Anyone else get banned from the G8X section for making fun of its looks?

[pbar]

FWIW, one of my local dealers had the two US press cars last week and told me that he got to drive one of the cars around the block (at 20mph!). On the basis of that he claimed that the steering was greatly improved over even an M2CS and felt comparable to some P-cars.

I will obviously reserve judgement!

However - I did get to see the two press cars in person at another dealership ac couple of days ago. I was surprised that I didn't find the M4 as awful in person as it looks in photos. It's still not a pretty car, and it's huge. The tacky bonnet scoops are not nice, and the hanging out rear bumper too.

But... the interior had some nice improvements:

The CF bucket seats in the M4 were actually very nice - and when you tilt them forward they have motors that quickly make room to get in the back seats. The 'between the legs' attachment is not as uncomfortable as I'd imagined - and the seats actually felt more comfortable than the F82 ZCP seats (with the missing lumbar support). I not a fan of the multicolor leather interiors.

The new shifter knob is quite nice too (leather?) ... but the center console is *enormous* - it's like sitting in a wide boat.

The CF paddle shifters were a nice touch that made the wheel feel less mundane than the one in the X3M. Now we just have to hope that the car changes gear immediately when I press them! ;-)

Speaking of which, this technical article on the ZF8 is an interesting (if intense) read https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/20...eed-automatic/. And it points out that the ZF8 with a wet-clutch (instead of a torque converter) would be basically a DCT. (some relevant info in this thread https://www.2addicts.com/forums/show...18&postcount=1)

Reading some of the Alfa Giulia QV forums, it sounds like the setup of the ZF8 in those cars is so aggressive (presumably to make the shifting more aggressive) that the torque converter is quite jerky at slow speeds! (how ironic!)

[SYT_Shadow]

I'm going to see one in person this weekend, it arrived

[clutchdj]

does any know when harrismonkey or evo are going to get the car and talk about slip angles and balance, like drivers, and not journalists. beside's it being an architectural snafu, at least we will get an honest drive. The ///Mtown reviews are hardly credible. everyone wants to like the car like but damn can we get some pros behind the wheel; today?

[RugbyBro]

Originally Posted by pbar

Speaking of which, this technical article on the ZF8 is an interesting (if intense) read https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/20...eed-automatic/. And it points out that the ZF8 with a wet-clutch (instead of a torque converter) would be basically a DCT. (some relevant info in this thread https://www.2addicts.com/forums/show...18&postcount=1)

Reading some of the Alfa Giulia QV forums, it sounds like the setup of the ZF8 in those cars is so aggressive (presumably to make the shifting more aggressive) that the torque converter is quite jerky at slow speeds! (how ironic!)

Sounds like the Mercedes MCT transmission - which is a cool thing in and of itself. But doesn't the clutch pack vs torque converter only really effect take off? I had thought the torque converter is locked up fairly soon after taking off on ZF8 - so really it would come down to the internal planetary clutch packs? I had read a few posts from CanAutM3 explaining that the planetary clutch packs can't shift with the same force as the dual clutch and engine speed needs to be momentarily reduced in WOT situations for the planetary clutches to engage properly. That makes intuitive sense to me and I would love to see some technical break down just to expand my own understanding

[pbar]

Originally Posted by RugbyBro

Sounds like the Mercedes MCT transmission - which is a cool thing in and of itself. But doesn't the clutch pack vs torque converter only really effect take off? I had thought the torque converter is locked up fairly soon after taking off on ZF8 - so really it would come down to the internal planetary clutch packs? I had read a few posts from CanAutM3 explaining that the planetary clutch packs can't shift with the same force as the dual clutch and engine speed needs to be momentarily reduced in WOT situations for the planetary clutches to engage properly. That makes intuitive sense to me and I would love to see some technical break down just to expand my own understanding

That may well be true (there's a lot of variation between ZF8 applications and variants and I don't know how the internal clutch strengths compare to a DCT equivalent - since they have to handle very different torques).

