preceeding models.

[SVT666]

They should do a back to back test of the last gen M3 and the new M3 and then give us their thoughts.

[JYODER240]

They should do a back to back test of the last gen M3 and the new M3 and then give us their thoughts.

I wish they'd do that with all new cars.

[SJ_GTI]

Its always fashionable to criticize a new vehicle and claim the previous generation was more "pure" and "direct." Especially when reviewing BMW's.

[r0tor]

I'm definately keeping my E46 for a long time......for the looks alone!!

can't argue with that 

[Raza]

Its always fashionable to criticize a new vehicle and claim the previous generation was more "pure" and "direct." Especially when reviewing BMW's.

It's never fashionable to criticize BMW!

[Vinsanity]

It's never fashionable to criticize BMW!

right. because everyone loves iDrive

[LonghornTX]

Its always fashionable to criticize a new vehicle and claim the previous generation was more "pure" and "direct." Especially when reviewing BMW's.

I tend to agree with that.

Also, I am thinking BMW is taking a new direction with its M department, choosing to go with a two tiered performance level like Audi (S and RS) and MB (AMG and AMG Black).  So now, we will have regular M models that are made to satisfy larger audiences and CSL models to satisfy the hardcore enthusiasts.

The early reviews are by no means bad, they just portray a different type of car than we were expecting.  I for one appreciate the new cars exhaust note over the rather strained sound from the E46, all IMO of course.

[Raza]

Do recall that the CSL wasn't sold here.

[MexicoCityM3]

I've been following all these reviews on the M3 forums. I recommend this thread where Steve, the reviewer for EVO magazine (the review isn't out yet), gives his impressions and answers a lot of specific questions. This guy owns an E46 M3 CSL, an M Coupe, and an RS4. He took the RS4 to the M3 launch in Spain to do a back to back. I invite you to read it yourselves here:

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70400

Most recent BMWs have been criticized at launch for "going soft" and then go on and win their comparison tests anyway. Regarding the E92 M3, I'll form my own opinion after I test drive it and in the meantime will keep following the reviews (these were all first drives) .

[SVT_Power]

The E46 M3 in the original post looks like a CGI. Is it?

[sportyaccordy]

The E46 M3 in the original post looks like a CGI. Is it?

No, just soulless. (I kid, I kid)

I suppose it's just semantics, but I don't see why BMW has to make 2 different M3s. Why not just call it a 340i ///M-sport, then make the CSL the regular M3? I suppose a lot lies in a name, but I never got why ///M cars had to be liveable.

In any case I'm sure the new M3 is a great road and track car, but again, for whatever reason, doesn't provide the purpose-built thrill of the original.

[LonghornTX]

Do recall that the CSL wasn't sold here.

Oh I remember.  Then I remember the first time I saw one IRL  .

[SJ_GTI]

No, just soulless. (I kid, I kid)

I suppose it's just semantics, but I don't see why BMW has to make 2 different M3s. Why not just call it a 340i ///M-sport, then make the CSL the regular M3? I suppose a lot lies in a name, but I never got why ///M cars had to be liveable.

In any case I'm sure the new M3 is a great road and track car, but again, for whatever reason, doesn't provide the purpose-built thrill of the original.

Have you driven an original? They are pretty rare. I've never even seen one in person believe it or not.

The E36 M3 wasn't anything special. A coworker had one (with an automatic), and I don't think she really knew what an "///M" car was about. To her it was just a 3-series with a nicer engine.

The E46, to me, actually seemed like a more "track oriented" car than the E36, but it was a perfectly livable day to day car. It was not a "purpose-built" track car. I see M3 Verts all over the place, usually driven by women in their 30's or 40's.

[Raza]

But then again, you are the one who would rather have a Kia Rio than an E30 M3. 

[SJ_GTI]

But then again, you are the one who would rather have a Kia Rio than an E30 M3.?

Of course I've never said such a thing (I've never driven either one anyway).

If you disagree with my points, please feel free to state where you think I am wrong.

[sportyaccordy]

Have you driven an original? They are pretty rare. I've never even seen one in person believe it or not.

