2014 BMW M3 / M4 to Gain About 100lb-ft More Torque While Targeting E46 M3 Weight

[dlbrooks18]

2014 is so far away.. gonna be sick tho!

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by Beemw335

335's were beating m3s in a straight line while making the same or less horsepower. They all accelerated much faster due to the torque difference.
This new m3 will be much faster, 100ft pounds of torque makes a huge difference. And we all know this car is going to be underrated just like any turbocharged bmw.

Power to weight is what counts, period. It is a question of physics. If the car is properly driven that is.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Folks have already took most of the the words out of my mouth...

As NISFAN pointed out in another post these specs do not look very plausible. The new engine will very likely redline in the 7500 rpm range (just a bit higher than the F10 M5). Similarly it should make constant torque to about 6500 rpm (the F10 M5 does so until almost 6000 rpm). However, 395 ft lb will make 420 hp at around only 5500 rpm. To not exceed a peak of 420 hp would require the torque to drop off steadily after 5000 rpm to only 315 ft lb at 7000 rpm along with a redline of 7000 rpm. Those simply do not seem like reasonable figures. If the engine makes torque and power curves anything like the M5 395 ft lb should make closer to 460 hp.

In short I do not at all buy 395 ft lb AND 420 hp.

Power to weight is what matters, period. Torque is relatively meaningless since you have to know gear ratios to make the torque something physically meaningful. That being said more torque does appear to lazy drivers who do not want to use their gearbox. With an 8 speed DCT this thing should maintain as high of an rpm as possible and take advantage of the DCT.

Weight claims: I also doubt they can achieve low 3400 lb range. It will just be too expensive to do so. Something in the 3500 range is more reasonable. However, it all depends on what the F30 335i obtains and I just have not seen a certain and final figure for that.

Power to Weight: 420 hp at 3415 lb would place the car right at about the F10 M5 power to weight although impressive, the current M3 has typically exceeded the prior generation M5 in power to weight. Something closer to 3550 lb with 450 hp is more reasonable solely from a trend perspective. Similarly there is still a power war of sorts going on. Most folks will just pass on the M3 if its power is so close or the same as the current generation car.

LOL at the comparisons between a tuned 335i and the next gen M3/4. Talk about not even a contest, strip nor track... This is almost a tautology isn't it. This is basically the same debate at tuned 335i > E92 M3 which only was the case under an aggressively tuned 335i and only at the drag strip.

+1 Fully agree with the analysis.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Horsepower is what counts, period. It is a question of physics. (If the car is properly driven that is.)

+1.

No 335i modded with less power but more torque were out accelerating M3s. Well if their power to weight ratio was better perhaps you would get an even/drivers race. I get so tired of telling folks that crank torque is utterly meaningless. It is torque to the wheels (per weight of course) that matters and thus when taking into account gearing, that basically just turns out to be a long cut to simply talking about the engines peak power in the first place. The only time high crank torque matters is if at a given speed the torquier car can put down more torque to the wheels (again more power...). That can happen in some cases, but typically only when the wrong gear is chosen, i.e. bad driver. Of course there is always the highly insightful test of the 30 or 50 mph top gear roll on, in which again the high crank torque car may shine. Again, wrong gear for the job means poor performance - any car, it just can hurt low crank torque/high hp cars more.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Hoosiers

This is the company that used to preach in their marketing brochures that NA engines are superior to FI. RWD is superior to FWD or AWD. 50/50 weight distribution is key. Each one slowly going away.

I hope 50/50 does go away it never was and never will be the best for a sports/sporty car. In the range of 45F/55R -> 40F/60R is superior from the perspective of many aspects of handling. Just more BMW marketing BS that many of us have accepted as gospel.

[JHAKIMI]

Used GT-R will be my next M3/M4 or w/e they call it. E93 M3 will also be a keeper! Im sure it will be amazing, but $80k is approaching used supercar territory!

[mhabs]

Nice analysis. some point to M3's historically putting ~80-83% of the hp of the like-for-like generation M5, but was during times when the weight gain on both cars was proportionally similar.

Originally Posted by swamp2

Folks have already took most of the the words out of my mouth...

As NISFAN pointed out in another post these specs do not look very plausible. The new engine will very likely redline in the 7500 rpm range (just a bit higher than the F10 M5). Similarly it should make constant torque to about 6500 rpm (the F10 M5 does so until almost 6000 rpm). However, 395 ft lb will make 420 hp at around only 5500 rpm. To not exceed a peak of 420 hp would require the torque to drop off steadily after 5000 rpm to only 315 ft lb at 7000 rpm along with a redline of 7000 rpm. Those simply do not seem like reasonable figures. If the engine makes torque and power curves anything like the M5 395 ft lb should make closer to 460 hp.

In short I do not at all buy 395 ft lb AND 420 hp.

Power to weight is what matters, period. Torque is relatively meaningless since you have to know gear ratios to make the torque something physically meaningful. That being said more torque does appear to lazy drivers who do not want to use their gearbox. With an 8 speed DCT this thing should maintain as high of an rpm as possible and take advantage of the DCT.

