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

[sportyaccordy]

I've never disagreed with my man, Mark Wan, webmaster of what may be the best automotive site on the internet:

http://www.autozine.org/html/BMW/M3_E92.html

Fire the V8, the first thing you notice is how quiet it is compare with the old straight-6. At low rev it emits a subdued bubble. As rev rise its sound track migrates to something like a racing V8 with high pitch noise, but it still lacks the addictive, pulse-raising excitement of the old engine. Those expecting a muscle car kind of power delivery will be disappointed either, because the M-Power V8 runs with turbine smoothness and a surprisingly linear character. 6000 rpm is just the beginning, from there to 8400 rpm lies the sweet zone and the car is really flying. V8 or not, M3 remains as rev-hungry as ever. To access its performance, you still need to work hard on its slightly clonky gearshift and put up with a fuel consumption of 15 mpg or so.

We have no doubt that the new car is faster ? BMW said it lapped Nurburgring in 8 min 10 seconds, 12 seconds faster than the old car, 3 seconds quicker than the current M5 and just 1 second behind M6. Yes, it is still some way behind the old M3 CSL, but that car employed semi-slick tires, remember. However, whether it can match the new C63 AMG is quite doubtful to me. As we know, the AMG not only have stronger power but also better brakes. In contrast, M3's single-piston brakes are prone to fade during hard use, especially on tracks. Just don?t know why, BMW has never taken brakes seriously.

But that is only the beginning of its weaknesses. Unbelievably, the V8 power is wrongly mated with a chassis setup that gone soft. On mountain roads, the new M3 rides more comfortably, understeers more, rolls more on the turn-in and becomes more difficult to trigger power slide in corners, although once it is sliding the movement is progressive and controllable. However, the most disappointing aspect is steering, which lacks feedback from the front tires, so the driver can only guess how much grip left. That hurts driving confidence and stops the driver from pushing it as hard as previously possible. Even when you switch to Sport mode, the steering is still too light for keen drivers, and the numbness remains unchanged.

Sadly, the new M3 has lost the razor sharp character of E46. It becomes more like a M5 rather than a nimbler, more driver-focused and more entertaining machine. It might have a bigger heart, but what it lacks is a soul. Sorry to the fans of M3, perhaps it's time to turn to AMG for driving excitement...

I'm still holding out for the CSL... but IMO, the CSL will probably be what the regular M3 should have been... of course, with completely unstreetable tires, and an unreasonable price premium. Better luck next time?

[Raghavan]

So i guess the smart thing to do would be to get a 335i and mod it and save some money.

[SVT666]

If cars didn't become more refined and less raw then the last version, the same people bitching about the lack of rawness will be the ones bitching about the lack of refinement and luxury. 

[Raza]

If cars didn't become more refined and less raw then the last version, the same people bitching about the lack of rawness will be the ones bitching about the lack of refinement and luxury.?

I doubt it would be the same people.






"However, whether it can match the new C63 AMG is quite doubtful to me."

[Raghavan]

If cars didn't become more refined and less raw then the last version, the same people bitching about the lack of rawness will be the ones bitching about the lack of refinement and luxury. 

I don't think so. That's what the regular 3ers are for. M is for Motorsport, not luxury. An M car is supposed to be a relatively all out performance car that you can use as a daily driver.

[SVT666]

I don't think so. That's what the regular 3ers are for. M is for Motorsport, not luxury. An M car is supposed to be a relatively all out performance car that you can use as a daily driver.

I guarantee the people buying these cars look at the price tag and think, "I better get some fucking luxury for that price".  I want to see back-to-back tests of the new car with the old car, because people don't exactly remember things the way they were.

[sportyaccordy]

If cars didn't become more refined and less raw then the last version, the same people bitching about the lack of rawness will be the ones bitching about the lack of refinement and luxury. 

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?

[Raghavan]

I guarantee the people buying these cars look at the price tag and think, "I better get some fucking luxury for that price".

Yeah, with the E46, you still got leather, A/C, a sound system and all power windows, door locks, etc. And it was still a lot more hardcore than the new one.
I'm having hope that the E90 M3 will be better, but i honestly don't think it will be.

[Raza]

I guarantee the people buying these cars look at the price tag and think, "I better get some fucking luxury for that price".? I want to see back-to-back tests of the new car with the old car, because people don't exactly remember things the way they were.