The E36 M3 wasn't anything special. A coworker had one (with an automatic), and I don't think she really knew what an "///M" car was about. To her it was just a 3-series with a nicer engine.

The E46, to me, actually seemed like a more "track oriented" car than the E36, but it was a perfectly livable day to day car. It was not a "purpose-built" track car. I see M3 Verts all over the place, usually driven by women in their 30's or 40's.

I rode in one a few years back... but this was before I knew what to look for in a performance car.

The E36 M3 went mega soft IMO. It was a great GT, and a capable performer, no doubt... but it was made with a totally different philosophy than the original. I think the philosophy of the original was what made it so good... the actual car, on paper at least, was nothing special. ///M cars now seem to be more about impressive specs than an uncompromised, thrilling driving experience.

[ChrisV]

Have you driven an original? They are pretty rare. I've never even seen one in person believe it or not.

I've seen many, including some beat up daily drivers around here. I love them, but they are fragile.

The E36 M3 wasn't anything special.

The E46, to me, actually seemed like a more "track oriented" car than the E36, but it was a perfectly livable day to day car.

Don't say any of that around the GRM boards, as the E36 was and still is the best all around value for a track/street car, and other than the Miata is the number one answer to what to buy to go racing with while still being able to use it on the street. The E46 is really too big and too expensive to use as a nimble track car for most owners, but are good at the pro levels of racing, where budgets are much bigger.

E36 M3s are autocrossed and tracked everywhere and with nice examples being able to be had for under $10k, are also affordable alternatives to most other street/track alternatives. if I hadn't been looking for a luxury car when I bought my 7 series, the E36 M3 was my next choice. Nothing special? I beg to differ.

[Raza]

Of course I've never said such a thing (I've never driven either one anyway).

If you disagree with my points, please feel free to state where you think I am wrong.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing.

I'm just making a joke.   

[SJ_GTI]

E36 M3s are autocrossed and tracked everywhere and with nice examples being able to be had for under $10k, are also affordable alternatives to most other street/track alternatives. if I hadn't been looking for a luxury car when I bought my 7 series, the E36 M3 was my next choice. Nothing special? I beg to differ.

What was so special about it? It seemed to have normal on-road manners and a decent engine (~240 HP) but I can't see where it was really outstanding in any way.

[the Teuton]

BMW used to be able to get away with selling a premium compact sedan in the 3 Series with not a lot in it.  The E30 was a purpose-built beast with adjustable shocks, and a 7000 rpm 4 banger with 200 hp, and 220 in some cases.  It was a hell of a car.

The E36 was softened up here, but figure that the lightweight (the closest thing we got to the CSL) sold like crap here, and emissions brought the 286 hp S50 engine down to 240.  The S52 was an improvement in the torque department, but it was cheaper to build the American-spec version and they could still sell it for a premium, so why wouldn't they?  Also, there was a Luxury and a Sport model much like what Lotus does only to less extremes.  My friends luxury model had wood trim, standard leather, heated seats, and a few extra conveniences.  That's it.  The Euro S52 had a stiffer suspension with 321 hp.  It was a mainstream ///M much like the Cobalt SS (non-SC) is a mainstream SS.

BMW can't get away with selling a pure sports car in America anymore, which is kinda unfortunate.  If you could get a Lightweight and you had to pay a premium for it over the regular car with less features for a more visceral experience, would you?

[the Teuton]

What was so special about it? It seemed to have normal on-road manners and a decent engine (~240 HP) but I can't see where it was really outstanding in any way.

My friend's which is chipped and has a lower rear axle gearing for better acceleration, would blow you away.  Speaking that I've ridden in it while it has done so, I've witnessed the back end breaking loose in fifth gear because of all the torque.  If the car can't hit 60 in the mid to high 4s, I'd be surprised.

[sportyaccordy]

BMW can't get away with selling a pure sports car in America anymore, which is kinda unfortunate. If you could get a Lightweight and you had to pay a premium for it over the regular car with less features for a more visceral experience, would you?

