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

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

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.

Im not trying to compare, but others love to beat their chest to the fact that the M3/4 might be able to run with an entry level 911. Whoa, big deal. BMWs best vs Porsche's "worst". And while it might be close in a straight line, it wont have the track prowess the 911 does among many others. Plain and simple, people want to be like the 911 and say I can match XYZ of the 911 because its the benchmark.

The 911 is a far more exciting car to drive, and model, even the Boxster/Cayman. Go drive a GT3 and tell me its not in a whole different universe.

Outside the straight line speed of an entry level 911 performance wise the M3/4 just cant compete. And they should never be compared.

Hell, Porsche even makes a Panamera that runs circles around any M sedan on the track by far and away large margin (VIR Pan Turbo - 3:00 F10 M5 3:05, e9x m3 3:05) and street too (except the M5 is right there for straight line speed).

Originally Posted by MisterEm

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.

Time was an anomaly.

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 .... :-)

See above. And see above. Just because the M4 might be close to the straight line speed of an ENTRY LEVEL 911 doesnt mean much. A Mustang 5.0 is as fast or faster than an e9x M3, but it still doesnt have quite the same experience. Same goes for the M3 and 911.

And once you leave the entry level 911s, BMW is left in the wake even more.

Originally Posted by m3evobr

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.

It seems to be more a rule to go M to Porsche. Ive also has a 911 and cayman S and even though I dont have one anymore there isnt a day I dont feel those are flat out better cars, but the M3 is a very good car that does its job well until I can get another.

[m3evobr]

Indeed, great car, but what really killed the moto for we was the lack of track dependability, weight which brought the performance level and also the 'fun' factor a lot down.
Simple example nowadays I drive a 1993 964 RS America (race car) at the track, even though the GT3 RS was about 10 seconds faster per lap, I have a blast and the driving fun of a 2600 lbs unassisted steering etc ... is way higher, also there is the price point as the way we used to run the RSs was just a matter of time until someone ball up, and the repair bills are hardly below 5 digits in those cases.

I say over and over again, had Gallardo, GTR, BMW, Mercedes, etc.... drove a lot of different 'high performance cars'. Nothing drives like a 911 and also nothing is more dependable than a proper 911.
Unfortunately is the only car (GT3-GT2) that you can go to the track drive the wheels of it and go back home without being in limp mode, in pieces, without brakes etc....
It's a simple test, if the car survives Sebring summer for a complete weekend driven at 10/10ths... I'll rephrase it, but haven't seen it yet, not an unmolested factory car.

Now me may have a contender which is the new C7 and hopefully the M3/4. Still don't think the M3/4 will have the same performance as a C7 specially for the same $$$, but if it's close and most important lasts ... it's well worth it.

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

Originally Posted by m3evobr

Indeed, great car, but what really killed the moto for we was the lack of track dependability, weight which brought the performance level and also the 'fun' factor a lot down.
Simple example nowadays I drive a 1993 964 RS America (race car) at the track, even though the GT3 RS was about 10 seconds faster per lap, I have a blast and the driving fun of a 2600 lbs unassisted steering etc ... is way higher, also there is the price point as the way we used to run the RSs was just a matter of time until someone ball up, and the repair bills are hardly below 5 digits in those cases.

I say over and over again, had Gallardo, GTR, BMW, Mercedes, etc.... drove a lot of different 'high performance cars'. Nothing drives like a 911 and also nothing is more dependable than a proper 911.
Unfortunately is the only car (GT3-GT2) that you can go to the track drive the wheels of it and go back home without being in limp mode, in pieces, without brakes etc....
It's a simple test, if the car survives Sebring summer for a complete weekend driven at 10/10ths... I'll rephrase it, but haven't seen it yet, not an unmolested factory car.

Now me may have a contender which is the new C7 and hopefully the M3/4. Still don't think the M3/4 will have the same performance as a C7 specially for the same $$$, but if it's close and most important lasts ... it's well worth it.

Agree. 911. Best. Car. Ever.

Here are some quotes from the Motortrend article of the 991 C4S vs the Ferrari F12 and the C7 Vette, in which the Porsche to no surprise won.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2g1L6GIQE


"I feel embarrassed and trite saying how good this car is, but the fact remains it is the current world standard,"

"the 991 iteration of the 911 has the best suspension damping in the history of the production car."

