2015 BMW M4 Coupe (F82) Official Specs, Wallpapers, Videos, Photos, Info

[Longboarder]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

I am glad that we are so good at time travel.

First it's pooping on a car no one has driven or tested.

Now it's dismissing the cars future tuning potential.

I am not claiming that tuning this car is going to be EASY or fast and speedy.

All I am saying is not just BMW, but in the tuning arena as a whole, it is always said how hard some next generation of ECU is going to be to crack. But it gets done.

Problems still with the M5/M6? Ok, does that mean it's always going to be this way?

Look, just go research the new ECU's that BMW is putting in this car. This is not some minor change like going to direct injection that people think is going to take years to crack and then someone figures it out in a few months.

It's not a simple evolutionary change like in times past...it's a revolutionary change.

Hopefully my good friends Terry and Shiv can figure it out. I know them well and just hung out with Terry a few weeks ago. He says he's getting the new M3/4. I wished him luck on the ECU crack. He's gonna need it this time.

[Alessandro]

On the spec sheet they are quoting 21,9 sec from 0-1000m for the M4 with DCT that's 21.85s @ –––.– Kph - Porsche 997 GT3 (Auto)territory!

Just a observation

[BuLoOoSki]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

Only time will tell.

But I hold to my 400-430whp estimate.

I watched my N20 put down crank+ numbers, I see it on my friends N54, I frankly am used to seeing it on any modern FI BMW engine.

Why would the S55 suddenly be different?

As for tuning cost...BMS seems to charge the same $350-500 whether it is an M product or not. Sure, not the only game in town, but even Cobb is usually $600-900. Exhausts, well those will run from moderate to crazy like is always the case. You can be the guy to spend $5k on a titanium exhaust or be the guy who gets it done for $1000.

I can't speak for the N20m but for the N54 I can tell you that they made 270-275rwhp on average and 280rwhp at the most in some cases. I know because I owned one and new many who did and been around since 2006 to see it. But I do hope that the M3 makes 430rwhp.

[Longboarder]

Originally Posted by BuLoOoSki

I was referring to both cars being stock, modding the cars is a different story. Like you said for the E9X M3 you need to add a supercharger system and a exhaust totaling to around $15,000 to make the kind of power you are referring to. And although I agree with you of how it's currently difficult to crack the new ECUs, but trust me it's only a matter of time till the tuners crack them. It was the same thing with the N54s, the initial MSD v80 ECU was easy to crack and like you said you were even able to tune it with resistors, then BMW came with MSD v81 which introduced the whole torque limiting and hidden codes crap, but still tuners found a way around it. Same with the N55 when it came out. What I'm trying to say is that BMW and other car manufacturers will always keep trying to make it difficult for tuners to hack into their ECU, but tuners will in return do their best to crack them to make a living. So putting that issue on a side I honestly see a lot of potential in terms of tuning for the new M3, even more potential than the current M3 just for the fact that later in the future it will be so easy and much more cost effective to do turbo upgrades or even simple bolt-ons.

Fair enough. And I agree with all your points.

All I'm saying is that the new ECUs will simply be that much harder than ever before to crack. And when they are cracked, the M3/4's turbos are already out of breath @ 18psi stock.

[brisance]

Originally Posted by starkindustries

HP is not the selling point, its the massive increase in torque and lighter weight that will ultimately make our e92 M's feel like a horse and carriage ride.

Things may not be so cut and dry. That top mount intercooler may quickly become heat soaked in warm climates. I guess we'll just have to withhold judgment until tests results are in.

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by DrakeKemper

...automatic blip downshifts? That ruins what is great about a manual transmission. STOP TRYING TO MAKE MANUALS EASIER TO DRIVE!!! That's not the point.

+1!

[s!ke]

Wait so they are both coming at the same time? Not the coupe a year later??

[BuLoOoSki]

Originally Posted by Longboarder

Fair enough. And I agree with all your points.

All I'm saying is that the new ECUs will simply be that much harder than ever before to crack. And when they are cracked, the M3/4's turbos are already out of breath @ 18psi stock.

Agreed, the turbos will definitely need to be swapped for those looking at making 500rwhp. I personally don't see myself tuning the M3 if I get it, the only thing I see myself doing is changing out the downpipes for some cat-less ones just for a better sounding exhaust.

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by PrimeBMW

What is the weight difference between 6-M and DCT? I think "someone" could make that cal. given the power/weight ratios for the different trans.

If this has not already been posted, I ran the simple calc.

Manual M4 = 1,497 kg/317 kW = 4.72 kg/kW
DCT M4 = X/317 = 4.84 kg/kW
Solving for X, 4.84 x 317 = 1,534 kg

So, DCT is 37 kg or 81.6 lb heavier than manual tranny. Sounds about right.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by Longboarder

Look, just go research the new ECU's that BMW is putting in this car. This is not some minor change like going to direct injection that people think is going to take years to crack and then someone figures it out in a few months.

It's not a simple evolutionary change like in times past...it's a revolutionary change.

Hopefully my good friends Terry and Shiv can figure it out. I know them well and just hung out with Terry a few weeks ago. He says he's getting the new M3/4. I wished him luck on the ECU crack. He's gonna need it this time.

I don't need to do research. I am not talking about easy or not, I am just not being bleak about the car's future tuning potential.

I have an NA engine that I bolted a supercharger onto which I love. I also have a factory FI engine in the other car.

The S65 with $15k bolt on blower is no where near the category of easy/bang for the buck power that an OEM FI setup like the S55 WILL offer...the time that takes not withstanding.

Originally Posted by BuLoOoSki

I can't speak for the N20m but for the N54 I can tell you that they made 370-375rwhp on average and 380rwhp at the most in some cases. I know because I owned one and new many who did and been around since 2006 to see it. But I do hope that the M3 makes 430rwhp.

