In developing the new M3 BMW claims to have taken steep measures to keep the weight down. The new engine despite being a V8 is not great deal more heavy then the I-6 in E46 M3. The carbon fiber roof has been added as well as other measures to keep the weight down and very close to the outgoing E46 M3. So overall the car despite being more roomy and having a V8 is very near outgoing M3's weight.?
The new M3 power to weight ratio is 8.4 Ibs per horsepower. To get an idea of its performance potential I was wondering what others cars in its class have the same power/weight ratio.
Oh and the new M3 looks sexy and aggressive.
(http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=103562&d=1176049327)(http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=103561&d=1176049327)
The S5 is like the nice girl that you bring home to mom. It's pretty, its comfortable but it eats a little too much. The M3 is like the somewhat anorexic slut that you call to your house for a great night. I'll take the M3. What a brilliant car.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on April 08, 2007, 01:55:24 PM
Has anyone even driven it yet?
Nope, but you know it will be a screamer of an engine, it will have a manual gearbox, it employs extensive use of lightweight and hardcore materials such as the carbon fiber, and look at the size of those brakes! In fact, look at the whole thing! It looks badass.
Still has a strut front suspension :(
I like the S5.
"Sexy and aggressive"
Ha!
Repost out of hell.
Quote from: Raza on April 08, 2007, 03:14:23 PM
"Sexy and aggressive"
Ha!
Now now, Raza...remember the poster.
70 grand is too steep IMO for a 3 series.
I think when the time comes it'll be the upcoming GT-R.
450+hp, AWD, looks like nothing else on the road, 911 turbo level track performance, Mmmmhhhh.
M3 FTW
Close to the last one's weight? How is 85kg, or close to 200#, close in weight? Not to mention, the RS4 beats it engine wise, as will the C63 or whatever... it's not much different in appearance to a 335i coupe... and most importantly, nobody has driven it yet! LOL... Kayani you are not of this world
Quote from: HotRodPilot on April 08, 2007, 02:53:26 PM
Still has a strut front suspension :(
Score one for my lowly Honda Civic! :lol:
Struts or not, you can't argue with what the M engineers (and BMW) have achieved with the 3er suspension. It's very well-rounded and capable IMO. A small plus is that strut suspensions can be lower maintenance than a double wishbone or control arm suspensions. It's a simpler design, and thus there are less moving parts (ball joints, bushings, etc.). Space efficiency is much improved as well, which helps fit that V8 under the hood.
It all comes down to price. If it does cost around $70k, then I would much prefer a RS4. If it is less, it would have to be a damn good car to keep me from a CTS-V (that car looks so mean in person, so much better than the regular model) or S4.
Quote from: 565 on April 08, 2007, 06:42:35 PM
70 grand is too steep IMO for a 3 series.
I think when the time comes it'll be the upcoming GT-R.
450+hp, AWD, looks like nothing else on the road, 911 turbo level track performance, Mmmmhhhh.
Who came up with this 70k figure? It better not be much more than 60k or BMW will be making a huge mistake, even if the car is absolutely remarkable.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 08, 2007, 07:18:21 PM
Close to the last one's weight? How is 85kg, or close to 200#, close in weight? Not to mention, the RS4 beats it engine wise, as will the C63 or whatever
:confused: It weighs 68 lbs more than the E46 while gaining two cylinders and more than 80HP. BTW the RS 4 makes 6 more HP and is nearly 600lbs heavier.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on April 08, 2007, 09:14:05 PM
Who came up with this 70k figure? It better not be much more than 60k or BMW will be making a huge mistake, even if the car is absolutely remarkable.
No one really knows. I would certainly hope it's closer to $60K, but it's all supply and demand - BMW will charge what it thinks it can sell it for.
The RS 4 starts at $66K, BTW, and it's the most direct competitor to this M3.
If an E90 is made, that might end up being both less expensive and lighter than the E92 (based on the fact that the E90 is less expensive than the E92 at both 335 and 328 levels - the other part is still up in the air because the E92 328i is heavier than the E90 variant while the E92 335i is lighter than its E90 variant, the differences are rather small in both cases)
In any case, the RS 4 already weighs nearly 600 lbs more than the E92.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 08, 2007, 07:18:21 PM
Close to the last one's weight? How is 85kg, or close to 200#, close in weight? Not to mention, the RS4 beats it engine wise, as will the C63 or whatever... it's not much different in appearance to a 335i coupe... and most importantly, nobody has driven it yet! LOL... Kayani you are not of this world
They are actually closer to ~70lbs according to most sources, I don't know where you got 200 lbs from.? With regards to the engines of the M3 vs. RS4, there really is no comparison to me.? The M3s engine makes the same power and slightly less torque from less displacement, has a higher redline, and employs weight saving technology, making for one of the lightest v8s in the world and a car that is 500+lbs lighter.? The RS4 is a bit of a pig in comparison.?