Whats funny is, the F12 despite having 331 MORE hp than the 911 C4S wasnt even a full second faster, hahahah.

And whats even more awesome is that this is an AWD 911 making a mockery of RWD cars, and great ones at that.

[Cool Steel]

Direct injection versus port...how does everyone feel about this?

I have read about the carbon build up in the direct injection, premature fuel pump failures etc.

I am sure they have engineered around this, but any concerns?

[gymtime]

The 991 S was the best car I've ever driven. Just the feel of the car.....I can't describe it but you have to drive one to understand.

[Judah]

We shall see .....

[BMWintoxication]

S55 in M2 ... hummmmmmmmmmm

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by BMWintoxication

S55 in M2 ... hummmmmmmmmmm

Perhaps with a smaller bore for 2,5-2,8l displacement?

[BMWintoxication]

Originally Posted by Boss330

Perhaps with a smaller bore for 2,5-2,8l displacement?

doubt BMW M will downsize an S engine.. but.. you maybe right.

[DASHOCKER]

caddy and mercedes has some work to do.. merc will always be heavy but caddy is the wild card with their upcoming ats v..

[Carl L]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

Im not trying to compare, but others love to beat their chest to the fact that the M3/4 might be able to run with an entry level 911. Whoa, big deal. BMWs best vs Porsche's "worst". And while it might be close in a straight line, it wont have the track prowess the 911 does among many others. Plain and simple, people want to be like the 911 and say I can match XYZ of the 911 because its the benchmark.

Your posts are intolerable, and its common knowledge they're not taken seriously by anyone but you. The base 991 is a faster and better handling car than the M3, but with 2 useable seats and a list price that is almost 35% higher. What's your point? You compare the M3 to the GT3 and the C2 to the 328 in other posts, utterly ridiculous tripe and a waste of bandwidth

Re driver enjoyment, that a totally subjective opinion, I'm happier in my M3 than I was in my P-car but that does not mean the M3 is faster or handles as well. It is not but this is purely my preference, just like I prefer Pajeros to Discoverys. The 991 is the better car by the numbers and only a fanboy would argue otherwise, but they are priced in two different markets and are also not true rivals even though they are cross shopped by many.

[Carl L]

Originally Posted by m3evobr

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.

Great post. You are a proper and educated car enthusiast, someone I can relate to. Porsche has always delivered one of the purest driving experiences (yup, purer than the M3 for sure) any car suitable for DDing can give.

[e92_m3]

Originally Posted by lfelunden

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/goodiesfor...4_closeup1.jpg

This picture shows, that car has 320kW ~ 435 HP! Not more or less

I've been staring at the picture and seem lost.

How can you tell that the picture shows that the car has 320kW ~ 435HP?

[bimmerjph]

Originally Posted by e92_m3

I've been staring at the picture and seem lost.

How can you tell that the picture shows that the car has 320kW ~ 435HP?

The "sport display" on the navigation screen.

[buildbright]

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 cant agree. The M4 should have a more usable power band. The one thing I can say about 911C is it lacks that low end torque. The M3 GTS was right in line with the GT3 cars ring times. But lap times mean little to me. Because by the same logic the Nissan GTR is worlds better then the 911.

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

Originally Posted by buildbright

I cant agree. The M4 should have a more usable power band. The one thing I can say about 911C is it lacks that low end torque. The M3 GTS was right in line with the GT3 cars ring times. But lap times mean little to me. Because by the same logic the Nissan GTR is worlds better then the 911.

Right there? 7:48 is in line with 7:40 for the GT3 and 7:33 for the RS? Not a chance. 1 second on a 2 min lap is a LOT of time. 8 seconds on a sub 8 minute lap, let alone 15 second is an eternity.

So then I guess the e9x m3 lacks low end tq then?

911 has plenty of low end tq, if you want more go buy a 911 turbo.

[m3evobr]

Originally Posted by buildbright

I cant agree. The M4 should have a more usable power band. The one thing I can say about 911C is it lacks that low end torque. The M3 GTS was right in line with the GT3 cars ring times. But lap times mean little to me. Because by the same logic the Nissan GTR is worlds better then the 911.

Sure from a 2003 996 GT3 RS, but again you cannot compare an M3 with a GT3 RS, different league cars.

