Official BMW M3 M4 Specs: 430HP, 369+ LB-FT, Under 3306 Pounds, Bi-Turbo Inline 6 Cyl

[Judah]

Originally Posted by sparkyg

Well the GT3 doesnt have plastic windows and it is still a car, it just has been built with far less compromise.

I agree the GT3 is a 2 seater but seriously, I am in the car alone 95% of the car, and I bet lots of others are too.

I never said my E9X was light, dont know wtf has to do with anything. I just said I want more than my E9X and the F80 is incremental, not a blow your doors off difference.

The R&D is spent trying to make a car as cheap as possible with an improvement in performance and still be the same price. Is that not the definition of compromise? Try to make more for the same price, thats dam hard, I agree. Instead I wish they spent $10k more on the car and gave it an alum chassis and then, wow, what a weight savings. What a jump in the cars opportunity for performance and handling.

I just see all this marketing as a missed opportunity.

BMW just spent an butt load on carbon fiber, (lighter and stronger than aluminum) that will be heavy implemented into the next generation of series chassis construction starting with the upcoming 7 series.
Going aluminum is going backwards for them at this point.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Again the (valid) comparison was simply that some companies are purposefully choosing to continue down the path of NA high revving engines for their sports cars and that "the government" isn't forcing them to do anything else.

I am a big NA engine fan and was quite disappointed by the lag present in the M550d (a diesel I know, but still...).

Lag and correlation between throttle input and the engine's power delivery is the one thing that, to me, is against a turbo engine. And to some extent sound.

However those are traditional traits associated with a turbo engine and I'm willing to give this engine a chance on power delivery/throttle input before making judgement. The DTM drivers where very positive (as they would be, being on a BMW payroll ). I'm eagerly awaiting the first test drives by journalists and forum members

To me, the M550d had heaps of lag vs the M5/M6 that feels completely different and where lag is not a factor that is annoying (to me). I suspect the S55 will be even better, especially since it also has a short stroke.

Which manufacturers are shying away from Turbo/FI in their future cars?

Some claim that Ferrari will go FI, McLaren has done so etc. I'm sure Ferrari will make sure they get a responsive engine, but their past has been littered with cars that has poor quality, questionable handling, strange ergonomics and very fragile... It's only in recent years, perhaps starting with the F355, that Ferrari's generally have had great handling, reliability and better ergonomics.

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

Originally Posted by Judah

But that GTR though.... :-)

The real advantage Porsche has over the BMW in this regard is weight. BMW is closing the gap on that, so I don't know about "never".

I couldn't help but laugh. Closing the gap on what? A base 911, the porsche equivalent to a 328? Yea, in that case you're right. Porsche has better engineers, better motors especially more so now that bmw moved to FI and are still considerably lighter. And the fact that porsche hasn't had to do nearly as much to keep weight in check means they can start employing CF to go even lighter making that gap even bigger again than it is now. And IMO their suspension tuning and geometry are much better not to mention the fact that their steering feel and precision and ability to take track abuse are far better.

Bmw will never be Porsche. Plain and simple. With the m3 gts bmw was a good ten years behind where porsche is. Bmw went all out on that car only to fail miserably. If they had made it ten years earlier it would have barely competed with a 996 gt3 let alone any current gt3. And that's not even getting into the fact they they make a GT2 and have a serious game changer in the 991. And that's not evens ruining the CGT or 918 spyder. Porsche is simply a superior car maker.

[spool twice]

369 ft/tq doesn't make sense @ peak HP

369 ft/tq @ 5,000rpm = 351hp@ 5,000rpm

452 ft/tq @ 5,000rpm = 430hp 5,000rpm

HP = TQ x RPM / 5250

LIES, ALL LIES BMW!!

[Judah]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

I couldn't help but laugh. Closing the gap on what? A base 911, the porsche equivalent to a 328? Yea, in that case you're right. Porsche has better engineers, better motors especially more so now that bmw moved to FI and are still considerably lighter. And the fact that porsche hasn't had to do nearly as much to keep weight in check means they can start employing CF to go even lighter making that gap even bigger again than it is now. And IMO their suspension tuning and geometry are much better not to mention the fact that their steering feel and precision and ability to take track abuse are far better.

Bmw will never be Porsche. Plain and simple. With the m3 gts bmw was a good ten years behind where porsche is. And that's not even getting into the fact they they make a GT2 and have a serious game changer in the 991. And that's not evens ruining the CGT or 918 spyder. Porsche is simply a superior car maker.

