New BMW M3 V8 owner and his first impressions (+photos)

[cawimmer430]

Here: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82701

[Champ]

Wouldn't it be nice to own a M5, M6 and a M3.

P.S. he noted he wasn't impressed with the engine below 4,000 rpm's to whoever was arguing with me about this vs. the vette for torque.

[Secret Chimp]

I really dislike that wheel style, both on this car and the previous M3. They look like something upsized from a half-assedly designed Hot Wheels.

[SVT666]

P.S. he noted he wasn't impressed with the engine below 4,000 rpm's to whoever was arguing with me about this vs. the vette for torque.

Which is exactly why I prefer larger displacement and lower revving engines.  I hate having to wring an engine out to get any power.

[GoCougs]

Wouldn't it be nice to own a M5, M6 and a M3.

P.S. he noted he wasn't impressed with the engine below 4,000 rpm's to whoever was arguing with me about this vs. the vette for torque.

Actually, not quite. He stated:

"One thing I did find, though, is that you do have to keep the revs up above 4,000 to get the best from the engine."

[Champ]

Actually, not quite. He stated:

"One thing I did find, though, is that you do have to keep the revs up above 4,000 to get the best from the engine."

Which is a nice way of putting it, and also proves my point that I was getting to in whatever thread we were arguing about that.

[sportyaccordy]

Which is exactly why I prefer larger displacement and lower revving engines.  I hate having to wring an engine out to get any power.

Different strokes (and bores) for different folks. I find larger displacement, low revving engines to be boring.

But that's another thread... the new M3 seems cool, still waiting on the CSL version to come out.

[JYODER240]

Why does is have to have such ackward details on a car on an otherwise good looking car

I'm sure it's probably a great drive but unless I absolutly needed a back seat I'd get a Cayman S for the price.

[SVT666]

Different strokes (and bores) for different folks. I find larger displacement, low revving engines to be boring.

I can appreciate high revving engines, but I like putting my foot to floor at any rpm in any gear and have the car pull hard.

[sportyaccordy]

I can appreciate high revving engines, but I like putting my foot to floor at any rpm in any gear and have the car pull hard.

Do you really think a 400HP car will have any trouble pulling in any gear at any speed, regardless of redline? I thought we established that gearing eliminated all the effects of high revving engines.

Again, power is power... if there were no tach you wouldn't know the difference.

[GoCougs]

Which is a nice way of putting it, and also proves my point that I was getting to in whatever thread we were arguing about that.

There's was nothing regarding disappointment.

I'm not exactly sure what you're referring to, but anecdotal experience is not proof.

[Champ]

There's was nothing regarding disappointment.

I'm not exactly sure what you're referring to, but anecdotal experience is not proof.

Referring to the high revs low torque vs. low revs high torque.  There was a large debate over which was better in some other thread, and the two cars compared I think were the Zo6 and this, which have similar HP but much different torque.

Some people were arguing that the M3 will have good torque and pull down low, and relatively I don't think it'll be that great.

[sportyaccordy]

Some people were arguing that the M3 will have good torque and pull down low, and relatively I don't think it'll be that great.

Compared to what... a tractor????

[SVT666]

Again, power is power... if there were no tach you wouldn't know the difference.

Except for that little thing called noise.

Take the M3 and put it against a Roush Stage 3 Mustang.  Both cars have about 415hp and weigh within 100 lbs or so of each other.  The Roush will walk away from the M3 if you're rolling along at 1500 rpm and mash the loud pedal if this engine doesn't produce significant power until after 4000 rpm.

[Champ]

Compared to what... a tractor????

Are you serious or...?

Compared obviously to an engine with more torque but the same HP.

It really is all personal preference.  Do you like to downshift to pass or would you rather just mash the pedal and go?  Do you get a thrill by redlining and shifting often or do you like being in any gear and not get bogged down.

It's a pretty simple question, and BMW hasn't made some jesus engine that pulls super hard over all the super long rev range.  No doubts it's a great engine and will sell a lot of cars, but it isn't for everyone.

[SVT666]

Are you serious or...?

Compared obviously to an engine with more torque but the same HP.

It really is all personal preference.  Do you like to downshift to pass or would you rather just mash the pedal and go?  Do you get a thrill by redlining and shifting often or do you like being in any gear and not get bogged down.

It's a pretty simple question, and BMW hasn't made some jesus engine that pulls super hard over all the super long rev range.  No doubts it's a great engine and will sell a lot of cars, but it isn't for everyone.

I personally think it's a great engine and I would probably have a shitload of fun with it, but I also believe there are better alternatives.  Especially considering an LS3 can be bought from GM in crate form for about $7K and the BMW engine probably costs 3 or 4 times that and the LS3 gives better power, mileage, and torque.

[sportyaccordy]

I personally think it's a great engine and I would probably have a shitload of fun with it, but I also believe there are better alternatives.  Especially considering an LS3 can be bought from GM in crate form for about $7K and the BMW engine probably costs 3 or 4 times that and the LS3 gives better power, mileage, and torque.