Any really, what else could they have done to change the appearance from a 335i coupe?? They have changed almost every body panel, added a CF roof, changed the styling of both the front and rear (dramatically), added a prominately different hood, wheel setup, and mirrors.....I mean come on? :rolleyes:, other than making a completely different model out of it (which would be contraditory to the M3s purpose and would thus change its name to something other than M3), what else could they have done?
I think this one looks about as different from the E92 as the last M3 looked from the E46. I guess it could use a little more aggresive wheel arches but that's all they could really change. The front and rear bumper design is significantly different.
If the sedan does come in about the same weight as the coupe, and ~600lbs less than the RS4, and well equipped for around $60k, then that would be pretty sweet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOwHOPtrLNo&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Emotorcities%2Ecom%2Fcontents%2F07%2F2008%2DBMW%2DM3%2DRacetrack%2DTV%2DCommercial%5F07D8B493007065%2Ehtml
:rockon:
First of I dont know where are you getting 70K figures from. From all accounts the new M3 will be arround $55K which is far less then $70K price tag that you are suggesting. Second the GT-R will be $70K plus car not M3. As for performance we will have to wait and see.
But right off the bat I can tell you that GT-R will be more of a raw sports car. Where as M3 is a hyper luxury sports GT with very useable back seats for every day use. ;)
The two cars will be very different and will not be in same class much like how M3 and Corvette are not in the same class. I think GT-R will compete more with Corvette then M3. :ohyeah:
Quote from: 565 on April 08, 2007, 06:42:35 PM
70 grand is too steep IMO for a 3 series.
I think when the time comes it'll be the upcoming GT-R.
450+hp, AWD, looks like nothing else on the road, 911 turbo level track performance,? Mmmmhhhh.
I still can't believe you people have drivers' licenses, considering you're all blind, thinking that car is attractive.
First off calm down and stop foaming at mouth :rolleyes:.
I am from this world for asking a valid question while you seem to be from planet "dumb dumb" for just going off the deep end for no reason at all.? :rolleyes:
My info is more correct then yours as others have already pointed out to you. The new M3 has a V8 vs I-6 and considering that the weight saving is very decent in my opinion. Not to mention that the E92 M3 is significantly larger and more roomy overall in interior space vs the E46 M3 and comes with more standard features.
As for the looks you have to be blind to think that there is not much difference in M3's looks vs those of the 335i.? One quick glance and you can tell that E92 M3 is no run of the mill 335i. Infact if you compare E92 M3 vs 335i and E46 M3 vs 330i the E92 M3 looks far more aggressive and sporty looking then E46 M3 ever looked compared to its regular 3 series counter parts.
Last but not least I never said anything about the fact that if anyone has driven it or not :rolleyes:.
I just asked a basic question that based on weight/hp ratio what other cars does M3 compares to when it comes down to basic performance figures to get a rough idea of how it will stack up. :huh: But you are from a different planet of "dumb dumb" to get your panties in a bunch over a simple basic question :rolleyes:
Calm down man life is too short for going of the deep end with no apparent reasons ;)
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 08, 2007, 07:18:21 PM
Close to the last one's weight? How is 85kg, or close to 200#, close in weight? Not to mention, the RS4 beats it engine wise, as will the C63 or whatever... it's not much different in appearance to a 335i coupe... and most importantly, nobody has driven it yet! LOL... Kayani you are not of this world
Well feelings are mutual?because I think you are blind for not thinking it is an attractive car :P
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=8502.msg411830#msg411830 date=1176144637
I still can't believe you people have drivers' licenses, considering you're all blind, thinking that car is attractive.
Of course M3 FTW. <----- I am NOT objective on this matter.
And those of you comparing it to the CLK63 Black Edition, are you out of your mind? That Merc will cost as much as an M6 :confused:
If anything, its a compliment to the M3 to be compared to that thing.
The E92 M3 power/weight ratio of 8.4 Ibs per hp is better then that of Porsche 911 Carrera S @ 9.14 Ibs per hp. The price difference is $55K appx. vs $85K. It is also better then a $110K Aston Martin Vantage V8 with power/weight ratio of 9.24 Ib per hp. As for MB CLK they only offer Cabriolet version which costs nearly $89K and still has power to weight ratio of 8.7 Ibs per hp.