1. Why not? What about a stripped Z4 Coupe?

2. Hell no, I would not pay a premium for a more visceral experience... charge me for what you make. Don't these car manufacturers realize a lot of the people who buy their cars will just get rid of a lot of the parts they put on the car with parts that either cost the same or a little more, and make the experience more fun???

I made a thread in General Talk regarding this topic... but to reiterate, I don't know why BMW would make an M3, and soften it up. If the feedback is lacking, make the bushings and suspension stiffer. If the engine seems a bit muted, keep it legal for the noise test, but let it rip outside of that operating range. Do away with leather and the DVD navigation media center... it's not necessary. The M3 should be an uncompromising driver's car... not a status symbol, IMO

[ChrisV]

What was so special about it? It seemed to have normal on-road manners and a decent engine (~240 HP) but I can't see where it was really outstanding in any way.

When you can take it off the showroom floor and wipe up the class autocrossing, in fact, wipe up most classes autocrossing, that's a perfectly balanced car. That was it's claim to fame, not many cars could, or even still do, equal it's precision and balance, especially not for the money. I'm serious when I say that on the boards dedicated to racing, the E36 M3 is a top contender when anyone wants a car to do dual duty, and not far behind when a dedicated track car is discussed. Even the E30 is dismissed as too fragile and expensive in comparison. and the E 36 tends to beat them in head to head competition on the track.

Yeah, the E36 lost some of the rawness that the E30 has, and is part of the E30's charm and desirability. But it gained ability that for the price, hasn't been equalled by the newer M3s, even though they are great cars.

[LonghornTX]

1. Why not? What about a stripped Z4 Coupe?

2. Hell no, I would not pay a premium for a more visceral experience... charge me for what you make. Don't these car manufacturers realize a lot of the people who buy their cars will just get rid of a lot of the parts they put on the car with parts that either cost the same or a little more, and make the experience more fun???

I made a thread in General Talk regarding this topic... but to reiterate, I don't know why BMW would make an M3, and soften it up. If the feedback is lacking, make the bushings and suspension stiffer. If the engine seems a bit muted, keep it legal for the noise test, but let it rip outside of that operating range. Do away with leather and the DVD navigation media center... it's not necessary. The M3 should be an uncompromising driver's car... not a status symbol, IMO

You, my friend, are an idealist.  That is good in many ways, but when it comes down to making and selling cars, it can sometimes be a flaw.

It is all about marketing, really.  Why would BMW try to make the new M3 so hardcore that it would only appeal to people like us (a VERY small % of the population), when they can make a regular M3 that is still very fast, very loud (read the link that Mexico posted), yet very refined, and very capable that appeals to a MUCH larger % of the population and then serve the hardcore types with a CSL model.  Your target market is expanded this way and you are able to sell many more cars.  Remember, BMW is in the business of making money, and they are VERY good at that, not satisfying the desires of a few enthusiasts who want open exhausts, solid bushings, and a low travel suspensions  .

[sportyaccordy]

You, my friend, are an idealist. That is good in many ways, but when it comes down to making and selling cars, it can sometimes be a flaw.

It is all about marketing, really. Why would BMW try to make the new M3 so hardcore that it would only appeal to people like us (a VERY small % of the population), when they can make a regular M3 that is still very fast, very loud (read the link that Mexico posted), yet very refined, and very capable that appeals to a MUCH larger % of the population and then serve the hardcore types with a CSL model. Your target market is expanded this way and you are able to sell many more cars. Remember, BMW is in the business of making money, and they are VERY good at that, not satisfying the desires of a few enthusiasts who want open exhausts, solid bushings, and a low travel suspensions .

Well... they should at least make some kind of stripper M3. I don't get why the CSL should cost more... stuff like a CF roof, etc, are just stupid gimmicks. Odds are if you can afford an M3, you have a normal car you can drive every day, so rather than charge me $20,000 for a CF roof, you can just take away A/C, P/S, the spare tire, and all the other silly luxury stuff they put in M3s.

[Vinsanity]

you can just take away A/C, P/S, the spare tire, and all the other silly luxury stuff they put in M3s.

BMW wouldn't sell any cars in the southern half of the country if they didn't include a/c. Heck, noone would sell any cars down here without a/c