Wow, listen to the big bad wolf.

I don't think BMW wants to be Porsche but they do want to beat Porsche and I think they are arming themselves with what they need to do so. You are assuming BMW went all out with the GTS but I'm really not sure why, it had no proprietary parts...

When VW/Porsche starts to employ carbon into their chassis it will most definitely not be at the price point to which BMW can. Nor will it be to the extent in which BMW can or will. VW already made that announcement last week thru Audi. Its just to expensive for them for mass production. We already know it will result in a Porsche that cost a customer at least half a mill, theres your 918 and your CGT. In fact VW/Porsche may have to buy its carbon from BMW/SGL... HaHa

Porsche current weight advantage is due to the fact that they are much smaller cars with no back seats, extensively using aluminum construction. What happens when BMW matches and raises .... Hmmmm

"Better engineers", are these the same engineers that bought a GTR to see why Nissan was kicking its butt for a fraction of the price,(still is by the way) ran it on the ring but refused to publish their finding,(lap time) due to embarrassment.



2016 is right around the corner, we will see my friend...

[Alext]

I reckon 0-100km/h in 4.1 sec.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by spool twice

369 ft/tq doesn't make sense @ peak HP

369 ft/tq @ 5,000rpm = 351hp@ 5,000rpm

452 ft/tq @ 5,000rpm = 430hp 5,000rpm

HP = TQ x RPM / 5250

LIES, ALL LIES BMW!!

BMW has said well beyond 500Nm/369lb.ft

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

Originally Posted by Judah

Wow, listen to the big bad wolf.

I don't think BMW wants to be Porsche but they do want to beat Porsche and I think they are arming themselves with what they need to do so. You are assuming BMW went all out with the GTS but I'm really not sure why, it had no proprietary parts...

When VW/Porsche starts to employ carbon into their chassis it will most definitely not be at the price point to which BMW can. Nor will it be to the extent in which BMW can or will. VW already made that announcement last week thru Audi. Its just to expensive for them for mass production. We already know it will result in a Porsche that cost a customer at least half a mill, theres your 918 and your CGT. In fact VW/Porsche may have to buy its carbon from BMW/SGL... HaHa

Porsche current weight advantage is due to the fact that they are much smaller cars with no back seats, extensively using aluminum construction. What happens when BMW matches and raises .... Hmmmm

"Better engineers", are these the same engineers that bought a GTR to see why Nissan was kicking its butt for a fraction of the price,(still is by the way) ran it on the ring but refused to publish their finding,(lap time) due to embarrassment.



2016 is right around the corner, we will see my friend...

BMW did go all out on the GTS proprietary parts or not. That car on paper was pretty special. 4.4 liter, roll cage, uprated DCT software, wider track, 3400 lbs. Too bad it was 10 years late to compete with a Porsche from the early 2000s, hahah.

LOL, beat Porsche at what? They may be able to get the M4 to base 911/S level of performance but again, go up the 911 line and BMW shows its inferiority to them. They cant compete with cars like the 911 turbo/S, GT3, GT2 in any way, shape or form.

BMW uses Porsche as the benchmark. Enough said. They arent arming themselves for anything but to have the M4 come close to the straight line speed of the entry level 911/S nothing more. They know they cant compete with them otherwise. The 991 is the biggest game changer weve seen in a long time and its only going to be pushed further with the GT cars and the turbo/S.

Have you ever been in a GTR? Not even close in terms of the build quality and the fact that the Turbo is a limited production car and highly customizable is why its priced higher. The GTR likely doesnt make Nissan money either and too many people are still buying 911 turbos to care.

If Porsche wanted to, it could drop a 450 hp (3200 lbs car) reincarnation of the 928 that would go into the M3/C63/RS5 segment and shame them all to no end...in fact I would love to see them do this just to shove it to them all for 85-90K. Sorry, but again BMW at its best is not even close to Porsche at its best.

As far as CF, Porsche keeps weight in check. A 911 still has a 31XX curb weight while cars like the GT3 are sub 3000 lb cars. CF isnt needed to get to level that BMW cant even reach with extensive CF use.

[Judah]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

BMW did go all out on the GTS proprietary parts or not. That car on paper was pretty special. 4.4 liter, roll cage, uprated DCT software, wider track, 3400 lbs. Too bad it was 10 years late to compete with a Porsche from the early 2000s, hahah.

