BIMMERPOST M3/M4 First Ride Notes, Impressions and More Tech Details

[gbelton]

Sounds like BMW has listened to its customers and fans feedback. I say a 'Thank You' is in order. At least on this preliminary information.

So here's mine. Thank you BMW AG. I cannot wait for the M3 / M4 to hit the streets. Note to the competition, 'Check!'

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by pkim1079

Dont you want to shift so that in the next gear you have hit peak hp and tq: Eg shift into second at 6k, engine will be at around 4k where hp and tq are still increasing vs shifting at 7.5k where engine will be at 5.5k where hp and tq are already at peak power? It may feel faster since tq is still increasing but its not at max tq. Just a thought.

Doesn't really matter what the torque and power are doing in the next gear, you want to optimise the 'torque amplification' of the current gear (gear ratio) + engine torque to get best acceleration. Only when torque falls away so much in current gear to below the advantage the higher gear ratio gives does a gear change improve acceleration. Plus a few other minor factors.

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by Dackelone

I suspect it is done thru the electronic wastegates.

Sounds like they are using 'good ol fashioned' 'street' anti lag. Retarded ignition more fuel air. The fact they don't use this continuously points very much in that direction. A shame really as they clearly have no 'sequential turbo' set up, just a cheap twin turbo system.

[solstice]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

Only 80 kilos? Seriously, the car is larger has more tech (hidden stuff like safety) and you complain it's ONLY 80 kilos lighter? An F30 is a LOT bigger than an E90. Just those 80 kilos took a lot of effort.

In my case the "only" 80kg is in context of the result in how the car will feel vs. the current car. It's just not enough to make a very noticeable difference. Since weight is touted by M as the headline of the new car I was expecting a more ground breaking figure to offset the loss of the S65.

Outside the context of the current M3 the effort and resulting weight of the car is quite impressive and highly appreciated.

Also these days it seems that we need to celebrate anything outside of power that isn't getting worse and here is something that at least on paper is getting better.

[tdizzle]

Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux

Other considerations: The average weight of the driver really should not be 68kg - realistically it should be set at 80kg at least.

Obviously, they're going with the average weight of the world and not us fatties in the US (the heaviest people on average in the world).

If Wikipedia is to be trusted, looks like the average person in Europe is 156lbs (71kg) and North America is 178lbs (81kg) but those helpful Asians drop the world figure since they come in at a wonderful 127lbs (58kg).

Looks like the 'world' average of the adult population's weight is 136lbs (62kg)

(Sheesh, the average Female in the US weighs more than the average male in South Korea..BY 12 lbs!. )

[MisterEm]

Take my money please.

[ATX78703]

like everyone else has posted - i just cannot believe the weight savings on this. more than makes up for any sort of power numbers...

All this CFRP sounds awesome, but expensive. 50% different content than a standard F30, which is disappointing - i thought usually it was about 75%???

plus it's going to be underrated - but looks like it will spec similar to Caddy's new V6TT that will likely power the ATS-V. Of course caddy usually overrates and BMW usually underrates.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by bselim3

"In "Sport" and "Sport Plus" settings, the turbochargers are "pre-tensioned," which means that they keep spinning at a high rate of speed even after you have taken your foot off the throttle. This trick ensures ultra-quick response times fully comparable to those of a naturally aspirated engine."

This is what I was afraid of, I like BMW's solution though. Hopefully it works well.

this method was employed on the N54T in the 1M via the " M button", along with different throttle maps.

[Oaktree]

Did I miss the notes on the driving impression or was it just the video?

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by solstice

In my case the "only" 80kg is in context of the result in how the car will feel vs. the current car. It's just not enough to make a very noticeable difference. Since weight is touted by M as the headline of the new car I was expecting a more ground breaking figure to offset the loss of the S65.

Outside the context of the current M3 the effort and resulting weight of the car is quite impressive and highly appreciated.

Also these days it seems that we need to celebrate anything outside of power that isn't getting worse and here is something that at least on paper is getting better.

Where have weight been touted by BMW M as the headline of the new car? Yes, it's one of the major achievements. But I haven't seen M say it's THE headline feature...

And I don't get the obsession with power besides as a "simple and easy to understand number". If you keep the power but loose weight, you will feel that while accelerating just the same way you would if you kept the weight and added power... So would people rather have a higher HP number but kept the weight???

Lower weight also has the added bonus of handling and braking improvements

And don't forget the MAJOR increase in torque. Why doesn't as many comment on that?

And in the context of the E92 M3:

The E92 M3 GAINED 65kg extra over the 335i,
The F80/82 LOOSES 10kg over the F30 335i
(source is the EU spec brochures from BMW.de)

That takes quite an effort to achieve, as adding all the M stuff adds weight to the car and means that weight saving has to negate all that extra componentry that is added to the car.

