Originally Posted by m3alabama
Someone hit the nail on the head. Often people compare the original m3 as having 7200 RPM redline and then justify a new one as being consistent with its heritage. BUT the m3 engine was always about pushing the envelope with modern technology and pushing an engine to the limits that other car manufactures did not do. 7200 was a very very rare feat back than outside a supercar but for a very accessible car, it was unheard of. It also required an extremely light valvetrain and was pushing technology to squeeze a lot of hp out of the engine.
Fast forward, like someone mentioned, creating an engine revving to 7200 is possible with spare parts from a used for taurus. So while the new m3 engine may be great, it simply is EXTREMELY low revving in comparison to its heritage which would have been pushing 9k rpms if the new m3 followed the trend. That would make sense to, to push it to 9k which would require unique engineering, pushing the envelope of what coil springs could do-maybe jumping to the first pneumatic springs in a production car, going to a camless valve actuation etc. All stuff that would push the envelope.
Because of turbo's we will likely never see or not for a long time the use of camless valvetrains. A camless valvetrain would be possible to hit infinetely higher redline than one depending on a traditional spring loaded valvetrain as you would not have to be limited by ability of the springs to work at that level.
Direct injection, a new vanos, and a camless valvetrain in the next m3 after the f80 was where things would have gone had it continued like the last 25 years had. Unfortunately there is now virtually nothing special about this turbo technology.
My 2002 Honda S2000 had a 9000 rpm redline. By your logic the old m3 was certainly not leading the pack or pushing the envelope.
The new m4 with 6 cylinder turbo will be awesome. Period.