Those people are not real M buyers. 

[SVT666]

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

Don't get me wrong, I want my performance cars to be hardcore and raw which is one of the things that attracts me to the Mustang, but BMW is selling more M3s now then they ever have, so they must be giving the buyers what they want.  The market is fairly small for hardcore and raw performance cars.  My co-workers 335i is so quiet you don't even hear the exhaust at WOT until he's over 5000 rpm.  I can't handle that.  I gotta hear and feel the exhaust in my cars.

[Raghavan]

Hemi is one of those people who are the reason that cars are getting softer.
"Oh, i want something less hard edged, and i want more luxury. Leather, full power everything, sound system, etc is enough for me! I want cushy suspension..." etc etc etc.
It's the top of the line M car. You don't get much more performance from the factory (only one being the CSL).
You only have a bajillion other options other than the M3 if you want "luxury".

[Raghavan]

Don't get me wrong, I want my performance cars to be hardcore and raw which is one of the things that attracts me to the Mustang, but BMW is selling more M3s now then they ever have, so they must be giving the buyers what they want.  The market is fairly small for hardcore and raw performance cars.  My co-workers 335i is so quiet you don't even hear the exhaust at WOT until he's over 5000 rpm.  I can't handle that.  I gotta hear and feel the exhaust in my cars.

Ok, disregard the first line of my previous post then.

Oops.

[SVT666]

Ok, disregard the first line of my previous post then.

Oops.

After all the time on this board, you think I like cushy?  Dude, you need to be more observant.

[the Teuton]

The RS4 is a porker, the C63 only comes with an automatic, the M3 is soft (?!?!), and the jury is still out on the ISF.  Will the Nissan Skyline GT-R and Cadillac CTSv be the best cars in the class?  Is the GT-R even in the same class?

Honestly, the E30 was amazing, the E36 M3 was far more civil but faster and kind of a stopgap, the E46 was a huge improvement, and the E92 almost seems like a step back in terms of a sports car.  It's what the E36 was to the E30, but it's less raw than anything before it, seemingly. 

[Raghavan]

After all the time on this board, you think I like cushy?  Dude, you need to be more observant.

Well thats what i thought because you're such a big Rustang fan, but then i saw your posts here and wasn't sure.

[Raghavan]

The RS4 is a porker, the C63 only comes with an automatic, the M3 is soft (?!?!), and the jury is still out on the ISF.  Will the Nissan Skyline GT-R and Cadillac CTSv be the best cars in the class?  Is the GT-R even in the same class?

Honestly, the E30 was amazing, the E36 M3 was far more civil but faster and kind of a stopgap, the E46 was a huge improvement, and the E92 almost seems like a step back in terms of a sports car.  It's what the E36 was to the E30, but it's less raw than anything before it, seemingly. 

The ISF will be auto only (8 speed auto FTL) and will be like the Benz probably.
The GTR competes with Corvettes I thought. But I want to see what the CTS-V will be like. If it is anything like the current (previous?) one, it'll be beautiful.

[deesea]

The article states at the end that the E92 M3 is becoming more like the M5, last time i checked...there was nothing wrong with the M5  :P. the engineers at BMW are just trying to get whatever sells best, since the E46 M3 marked a huge spike in M3 sales, I'm pretty sure BMW decided to go with w/e sells best...more luxury, and performance, though the only problem is that the more luxury the car has, the less performance its able to carry, guess BMW missed the mark with this one. Hopefully the CSL will be better...i seriously doubt the chances of the E90 M3 being more "raw" and performance oriented...its a friggin sedan for godsake! 

Well, I guess its best to go with Rag's idea...buy a 335i and mod it yourself  :P But I'm sure there will be aftermarket companies who are out there to make the E92 M3 more performance oriented when it does come out in 2008. Hopefully autozine is wrong, and the M3 is better than what it seems like in the article...

[1 BAD 7]

The C/D article disagrees with this and so does the M/T both of them found M3 to be very capable arround a track yet still more refined arround town then E46.

[SJ_GTI]

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.

