Autocar big homie Steve Sutcliffe drives the new M3

[12,000 RPM]

Configurator here: http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicles/mseries/m3sedan/2014/showroom/design/visualizer.html

BYO configurator here:

http://www.bmwusa.com/standard/content/byo/byohome.aspx?namodelcode=15TN

Only options I would get would be carbon ceramic brakes, USB connectivity (how is this not standard on a 60K car) and the moonroof. Alpine white paint with black cloth seats... would be cool if they brought back the old ///M cloth from the E30 like they do for the plaid in the GTI.

[MrH]

Woah, that thing shifts fast.  That acceleration video is nuts.

[68_427]

I hate the farting sounds

[MexicoCityM3]

BYO configurator here:

http://www.bmwusa.com/standard/content/byo/byohome.aspx?namodelcode=15TN

Only options I would get would be carbon ceramic brakes, USB connectivity (how is this not standard on a 60K car) and the moonroof. Alpine white paint with black cloth seats... would be cool if they brought back the old ///M cloth from the E30 like they do for the plaid in the GTI.

Really the moonroof? That means losing the CF roof which IMO is a big feature.

[12,000 RPM]

Really the moonroof? That means losing the CF roof which IMO is a big feature.

IMO it's a gimmick. If I have to drive a sedan I might as well make it comfy. Leave the full on sacrifices for the full on sports cars. That is not meant to be a swipe... M3 is the jack of all trades which includes luxury/convenience.

[Lebowski]

Leave the full on sacrifices for the full on sports cars. That is not meant to be a swipe... M3 is the jack of all trades which includes luxury/convenience.

So why the $8k carbon ceramic brakes?

[12,000 RPM]

So why the $8k carbon ceramic brakes?

That won't affect the car's comfort or usability. Just make it better at the track

[68_427]

Here's a shirt for the M fanbois in here

http://blipshift.com/products/m-azing?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_content=m-azing&utm_campaign=new

[MexicoCityM3]

Here's a shirt for the M fanbois in here

http://blipshift.com/products/m-azing?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_content=m-azing&utm_campaign=new

Meaning me. I've got a lot of ///M or BMW clothing. You know, for track days & club events. And for being an ass.

[MexicoCityM3]

IMO it's a gimmick. If I have to drive a sedan I might as well make it comfy. Leave the full on sacrifices for the full on sports cars. That is not meant to be a swipe... M3 is the jack of all trades which includes luxury/convenience.

I see your point. Personally, I just don't care about the moonroof. The 1M doesn't have one and I never miss it.

[12,000 RPM]

I see your point. Personally, I just don't care about the moonroof. The 1M doesn't have one and I never miss it.

My Z doesn't have one and I don't miss it. Wifey's Rabbit does have one though. But the funny thing is her cabin is much more airier than mine so she barely uses hers, but wishes I had a sunroof in mine.

[Lebowski]

Every car I've ever had that had one, I never opened it.  My girlfriend likes them though.

[12,000 RPM]

Night time is open window season. Convertible season to be 100% honest but that's too much of a commitment. In the rare occasions where we are out in wifey's car instead of mine at night we use the moonroof all the time.

Back to the M3/4 though....

Performance coupes go head-to-head: BMW M4 vs. Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG

[GoCougs]

Definitely no moon roof at all possible - more weight, more noise, something else to go wrong as the car ages.

[Colin]

A number of Sutcliffe articles in this week's Autocar.

Comparison of BMW M4 vs Merc C63 AMG Coupe..... conclusion is fairly clear that he prefers the Merc. He likes the M4, but it sounds like it is a bit too civilised.

But then there is a First Drive review of the Cayman GTS, and he states that if he had £55 - 6oK burning a hole in his pocket, he's take this car in preference to the M4 without hesitation. 

[MexicoCityM3]

A number of Sutcliffe articles in this week's Autocar.

Comparison of BMW M4 vs Merc C63 AMG Coupe..... conclusion is fairly clear that he prefers the Merc. He likes the M4, but it sounds like it is a bit too civilised.

But then there is a First Drive review of the Cayman GTS, and he states that if he had £55 - 6oK burning a hole in his pocket, he's take this car in preference to the M4 without hesitation. 

In other news, the sky is blue.

He said the same about the E92. Back then he missed the E46.
The Cayman is a 2 seater and more focused (of course). This guy always likes the "rawer" choice. Autocar also blasted the i8. Old man.

[12,000 RPM]

This guy always likes the "rawer" choice.

Old man.

Lol. Kill the dissenters

[Colin]

In other news, the sky is blue.

He said the same about the E92. Back then he missed the E46.
The Cayman is a 2 seater and more focused (of course). This guy always likes the "rawer" choice. Autocar also blasted the i8. Old man.