I assume you are talking tuned/bolt ons for 380whp for an N54? I just got my best friend dowpipes, intake, and Cobb tune for his and I am guestimating around there. But stock, I think it's more like 285-295whp.

My N20 put down 220whp/260tq stock on a load bearing dyno when the car was rated 240/258, meaning on a Dynojet it would have been closer to 235-240(InsideLine put it on a Dynojet and made the same or more as the ATS which claims 272hp).

[BuLoOoSki]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

I don't need to do research. I am not talking about easy or not, I am just not being bleak about the car's future tuning potential.

I have an NA engine that I bolted a supercharger onto which I love. I also have a factory FI engine in the other car.

The S65 with $15k bolt on blower is no where near the category of easy/bang for the buck power that an OEM FI setup like the S55 WILL offer...the time that takes not withstanding.


I assume you are talking tuned/bolt ons for 380whp for an N54? I just got my best friend dowpipes, intake, and Cobb tune for his and I am guestimating around there. But stock, I think it's more like 285-295whp.

My N20 put down 220whp/260tq stock on a load bearing dyno when the car was rated 240/258, meaning on a Dynojet it would have been closer to 235-240(InsideLine put it on a Dynojet and made the same or more as the ATS which claims 272hp).

Sorry my bad, it was a typo. I was referring to a stock N54 and I meant to say 270-275rwhp and not 370-375rwhp.

[Longboarder]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

I don't need to do research.

I'm out.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by Longboarder

I'm out.

To do research?

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

Originally Posted by Alessandro

On the spec sheet they are quoting 21,9 sec from 0-1000m for the M4 with DCT that's 21.85s @ –––.– Kph - Porsche 997 GT3 (Auto)territory!

Just a observation

Except that the 997 GT3 is closing in on 10 years old. And surely won't have the type of track times or top end and surely isn't the same calibre of car by any stretch.

This car is def pretty maxed out with 18 psi from the factory. Lets see if it has a top end. If the fact that is a massaged n54 is any indication, it will die out after 5500 rpm.

[AlteredBe4st]

M4

[elitex]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

Except that the 997 GT3 is closing in on 10 years old. And surely won't have the type of track times or top end and surely isn't the same calibre of car by any stretch.

This car is def pretty maxed out with 18 psi from the factory. Lets see if it has a top end. If the fact that is a massaged n54 is any indication, it will die out after 5500 rpm.

I think it's a little more than just a massaged N54. Look at the difference between N63 and S63. I've owned both and they feel completely different. M5 doesn't run out of breath like my 550I did.

[leletyM3]

I think I ll start to save for the M4!! Will sell the M5 and keep my E46 M3!!!

[Gastoys]

425hp? Only 10 more than current M3, yes over a 100 lb ft of torque, I get it and that is awesome, but was expecting higher hp.

The AMG 2.0l 4 cylinder is cranking out 355hp, why cannot BMW get 460hp out of a 3.0.

I am wondering how the M3 will compete with higher hp German cars like MB C63 AMG and Audi's RS.

I am also wondering if the M3 will be worth the $30k premium over a 335i.

I love the exterior and the interior especially the leather stitching on dash, just that 90hp/70lb ft torque over a ppk equipped 335i makes me question the M3.

[Mako]

M4 is 50 pounds lighter than M3, but the 435i is 55 pounds HEAVIER than the 335i? why would BMW do that?

so the M4 got 100 pounds more cut off than the M3, very strange.

maybe I read the specs on the F30/32 wrong?


M versions should be about $15K more than the non M versions with the same options. Of course lots of options on the 335i are included in the M3 base or part of more expensive packages. My build would probably come in around $80K (so $20K more than my current 335i xdrive M Sport, but would add some things like better leather, more tech options...).

I care the most about actual performance numbers, not horsepower or torque numbers, I am sure the new C63 AMG will have crazy torque again and probably hit 0-60 in 3.7 (without performance package, 3.5 with it) but this new M3/4 may be in that range for magazine tests.

[Adem1534]

Originally Posted by greycrx87

Very impressive, but for 5 hp increase I'm keeping my for sure better sounding e92

Can't laugh harder at these people using the LAST thing they can (the sound) to justify their e9x ownership. WOW. Seriously, you're still bringing up sound difference? Get over it. The ///M4 rips your car apart.

[left123]

Originally Posted by Adem1534

Can't laugh harder at these people using the LAST thing they can (the sound) to justify their e9x ownership. WOW. Seriously, you're still bringing up sound difference? Get over it. The ///M4 rips your car apart.

Well, unfortunately, after just watching the newest videos posted here (the ones of the m3/m4 individually on the track), the sound of each car on this official video is really very lackluster. Almost appliance-esque. I love the straight 6 and am glad they went back to it, but this sounds like crap to me. I know the aftermarket can fix it (most likely) but we shouldn't have to go to it for a reasonable sound.

The sound of a car is one of the more emotional components of it. Don't downplay this. The v8 e9x M3 definitely has it acoustically. The rest will be decided later, but its not always about pure speed, at least 95% of the time.

[flagger]

Those that can not keep their right foot out of the throttle are going to be buying rear tires a lot. This car will probably spin it tires as much as a Merc C63 with the torque it is producing. Merc can't seem to get their rear wheels hooked up easily. Hopefully the chassis engineers at BMW have solved that problem with the new M's.

Also, fuel tank capacity appears to have gone down to 15.8 gal. I'm glad to see the mpg figure go up, but I was hoping for a slightly larger tank than the E92, perhaps 17 - 17.5 gal.

Overall, should be a stunning car to drive and look forward to their arrival.