[Raza]

The article states at the end that the E92 M3 is becoming more like the M5, last time i checked...there was nothing wrong with the M5? :P. the engineers at BMW are just trying to get whatever sells best, since the E46 M3 marked a huge spike in M3 sales, I'm pretty sure BMW decided to go with w/e sells best...more luxury, and performance, though the only problem is that the more luxury the car has, the less performance its able to carry, guess BMW missed the mark with this one. Hopefully the CSL will be better...i seriously doubt the chances of the E90 M3 being more "raw" and performance oriented...its a friggin sedan for godsake!?

Well, I guess its best to go with Rag's idea...buy a 335i and mod it yourself? :P But I'm sure there will be aftermarket companies who are out there to make the E92 M3 more performance oriented when it does come out in 2008. Hopefully autozine is wrong, and the M3 is better than what it seems like in the article...

Engineers don't think about sales.  It's the marketers and the bean counters that are the problem. 

[1 BAD 7]

First I think you need to read the C/D and M/T article which clearly state that there is nothing wrong with M3 at 10/10th and it is very capable car arround a track infact according to C/D it is capable enough to be pushed by even a normal person to its 10/10th limit that is how easy it is to drive.

As for the engine I agree with you that the 3.2 liter inline-6 was a jem of an engine but your hint that the new V8 has made M3 heavier is not true. The new V8 is lighter then the older inline-6 by a significant margin now if it was heavier then you would have a point. The weight that M3 has gained is not from going with heavier engine but from the fact that the new 3 series is overall a larger car then the E46 generation 3 series not to mention it comes with more standard weight adding luxury gizmos. Now many enthusiast might not care for such gizmos but M3 is primarly bought by people that are looking for a hyper sports luxury GT coupe. I high lighted the fact about luxury because last generation M3 lost plenty of comparisons during its last couple of years to heavier more powerfull and better refined cars from Audi or MB.


The funny thing is that the author of the topic claims M3 has become like M5 yet it is clearly faster and more capable arround a track then M5 and that is despite being underpowered by 100hp and appx. some 70 Ib-ft of torque. Also both C/D and M/T had nothing but praise for M3 brakes that they didnot show fade and were great in braking lap after lap.


As for MB C63 AMG vs BMW M3 that is still to be seen.

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?

[Tave]

 

Well put, SJ. Your point about the V8 being light weight is especially pertinant to sporty's complaints. I6s are a relatively heavy engine design to begin with, so it was unfair of him to criticize the new M3s V8 like he did.

If BMW could truely put out a magnesium I6 that weighed 300 pounds less than the V8 it would have to scale in at, like what, 100 lbs? That would be quite the engineering accomplishment.

[Submariner]

The C/D article disagrees with this and so does the M/T both of them found M3 to be very capable arround a track yet still more refined arround town then E46.

And herein lies the problem.  The M3 shouldn't be "more capible."  It should be civilized enough to be a daily driver but raw enough to evoke pleasure in serious drivers.  I think many on here would agree that thwy would give up a vew seconds on a track for a car that talks to you, and a car that just does not go fast, but feels fast.

BMW is doing this not because they cant build a proper sports car, but because their price bracket demands cars that, well, aren't hardcore.  The M3 is the cars for middle agemen with a bit of a gut who want to look impressive as they pass by 20 - something year old girls.   All they have to to is flip the switch to "Auto" and they're off.  I seriously doubt the mass majority of SMG customers buy it for the "performance edge"  No.  They buy it for the slushbox function.  The M3 is a fine car in the sense that Harrison Ford is a good actor.  It may look good at first glanse, but once you get to know it, it really isn't all that interesting.  In essence, BMW is selling out.  But why shouldn't they?  I know most of us (except Wimmer, he likes coushy underpowered diesel land yachts  )  Want something with a bit of driving excitement, but we are an enthusiast board, so naturally we should.  Most of us, however, don't  have 50 or 60 grand lying around, thus we have no say in how the M3 should be built. 

[Tave]

I know most of us (except Wimmer, he likes coushy underpowered diesel land yachts? )? Want something with a bit of driving excitement, but we are an enthusiast board, so naturally we should.? Most of us, however, don't? have 50 or 60 grand lying around, thus we have no say in how the M3 should be built.?

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

[SJ_GTI]

And herein lies the problem.? The M3 shouldn't be "more capible."? It should be civilized enough to be a daily driver but raw enough to evoke pleasure in serious drivers.? I think many on here would agree that thwy would give up a vew seconds on a track for a car that talks to you, and a car that just does not go fast, but feels fast.