I was mainly intrigued by the final paragraph of the article:

Shift feel
All sequential upshifts and downshifts with this design involve just releasing one shift element and engaging another. In engineering literature, this is referred to as a “clutch to clutch” shift. Many skip shifts are also possible in the same way, e.g. a shift from Eighth to Fourth involves releasing brake A and engaging brake B while leaving clutches D and E engaged. This transmission therefore shifts very quickly. If the torque converter is replaced by a launch clutch, this transmission would be equivalent to a dual clutch transmission.

Regarding 'fast' torque converter lock up -- I suspect this is what the Giulia QV transmission is using to get a better shift feel, and that's why I was interested to see comments on their forums about how sometimes it makes it quite hard to stop the car smoothly. (to the extent that people talk about fear of rear-ending the car ahead in stop-n-go traffic!) ... and bizarrely even changing out front brake pads to have enough stopping power to fight the torque converter! (

)

[swagon]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Ehhhh no. The M3 hood didn't become that until the E46 with the introduction of a pronounced power dome. Now people act like the lack of a power dome signals the demise of the M3. The E46 and E9X needed the dome. The F8X did not. You guys always lament about wanting things to be functional.......until....

This is very true! E36 M3 looked like an M-Tech 318i. That's how AMG M GmbH and quattro GmbH rolled in the 90s and early 00s - very discreetly. E46 M3 was the changing point for BMW M. Agreed about the F8x powerdome, although at least the CS hood vent is functional. And the E9x had one of its hood vents blocked off as well. Fake news! Haha.

Originally Posted by GrussGott

The loonnnggg sloping hood and nose combined with the awkward axel placement make the front end look like it's unsupported and bending due to weight - then when you move towards the front and see the lower front bumper with it's inward-leaning lines, it looks like the front end is melting and flowing down over intakes.

For the G8x, it looks like BMW actually designed in line-breaks and bulges as a feature of the rear quarter - really bizarre (look above the circle):

And rear-end wheel well drape and bowl cut is really unflattering, not to mention the vertical reflectors ... and why are there 2 trunk edges? (one behind the spoiler lip):

To be fairrr, sloping front ends on passenger cars are here just because of pedestrian crash tests... F30 also had a noticeable slope to the hood with a bumper that went over the kidneys, and was criticised for it. There are certainly workarounds but there's a lot of regulatory and financial BS to adhere to, as you know, I'm sure. Wait till I tell you which car from one of the luxury Euro manufacturers has a rear wing that doesn't do anything functional because they didn't want to pay for crash tests and additional certification processes.

This is the ideal modernised shark nose, but again, Euro NCAP officials would have gotten a heart attack.



Regarding the rear quarter panel. I have only seen the G32, though I would say that in some photos, the G8x appear to have their rear fenders more integrated to the body of the car. F80's rear wide-body fenders are more pronounced, and there is a much sharper shoulder line on the old-shape car that doesn't exist on the G20/80. The shoulder line going through the door handles was one of the hallmark BMW design cues that they've gotten rid of, too.

In this photo, however, the rear fenders look much better.

Originally Posted by stein_325i

They have officially invaded. Still ugly.

Excuse the s*** quality, they were in a locked area further from the entrance.

I want to stop beating the dead horse. BUT. Shit looks like it was tacked on as an afterthought after doing a few lines of Bavarian nose candy imported through Amsterdam from Colombia. Much like the black diffusers and side sills on the lower portion of the car. And the fake vents.

[RugbyBro]

Originally Posted by pbar

Regarding 'fast' torque converter lock up -- I suspect this is what the Giulia QV transmission is using to get a better shift feel, and that's why I was interested to see comments on their forums about how sometimes it makes it quite hard to stop the car smoothly. (to the extent that people talk about fear of rear-ending the car ahead in stop-n-go traffic!) ... and bizarrely even changing out front brake pads to have enough stopping power to fight the torque converter!