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by Boss330

Where have weight been touted by BMW M as the headline of the new car? Yes, it's one of the major achievements. But I haven't seen M say it's THE headline feature...

And I don't get the obsession with power besides as a "simple and easy to understand number". If you keep the power but loose weight, you will feel that while accelerating just the same way you would if you kept the weight and added power... So would people rather have a higher HP number but kept the weight???

Lower weight also has the added bonus of handling and braking improvements

And don't forget the MAJOR increase in torque. Why doesn't as many comment on that?

And in the context of the E92 M3:

The E92 M3 GAINED 65kg extra over the 335i,
The F80/82 LOOSES 10kg over the F30 335i
(source is the EU spec brochures from BMW.de)

That takes quite an effort to achieve, as adding all the M stuff adds weight to the car and means that weight saving has to negate all that extra componentry that is added to the car.

+1

Power only works when on WOT. Weight works everywhere

EDIT: Sorry, just occurred to me that power also works at the pub, and therefore is a major buying factor by some

[pkimM3r]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

Doesn't really matter what the torque and power are doing in the next gear, you want to optimise the 'torque amplification' of the current gear (gear ratio) + engine torque to get best acceleration. Only when torque falls away so much in current gear to below the advantage the higher gear ratio gives does a gear change improve acceleration. Plus a few other minor factors.

I dont know, my logic is this:

If we were to race on foot (or carriage), and i start with 10 horses and the subsequent torque they will bring, and you start with 8 horses, and then add 2 more horses a couple seconds later (btw how long does it take to lasso in a horse onto a carriage lol?), the change acceleration for you will feel like its pulling harder of course, but wouldnt i still be ahead of you since we are both being lugged by ten horses now except i started with ten from the get go?

Assuming we both have the same type of horse - not a short legged mongolian horse, a little pony, or a unicorn. Unicorn would be cheating.

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux

Other considerations: The average weight of the driver really should not be 68kg - realistically it should be set at 80kg at least.

Also, from what I remember the vast majority of buyers of the E9x M3 opted for a DCT which will again be quite a bit heavier than the MT version. Add a few options that everyone chooses (like satnav, better audio system etc.) and you'll rather be at 3600 at least.

Still, it's good that BMW makes an effort to reduce weight. I'm not really enthusiastic about the power figure though.

Alpina_B3_Lux

Precisely. DCT alone adds 60-70 lbs. Add back the 20-30 lbs of weight savings from the ceramic brakes, and add all other options (nav, upgraded sound, 19s, etc) youre likely looking at another 75 lbs of equipment. In total, thats roughly 150-175 lbs over their 33XX base weight. So a fully loaded m4 will have negligible difference from an e92 m3 if in fact that weight is no options and includes ceramic brakes.

On a side note, previous Ms were differentiated by 75-80% new parts in the M vs their regular model counterpart. Looks like that number has significantly dropped being on 50% differentiation now.

Either way, amongst my well derseved criticisms, I am excited about the car.

[bunker]

WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN
WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN
WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN WIN

[Alpina_B3_Lux]

Originally Posted by Boss330

And don't forget the MAJOR increase in torque. Why doesn't as many comment on that?

Because people had that much torque in their 335i N54 for years by way of a simple remap or piggyback. It's nice the M3 now catches up on this, but it's hardly groundbreaking.

I also applaud BMW for making the weight saving efforts, but touting misleading weight figures (naked cars, no driver included etc.) doesn't earn them my appreciation.

I'm sure the new M3/M4 will be a great car, and I'll certainly consider it as a replacement for my current ride. But even with the reduced weight the power figures are on the low side, at least IMO. Once we can get to 500hp at the crank with downpipes and a remap I'm all for it, but 430hp is rather underwhelming.

Alpina_B3_Lux

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux

Because people had that much torque in their 335i N54 for years by way of a simple remap or piggyback. It's nice the M3 now catches up on this, but it's hardly groundbreaking.

I also applaud BMW for making the weight saving efforts, but touting misleading weight figures (naked cars, no driver included etc.) doesn't earn them my appreciation.

I'm sure the new M3/M4 will be a great car, and I'll certainly consider it as a replacement for my current ride. But even with the reduced weight the power figures are on the low side, at least IMO. Once we can get to 500hp at the crank with downpipes and a remap I'm all for it, but 430hp is rather underwhelming.

Alpina_B3_Lux

Ok, so the M3/M4 gets 430hp AND the same torque (according to you) as a tuned 335i. The combination of the two and the engine's characteristics will probably feel VASTLY different than a tuned 335i...

Where do you get the weight info from?

The weight is with fluids and 90% fuel (as per EU legislation) and without driver. The new car is 80kg lighter than the old.

Where is the "etc" and "naked" part?

[Alpina_B3_Lux]

Originally Posted by tdizzle

Obviously, they're going with the average weight of the world and not us fatties in the US (the heaviest people on average in the world).

