Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Bread
Seriously?! Is there any successful car company that doesn't use this approach? Would an M3 with a smog friendly BRM H16 be cool? Of course it would. Would a 3.0L V8 that revved to 11k rpm be cool? Yep, that too.
But those things don't make financial sense. Does a 730 hp V12 make financial sense in a $330k F12? Yep, some. Does an LS7 make financial sense in a Z06? Enough. Does leaving mechanical LSD's out of all non M cars make financial sense? Probably. Does saddling every car with subsidized RFT's and saving the cost of a spare, a lug wrench and a jack make financial sense? Yep.
I'm an accountant and I can't think of a single car that isn't burdened by the reality of cost savings. Even the ne plus ultra of stupid cars, the Veyron, would be massively cooler if it didn't weigh as much a Suburban, but making it lighter would have made it even more expensive.
Give the M3 a straight six, the engine it's had more often than any other configuration.
|
No real disagreement with this. It is simply that BMW M have literally
preached the virtues of a high revving, naturally aspirated, instantaneous throttle response, Motorsport inspired engine over a very long time period. With previous engines and reaching a peak with the current S65 design they have adhered to this philosophy. Neither the S85 from the M5 nor the derived S65 from the M3 were the inexpensive approach. At the volumes involved they were actually very far from the "accountants choice". These decisions were possible at BMW M at that time but are simply not possible today.
Again this discussion/debate began around BMWs motivations. To understand their motivations we simply must look at company strategy, their increasing focus on cost and part commonality. Most M owners want to have a special (i.e. rare) car (even if only slightly more special/rare than the base model). The M3/4 of tomorrow is becoming less special with respect to engines. And, again, these choices are not being made at the heavy hand of green politicians and governments. The volume of M cars is way too low to affect fleet average consumption in any appreciable fashion.