How can you say that a 997 Carrera doesn't have low end torque ?
Please check the numbers on a 2009 + 3.8 Carrera. It has almost the same amount of torque as a GT3.


This is the torque curve from my previous car. 3.8 GT3RS


Here a dyno sheet (also from a dynojet) from an M3. Also take in consideration the engine sizes and the fact that's 6cyl vs 8 cyl.

I'll say it again, they are not cars to be compared.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7010/6...8fce77f1_b.jpg

[buildbright]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

Right there? 7:48 is in line with 7:40 for the GT3 and 7:33 for the RS? Not a chance. 1 second on a 2 min lap is a LOT of time. 8 seconds on a sub 8 minute lap, let alone 15 second is an eternity.

So then I guess the e9x m3 lacks low end tq then?

911 has plenty of low end tq, if you want more go buy a 911 turbo.

8 seconds on 13 mile track is not that big a gap specially with the ever changing weather conditions. Not to mention using different drivers, and tires. If you ever raced the ring you would understand.

This is why I think comparing ring times is silly. Because by this logic you have, the 911 is no where near as good as a GTR.

Yes the e9# M3 lacks low end tq its one of the biggest criticisms of the car. I just drove (4) 911 variants on a race track yes it lacks low end torque.

[Never Convicted]

Originally Posted by sparkyg

I prob will. I agree, the guy bucked up.

Why is everyone here so stuck up on people being critical about this car.

I never said your baby was ugly. Seems I did...

Can't say I'm surprised. Just another drama queen who can talk the talk, but can't walk the walk. Good luck with the "Porsche."

[buildbright]

Originally Posted by m3evobr

Sure from a 2003 996 GT3 RS, but again you cannot compare an M3 with a GT3 RS, different league cars.

How can you say that a 997 Carrera doesn't have low end torque ?
Please check the numbers on a 2009 + 3.8 Carrera. It has almost the same amount of torque as a GT3.


This is the torque curve from my previous car. 3.8 GT3RS


Here a dyno sheet (also from a dynojet) from an M3. Also take in consideration the engine sizes and the fact that's 6cyl vs 8 cyl.

I'll say it again, they are not cars to be compared.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7010/6...8fce77f1_b.jpg

No the 2009 GT3 has a time of 7:40. Also I agree, you shouldn't compare but I was responding to someone who was comparing both cars. I think its silly to compare any ring time. I think its funny people bragging about track times they didn't run.

The 991 C and S variant don't have the low end torque I prefer. I think they are great cars and have amazing engines but I like the low peak torque to shoot me out of the corners. I was not judging the 991 I was responding to a silly comparison.

[m3evobr]

Originally Posted by buildbright

No the 2009 GT3 has a time of 7:40. Also I agree, you shouldn't compare but I was responding to someone who was comparing both cars. I think its silly to compare any ring time. I think its funny people bragging about track times they didn't run.

The 991 C and S variant don't have the low end torque I prefer. I think they are great cars and have amazing engines but I like the low peak torque to shoot me out of the corners. I was not judging the 991 I was responding to a silly comparison.

Yes I hear you. The 2009 test was a 3.8 car, but not RS ... anyway.
For the torque you like, most likely a FI car, or a BIG V8 any of the mortals cars like Scud, GT3 RS etc, are in the same range. Hi Rev engines and in order to be able to produce Hi HP they will have compromise if they are NA or not big displacement engines.
I'm not a fan of the 991 myself as I think the car lost a lot ... but for some it gained a lot, just perspective. I think the older I get I see more myself a lot more interested in the older cars, with very little technology.
I always liked cars that were challenging to drive (not that a GT3 is) and have to say that the older cars with shorter wheelbase and no assist of any kind are a blast to drive, and those really prove who can or can't drive.

I'm looking forward to the M4. Just got a call from my dealer saying that no info or can't take orders yet as they don't have production dates, but assured me that I could get their first ones.

My idea is to get a early car or if not possible just take Euro delivery and have some fun with it in Europe for a couple of weeks during spring time.

[m3evobr]

Originally Posted by Carl L

Great post. You are a proper and educated car enthusiast, someone I can relate to. Porsche has always delivered one of the purest driving experiences (yup, purer than the M3 for sure) any car suitable for DDing can give.

Tks !