[Mik3ymomo]

Originally Posted by gthal

Agreed BUT part of the reason it isn't as track friendly is because of how AWD influences the overall design of the car... weight, understeer vs oversteer, etc. So not as track friendly in large part because of AWD.

Don't tell that to the GT-R guys...

[solstice]

Originally Posted by Vectors2final

Some of you may need some classes on throttle modulation to help you with those tires... Both of my Mustangs made around 450RWHP and I didn't go through tires every 4-6k miles. I could smoke them up at will, effortlessly if I wanted to. Those PSS are better than the Pirellis I was using.

I think some of you will figure out how to get it right once you get some more seat time... In previous M's the power came on so late that it was really easy to work the throttle as opposed to the down low mid range power of the F8x.

I think AWD will make this car boring... Like the GTR- fast, but nannied to death.

+1

I've been trying to understand the complaints about traction and tires but I just can't. Wet or dry this car has fantastic grip. It has no problem shaking off S4s etc from a stand still. It accelerates a lot harder than the E9Xs wet or dry. Tires, LSD, weight distribution all make up for one of best gripping RWD car I've driven and when adding the power of the S55 it's a rocket. 911s has more traction due to the weight over the rear wheels but other than that it's close to the top. Of course it can shred the tires in the lower gears, all powerful rwd cars can but that's not a problem.

[Vectors2final]

Originally Posted by solstice

+1

I've been trying to understand the complaints about traction and tires but I just can't. Wet or dry this car has fantastic grip. It has no problem shaking off S4s etc from a stand still. It accelerates a lot harder than the E9Xs wet or dry. Tires, LSD, weight distribution all make up for one of best gripping RWD car I've driven and when adding the power of the S55 it's a rocket. 911s has more traction due to the weight over the rear wheels but other than that it's close to the top. Of course it can shred the tires in the lower gears, all powerful rwd cars can but that's not a problem.

I drove both the M3 and M4... I didn't really have any issues that I can recall. I'm sure if I were to just trash it off the line, I'm not going to have favorable results. It was well composed, and was surprised at how much grip it did have. I honestly thought it was going to be a shit-show getting into the throttle, but I'm sure with a tune, things will be a little more complicated, but that doesn't worry me much. I never drove the F8x in the wet, so I can't really say. My Mustang had terribad wet traction, and the live axle was easily disturbed in rainy conditions.

[l!ve]

It wouldn't be my preferred option, but given the 4wd trend on most cars, I don't think I will have a choice in the near future.

[TheIceStormOf06]

Originally Posted by Patrnflyr

I wish the car was offered with AWD. I owned a heavily tuned Porsche turbo a few cars ago and an R8 before my F car. They were AWD because they had to be in order to keep the tires from lighting up. We "over modded" the P turbo (637hp) and it would light them up even when AWD!

The M4 seems to have the same situation. I haven't been able to punch it to the floor without the traction control coming on and taming the tail. That may be fun for you drifter types but I'd rather have it hook up and accelerate faster than make smoke. It's my wife's car but I bet we go through rear tires every 4-6 thousand miles.

Please don't give BMW any ideas. They end going the route of Audi and AMG. That would suck. If you want more grip, get wider rubber. AWD would add 300 pound and heavy and no longer handles. People wanted more power, now they get it and complain. Now people awd. Be careful what you wish for. Give AWD and people would complain it's numb. Take the RS5. No matter what it doesn't handle.

For those making If Porshe can do it, why can't BMW. Note the 911 turbo would be the equivalent to the M4 since the C4 is nat aspirated and doesn't have the tourqe. The 911 turbo to get it to compensate and handle due to the AWD, they had to introduce rear steering to get the sharp handling required for the platform. BMW is not going to do that.

If it's about driving in the snow, good winter tires will do the trick.

[V1.47fan]

Why not offer both, RWD and AWD like Porsche does on the 911?

[TahoeM3]

Originally Posted by Mik3ymomo

Don't tell that to the GT-R guys...

Define "track friendly."

And show me a production car under $200k that's faster than the GT-R on a track...the 458 speciale beat the Nismo by 1/100th of a second at the Motown Mile. If the point of racing is to go fast and post good times, doesn't that make it "track friendly?"