As for the CLK63 AMG Black I love its looks :ohyeah:. But it will cost $130k-$140K :cry: and the power to weight ratio will be appx. very close to that of M3. Since it will weigh only slightly less then the CLK cabriolet according to automotive sources.
Even when compared to the in house bone stock super light weight version of E46 M3 CSL which by the way cost nearly $77K plus in price the new E92 M3 has similar power to weight ratio of 8.4 Ibs per hp.
I think E92 M3 will be one heck of a fine GT performance car. :partyon:
way to ruin a perfectly nice looking car.
(http://www.cardata.com/2005/bmw_m3_coupe.jpg)
Quote from: Kayani_1 on April 09, 2007, 01:13:33 PM
Well feelings are mutual because I think you are blind for not thinking it is an attractive car :P
The back end is also "meh" which I assume is why there are not very many pictures of it. It's not particularly attractive to me.
I can't even understand. The half posts this in thread.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on April 08, 2007, 01:55:24 PM
Has anyone even driven it yet?
The M3 has a reputation for sporting qualities. I think that's what Nick was reffering too. :ohyeah:
By the way, you should see the Lexus fanboys on other sites and how the talk smack about the M3. They act as if the IS-F has been tested already...
"The new IS-F is going to destroy the BMW M3 because it has the worlds only 8-speed automatic which is so much better than the POS BMW 7-speed SMG."
"The BMW M3 will explode if you drive it hard. Lexus on the other hand makes reliable cars and the IS-F can be abused and it will never break down."
"The BMW M3 is just a rebadged 318i with a powerful engine. Nothing special in terms of engineering."
There's a reason I hate Lexus fanboys. :P
Quote from: Kayani_1 on April 09, 2007, 02:17:46 PM
The E92 M3 power/weight ratio of 8.4 Ibs per hp is better then that of Porsche 911 Carrera S @ 9.14 Ibs per hp. The price difference is $55K appx. vs $85K. It is also better then a $110K Aston Martin Vantage V8 with power/weight ratio of 9.24 Ib per hp. As for MB CLK they only offer Cabriolet version which costs nearly $89K and still has power to weight ratio of 8.7 Ibs per hp.
As for the CLK63 AMG Black I love its looks :ohyeah:. But it will cost $130k-$140K :cry: and the power to weight ratio will be appx. very close to that of M3. Since it will weigh only slightly less then the CLK cabriolet according to automotive sources.
Even compared to in house bone stock super light weight version of E46 BMW M3 CSL which cost nearly $77K plus has similar power to weight ratio of 8.4 Ibs per hp.
I think E92 M3 will be one heck of a fine GT performance car.
Do you really think that it will cost 55K? I mean, the E46 M3 started at 46K when it first came out, and that didn't even include leather. Considering how much the 335i, and market placement, and the M Roadster starts at 52K. I expect this to start at around 65K.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 10, 2007, 03:08:26 AM
"The BMW M3 will explode if you drive it hard. Lexus on the other hand makes reliable cars and the IS-F can be abused and it will never break down."
There's a reason I hate Lexus fanboys. :P
Well, on
Bullrun the BMW M3 ran a challenge and then shut down and the drivers thought they were out of it. It eventually started again, though. But they seem to have a point.
;)
Lexi are more relieble than other luxury cars. The fanboy exagerate things, though. They act as if your Lexus will never have a problem and your Jag/BMW/Caddy/MB/Audi/etc will constantly be in the shop with problems. Its a simple matter of playing the odds. Chances are you are less likely to have a problem with you Lexus but nothing is guaranteed. You could by a Lexus thats always in the shop and a MB that never has a problem. It's a matter of playing the odds.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=8502.msg412845#msg412845 date=1176216873
Do you really think that it will cost 55K?? I mean, the E46 M3 started at 46K when it first came out, and that didn't even include leather.? Considering how much the 335i, and market placement, and the M Roadster starts at 52K.? I expect this to start at around 65K.
+1
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=8502.msg412845#msg412845 date=1176216873
Do you really think that it will cost 55K?? I mean, the E46 M3 started at 46K when it first came out, and that didn't even include leather.? Considering how much the 335i, and market placement, and the M Roadster starts at 52K.? I expect this to start at around 65K.
I agree, I think this $55k talk is wishful thinking.? Mind you, I hope that's what it costs, but I think it's unlikely.