Even though I am staunchly in the DCT camp, I still maintain my belief that the ZF8 is really an incredible transmission. It should be in most cars - I still think it is actually the right trans for the M5 given what that car has become. Having owned one and driven countless others, I'm always impressed with far autos have come. On the Giulia it must lock up pretty quick if it is lurching badly in stop and go situations, but that would make sense in race mode like the guy was talking about in that vid. I did notice that on the M235i GC that I was given as a loaner recently, the transmission had an almost artificial jerkiness going on with the way it operated at low speeds... as if it was trying to replicate some of the characteristics of a DCT. There wasn't much consistency to the jerkiness so I was a bit perplexed as to whether it was intentional or not.

With regard to the M3/M4 or any car that is advertised as being a pseudo-track car, I still feel like the DCT is necessary not just for the small shift speed advantage (more apparent on downshifts), but for the shift feel, theater/experience, and automated-clutch idiosyncrasies.

[irunalot]

Not a flattering angle.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by pbar

Speaking of which, this technical article on the ZF8 is an interesting (if intense) read https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/20...eed-automatic/. And it points out that the ZF8 with a wet-clutch (instead of a torque converter) would be basically a DCT. (some relevant info in this thread https://www.2addicts.com/forums/show...18&postcount=1)

Reading some of the Alfa Giulia QV forums, it sounds like the setup of the ZF8 in those cars is so aggressive (presumably to make the shifting more aggressive) that the torque converter is quite jerky at slow speeds! (how ironic!)

The ZF8 will never be like a DCT simply because of the internal planetary gear layout.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by RugbyBro

Sounds like the Mercedes MCT transmission - which is a cool thing in and of itself. But doesn't the clutch pack vs torque converter only really effect take off? I had thought the torque converter is locked up fairly soon after taking off on ZF8 - so really it would come down to the internal planetary clutch packs? I had read a few posts from CanAutM3 explaining that the planetary clutch packs can't shift with the same force as the dual clutch and engine speed needs to be momentarily reduced in WOT situations for the planetary clutches to engage properly. That makes intuitive sense to me and I would love to see some technical break down just to expand my own understanding

Originally Posted by pbar

That may well be true (there's a lot of variation between ZF8 applications and variants and I don't know how the internal clutch strengths compare to a DCT equivalent - since they have to handle very different torques).

I was mainly intrigued by the final paragraph of the article:



Regarding 'fast' torque converter lock up -- I suspect this is what the Giulia QV transmission is using to get a better shift feel, and that's why I was interested to see comments on their forums about how sometimes it makes it quite hard to stop the car smoothly. (to the extent that people talk about fear of rear-ending the car ahead in stop-n-go traffic!) ... and bizarrely even changing out front brake pads to have enough stopping power to fight the torque converter!

Yes, this is my understanding. Modern planetary automatics mainly use the torque converter to launch from rest and it mostly remains locked-up during shifts. The gear changes are executed by slipping one planetary clutch pack against another similarly to how DCT passes power from one clutch to the other. The main difference is that since the main DCT clutches need to be robust enough to launch the car from rest, they can easily handle a very aggressive power shift, which is a major contributor to the positive feel and performance of a DCT. The many planetary clutch packs inside a planetary auto are not robust enough to handle an all out power shift and the engine torque (not speed) needs to be momentarily reduced during the shift to allow the clutch pack to grip.

MCT simply substitutes the lockable torque converter with a wet clutch pack. This changes nothing for the shifts since it is still the various planetary clutch packs that handle gear shifts. The main benefit is improved efficiency from the torque converter losses (even locked-up, a torque converter remains a massive oil pump) and a sportier (read less smooth) behavior when launching. The downside is the loss of torque multiplication at launch from the torque converter (brake torquing). It does not make MDCT any closer to a DCT.

[RugbyBro]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Yes, this is my understanding. Modern planetary automatics mainly use the torque converter to launch from rest and it mostly remains locked-up during shifts. The gear changes are executed by slipping one planetary clutch pack against another similarly to how DCT passes power from one clutch to the other. The main difference is that since the main DCT clutches need to be robust enough to launch the car from rest, they can easily handle a very aggressive power shift, which is a major contributor to the positive feel and performance of a DCT. The many planetary clutch packs inside a planetary auto are not robust enough to handle an all out power shift and the engine torque (not speed) needs to be momentarily reduced during the shift to allow the clutch pack to grip.

