I knew I wasn't crazy (Re: E92 M3)

[sportyaccordy]

The US E46 was criticized as being too civil compared to the E36 M3??? The E36 M3 was a 330iS...

And I'm sure the V8 is a gem, etc. But comparable to a Ferarri? Perhaps if the BMW's V8 was a flat plane design rather than the cross plane design... that separates Ferarri's V8s from those in say, Mustangs.

And I STILL think a 3.5L version of the magnesium inline 6 would have been better than the twin turbo aluminum 3.0L or this V8.

Of course, in the grand scheme of things I suppose none of it matters as I won't be getting an E46 or E92 M3 any time soon... and of course BMW is in the business of selling cars, not making cars that will satisfy sportyaccordy. I understand that. But I just think there are simple things they could have done a little differently that would have made the car a lot lighter and more raw while still being civilized and coddling.

But w/e... we'll see what happens with the CSL version.

[red_shift]

Wow, so much BS.

What is more "addictive" about the I6 compared to the V8? Both are high-strung engines that rev like crazy. The V8 simply has the added benefit of more power and less weight. You'd think all you "hard core" enthusiasts would be happy about that.

"AGAIN... I've been reiterating this point since the release of the E90... had BMW designed their magnesium motor to accomodate 3.5L of displacement... arggghhh. They could have had a 380-400HP L6 that would weigh a good 200-300# less than the M3 they decided to make that would have easily remained king against the more powerful (but heavy) RS4 and C63"

Of course you have no way of knowing that. If they increased to stroke it would have hurt its ability to rev.

Other bigger V6's haven't even matched BMW's old 3.2L...and here you sit second guessing their engineers? How rediculous.

This car will outperform the E46 with ease. The E46 outperformed the E36 with ease, which outperformed the E30 with ease. This constant notion that new cars are "less involving" has gotten to the point of rediculousness. Is the E30 "more involving" than an E92? Um, sure it is. But so was a 1989 Civic. Its a function of their lack of features and abilities. If all you guys want that type of car, go buy one. They are really cheap.

I don't have Raza's bitterness about the E-90 platform, however, at the same time I know what it can do better and what my E46 can do better. BOTH  are good cars, and carry the BMW DNA. I don't think the new M3 will be any different. The old M3 might be appealing in a different way, but I am certain the E92 M3 will have plenty to offer the serious driver.

[nickdrinkwater]

The problem is that all these people jacking off over the E30 M3 built up their hopes too much for the new M3.  You're always going to be disappointed when you hype something up so much and there's no way it can meet people's expectations.

[ArchBishop]

I doubt it would be the same people.

Finally, we agree on something.

[Submariner]

Another rediculous post.

The M3 provides as much or more involvement than practically every car that every person on this board drives. There are only a few exceptions (I think someone here drives an elise, another drives an M3, and Leblowski's plastic American junk could probably make a case for itself), but in general all the people complaining here about the M3's lack of involvement have themselves made decisions about buying cars with less involvement in order to get better refinement. Particularly ironic is sportyaccordy given his recent car purchase.

People just love to complain about new cars as far as I can tell. No matter what BMW did, I am sure the people complaining here would have found something to bitch about.

I'm not ratting on BMW in general.  I love many models to death.  For goodness sake, I own one.

And perhaps I should have further expanded on my post before. 

Yes, it's more than a bit ironic that I'm complaining about BMW selling out making cars that are coushier and coushier when I drive their master land yacht, and of course, I haven't driven it.  So I shouldnt really comment.  But I have driven the evolutions of the 5 and 7 series, and I must say that they are following this exact formulia.  Cars that are becoming, well, porkier, and less involving.  Even my 7 compaired to the new one feels different, less isolated, more fun to drive.

I suppose some of my distatse is linked to the liberal useage of computers and aids in cars, which again is ironic on my part, seeing as my car has many of the afore-mentioned bits.  But to say that we are all going back on our compliaints because of what we currently drive is a bit harsh.  I know many people who have a pratical car for every day, then something driveable, but far more focused for the weekends.  I would love an Evo, or an Elise, but, honestly, I just don't have a place in my life for one right.  But that does not mean I would love to own something alone those lines in the future.