BMW is doing this not because they cant build a proper sports car, but because their price bracket demands cars that, well, aren't hardcore.? The M3 is the cars for middle agemen with a bit of a gut who want to look impressive as they pass by 20 - something year old girls.? ?All they have to to is flip the switch to "Auto" and they're off.? I seriously doubt the mass majority of SMG customers buy it for the "performance edge"? No.? They buy it for the slushbox function.? The M3 is a fine car in the sense that Harrison Ford is a good actor.? It may look good at first glanse, but once you get to know it, it really isn't all that interesting.? In essence, BMW is selling out.? But why shouldn't they?? I know most of us (except Wimmer, he likes coushy underpowered diesel land yachts? )? Want something with a bit of driving excitement, but we are an enthusiast board, so naturally we should.? Most of us, however, don't? have 50 or 60 grand lying around, thus we have no say in how the M3 should be built.?

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. 

[Champ]

M is really the only BMW I'd seriously buy, unless I got an old 3'er to strip and race for kicks.

From what I understand, this car looks pretty nice.

[565]

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.

[ro51092]

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

[MexicoCityM3]

This is ridiculous. The E46 was criticized almost as much at its launch. C/D said then "the understeer brought tears to their eyes" and it was also criticized as soft compared to the E36 which in turn was softer (a lot) than the E30.

Nostalgia for the inline six? Sure its great but, COME ON, this V8 is probably the best this side of a Ferrari engine. C/D said it sound better and pulls harder than the RS4. Have you heard the videos? Now the E46 M3 is the greatest car ever LOL.

I'm still in line for an E92 M3 and will do all I can to keep the E46 alongside it only because I want to get them all!.

I think BMW is evolving the car along with their customer base. I like the direction the M3 is taking, it is too big anyway to be a true hard-core sports car. I won't argue with base 911 level performance with more practicality (which is what the M3 is for). Its a car you can drive every day that looks relatively low key (it a 3 series after all) and you can also track it and scare 911s or beat them in some cases.

Having said that, I think an M1/M2 based on a 1 series coupe with a slightly evolved S54 N/A inline six would be great for BMW's image with the purists. Then again, maybe the 135i will be enough.

[MexicoCityM3]

For all you (us?) E46 lovers to put things into perspective:

Just to prove you that history repeats itself ...

Do you guys agree M3 E46 is one superb machine & sports car?

You do?

But the initial reviews back then in 2000 were not so great :

Quote:
Originally Posted by Auto Express, Previews 9/21/00

"...But we get the feeling BMW's M division could have gone one step further. In faster bends, there's a tad too much body roll, and a safe and secure nose-led stance which won't get you into trouble. The steering could also be slightly sharper and do with more feel, while the chassis would benefit from being set up to be even tauter and more agile to combat the inertia of this 1,570 kg machine. These are all 'ifs' and 'buts', though. BMW has sought to build the ultimate all-around super coupe, and to that extent it has succeeded, as the M3 is an eminently usable everyday car despite it's fantastic performance potential. What seems to be needed is some sort of stripped-out 'RS' or 'Club Sport' pack, like Porsche offers, with less toys, less weight and more focus to tighten everything up for serious enthusiasts who may like to take their pride and joy to the odd track day or two. ..."

So, now you know the E92 M3 is one just fine car.

E46 M3 steering was also "not as sharp" with "not enough feel", suspension allowed "too much body roll", chassis was "not set up well to combat the weight inertia", the car was built to be "all-rounder", a "sharper package for true enthusiasts" was needed.

Sounds familiar?

OTHER ARTICLES:

Re: E46 M3 inital review vs. E92 M3 initial reviews
________________________________________
Here's TopGear, Oct 2000:
"across rough roads this new car offers more compliancy than the last M3. Even over sharply-angled cambers, the steering resists being twitched all over the place. Yet that isn't to say that it's perfect. Although a smidge quicker than a standard 3-Series' set-up, perplexingly - at least with the optional wheels in place - there's a reduction in communication through the wheel."

Car and Driver, Dec 2000:
"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. Understeer is a safe, if unexciting handling trait, and the new car masks its speed as well as the old."

C&D from 2003:
"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...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."