If Wikipedia is to be trusted, looks like the average person in Europe is 156lbs (71kg) and North America is 178lbs (81kg) but those helpful Asians drop the world figure since they come in at a wonderful 127lbs (58kg).

Looks like the 'world' average of the adult population's weight is 136lbs (62kg)

(Sheesh, the average Female in the US weighs more than the average male in South Korea..BY 12 lbs!. )

Well, I would assume the target customers of the M3/M4 will not be Asian women... so I maintain that this weight figure is irrealistic and therefor just more marketing BS.

Alpina_B3_Lux

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux

Well, I would assume the target customers of the M3/M4 will not be Asian women... so I maintain that this weight figure is irrealistic and therefor just more marketing BS.

Alpina_B3_Lux

Official EU weights of driver and luggage is 68kg and 7kg respectively.

As BMW is a German manufacturer, I don't find it marketing BS to use official EU type approval numbers as given by EU governments...

[Alpina_B3_Lux]

Originally Posted by Boss330

Where do you get the weight info from?

The weight is with fluids and 90% fuel (as per EU legislation) and without driver. The new car is 80kg lighter than the old.

The EU figures always have to include the driver (68kg) plus 7kg luggage. BMW uses the 1500kg figure which is without the driver and hence misleading, as most people would assume that figure already including driver and luggage.

Originally Posted by Boss330

Where is the "etc" and "naked" part?

Using a configuration that nobody would buy: no extras (no satnav, no upgraded audio, no other options that 99% of M3 / M4 drivers would choose), smaller rims (18", most would go for 19"), manual transmission (I believe more than 80% of the E9x M3 were DCT), ceramic brakes (expensive option)...only if you combine all this, which is not realistic at all, will you have a chance of reaching the figure BMW is advertising. And then there's still no one in the car to drive it.

Don't get me wrong, the efforts to save weight are laudable. It's just that the figures touted in the presentation are misleading as no one in their right mind would configure a car that way. If you configure a car in a more realistic fashion, the weight savings compared to an F30 335i or the E90 M3 will not be very substantial.

Alpina_B3_Lux

[cs4444]

Originally Posted by Never Convicted

No offense, but that's crap. You're clutching at straws here. Go to other manufacturers sites. C7 is 3298 lbs. CURB weight. 991S is 3120 lbs. CURB weight. RS5 is 4012 lbs CURB weight. GT-R is 3818 lbs. CURB weight. Then you speculate on how much options will add, like ANYONE, EVER got any of the others without options. And you think that BMW is acting in some sort of misleading vacuum? Maybe they should weigh it with 4 bodybuilders with their barbells in the trunk to satisfy you.

It's amusing that basically the same crew on here is convinced that BMW lost it's way, has gone downhill, is marketing driven, RIGHT AFTER you bought your cars. Amazing how much better timing you had, no matter that it covers every MY to the present.

+100

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux

The EU figures always have to include the driver (68kg) plus 7kg luggage. BMW uses the 1500kg figure which is without the driver and hence misleading, as most people would assume that figure already including driver and luggage.

Using a configuration that nobody would buy: no extras (no satnav, no upgraded audio, no other options that 99% of M3 / M4 drivers would choose), smaller rims (18", most would go for 19"), manual transmission (I believe more than 80% of the E9x M3 were DCT), ceramic brakes (expensive option)...only if you combine all this, which is not realistic at all, will you have a chance of reaching the figure BMW is advertising. And then there's still no one in the car to drive it.

Don't get me wrong, the efforts to save weight are laudable. It's just that the figures touted in the presentation are misleading as no one in their right mind would configure a car that way. If you configure a car in a more realistic fashion, the weight savings compared to an F30 335i or the E90 M3 will not be very substantial.

Alpina_B3_Lux

So, you are saying that the weight that is stated for E9X M3 was the "fattest" version and now they suddenly change that and use the "naked" version

First of all, the quoted curb weight figure is allways the base version of any car. Nothing new there.

Second of all, they say that the new car will be 80kg lighter than a comparable E9X M3.

Add the same equipment to both cars and the new will still be 80kg lighter.

-------------------

And, the EU weight doesn't have to include the driver. According to EU directive 92/21/EC (which governs masses and dimensions of M1 cars) it is clearly stated in the Appendix to Annex II:

1. The mass of the vehicle will be verified as follows:
1.1. empty, i.e. in running order as per item 2.6 of Appendix 1 of Annex I, but without driver,

[solstice]

The difference is 80kg(176 lbs) to the current car, period. Use whatever standard you want when comparing to the current car or the competition and then deduct 80kg(176 lbs) from the current car to get the F80/F82 weight.

There is a LOT of misleading figures and weight comparisons in these threads. Make sure you get it right if this is important to you.