This is a matter of myself believing that the M3 is moving away from what it should be.  Wheather or not I drive a car exactly like the M3 does not matter in this arguement.  Perhaps I was wrong in saying that the M3 is moving away from it's roots, but from what I heard, it seems like it is. 

Personally, The only current BMW I dislike is the 7.  Other than that, I quite like their current model range. 

[Submariner]

I'm willing to bet a small amount of money this car will offer at least "a bit" of driving excitement.

I didn't mean bit in the true meaning of the word.  I was trying to say "a lot"  But aparently my sarcasam was screwed by the interweb.  my bad.

[Tave]

I didn't mean bit in the true meaning of the word.? I was trying to say "a lot"? But aparently my sarcasam was screwed by the interweb.? my bad.

S'all good, just givin ya shit.

[Submariner]

S'all good, just givin ya shit.

Bastard.

[sportyaccordy]

I just did a simulation of a 3.7L "M3"... 9000RPM, 400HP, 3400#, tight gearing on CarTest2000... similar performance to the real deal in the straight line, but mine cornered better, lapped Laguna Seca 1.6 seconds faster, and would sip less fuel with better gearing...

Plus I'm sure a 9000RPM L6 wouldn't sound too bad...and beating the RS4/C98 with less HP and more finesse would have been sweet too. But w/e

[Raghavan]

A 9,000 RPM 3.7L 6 cylinder engine is pretty much impossible.
Maybe if it was a 3.6L-4.0L V8, it could work, but still, that's crazy.

[Eye of the Tiger]

A 9,000 RPM 3.7L 6 cylinder engine is pretty much impossible.
Maybe if it was a 3.6L-4.0L V8, it could work, but still, that's crazy.

Nonsense. A 3.7L 6cyl could go 20,000rpms if it was made of strong enough and light enough materials and/or the stroke was short enough

[sportyaccordy]

A 9,000 RPM 3.7L 6 cylinder engine is pretty much impossible.
Maybe if it was a 3.6L-4.0L V8, it could work, but still, that's crazy.

Why? The Porsche flat 6 revs to 8400 in the GT3. If anything the L6 would be the best choice to rev that high as it's internally balanced. With a big bore and a fancy pants valvetrain it would make clean power from idle to redline, and more importantly, be much lighter than the V8 with 2 less cylinders and the magnesium block (although the block would need serious reenforcement to rev to 9K)...

And I was really generous with the weight... the 328i 6spd weighs 3350#... BMW could easily knock off another 50-100# if they kept the same motor in it...

[1 BAD 7]

Well said SJ and you are dead on right

Another rediculous post.

The M3 provides as much or more involvement than practically every car that every person on this board drives. There are only a few exceptions (I think someone here drives an elise, another drives an M3, and Leblowski's plastic American junk could probably make a case for itself), but in general all the people complaining here about the M3's lack of involvement have themselves made decisions about buying cars with less involvement in order to get better refinement. Particularly ironic is sportyaccordy given his recent car purchase.

People just love to complain about new cars as far as I can tell. No matter what BMW did, I am sure the people complaining here would have found something to bitch about.?

[Raghavan]

Nonsense. A 3.7L 6cyl could go 20,000rpms if it was made of strong enough and light enough materials and/or the stroke was short enough

Yeah, with an unlimited pricetag...
I'm keeping things reasonable here.

[1 BAD 7]

Good post 565

One other thing to keep in mind is that the new M3 doesnot have to be very raw because that role now belongs to a more proper front engined rear wheel drive 2 seater car known as Z4 M coupe. By all stretch of imaginations the Z4 M coupe has been called raw/pure it is a car that you have to grab by the neck and throw arround the track to get faster and faster laps. According to a recent comparison Z4 M coupe is not a car that is easy to drive like Porsche Cayman S at 10/10th but rather a car which requires a lot more driver input and ability to be able to push to drive at 10/10th limit. But when you yank it by the neck and push it hard at the track it is very capable car and almost matches Porsche Cayman S track times. So for all those that want more raw/pure and edgy car that requires more driver effort and input need to go with Z4 M coupe.