The RS5 is not a car that was designed as a performance car. It's not the AWD as much as it is the layout...basically a FWD car converted to AWD, with resulting balance issues...that is the problem. This is not the case for the GTR and wouldn't be a problem for an AWD M4.

[auf Deutsch]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

For those that want AWD, Audi offers the option.

I shouldn't have to compromise and buy a glorified VW with front wheel bias, horrendous understeer, and engine placement in front of the front axle. Even though the current xdrive set up isn't bad (40/60 variable spit) as it relates to non M models, M division could engineer a killer 30/70 non-variable split similar to AMG.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by solstice

+1

I've been trying to understand the complaints about traction and tires but I just can't. Wet or dry this car has fantastic grip. It has no problem shaking off S4s etc from a stand still. It accelerates a lot harder than the E9Xs wet or dry. Tires, LSD, weight distribution all make up for one of best gripping RWD car I've driven and when adding the power of the S55 it's a rocket. 911s has more traction due to the weight over the rear wheels but other than that it's close to the top. Of course it can shred the tires in the lower gears, all powerful rwd cars can but that's not a problem.

I'm wondering if the cars with "traction issues" are DCT cars. Noticed during my test drive (beating) of the DCT M3 during the Ultimate Test Drive that I could get rubber during the 2-3 shift with no provocation. I think it's probably a combination of the fast shift times in D3 and the slightly shorter gearing.

[evanescent03]

Originally Posted by TahoeM3

Define "track friendly."

And show me a production car under $200k that's faster than the GT-R on a track...

z/28 … right? i'm not going to go and pull all the numbers from all tracks but i know it was faster around Barber (barely, but it still counts) with a pro driver behind the wheel. maybe it's not faster around every track all the time, but the z/28 isn't just RWD, it's far less expensive.


skip to the last paragraph for "in a nutshell" … otherwise, if you're bored:

gotta be careful when pulling out, especially if you're also turning or on an incline in the wet in the M3. not to say i can't do it, because i do all the time with success, it's just something that requires more attention than with AWD. In the wet, I usually leave DCT in easiest shift mode and throttle in "efficient" which helps a lot. once you get moving it's not so bad as long as you aren't stabbing the throttle. i did drove through torrential rains on the highway and the car was very well behaved. it's mostly just getting started that i notice lots of orange flickering lights and lack of power (which needs to happen often when driving around town). i've never driven this car on the track, let alone in the rain so i can't speak to it's performance in those conditions (the only car i HAVE driven in the wet was a RWD 991 Carrera with skip barber which was a lot of fun ... but left the nannies on)

I've owned multiple AWD and RWD cars. As long as i keep an AWD car in the garage for snow i don't mind having the M3. with snow tires and efficient mode i'm sure the car could get around in the white stuff okay, it's just not nearly as good as AWD on snow tires. If i didn't plan on taking the M3 to the track and AWD were an option, you bet i would've taken it. it's my opinion that people shouldn't really be seeing the RWD benefit on the street much at all because you're probably pushing it a little too hard for public roads, especially in the M3 vs BRZ/FRS on skinny tires (meaning rotating the car or otherwise moving REALLY fast through a turn, BRZ you'll be approaching those limits at a much lower speed but still probably shouldn't be rotating when merging onto a highway, call me a fuddy-duddy ).

in a nutshell (probably should go back and delete the rest of my post, but sorry, i'm not going to!): the M3 has to be far better than a 'vette in heavy rain/snow, but on a busy road when there aren't many opportunities to accelerate between fast-moving cars, AWD sure would be nice to get up to speed.

[evanescent03]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

I'm wondering if the cars with "traction issues" are DCT cars. Noticed during my test drive (beating) of the DCT M3 during the Ultimate Test Drive that I could get rubber during the 2-3 shift with no provocation. I think it's probably a combination of the fast shift times in D3 and the slightly shorter gearing.

mine's DCT and yeah.. D3 isn't the way to go for rain.. i put it in D1 and throttle in "boring" i mean "efficient" and the car feels slow but i don't see constant flashing orange in the instrument panel either

i get those flashes through 2nd/3rd even in the dry if i'm accelerating hard, btw. D3 is super fast, but it's so fast/hard that i'm not sure it's what you'd call smooth. maybe it's just me but i don't think that would be ideal for the track, in my hands at least.