MCT simply substitutes the lockable torque converter with a wet clutch pack. This changes nothing for the shifts since it is still the various planetary clutch packs that handle gear shifts. The main benefit is improved efficiency from the torque converter losses (even locked-up, a torque converter remains a massive oil pump) and a sportier (read less smooth) behavior when launching. The downside is the loss of torque multiplication at launch from the torque converter (brake torquing). It does not make MDCT any closer to a DCT.

Sweet, thanks for the insight! Exactly what I thought was going on - I was always curious why the MCT (or any auto) would substitute the TC for a launch clutch. Thought it was a cool concept but always kind of wondered that if TC locks up anyway, then you're just missing out on that torque multiplier from a stop so maybe there was something I wasn't seeing.

[kyrix1st]

Difference between ZF8 and MCT is extremely infuriating and less infuriating. At least MCT downshifts fast.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Yes, this is my understanding. Modern planetary automatics mainly use the torque converter to launch from rest and it mostly remains locked-up during shifts. The gear changes are executed by slipping one planetary clutch pack against another similarly to how DCT passes power from one clutch to the other. The main difference is that since the main DCT clutches need to be robust enough to launch the car from rest, they can easily handle a very aggressive power shift, which is a major contributor to the positive feel and performance of a DCT. The many planetary clutch packs inside a planetary auto are not robust enough to handle an all out power shift and the engine torque (not speed) needs to be momentarily reduced during the shift to allow the clutch pack to grip.

MCT simply substitutes the lockable torque converter with a wet clutch pack. This changes nothing for the shifts since it is still the various planetary clutch packs that handle gear shifts. The main benefit is improved efficiency from the torque converter losses (even locked-up, a torque converter remains a massive oil pump) and a sportier (read less smooth) behavior when launching. The downside is the loss of torque multiplication at launch from the torque converter (brake torquing). It does not make MDCT any closer to a DCT.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by kyrix1st

Difference between ZF8 and MCT is extremely infuriating and less infuriating. At least MCT downshifts fast.

I got to drive a 7-speed MCT C63S on track a little while back, there was this huge annoying lag/power lull on the 3-4 upshift. Terrible for track driving. I hear the 9-speed is better, but I haven't driven one.

[kyrix1st]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

I got to drive a 7-speed MCT C63S on track a little while back, there was this huge annoying lag/power lull on the 3-4 upshift. Terrible for track driving. I hear the 9-speed is better, but I haven't driven one.

I am talking about 9 speed. Haven't driven the 7-speed.

[stein_325i]

This is one horrendous color.

[pbar]

Originally Posted by stein_325i

This is one horrendous color.

Did somebody crash that already?

[GERMAN M3]

Originally Posted by stein_325i

This is one horrendous color.

That is just awful stein_325i . Hurts my eyes to even look at it.

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by pbar

Did somebody crash that already?

all the random clashing lines on this car ...

The front bumper reflector and intake below the headlight give it a backwards Eye of Horus look



The weird side vent in yellow looks like a traffic sign:



And then the weird swoopy line to nowhere trailing it ... and nose; it just looks weird and wrong, kinda like Audi does, but way worse; like everything BMW used to not be ...

[CT_M3]

Hot off the press.

Highlights every point every one has made here.
The new platform just aesthetically comes across as big and bloated

[ABenLauda]

Originally Posted by pbar

FWIW, one of my local dealers had the two US press cars last week and told me that he got to drive one of the cars around the block (at 20mph!). On the basis of that he claimed that the steering was greatly improved over even an M2CS and felt comparable to some P-cars.

I'd call that, being stunningly full of shit!

[pbar]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

all the random clashing lines on this car ...

I think this is the effect they were going for...

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by stein_325i

This is one horrendous color.

....on any year M!