In my opinion BMW intends Z4 M coupe to be the more classic front engine-rear wheel drive sports car. I hope that they soon introduce the lighter and more powerfull V8 to Z4 M.

I'm sort of torn with the new M3.? I actually like the direction BMW went with the M3, but I'm not sure if it makes sense with the 335i in its new lineup.

I've always said I wasn't a big fan of the older M3 because they started with a 3 series, a car known for balancing ride and handling, and then proceeded to tune all the comfort and compliance out of it.? Yeah history is great and all, and I'm sure the E30 brings a tear to many eyes, but one should assess cars based on their modern role.? I'm not alone when I say the E46 M3 was stiff, noisy, and lost the balanced and cohesive feel of the lesser powered 3 series cars.? The result was a car as punishing as a true sports car, but still not quite as capable.

I love quoting this C&D review ( and we know that C&D loves the BMW 3 series) , because it reminds us not to get all nostaglic over the older M3.? It may have been "raw," but it was at the cost of the 3 series balance of sport and luxury.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/13379/2003-bmw-m3.html

"Unlike other BMWs, the M3 is never the silky, whirring machine. It?s raw in its engine noises, interior booms, gear whines, tire songs, and pipe-organ resonances. Raw and quite loud. Always the jock. And sometimes rude. We noticed an odd ?death rattle? from the engine room each time the ignition was switched off. And the bixenon headlights sound a bad-mannered grunt as they rotate through their alignment ritual on startup.

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."

That said, I'm glad BMW made this new M3 softer, smoother, more comfortable, closer to the original balanced formula of the 3 series.? Starting with a heavier luxury chassis, BMW can never reach the levels of communication from a dedicated sports car, like say a 911.? Attempting to reach 911 levels of communication and handling will only result in the loss of all the original luxury of the 3 series underpinnings.? The BMW M3 should instead try to offer a level of isolation and compliance that a true sports car like a 911 can not achieve.

Thus when viewed alone, the E92 M3 is moving in the right direction when compared to the E46.? It seem offers all the performance bragging rights, but also adds more compelling reasons for purchase over a 911 beyond just practicality.?

But what does seem strange is the existance of the BMW 335i.? I originally thought that the E92 would be going the opposite direction in comparision to the E46, more hardcore and more raw, due to the placement of the powerful 335i to cover the luxury/sport balance vehicle.? It seems now that the E92 M3 and the 335 are poised a bit too close to each other for comfort.

[Raghavan]

Maybe BMW will make a M1 or something that will suit purists who think the new M3 has gone soft.
Hopefully...

[Eye of the Tiger]

300hp 1-er.

[Raghavan]

333 hp 1er.

[1 BAD 7]

I strongly disagree with you that the new 7 series is not a fun car to drive and the last generation is more fun to drive. The new 7er is far more capable car overall then the older 7er and it is a very fun car to drive among larger luxury cars. It is still considered the sports car of the flagship style luxury cars in the way it drives. Even C/D reviews have never said that it is not fun to drive they might dislike the i-drive but in now way they suggested that BMW 7er or new 5er are not fun cars to drive.

I drive E39 5er and yes it is as you call it a bit more raw or pure but in no way it is more capable car or aboslute more fun to drive then the new 5er. A statement like yours about new 7er vs old 7er shows typical bias most owners of previous generation cars show when their car is replaced with the new one and I dont blame you for it as it is quiet natural to be bias towards what you have parked in your driveway.

But once again never in 100 years would I ever trade my 745i for a last generation 7er.  

Even my 7 compaired to the new one feels different, less isolated, more fun to drive.

[1 BAD 7]

These are all pure assumptions and nothing more. The bottom line is that the new 4.0 liter V8 is appx. 45 Ibs lighter then the 3.2 liter and that is real good.

I just did a simulation of a 3.7L "M3"... 9000RPM, 400HP, 3400#, tight gearing on CarTest2000... similar performance to the real deal in the straight line, but mine cornered better, lapped Laguna Seca 1.6 seconds faster, and would sip less fuel with better gearing...