[evanescent03]

i also think that this is a valid consideration:

the M3/M4 is not what it used to be: BMW's track-est car. I think that the M2 will take that honor. it's smaller, lighter, etc… everything most of us fell in love with the M3 for being so good at, but because of the market the M3 has started growing out of that size. still VERY good at most things, but maybe not the FIRST choice for a car that will be used primarily for spirited drives and track time. i have 2 carseats in the back and like the space. i also LOVE the useful torque from the turbos. if i were looking for a sport/track car and didn't have the utilitarian aspects to consider, the 2 may have been a better choice for me.

AWD could make the M3 just that much better as an all-rounder .. sacrifice a little track-ness for usefulness on the street as a DD.

i think the people looking for an M3 for the small/balanced/quick trackable street car of yesteryear will now find that in the M2, which will be a great car and partially funded because of the success of other M cars. i don't think there's anything wrong with that at all. maybe they can call the f80 the m3.5 and rename the m2 the m3 and then all will be right in the enthusiast world

[TahoeM3]

Originally Posted by evanescent03

z/28 … right? i'm not going to go and pull all the numbers from all tracks but i know it was faster around Barber (barely, but it still counts) with a pro driver behind the wheel. maybe it's not faster around every track all the time, but the z/28 isn't just RWD, it's far less expensive.

Ok fair enough, but

1. That car runs on competition tires
2. It's probably a lot slower in the hands of a non-professional driver
3. I'd be willing to bet there is a big difference between best lap time and average lap time
4. It may not be as much cheaper as you may think, but it is cheaper.

Whatever the case, my point was that AWD can be very effective on the track.

[Gearhead999s]

This discussion is somewhat timely as Jaguar has decided to offer AWD on the F Types and at least in Canada the V8's will only be offered with the AWD,no V8 RWD will be available which in my mind is a big mistake.If AWD is offered in Canada in M cars I can see BMW only offering those in Canada just like Mercedes does on most of their product line.For a performance car the last thing I want is awd.

[Carl L]

Originally Posted by aus

Agreed the E9x was too fat, but imagine an F8x with a 4.6L V8 with direct injection, flat plane crank and 8,500 RPM redline. Lighter car, with more toque than the S65 down low and an even higher red line... and the sound of that V8 would send shivers down most people spine- think Ferrari V8.
Sad to say Ford now has that formula, and "the steering feel you used to get in a BMW" per Road and Track.

Maybe Ferrari was onto something with limiting torque in the lower gears on the new California. BMW should take notice.

.

I would have had zero problems with BMW going the route bolded above, that's for sure.

[minn19]

Nice too see the F80 section is similar to the F30 ones.

[erind]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Because the RWD chassis design would have to be compromised to allow the option. I rather have all the R&D money spent on a fantastic RWD layout.

For those that want AWD, Audi offers the option.

This plz

[Patrnflyr]

Originally Posted by Patrnflyr

I knew it would be controversial but the guys in the R8 forum don't sit around griping about it being AWD...

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by evanescent03

z/28 … right? i'm not going to go and pull all the numbers from all tracks but i know it was faster around Barber (barely, but it still counts) with a pro driver behind the wheel. maybe it's not faster around every track all the time, but the z/28 isn't just RWD, it's far less expensive.

Apparently you aren't aware that the base MSRP on a Z/28 is $75k, before inevitable dealer markup.

So not only is it not far less expensive. It's not less expensive at all. Even if you were to take an M4 with CCB's, it's still pretty much the same price.

[V1.47fan]

I'm ok with turbos on an M3...AWD that's crossing the line.

[AreOut]

the next M3 is probably going to be hybrid of sorts with electric motors turning front wheels so the car is still gonna be RWD biased, something like SH-AWD system on new NSX

[Accel Junky]

I wonder what percentage of the voters who want the AWD also prefer DCT? I'm just guessing those two may go hand in hand...