I think we should just leave it be as a difference in preferences. I have experienced the same level of power in the two forms contested here and for me, the wind up motor is just better. It's lighter on the nose, it's better gas mileage-wise (even with 60MPH "screaming" at 3K in top gear), and you get to utilize the full rev range. Why have the redline set at 6.5K when the car falls flat at 5?

And as far as low end torque... I'm cool with having a lot if I can get it while saving gas, and having it throughout the rev range... but honestly when I'm driving to work or to get groceries, I don't need 400HP off idle.

Again it's just a matter of taste really... pretty pointless to argue or debate over.

[r0tor]

if you have a truely rev happy engine, you can't even tell what the rpms are... so keeping in the powerband is not a hassle -shrug-

[SVT666]

I think we should just leave it be as a difference in preferences. I have experienced the same level of power in the two forms contested here and for me, the wind up motor is just better. It's lighter on the nose, it's better gas mileage-wise (even with 60MPH "screaming" at 3K in top gear), and you get to utilize the full rev range. Why have the redline set at 6.5K when the car falls flat at 5?

And as far as low end torque... I'm cool with having a lot if I can get it while saving gas, and having it throughout the rev range... but honestly when I'm driving to work or to get groceries, I don't need 400HP off idle.

Again it's just a matter of taste really... pretty pointless to argue or debate over.

You think the LS3 falls flat at 5K?  You think the M3 gets better mileage then the Vette?  You think the M3 V8 weighs less then the LS3?  LS3 weighs 443 lbs and the M3 V8 weighs 445 lbs.

[deesea]

damn...wish i could get a E92 M3, actually any M3 would be fine enough for me...just not the E36 *shudders*

[Raghavan]

Which is exactly why I prefer larger displacement and lower revving engines.  I hate having to wring an engine out to get any power.

Anywho, does anyone know when (if?) the E90 M3 is coming out?

[SVT_Power]

damn...wish i could get a E92 M3, actually any M3 would be fine enough for me...just not the E36 *shudders*

  You want a E46 M3.

[r0tor]

  You want a E46 M3.

the way this thread is going, you'd have to get out and push an E46 M3 in traffic to try to keep up!!!

[SVT666]

the way this thread is going, you'd have to get out and push an E46 M3 in traffic to try to keep up!!!

I never once said an M3 doesn't have any power down, it 's just that you have to wring it out to get it all, and that's what I don't like.  I like a car that has gobs of power available down low that doesn't require 8000rpms to get it all out.

[sandertheshark]

damn...wish i could get a E92 M3, actually any M3 would be fine enough for me...just not the E36 *shudders*

You mean the one that was once called "The Best Handling Car Ever, at Any Price?"
You mean the first M3 widely available in the US?
The first and so far only M3 sedan?

You could wish for worse.

[JYODER240]

Except for that little thing called noise.

Take the M3 and put it against a Roush Stage 3 Mustang.  Both cars have about 415hp and weigh within 100 lbs or so of each other.  The Roush will walk away from the M3 if you're rolling along at 1500 rpm and mash the loud pedal if this engine doesn't produce significant power until after 4000 rpm.

Whats the big deal? You're never going to race someone like that to begin with and even if you are who cares if someone else's car is faster? Big deal if you have to downshift that's part of the fun. That's why we have manual trannys because it's fun to shift gears. Personaly I think it's way more fun to feel the power build as the engine just keeps reving and reving. I'd much rather do that than have an engine that makes its peak power at 2000rpms and just stays constant from there, it's far more exciting to feel the power build up.

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

As good of a car I know the M3 is.I'd still buy a Vette.I just prefer the low slung look of the Vette to the upright(M3,911,GT500)look of other sports cars in this class.

[850CSi]

damn...wish i could get a E92 M3, actually any M3 would be fine enough for me...just not the E36 *shudders*

You're joking right?

I haven't driven that many cars, as I'm not an automotive journalist, but I've driven some nice/expensive cars, and the E36 3-Series is the sharpest car I've ever driven. I've driven an E46 M3 and it's not as direct as the E36.

[sportyaccordy]

I never once said an M3 doesn't have any power down, it 's just that you have to wring it out to get it all, and that's what I don't like.  I like a car that has gobs of power available down low that doesn't require 8000rpms to get it all out.

Dude, do you know how horsepower works? You have to rev every engine to get power, that is the nature of the internal combustion engine. No engine makes anywhere near full power off idle.

And again... gearing gearing gearing.... it's like talking to a brick wall.

[SVT666]

Dude, do you know how horsepower works? You have to rev every engine to get power, that is the nature of the internal combustion engine. No engine makes anywhere near full power off idle.

No shit, but if I can have an engine that makes the same power, more torque, beter gas mileage, weighs the same, and it does it all using 2000 less rpms, that's what I would prefer.

And again... gearing gearing gearing.... it's like talking to a brick wall.

Oh my god!  Gearing!  I forgot all about gearing.  Please.  Get off your high horse.  It's different strokes for different folks, and if you like engines screaming to get all the power then that's what you like.  I don't.