Plus I'm sure a 9000RPM L6 wouldn't sound too bad...and beating the RS4/C98 with less HP and more finesse would have been sweet too. But w/e

[LonghornTX]

I'm sort of torn with the new M3.? I actually like the direction BMW went with the M3, but I'm not sure if it makes sense with the 335i in its new lineup.

I've always said I wasn't a big fan of the older M3 because they started with a 3 series, a car known for balancing ride and handling, and then proceeded to tune all the comfort and compliance out of it.? Yeah history is great and all, and I'm sure the E30 brings a tear to many eyes, but one should assess cars based on their modern role.? I'm not alone when I say the E46 M3 was stiff, noisy, and lost the balanced and cohesive feel of the lesser powered 3 series cars.? The result was a car as punishing as a true sports car, but still not quite as capable.

I love quoting this C&D review ( and we know that C&D loves the BMW 3 series) , because it reminds us not to get all nostaglic over the older M3.? It may have been "raw," but it was at the cost of the 3 series balance of sport and luxury.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/13379/2003-bmw-m3.html

"Unlike other BMWs, the M3 is never the silky, whirring machine. It?s raw in its engine noises, interior booms, gear whines, tire songs, and pipe-organ resonances. Raw and quite loud. Always the jock. And sometimes rude. We noticed an odd ?death rattle? from the engine room each time the ignition was switched off. And the bixenon headlights sound a bad-mannered grunt as they rotate through their alignment ritual on startup.

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."

That said, I'm glad BMW made this new M3 softer, smoother, more comfortable, closer to the original balanced formula of the 3 series.? Starting with a heavier luxury chassis, BMW can never reach the levels of communication from a dedicated sports car, like say a 911.? Attempting to reach 911 levels of communication and handling will only result in the loss of all the original luxury of the 3 series underpinnings.? The BMW M3 should instead try to offer a level of isolation and compliance that a true sports car like a 911 can not achieve.

Thus when viewed alone, the E92 M3 is moving in the right direction when compared to the E46.? It seem offers all the performance bragging rights, but also adds more compelling reasons for purchase over a 911 beyond just practicality.?

But what does seem strange is the existance of the BMW 335i.? I originally thought that the E92 would be going the opposite direction in comparision to the E46, more hardcore and more raw, due to the placement of the powerful 335i to cover the luxury/sport balance vehicle.? It seems now that the E92 M3 and the 335 are poised a bit too close to each other for comfort.

Very good post .

[LonghornTX]

The US E46 was criticized as being too civil compared to the E36 M3??? The E36 M3 was a 330iS...

And I'm sure the V8 is a gem, etc. But comparable to a Ferarri? Perhaps if the BMW's V8 was a flat plane design rather than the cross plane design... that separates Ferarri's V8s from those in say, Mustangs.

And I STILL think a 3.5L version of the magnesium inline 6 would have been better than the twin turbo aluminum 3.0L or this V8.

Of course, in the grand scheme of things I suppose none of it matters as I won't be getting an E46 or E92 M3 any time soon... and of course BMW is in the business of selling cars, not making cars that will satisfy sportyaccordy. I understand that. But I just think there are simple things they could have done a little differently that would have made the car a lot lighter and more raw while still being civilized and coddling.

But w/e... we'll see what happens with the CSL version.

First off, have you driven an N54 equipped car?? Seriously, that may seem like I am picking bones with you, but really, there is a reason it is the highest rated engine in its class.

It does things no big displacement NA I6 can do, all the while doing so with very respectable fuel economy.? I have driven pretty much EVERY BMW made in the past 20 years, including the big boy 3.6L equipped E34 US M5 and so many M30 (3.5L I6) equipped cars that I cannot even begin to count.? I would take the ridiculous pulling power that the N54 has (combined with the typical smoothness and revability of any I6) over a bigger cube NA engine any day simply because it is a MUCH better engine to live with day to day.? Plus, I think I have mentioned before to you that the R6 (the one with all the weight saving tricks that you like) architecture cannot support a larger bore because of the cylinder spacings, so essentially you are asking BMW to design a whole NEW architecture, that is unless you suggest they start increasing the stroke.? Sorry, not going to happen.