Yes, no surprises in what got written.

It was fat guy Matt Saunders who failed to get the i8.

"They" only seem to have one criteria for almost any car, which is barely relevant to how anyone would/could drive on a public road.  Yesterday's nonsense was about the Macan Diesel, which has been lambasted as not being as fast as the petrol cars, them saying that they don't really understand the concessions that have been made to come up with a lower tax proposition. Of course, they don't - they don't ever have to pay for anything and on their salaries they would struggle to afford a Fiesta, so they have no concept of the fact that £££ is a criteria for most of us when we buy and own a car. And to think that I heard Steve Cropley (one of the few whom I do respect) say that they have to say "relevant".

[MexicoCityM3]

Posting this here as well as on Lebowski's thread. And proposing we rename this thread to "The M3 Thread". After all, we have a specific thread of brzzzzz, Yarises, Mustangs and Vettes.

Chris Harris comments on the new M3:

To add a little motivation. Chris Harris' notes on the new M3:

Engine
Weird noise to begin with. No word of a lie, I laughed out loud when trying to define it - all I could think was 'mapped 335d'. It's less musical, lower frequency and less clearly straight-six than the M235i I'm currently driving. At first I didn't like it much, then it became a non-issue and after thrashing around a circuit for a while I almost liked it. But it's a million miles from the E46 and E92. Would I buy an everyday car on the basis of noise? Probably not. Radio 4 and ZZ Top will always overcome.

Performance
Scorching. The manual will hit 100mph in nine seconds dead, the DCT in 8.7 seconds. It hardly feels turbocharged and the torque is all-consuming. Real-world, this car is miles quicker than the old E92, and the torque means the rear axle loads up much earlier in a given turn, meaning you have the sensation of controlling the car's attitude with your right foot far more than you did before.

Throttle response.
I didn't have any problem with the throttle response. In comfort the throttle is long and a little lazy - normally I like that, but the shorter sport and sport-plus settings worked better in this car for me. In the latter the speakers mess around with the intake noise some more. Compared to, say, an E46 you lose a tiny amount of instant zap, but considering it has two turbochargers, you can take several stabs mid-corner to trim your line and the response is always there. It's worth revving out to 7,500rpm too.

More engine..
Proper M engine, turbos and all? Yup Fuel economy at a cruise is miles better than before - a genuine 30mpg - whereas I used to see 19mpg in my E92. The M3 badly needed some range, it now has it. This is perhaps the most important improvement over the outgoing V8.

Is the motor special enough? For a quick track blast and a few hours on the road, to impress a few hacks? Probably not, especially in light of the deranged V8 model's zap and DTM blare beyond 7,500rpm. But for everyday use, the torque, the sheer speed and the range make the new gizzards - for me - far more appealing.

Colleagues have given it real flak, with the insinuation that it isn't special (dry sump, forged crank anyone?) but I'd buy this car because of the motor, not in spite of it.

Chassis
Flipping good.

Steering
Leave it in comfort. The other two settings simply add weight, and I disliked them both. The 3 Series electric steering rack has been comprehensively re-engineered for this car, at vast expense. Does it feel like a conventional hydraulic rack? Nope. Is it exceedingly accurate? Yes. And the world really does have a short memory if it cites the last two M3s as being steering paragons. The E46 was light but accurate, the E92 lacked initial response off-centre. Neither were great.

This is not steering to savour, but it gives the driver instant confidence, and that is a brilliant trick when allied to all that front axle grip. For a big car, you can place the M3 with uncanny accuracy.

Gearbox
I only drove a DCT, and the manual would need to be somewhere near a late NSX in shift quality to persuade me to not have the two-pedal car. The dual-clutch is fast, smooth in town, gives extra fuel economy and it just suits the power and torque delivery of the motor. Fast shifts give a decent exhaust crack too.

Brakes
We had the optional carbon ceramics, which will make prospective owners look away because they're too expensive. Well, BMW is talking about €7,000 for them, and they're plain superb. If I was going to use this car as intended, I'd have them, and normally I always advise the cheaper steel option. I'm saying that partly because with the standard Super Sport rubber and those ceramic stoppers, you have something instantly track-able.

Cabin
Single piece front seats are spot-on. Steering wheel still too thick, hi-fi very good, iDrive still baffling. Just the right amount of bespoke touches to make it feel that much more special than an F30 3 Series. Incidentally, geeks like me are rejoicing that this car gets its own internal designation - F80. The coupe is F82.

Looks
Not mine to judge really. But if the M3, in that baby blue colour (which is actually a metallic on closer inspection) isn't the best looking M3 since the 1990 Sport Evolution, then I'll call all those E46 CSL owners Jessies. Actually, the CSL is a belting looking thing, isn't it. Look, the F80 has such a sexy rear axle set-down on the road, that people like us will point and grin at them.