IIRC, I believe it was an article (C&D?) quoted in one of the myriad other threads on this topic that cited "low $60ks" as the likely
starting point.? Making some fairly conservative assumptions based upon how BMW typically equips its base-priced vehicles (i.e. no leather in base E46 M3), and it's reasonable to infer a well equipped example will push $70k.? That's where the $70k talk came from, peple didn't just pull that number out of their ass, and frankly I think that's more realistic than $55k.? I'm talking well equipped, not base, price.
If it's $55-$60k well equipped, I'd be very interested if I were in the market for a new car right now (which I'm fortunately not). If it's pushing $70k, I'd pass, likely for a 911.
I like where Lebowski went with that, especially the 911 part! :D
Quote from: Lebowski on April 10, 2007, 09:37:31 AM
I agree, I think this $55k talk is wishful thinking.? Mind you, I hope that's what it costs, but I think it's unlikely.
IIRC, I believe it was an article (C&D?) quoted in one of the myriad other threads on this topic that cited "low $60ks" as the likely starting point.? Making some fairly conservative assumptions based upon how BMW typically equips its base-priced vehicles (i.e. no leather in base E46 M3), and it's reasonable to infer a well equipped example will push $70k.? That's where the $70k talk came from, peple didn't just pull that number out of their ass, and frankly I think that's more realistic than $55k.? I'm talking well equipped, not base, price.
If it's $55-$60k well equipped, I'd be very interested if I were in the market for a new car right now (which I'm fortunately not).? If it's pushing $70k, I'd pass, likely for a 911.
We need to see more pics of your vette :ohyeah:
Quote from: JYODER240 on April 10, 2007, 09:03:06 AM
Lexi are more relieble than other luxury cars. The fanboy exagerate things, though. They act as if your Lexus will never have a problem and your Jag/BMW/Caddy/MB/Audi/etc will constantly be in the shop with problems. Its a simple matter of playing the odds. Chances are you are less likely to have a problem with you Lexus but nothing is guaranteed. You could by a Lexus thats always in the shop and a MB that never has a problem. It's a matter of playing the odds.
Well it does get equally annoying to hear M-B and BMW fanboys berate Lexus cars for being rebadged Toyotas, when in fact only a couple are. On top of that, just because a person buys a Lexus doesn't mean they are stupid or boring or cheap, because someone who can buy a Lexus could have bought a Benz or BMW if they wanted to. I'm sure I could browse the net and find comments from some pretty stupid German car fans as well and paint the whole owner base with the same brush.
Quote from: HurricaneSteve on April 10, 2007, 12:16:38 PM
Well it does get equally annoying to hear M-B and BMW fanboys berate Lexus cars for being rebadged Toyotas, when in fact only a couple are. On top of that, just because a person buys a Lexus doesn't mean they are stupid or boring or cheap, because someone who can buy a Lexus could have bought a Benz or BMW if they wanted to. I'm sure I could browse the net and find comments from some pretty stupid German car fans as well and paint the whole owner base with the same brush.
They all are, just most of them aren't sold in the US.
Quote from: Raza on April 10, 2007, 12:19:53 PM
They all are, just most of them aren't sold in the US.
Not anymore they're not.
Their best selling models are in fact rebadged Toyota's though (RX, ES, and LX). The only real "high volume" Lexus that isn't based on a Toyota is the new IS (as far as I know).
Quote from: HurricaneSteve on April 10, 2007, 12:27:45 PM
Not anymore they're not.
What isn't? (I'm not questioning you condescendingly, I honestly don't know)
Quote from: SJ_GTI on April 10, 2007, 01:20:08 PM
Their best selling models are in fact rebadged Toyota's though (RX, ES, and LX). The only real "high volume" Lexus that isn't based on a Toyota is the new IS (as far as I know).
The LS is the best selling car in its class. The ES I'll concede, the RX has some some underpinnings derived from the Camry but what's it a rebadge of? The LX outsells the Land Cruiser by a huge margin, an expensive vehicle to begin with so even if it is a rebadge, it's one that Toyota shouldn't be penalized IMHO for.
Quote from: Raza on April 10, 2007, 01:22:20 PM
What isn't? (I'm not questioning you condescendingly, I honestly don't know)
I'm assuming you meant that all Lexus models were Toyota rebadges because they were sold as Toyotas in Japan and most of the world. Lexus has been introduced in a number of countries including Japan now so the premium cars that were branded "Toyota" are no longer the case.
