Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice
The high rpm parts in the powertrain intrigues me since that signals that there are lighter materials than used in the N55. I wonder where and what.
|
Much more likely are lighter designs rather than lighter materials at least in the engine itself. A couple of specifics will likely be hollow camshafts and "trapezium shaped" connecting rods, just like the current S65 V8
. I'd also bet on composite drive shafts (since they've now been completely vetted on low end cars and SUVs like the Mitsubishi Montero...). The good thing is that they can save about 10-15 lb in the M4. Composite axles could be another possibility, saving about another 10-15 lb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice
I also disagree with the notion that the M3 is all about maximizing profit for this specific car. The M3 is an icon and a halo car for BMW. It's more about securing and strenghtening their brand and thereby reap longterm benefits and profit across the entire BMW lineup. I.e I think BMW is willing to go further to make this the car as they want it even if it means to eat some of the max profit per sold M3 unit.
|
Sure there is more room for higher cost in the M3/M4 but it's well made up for with higher price. That being said, I would be willing to be that BMW made more profit per M3 than per non M 3er and they will continue to do so with the next generation 3 and 4 series. I have argued in the past that automobile companies sometimes do offer "halo cars" are these can come with significantly reduced profit margins just to make a point, capture market, drive sales of lower end cars, etc. I think the Nissan GT-R is a good example of this. The M4 simply won't be. It's profit margin WILL be higher than the E92 M3.
One major reason for this is (as you've pointed out) engine costs will be dramatically reduced and this decision for an I6 with turbo and sits at the center of my largest frustration with BMW Ms direction. Ferrari is a brand more about design, excellence, engineering, racing heritage and emotion as opposed to BMW. That being said even Ferrari closely manage costs and save where they can. They just don't (and obviously don't have to) penny pinch as bad as BMW. I know BMW to Ferrari is really apples to oranges but you've got a bit of rose colored glasses on in your statement just above.
In the end the car will likely lead its class, but it won't do so by any tremendous margins (just like this time around); not in speed, not in handling, strip times or lap times. Why? It all comes down to basic economics. I think you have a somewhat naive view of this. If BMW was run by Motorsport enthusiasts and engineers the M cars would be substantially more filled with tech and performance. Marketing knows that as long as they win the magazines comparisons, that will drive sales. It's sort of a self evident truth but the car will only be as good as it needs to, because any better will simply be too expensive.
For instance from 1998 to 2007 BMW roughly doubled the number of vehicles they sold whereas their net income went up nearly 600%. That trend is continuing. How and why - one major factor is LESS EXPENSE PUT INTO THEIR CARS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice
All in all reading this interview made me very, very happy. I'm now truly excited about this car. BMW and M as we know it seems to be back, at least for the M3.
|
I glad you are excited. Don't let my "glass half empty" get you down too much...