Weight claims: I also doubt they can achieve low 3400 lb range. It will just be too expensive to do so. Something in the 3500 range is more reasonable. However, it all depends on what the F30 335i obtains and I just have not seen a certain and final figure for that.

Power to Weight: 420 hp at 3415 lb would place the car right at about the F10 M5 power to weight although impressive, the current M3 has typically exceeded the prior generation M5 in power to weight. Something closer to 3550 lb with 450 hp is more reasonable solely from a trend perspective. Similarly there is still a power war of sorts going on. Most folks will just pass on the M3 if its power is so close or the same as the current generation car.

LOL at the comparisons between a tuned 335i and the next gen M3/4. Talk about not even a contest, strip nor track... This is almost a tautology isn't it. This is basically the same debate at tuned 335i > E92 M3 which only was the case under an aggressively tuned 335i and only at the drag strip.

[Berardi3]

Wow looks mean

[spiike32]

I was thinking the same thing about the price. Rather pay a lil more and get this purely from a pricing perspective (unless the m4 really is truly awesome.)

Lamborghini gallardo sale

[jmunro]

This makes no sense. How can the new generation M3 have only a slight power bump over the 1M. The 1M will definitely weigh less, and is a "lower tier" M car as well as being an "older generation." I don't believe the 420/395 numbers for a second.

Unfortunately the "whole package" arguement only sells so many cars in the era of hp wars. The Mustang GT surely sends shivers down the spine of most M3 drivers these days, especially when the Mustang GT has near M3 handling....

[Eric335]

Originally Posted by jmunro

This makes no sense. How can the new generation M3 have only a slight power bump over the 1M. The 1M will definitely weigh less, and is a "lower tier" M car as well as being an "older generation." I don't believe the 420/395 numbers for a second.

Unfortunately the "whole package" arguement only sells so many cars in the era of hp wars. The Mustang GT surely sends shivers down the spine of most M3 drivers these days, especially when the Mustang GT has near M3 handling....

+1

i agree.

i love the direction the M4 is taking, but at that price point, it will be Gallardos all day

[flanast]

Don't get this. I'm not excited at all.

[desertfox73]

Originally Posted by nbennettksu

when are they finally going to show us what this monster looks like?

Hopefully soon...the more I see renders like this, the less interested I am. That front end is a mess...

[gblansten]

I applaud BMW for getting the curb weight down. But, I hope they don't cheapen the stereo system to save weight. That could really impact how good the engine sounds.

[fuddman]

Originally Posted by swamp2

The new engine will very likely redline in the 7500 rpm range (just a bit higher than the F10 M5). Similarly it should make constant torque to about 6500 rpm (the F10 M5 does so until almost 6000 rpm). However, 395 ft lb will make 420 hp at around only 5500 rpm. To not exceed a peak of 420 hp would require the torque to drop off steadily after 5000 rpm to only 315 ft lb at 7000 rpm along with a redline of 7000 rpm. Those simply do not seem like reasonable figures. If the engine makes torque and power curves anything like the M5 395 ft lb should make closer to 460 hp.

Where are you coming up with all this stuff? Are you pulling it out of your hat?

You need to put some substantive proof behind your "very likely" numbers because, if for no other reason, your conclusions conflict directly with what the moderator said and he has a direct line to the people who are making the car.

[bimmerjph]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

I think GM benchmarked the E90 for the ATS, not the E46 .

No it was the E46, but it was a benchmark for how the car should feel to drive. It wasn't their performance benchmark though.

[AbuArije5]

What's the price tag on this???

[Capt Slow]

If BMW had released the F10 M5 weighing 300lbs less that the E60, with an extra 100lbs ft but still "only" 500hp. I doubt there would be many haters.

The 1 M surprised us all, it wins a hell of a lot of comparisons against some pretty damn good cars. With these specs it's likely that it will basically be in the weight range of a 1 M with an "American" driver, 420hp and 400ft lbs of torque, a stiffer chassis and M-DCT. Speed won't be a problem.

Just look at the engine bay strut braces and the super flat cornering in the ring videos... I think the ace up the new m3's sleeve will be its handling dynamics, which is what it is supposed to be about. If you want to drag race people, wrong brand.

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by Hoosiers

Exactly. BMW may be overextending itself. Same thing happened to Cadillac in the 70's, Sony, Kodak...lots of once great companies can fall. Obviously BMW will be fine $ wise in the immediate future, but I think it'll be more along the lines of Infiniti, Acura, etc. Fuel efficiency and appealing to the soccer moms over all else.

This is the company that used to preach in their marketing brochures that NA engines are superior to FI. RWD is superior to FWD or AWD. 50/50 weight distribution is key. Each one slowly going away.

..overextension fears me as well.... BMW is a Toyota / Apple philosophy now.. hopefully will be more Apple than Toyota

[Frosty]

how much weight can be saved with CFRP hood and trunk?

[ZRODDICK]

sounds great. But I love my S65B40 more. IT"S NA!

[nez]

Originally Posted by gblansten

I applaud BMW for getting the curb weight down. But, I hope they don't cheapen the stereo system to save weight. That could really impact how good the engine sounds.

Lol. I see what you did there !