Would you?
Absolutely. I loved my E92, but it was surprisingly limited as my daily driver. Opportunities to enjoy that motor beyond 7,000 were predictably limited, the lack of torque left you exposed to turbo hot hatches and, well, you know my thoughts on the range.

This car rights all of those wrongs. In isolation, the motor gets blown into next week by the current C63 507 for pure noise and theatre, but on the road the BMW's fuel consumption and massive torque would swing it for me. Sounds boring, but that's what matters in a daily driver.Not to mention the transmission which makes the Merc's feel pretty antiquated now. And I still think the powertrain feels special enough for an M car.

The rest of the package is BMW M at its best. I think it's a truly special car. It made me smile for the two days that I drove it. When the video comes out in the next few weeks, watch the section where we talk through the level of modification over standard 3er. This car is 50 per cent new.

It's a blinder. I'll have the saloon, the dampers, the big brakes, the DCT, and probably the baby blue. So exactly the car I drove on the launch then.

[12,000 RPM]

Maybe I am weird but engine noise is paramount to me. If I am alone I rarely drive with music on. So I dont think people docking it for not having a great sound are just hating. That shit is important to some people.

I feel like the M3 is somewhat changing its purpose. It used to be the 3 series without compromise. Car is excellent but it kind of makes me sad the design was dictated by fuel economy and emissions. Incredible performance to get <200g/km CO2. I guess BMW had no choice.

[68_427]

The BMW Performance Exhaust makes it sound much more aggressive.  But at like $5K I'd rather just get it strait from Akrapovic.

[MrH]

Maybe I am weird but engine noise is paramount to me. If I am alone I rarely drive with music on. So I dont think people docking it for not having a great sound are just hating. That shit is important to some people.

I feel like the M3 is somewhat changing its purpose. It used to be the 3 series without compromise. Car is excellent but it kind of makes me sad the design was dictated by fuel economy and emissions. Incredible performance to get <200g/km CO2. I guess BMW had no choice.

The 3 series has always been a compromise. If you want a race car, then you shouldn't be looking at a sedan or BMW to begin with.

In my mind, M has always been about blending the best driving dynamics in a luxury package possible. Seems like it still sticks to that pretty well.

[Lebowski]

Nice sound is nice but isn't that important to me. I have music on most of the time anyway. I think in the real world for people who actually buy the cars, the extra torque and better mpg offset the subjectively less attractive note.

[12,000 RPM]

The 3 series has always been a compromise. If you want a race car, then you shouldn't be looking at a sedan or BMW to begin with.

In my mind, M has always been about blending the best driving dynamics in a luxury package possible. Seems like it still sticks to that pretty well.

Fair enough

[MrH]

Fair enough

I guess if you want a balls out sports car with 4 doors, the closest you got is an Sti, but even that is a compromise.

I like my sports cars extreme, and my sedans livable I guess.

[12,000 RPM]

I guess if you want a balls out sports car with 4 doors, the closest you got is an Sti, but even that is a compromise.

I like my sports cars extreme, and my sedans livable I guess.

Yea I think it's better to keep the things separate. The M3 has crazy range though... if you could only have 1 car you can't do better for the $$$. Even for the $$$, new, I can't think of two cars to replace it. Maybe a Mustang GT and like a Civic? It's pretty impressive.

[MrH]

Yea I think it's better to keep the things separate. The M3 has crazy range though... if you could only have 1 car you can't do better for the $$$. Even for the $$$, new, I can't think of two cars to replace it. Maybe a Mustang GT and like a Civic? It's pretty impressive.

Yeah, I agree. I guess at that price point though, I'd rather play the used two car game. Hell, that's what I'm doing now.

A used Genesis r spec + brz/future miata is significantly cheaper and a better option for me.

[12,000 RPM]

Interesting combo. I would probably go the other more generic way (Cayman S/Z4M/etc. and something like an Accord Sport)

[SVT666]

If a car has a great sound I will rarely ever turn the radio on.  If it doesn't, then the stereo is on all the time.  Sound is very important to me.

[12,000 RPM]

I think both kinds of cars have their place. Wifey's car has a much better stereo and less road noise than mine. If it had more power it would be a great long distance car. I just don't know if I want my performance cars to sacrifice "performance sound" for "practical sound". I had a big audio build planned for the Z.... after almost a year with it I'd much rather put that $$$ into "performance sound" mods. Especially due to the fact that with the stupid Bose system I have to rewire the whole car......

I know EU is coming down hard on noise regs (like everything).... but when BMW made the E39 they made the car quiet on the outside and piped real engine noise inside through a tube. Still a little cheesy, but real at least. I wonder why that's not an option for BMW. I think the Focus ST has that setup too.