|
Post Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
11-26-2013, 08:20 AM | #199 | |
Brigadier General
![]() 1863
Rep 3,021
Posts |
Quote:
1. Parts tooling costs 2. Parts manufacturing costs 3. Parts storage cost 4. Long-term parts supply costs Now you could say each of those cars had more unique content, but it didn't actually do anything except drive costs up. An f80 is a 3-series. It's always been a 3-series. It's a seriously beefed up 3-series. For upfront and long-term reasons, I don't want 80% unique parts. That's ridiculous. 50% is an excellent blend indicating lots of new body panels, drivetrain parts, suspension, steering, and brakes. And of course interior bits. However, we know that they are using unique parts when it counts most. This means that they STOPPED using unique parts where it didn't matter as much. What does this mean for us? More R&D and development dollars went into the vehicle's performance. Long term ownership will be less expensive for an M vehicle because some of the little stuff won't be 3x as expensive. And there's less opportunity for some uniquely developed part to be absolutely terrible because it's already been in use for 3 years. As an owner of a ~13 year old, 127k mile e39 m5, let me tell you: It pisses me off when my front porkchop (read: lower fender liner in front of tire) is 2x the cost of a e39 540i because the e39 m5 used a unique part in that location. It's not a brake duct or anything performance related. It's a fender liner that has a thick rubber lip where it meets the body for God knows what reason - and it's 2x as much as a result. In the e39 m5 crowd and many other older M crowds, it's a point of joy when you find a non-performance part that's shared across the line and therefore is a more reasonable cost ![]() /Rant |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-26-2013, 08:42 AM | #200 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() 831
Rep 7,887
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-26-2013, 11:37 AM | #201 | |
General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 21156
Rep 20,745
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
The S65 was produced over 7 years, meaning a yearly volume of about 8500 engines. That represents less than 1% of the Steyr plant output and less than 3% of the Munich plant production. I work in the engine manufacturing business, and I can attest that an engine built on a dedicated production line with dedicated resources gets more attention. It is however much more expensive because of it... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-26-2013, 11:56 AM | #202 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 1727
Rep 5,110
Posts |
Quote:
![]() From the link in my previous post it seems the S65 has it's fair share of tolerance related issues though... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-26-2013, 11:59 AM | #203 |
Colonel
![]() ![]() 128
Rep 2,298
Posts |
Purists hate change.
They feel much more comfortable using verbage such as evolution. I for one feel like the ///M brand is growing and setting targets for itself where it has to break some of the long standing individualism. Do I agree with any of it NO. But life goes on. If the new M4 is a lighter, faster, and more rewarding(doubtful) I don't see how I can be mad. If that's not the case then that's more of a reason to look for an e92 or e46 or e30. First build for these cars is May 14'
__________________
Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction. - Albert Einstein
01 e46 m54 - Current : 14 f10 n26 - Boring & Gone : 15 f30 n26 - Current : 08 e92 n54 - Gone & Missed!!! |
Appreciate
0
|
11-28-2013, 11:07 AM | #204 |
Major
![]() ![]() 85
Rep 1,489
Posts |
Yessir. Love the car.
__________________
Current: '16 GT4
Past ///Ms: '13 F10 M5, Alpine Weiss III/Sakhir Orange Full '10 E60 M5, Space Gray/Black |
Appreciate
0
|
11-28-2013, 01:01 PM | #205 |
General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 21156
Rep 20,745
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-28-2013, 03:31 PM | #206 |
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 1727
Rep 5,110
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-28-2013, 03:59 PM | #207 |
General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 21156
Rep 20,745
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-28-2013, 06:02 PM | #208 |
///M
![]() 165
Rep 3,191
Posts |
Really hoping M3/M4 will be GREAT, really do.
Just really on the fence about it too. Can't wait til the reviews and responses from you guys with a few years into the new cycle. I suspect a few kinks to be worked out with the S55...esp being built on the same prod line as regular engines.
__________________
2011.5 AW/FR E92 M3 6MT
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-02-2013, 03:44 PM | #209 |
Private
![]() 18
Rep 91
Posts |
How have the other clearcoat roofs held up to the elements? Any fading issues?
Personally, I have never owned a BMW. Great cars, but I didn't see the point of spending money on an M3 when it was an NA car (I like to modify things). Now with the twin turbo going to be in it, I am completely interested. I feel once people drive it, they won't be complaining. With the lighter weight and added torque, it's going to be awesome. And turbo engines love to be modified. It's going to be a very fun car. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-02-2013, 03:58 PM | #210 |
Private First Class
![]() 157
Rep 156
Posts |
Sorry put this in the wrong thread!!
If those figures are true then I'll be seriously looking at the Alpina. ALPINA B3 BI-TURBO Engine: 2,979cc, six-cylinder, twin-turbo Transmission: 8-speed ZF automatic, rear-wheel drive Power (hp): 410hp@5,500rpm Torque (lb ft): 443lb ft@3,000rpm 0-62mph: 4.2sec Top speed: 190mph Weight: 1,680kg MPG: 37.2mpg (claimed) CO2: 177g/km Price: £54,950 Expect the B4 to be similar. Ok on track the m would be the better car, but real world everyday driving? Not so sure
__________________
M2 :-)
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-20-2013, 11:59 AM | #211 | |
Captain
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 79
Rep 968
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|