Plus, all that TT torque allows the 335i to run with E46 M3?

[SVT32V]

This is not a Toyota Camry we're talking about. If what you say were true, the E30 M3 would be long forgotten.

AGAIN... I've been reiterating this point since the release of the E90... had BMW designed their magnesium motor to accomodate 3.5L of displacement... arggghhh. They could have had a 380-400HP L6 that would weigh a good 200-300# less than the M3 they decided to make that would have easily remained king against the more powerful (but heavy) RS4 and C63

"but why push the inline 6 to the limit. the V8 is less stressed"

Because stressed out motors are what the M3 is all about, damn it. Yes, I admit, the M3 should be somewhat civil, at least enough to be drivable as an everyday car. But if it cannot inspire confidence and thrill at 10/10ths, why bother with it over a 335i?

The new V8 is significantly lighter than the I6 it replaces, and is shorter provding better weight distribution.

[Raza]

If they were really serious, they'd put the engine where it belongs.?

[sportyaccordy]

The new V8 is significantly lighter than the I6 it replaces, and is shorter provding better weight distribution.

The old L6 from the E46 had a cast iron block.

[red_shift]

The new V8 is significantly lighter than the I6 it replaces, and is shorter provding better weight distribution.

Coming to that... an I6 is longer and purportedly smoother.? ? However, it makes for a longer hood, increasing the polar moment of inertia (if I remember correctly, this is from a competitor's ad). Why wouldn't BMW do V6s? Fine, V6s require balance shafts to remain smooth, but hey, we talking about the pursuit of ideal dynamics here.

Look at the hood of the frickin Civic. Ridiculously short (of course, FWD and all) but that got me going on what a small displacement V6 can do for BMW.

[sportyaccordy]

Coming to that... an I6 is longer and purportedly smoother.    However, it makes for a longer hood, increasing the polar moment of inertia (if I remember correctly, this is from a competitor's ad). Why wouldn't BMW do V6s? Fine, V6s require balance shafts to remain smooth, but hey, we talking about the pursuit of ideal dynamics here.

Look at the hood of the frickin Civic. Ridiculously short (of course, FWD and all) but that got me going on what a small displacement V6 can do for BMW.

Honestly a V6 would really do wonders for BMW. It would help with packaging and be lighter than an inline 6. However the inline 6 runs smoother and is just a BMW tradition... outside of the Volvo S80 and the Chevy Trailblazer BMW's L6s are the last in production

[SVT32V]

Coming to that... an I6 is longer and purportedly smoother.    However, it makes for a longer hood, increasing the polar moment of inertia (if I remember correctly, this is from a competitor's ad). Why wouldn't BMW do V6s? Fine, V6s require balance shafts to remain smooth, but hey, we talking about the pursuit of ideal dynamics here.

Look at the hood of the frickin Civic. Ridiculously short (of course, FWD and all) but that got me going on what a small displacement V6 can do for BMW.

Perhaps an I6 is inherently smoother, but it is not like most V8s or this one has agrarian qualities, clearly one of the criticisms of this car was that it was too soft.

What is wrong with a V8 in this car, it is shorter and lighter and more powerful.  They could make it a 6 but I can't think of any V6 that has this power level NA.  Of course, they could up the boost on the 335 motor and achieve more power, but they obviuosly want the V8, just like the competition.

[565]

Look at the hood of the frickin Civic. Ridiculously short (of course, FWD and all) but that got me going on what a small displacement V6 can do for BMW.

I agree.  It may alarm traditionalists, but I wonder how long BMW will continue to hang onto it's I6's.  In the M5 and M3, along with its higher powered models, BMW is already using V10 and V8 power.  Beyond BMW, the market is almost devoid of inline 6 engines now.  Just a few years ago, automakers such as Nissan and Toyota still had a healthy line of straight six engines, but now they are gone too.  I personally have a soft spot for straight sixes, since my Supra has one.  But with V6's becoming ever smoother, the time of the straight six may really be coming to an end.

[SVT32V]

The old L6 from the E46 had a cast iron block.

Because they needed the extra rigidity.