Quote from: HurricaneSteve on April 10, 2007, 04:48:40 PM
I'm assuming you meant that all Lexus models were Toyota rebadges because they were sold as Toyotas in Japan and most of the world. Lexus has been introduced in a number of countries including Japan now so the premium cars that were branded "Toyota" are no longer the case.
Yeah, I did. Like the Harrier, Soarer, and stuff like that.
Quote from: Raza on April 10, 2007, 04:54:41 PM
Yeah, I did. Like the Harrier, Soarer, and stuff like that.
That's no longer the case but prior to last year Lexus didn't exist in Japan and several other countries. If you want to get technical, you can say that Lexus models are rebadged Toyotas but it's like judging M-B as a company based on the A-Class, which is not the first car that comes to mind when you think of M-B, nor should their prestige be penalized for it.
I wouldn't expect the new M3 to cost more than 65k.
I wouldn't expect the new M3 to cost more than US$132,000.
Quote from: omicron on April 11, 2007, 12:11:54 AM
I wouldn't expect the new M3 to cost more than US$132,000.
You crazy Australians and your funny price manipulations. I feel bad for you.
Quote from: HurricaneSteve on April 10, 2007, 04:45:24 PM
The LS is the best selling car in its class. The ES I'll concede, the RX has some some underpinnings derived from the Camry but what's it a rebadge of? The LX outsells the Land Cruiser by a huge margin, an expensive vehicle to begin with so even if it is a rebadge, it's one that Toyota shouldn't be penalized IMHO for.
The Lexus LS sells the most in its class in the US. Worldwide its not even in the top 3.
The RX is based on the Highlander, not the Camry. The ES is based on the Camry.
Chevy Tahoes can be pretty expensive as well. Should we not consider the Escalade a rebadge?
Quote from: SJ_GTI on April 11, 2007, 11:48:11 AM
The RX is based on the Highlander, not the Camry. The ES is based on the Camry.
Are you sure? I know the first one was based somewhat on the camry and I thought that carried over to the second generation. I always seemed to think that the suspension had Camry bits in it....maybe not :huh:.
The Lexus thread called, it wants its posts back ...
Quote from: SJ_GTI on April 11, 2007, 11:48:11 AM
The Lexus LS sells the most in its class in the US. Worldwide its not even in the top 3.
The RX is based on the Highlander, not the Camry. The ES is based on the Camry.
Chevy Tahoes can be pretty expensive as well. Should we not consider the Escalade a rebadge?
the Highlander is built on the Camry platform
Quote from: LonghornTX on April 11, 2007, 01:40:11 PM
Are you sure? I know the first one was based somewhat on the camry and I thought that carried over to the second generation. I always seemed to think that the suspension had Camry bits in it....maybe not :huh:.
The Highlander, the Sienna (first-gen was anyway, not sure about current), the ES300/330/350, are built on teh Camry platform.
Sorry kayani but I think this car is FUGLY. :(
Quote from: LonghornTX on April 10, 2007, 10:46:42 PM
I wouldn't expect the new M3 to cost more than 65k.
I think if the base price is over 65k, BMW would be making a huge mistake. I can see 60k, I think 65k is pushing it, and I think anything over that would lose too much market share to the 911.
Exactly my point that E46 M3 started out at base price of $46K and no way in hell is M3 gonna be starting out at base price of $65K :nono:.
Get real Raza M3 is not jumping up in base price by $20K. The new M3 will start at arround $55K range of base price. Which is already appx. about $10K more then E46 M3. As for M roadster starting at $52K yes that is very true and in past M roadster and M3 prices have been only separated by few thousand dollars thus $55K price range makes perfect sense.
You sound like one of those people who had claimed that E60 M5 will cost $90K plus in base price and it will be atleast $20K more then E39 M5 in base price. But when it really came down to it that never happened and M5 came out at base price of $79K which is no where near $90K plus quoted by some people. My prediction is that M3 is gonna be starting out arround base price of $55K. :partyon:
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=8502.msg412845#msg412845 date=1176216873
Do you really think that it will cost 55K?? I mean, the E46 M3 started at 46K when it first came out, and that didn't even include leather.? Considering how much the 335i, and market placement, and the M Roadster starts at 52K.? I expect this to start at around 65K.
I guess to each his own :ohyeah:.
I think it looks very nice and I can understand why you might disagree with me since you own the last generation E46 M3.
Quote from: E46M3 on April 11, 2007, 07:23:40 PM
Sorry kayani but I think this car is FUGLY. :(