LOL, beat Porsche at what? They may be able to get the M4 to base 911/S level of performance but again, go up the 911 line and BMW shows its inferiority to them. They cant compete with cars like the 911 turbo/S, GT3, GT2 in any way, shape or form.

BMW uses Porsche as the benchmark. Enough said. They arent arming themselves for anything but to have the M4 come close to the straight line speed of the entry level 911/S nothing more. They know they cant compete with them otherwise. The 991 is the biggest game changer weve seen in a long time.

Have you ever been in a GTR? Not even close in terms of the build quality and the fact that the Turbo is a limited production car and highly customizable is why its priced higher. The GTR likely doesnt make Nissan money either and too many people are still buying 911 turbos to care.

If Porsche wanted to, it could drop a 450 hp (3200 lbs car) reincarnation of the 928 that would go into the M3/C63/RS5 segment and shame them all to no end...in fact I would love to see them do this just to shove it to them all for 85-90K. Sorry, but again BMW at its best is not even close to Porsche at its best.

As far as CF, Porsche keeps weight in check. A 911 still has a 31XX curb weight while cars like the GT3 are sub 3000 lb cars. CF isnt needed to get to level that BMW cant even reach with extensive CF use.

Did you even read my previous post, it doesn't seem like it because you kinda just rambled on making excuses and theoretical scenarios.

My previous post is my reply to your most recent post as well.

Like I said, we will see .... :-)

[spool twice]

Originally Posted by Boss330

BMW has said well beyond 500Nm/369lb.ft

Definitely well beyond lmao

[Carl L]

Originally Posted by swamp2

And E46 M3s had a major rod bearing failure problem. And millions of cars are recalled each year in the world... This is pretty well argument ad absurdum here...

Again the (valid) comparison was simply that some companies are purposefully choosing to continue down the path of NA high revving engines for their sports cars and that "the government" isn't forcing them to do anything else.

You missed my main point (which was unclear)swamp, that an M3 is hard to beat as performance daily driver. The crash safety- a huge factor for me with all the idiots on the road- of a mass produced chassis has to this point be far better than a Ferrari or Lamborghini. Now, the carbon tub Mclaren MP may be a different matter. I was having fun re the on board 458 fires- I had an 08 M5 and got lucky but my other friend's vehicle was crippled by SMG issues. Were 500,000 mile reliability alone what we were chasing, we'd all be in Toyotas.

[Carl L]

Originally Posted by dreamspeed

TLDR version

Every generation M3 is the "last" of the great M cars

Any M car besides the one you own will inexplicably be not as good as yours

BMW has been killing off The Ultimate Driving Machine since the E30 or 2002 or 507 !

An on point and laconic post. Each new gen is a chance to own the latest, or keep the one you have. Simple.

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

Originally Posted by Judah

Did you even read my previous post, it doesn't seem like it because you kinda just rambled on making excuses and theoretical scenarios.

My previous post is my reply to your most recent post as well.

Like I said, we will see .... :-)

I may have gotten a bit tangential but fact is BMW will never be the calibre of car or regarded in the same way as Porsche or Ferrari, as street cars or in the world of motorsports.

BMW only recently broke the 8 minute barier on the N'Ring (barely with the M5), Porsche has been doing that for 15 years and was the first car to break 7 minutes.

I love BMWs (on my second e92 m3, 5th M car and gf and I also have 335 vert) and think they make a great ALTERNATIVE (not replacement) to the higher end cars but in no way are they Porsche, Ferrari, etc. I an on my second e92 m3, and will likely be getting an f8x m3/4 due to the fact that I need the backseat...otherwise no question a 911 is the better car.

[Jason]

Added Animated Technical Presentation video to the guide.

[Brosef]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

I may have gotten a bit tangential but fact is BMW will never be the calibre of car or regarded in the same way as Porsche or Ferrari, as street cars or in the world of motorsports.

BMW only recently broke the 8 minute barier on the N'Ring (barely with the M5), Porsche has been doing that for 15 years and was the first car to break 7 minutes.

I love BMWs (on my second e92 m3, 5th M car and gf and I also have 335 vert) and think they make a great ALTERNATIVE (not replacement) to the higher end cars but in no way are they Porsche, Ferrari, etc. I an on my second e92 m3, and will likely be getting an f8x m3/4 due to the fact that I need the backseat...otherwise no question a 911 is the better car.

please stop with the Porsche dogma. not everything needs to be compared to the 911, and the fact that M3's of the past have always been nipping at the heels of the 911 is pretty damn impressive because they shouldn't be compared. the 911 is a sports car without a usable trunk or usable backseat. the M3 just happens to be a far more practical car that I find to be a lot more fun to drive than a 911.

