First BMW M4 Coupe Video Footage: Performance Testing at the Ring

[kdiggz]

Originally Posted by eisenb11

Why does everyone always act as if the cts-v is an alternative to the m3? The v is huge and is designed to compete against the m5. Had I decided not to get a m3, the v wouldn't have been an option.

They are the same price and both daily driver rwd luxury sports sedans. Makes perfect sense to cross shop them if looking for a 60k sedan. Besides, the 3 series has grown if you didn't know. I doubt the ctsv is drastically bigger that you would notice from behind the wheel

[Merlosso]

Originally Posted by WJGreer

Why does every press release I see about the F80/F80 say that it will have 450 horsepowers?

I noticed that too. I'm not sure why some have started adding the "s" for plural uses. It's certainly not common.

[grimlock]

Small child: "Daddy, why does the new M4 have such a small engine?"
Father: <speechless>

[shvydkist]

Flat is king!

[Dave07997S]

Man the E92 M3 sounds so much better even with the exhaust in OEM configuration. Also the intake roar is missing from these cars due to the turbos.

Please don't call it an M4 BMW, why would you do this? This is an M4

[GIdriver]

Originally Posted by aajami

Agreed.

And I know that Jason points out that the exhaust note is still under development, but god does it sound depressing right now...

Totally agree. Very weak that exhaust note is, IMO.

[Daft]

I'm sure the new M3/M4 will be a hit, but I'm so liking my E92 right now it will have to be a huge hit for me to trade up!

[JulieDriving]

Originally Posted by SamS

Seeing videos of each in motion, seems like the F82 wheelbase looks a bit too long, vs. the F80 which seems exactly right, in proportions. I realize the wheelbases are likely identical, just observing the proportions to the overhangs/greenhouse/etc.

+ 1.

Although I suspect it'll look better once I see it in person.

[///Morris31]

I'm a sucker for the I-6, I really like it. I'm sure they'll fine tune the exhaust to make it more aggressive tho.
Personally, I wish BMW ///M wouldn't use FI in their pride and joy (the M3) but it'll certainly be something very impressive regardless. Just wish we all didn't have to wait so long...

[benzy89]

Originally Posted by Levi

It is not a question of redline, but of how power is delivered. The N52 is more fun than the N54 and the S54 is even better than the nice N52.

[Remonster]

Originally Posted by Levi

DCT only, afterall neither the RS5 nor the C AMG offer manual, and maybe not even the next 911 GT3.

Except in a recent interview the head of M (I think it was him) said the M3 will always have a manual. Thank god someone doesn't have their head stuck in their ass.

[agentm]

Originally Posted by James T. Kirk

Will everyone stop calling it an M4 !?!?!

.

I agreed! Why didn't they use the 2 door for M3 and 4 door for M4 Stupid!

[SamS]

OK, found some numbers to justify my theory that this new (M) coupe just looks too long.

If we assume the F32/F82 share the same wheelbase as the F30, it would have a wheelbase of 2810mm, i.e. 110.6". The E90/90 has a wheelbase of 108.7", and the E63 6er had a wheelbase of 109.5"! So the new coupe will likely have a full inch longer wheel base than the big old 650i. That is crazy. No wonder it seems so big and looks like a 6-series going around the track.

I'm sure it will be a good looking car, but I don't think I want a coupe much bigger than my E92.

[///MPower]

Originally Posted by agentm

I agreed! Why didn't they use the 2 door for M3 and 4 door for M4 Stupid!

Uhm because BMW wants to use even numbers for coupes and odd numbers for sedans (i.e. 5 series sedan / 6 series coupe)

[Dave07997S]

Originally Posted by ///MPower

Uhm because BMW wants to use even numbers for coupes and odd numbers for sedans (i.e. 5 series sedan / 6 series coupe)

Yes but they are throwing away over 20 years of heritage of the M3 and name familiarity. People have never heard of a BMW M4...sacrilege.

[amirz1000]

Originally Posted by Remonster

Except in a recent interview the head of M (I think it was him) said the M3 will always have a manual. Thank god someone doesn't have their head stuck in their ass.

He was saying DCT only for the new ISF. But yes you are correct they did say that the M3/4 would always have a manual option

[Yogijet]

Originally Posted by amirz1000

+1. Sounds pretty good to me too

And me! But that S65 did sound mighty good coming off that bend in the F80 vid.

[odiesback]

Of all the reasons that prompted BMW to change to FI, the one that I could care less about is mpg... I'm willing to pay to play... It's one thing if they had found a way to make the S65 more efficient instead of dropping the current powertrain altogether in favor of a new configuration.
No doubt in my mind that the M engineers will deliver a great car but I would love to have seen more research and new technology applied to the V8.... My 2c

[Mr. ///M3 RD]

I like everything except for the M3/M4 bid ... what's this all about ... ???

The first M3 was interduced in the 1986 model year E30 3-Series.

With the excelent history the M3 made over the past 27 years and all the fine work the ///M Devision put into this car, why would anyone in there right mind now call it a M4 ??? (I realize it's only for the coupe) I like the coupe and I guess my e92 will be my very last M3.

M4 what is that ??? some of us do know it is excactly this as shown below. In 1994 the US miletary officially accepted the XM4 into service as the M4 carbine gun. Let's keep the M3 badge for the coupe whatever you do please.

[flinchy]

Sounds like ass, the 1m sounds better, and no way will it sound nicer than the v8 in a current m3 -_-

[antzcrashing]

going to be amazing

[RASHID007]

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.