Videos: M3 and M4 track testing and launch control acceleration videos

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by Jockey

Wow, what drugs are you on?

This pill is oval and marked with an S65 on the outside. lolol

[brava09]

The turbo thingie spoiled the M3. All this crap at efficiency, I bet if the F80 M3 is driven as an M3 should be driven, the fuel consumption will be on par with the E92 M3. What get?
At least the E92 M3 sounded exotic at 8,400 rpm.

The same story with the F10 M5, the turbo completely muted the engine. Hear only fart from exhaust.

[Falafel Combo]

Originally Posted by brava09

The turbo thingie spoiled the M3. All this crap at efficiency, I bet if the F80 M3 is driven as an M3 should be driven, the fuel consumption will be on par with the E92 M3. What get?
At least the E92 M3 sounded exotic at 8,400 rpm.

The same story with the F10 M5, the turbo completely muted the engine. Hear only fart from exhaust.

I personally don't mind the turbo, and quite frankly feel like my e92 M3 would have benefited form the low end turbo torque. It felt like a dog in low RPM's.


I'm mostly concerned because so far I see the f80 following in the f30's footsteps in being an excellent car on paper, and better in most measurable ways than the e90 it replaces. Yet lacking most of the key visceral and emotional elements which actually make a BMW exciting to drive, and not just compare to others ... on paper. The sounds being just one of them.


I really hope more reviews and my own test drive proves me wrong. But color me cautious at this point.

[Johnmd]

Is this faster than the M5 or slower? It looks like the speed falls off after 240, but until then it's pretty stable, question is how fast(er) is it compared to the M5/M6?

M5 probably has a lot more torque, lots of more torque in fact, and if it weren't for its traction disadvantage, it could probably improve more.

What would be more interesting is say like a 60-130 pull. Probably M5 would put 1-2 car lengths.

This whole turbo hate is nonsense. What's the matter with you guys. Do you have a choice? Do you have a car that costs 60k and has the same characteristics and performance figures? No you don't. So there you go.

[KKM3]

For those of you who defend bmw by saying they were forced to turbocharge the new m3 to meet eu standard for mpg and emissions, I say to you this.

Why couldn't they use a supercharger ala the 3.0 tfsi engine in the Audi s4 instead of a turbocharger? A supercharger will feel naturally aspirated, deliver a linear powerband, will not muffle/mute the sound and still achieve good mpg.

My opinion is that Bmw is fucking cheap and wants to use the same engine in every freaking car they have available. Cost cutting and profits, that's really what it comes down to.

[ake]

Originally Posted by KKM3

For those of you who defend bmw by saying they were forced to turbocharge the new m3 to meet eu standard for mpg and emissions, I say to you this.

Why couldn't they use a supercharger ala the 3.0 tfsi engine in the Audi s4 instead of a turbocharger? A supercharger will feel naturally aspirated, deliver a linear powerband, and will not muffle/mute the sound.

My opinion is that Bmw is fucking cheap and wants to use the same engine in every freaking car they have available. Cost cutting and profits, that's really what it comes down to.

Someone else just asked the same question... to be found here:
http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=983914

[KKM3]

Originally Posted by ake

Someone else just asked the same question... to be found here:
http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=983914

He's right, I have a 2013 s4 used as my DD and with a simple tune and pulley I'm putting close to 400awhp while achieving 20mpg city and 31mpg highway and my car weighs 4000 pounds. Imagine a similar setup in the m3 only with a higher redline. Check out my apr stage 2 s4

[Remonster]

Originally Posted by KKM3

For those of you who defend bmw by saying they were forced to turbocharge the new m3 to meet eu standard for mpg and emissions, I say to you this.

Why couldn't they use a supercharger ala the 3.0 tfsi engine in the Audi s4 instead of a turbocharger? A supercharger will feel naturally aspirated, deliver a linear powerband, will not muffle/mute the sound and still achieve good mpg.

My opinion is that Bmw is fucking cheap and wants to use the same engine in every freaking car they have available. Cost cutting and profits, that's really what it comes down to.

Superchargers are not as good for gas mileage, a turbocharger is able to improve efficiency because it is powered by waste (exhaust gas). A supercharger is belt-driven and is powered by the motor itself. It's possible to gain a small amount of gas mileage from a supercharger, for example when I got the VT2-625 kit on my car and drove it similarly I averaged around 1mpg higher because I have more torque in the 3-4,000RPM range and am able to arrive at cruising speed more quickly but this is nothing to write home about.

According to the EPA, an S4 with the 3.0TFSI motor only gets 3-4mpg better than an E92 M3 while making a hell of a lot less power.

[KG3356MT]

As an e90 m3 owner, I like the new M3. Better in every way except sound. Still when it's time for me to upgrade though, its either the new C63 AMG or the B9 RS4/RS5 for me. Cheers everyone. Long live M.

[absoluteis350]

Originally Posted by N.S.A

it sounds amazing but I just clocked 4.1 to 4.2 sec consistently on my stop watch for lunch control from 0-100km/h. Which is super fast but not faster than the m5 or m6gc as BMW states the m3/m4 is faster.

Huh.. I clocked 3.6/3.7 consistently off the video.. which video were you using? I used the first one. No way I am a half second off.

[N.S.A]

Originally Posted by absoluteis350

Huh.. I clocked 3.6/3.7 consistently off the video.. which video were you using? I used the first one. No way I am a half second off.

I clocked it on the 3rd video to the last where they just show lunch control there's new post and they show acceleration results with a Vbox and it gets 4.2 0-100mkph which matches my time. So basically it's not faster than the m5