[MisterEm]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

BMW only recently broke the 8 minute barier on the N'Ring (barely with the M5), Porsche has been doing that for 15 years and was the first car to break 7 minutes.

Really? The CSL hit 7:50 in 2003 on a "wet-track" day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...eife_lap_times

I am confused.

[Judah]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

I may have gotten a bit tangential but fact is BMW will never be the calibre of car or regarded in the same way as Porsche or Ferrari, as street cars or in the world of motorsports.

BMW only recently broke the 8 minute barier on the N'Ring (barely with the M5), Porsche has been doing that for 15 years and was the first car to break 7 minutes.

I love BMWs (on my second e92 m3, 5th M car and gf and I also have 335 vert) and think they make a great ALTERNATIVE (not replacement) to the higher end cars but in no way are they Porsche, Ferrari, etc. I an on my second e92 m3, and will likely be getting an f8x m3/4 due to the fact that I need the backseat...otherwise no question a 911 is the better car.

I stand by my first post in this matter adding the M3 CSL broke 7s about 10 years ago, matching the then current Carrera S. Also I wouldn't call a 911 a better car but I might call it a better performing car, for now. It should be, it's a small, light, aluminum 2 seater.

Now at this time I would like to reiterate, We Shall See .... :-)

[Race 1]

When discussing the new M line vs Porsche, I just feel as if P cars are a lot more expensive to purchase new, and to live with used. A lot more M vehicles driving around and parts out for them then P car daily drivers!?

a Boxster is 62k.... BLAH

[m3evobr]

Originally Posted by Brosef

please stop with the Porsche dogma. not everything needs to be compared to the 911, and the fact that M3's of the past have always been nipping at the heels of the 911 is pretty damn impressive because they shouldn't be compared. the 911 is a sports car without a usable trunk or usable backseat. the M3 just happens to be a far more practical car that I find to be a lot more fun to drive than a 911.

Like you said, they shouldn't be compared as they belong to different price points and different performance category. M3 is a 4 seater that performs the daily duty in a much more practical way. Not that the 911 is not practical, as I used all my porsches on the road and for daily duties without any problems.
From a 996 turbo to a 997 GT3RS.
Fun factor is really relative, but hard to believe that it's a lot more fun than a 911, but again it's personal preference.
I have to say that I tried a really big variety of cars over the years and can't see myself steering away from a 911 of some sort.
The same didn't happen with BMW M cars.
Maybe now with this specs this is going to be the car that will bring me back to a M.

[m3evobr]

Originally Posted by Judah

I stand by my first post in this matter adding the M3 CSL broke 7s about 10 years ago, matching the then current Carrera S. Also I wouldn't call a 911 a better car but I might call it a better performing car, for now. It should be, it's a small, light, aluminum 2 seater.

Now at this time I would like to reiterate, We Shall See .... :-)

As a matter of fact the Regular Carreras are 4 seater, even though you can only fit a 20 lbs toddler in the back.
Kidding aside, the performance levels are not on par, that's just a fact without argument. It's been like that for so many years.
Again this doesn't make the M car a bad car or not so great.
What they became over the years in their own, is what made a lot of people steer away from them.
At least this is what happened to me.

[Judah]

Originally Posted by m3evobr

As a matter of fact the Regular Carreras are 4 seater, even though you can only fit a 20 lbs toddler in the back.
Kidding aside, the performance levels are not on par, that's just a fact without argument. It's been like that for so many years.
Again this doesn't make the M car a bad car or not so great.
What they became over the years in their own, is what made a lot of people steer away from them.
At least this is what happened to me.

With a rear seat that useless, it's a two seater.

I didn't write the Ms are on par. I wrote BMW is closing the gap. However, at BMWs current rate of movement, they will be on par very soon hence all the chest beating, from both sides.... :-)

[m3evobr]

I believe both companies have different approach with their product line, but of course the same goal, sales therefore profit.
BMW has a much larger variety of cars and of course that reason higher volume.
I don't see them going for such an exclusive market like you see in the Porsche GT cars, first because their price point and again, volume...
I don't even think they want to close the gap, if you're comparing with 911, very different cars, and if not comparing an M car, what can you compare to a 911 that is not an M car ?
Of course if you go Panamera vs M6 GT or M5
Cayenne vs X5

That's a different story.