RE: 2024 BMW M4 CS | PH Review
Discussion
Love it!
Bonkers performance and can do the practical stuff.
On the road the new M3 and M4 look great in the flesh.
I’m not rich enough to ever justify sticking money on one of these but an M3 or M4 Comp with Xdrive would be spot on for me.
Likely the pinnacle of petrol performance saloons so imagine will do well on depreciation for those who can actually afford them.
Bonkers performance and can do the practical stuff.
On the road the new M3 and M4 look great in the flesh.
I’m not rich enough to ever justify sticking money on one of these but an M3 or M4 Comp with Xdrive would be spot on for me.
Likely the pinnacle of petrol performance saloons so imagine will do well on depreciation for those who can actually afford them.
GT9 said:
E90_M3Ross said:
GT9 said:
E90_M3Ross said:
From what I gather the DCT boxes seem a little less reliable in cars with turbos. They are pretty much bullet proof in the E9x M3s.
The input torque to the gearbox being the defining variable.Turbo + slushbox is all part of a pre-ordained pathway to the ultimate goal of no cylinders, no turbos and no gearbox.
However, as an exercise, let's estimate the size and value of these lists for all cars ever made for the last 150 years:
1. Interesting normally-aspirated or supercharged petrol cars with either manual or semi-automatic transmission
2. Interesting normally-aspirated petrol cars with automatic transmission
3. Interesting forced-induction petrol cars with automatic transmission
4. Other interesting cars (turbo+manual, hybrid, wankel, etc)
And, if you can save just one of those lists, which one are you going to go for?
I believe a situation could be envisaged where list 1 can be preserved for the long term, and maybe, just maybe, some new cars added to it after 2035, to keep enthusiasts happy.
But the price is eventually replacing everything else with cars that don't burn stuff...
I don't quite get what you're asking, sorry. Maybe you could be a bit more clear? Maybe I wasn't clear, so if you don't understand something I said earlier please ask and I'll try to clarify it
E90_M3Ross said:
I'm not sure the relevance of choosing 1 from that random list has anything to do with your comment to which I was referring to RE "ultimate goal"? Or have I missed the point? You said the ultimate goal was for no gears, cylinders or turbochargers etc. I asked what you meant by "ultimate goal", and instead of answering you ask me to choose from a list?
I don't quite get what you're asking, sorry. Maybe you could be a bit more clear? Maybe I wasn't clear, so if you don't understand something I said earlier please ask and I'll try to clarify it
I don't quite get what you're asking, sorry. Maybe you could be a bit more clear? Maybe I wasn't clear, so if you don't understand something I said earlier please ask and I'll try to clarify it
Don't read too much into it, we are in danger of dragging this thread into the abyss of electro-hell.
I was making the point that if you had the choice of any powertrain configuration you wanted for these cars, with no concession whatsoever to anything save pure enjoyment, are you really going to go for a wall of monotonous-sounding (easily simulated) torque fed through an 8-speed auto to all 4 wheels. The ultimate incarnation of the 'wall of torque' pathway will shortly no longer need to have cylinders, turbos or gears, or possibly has already reached that point.
I'm romanticising about a scenario where a small island of naturally-aspirated manual/semi-manual ICE nirvana can be given a new lease of life whilst everything else cracks on with the ultimate incarnation of wall of torque.
GT9 said:
Don't read too much into it, we are in danger of dragging this thread into the abyss of electro-hell.
I was making the point that if you had the choice of any powertrain configuration you wanted for these cars, with no concession whatsoever to anything save pure enjoyment, are you really going to go for a wall of monotonous-sounding (easily simulated) torque fed through an 8-speed auto to all 4 wheels. The ultimate incarnation of the 'wall of torque' pathway will shortly no longer need to have cylinders, turbos or gears, or possibly has already reached that point.
I'm romanticising about a scenario where a small island of naturally-aspirated manual/semi-manual ICE nirvana can be given a new lease of life whilst everything else cracks on with the ultimate incarnation of wall of torque.
chunder said:
mrclav said:
GT9 said:
200k global M division sales last year says to me BMW know exactly what they are doing.
Indeed, it's clear BMW know what their customers want more than anyone on here - this is the bit that people on the forum don't seem to (or want to) understand. cerb4.5lee said:
You do realise this is PistonHeads and not Mumsnet don't you?
You did make me laugh/smile with the eyesight bit though thanks!
Figures that constitute brewing rights but are not realisable in all but extreme edge cases are not worth the premium. So l. Assuming you did find a couple of unrestricted roads where you could hit the max and a bit of tarmac so empty you could launch it that quick (look at me - oh there’s no one here) that is what 0.001% of the time to be quick (and be mindful that other cars are quicker) and still 100% of the time when it looks sYou did make me laugh/smile with the eyesight bit though thanks!
te. And, viv mumsnet, my SO is in agreement with the above.J-P said:
chunder said:
mrclav said:
GT9 said:
200k global M division sales last year says to me BMW know exactly what they are doing.
Indeed, it's clear BMW know what their customers want more than anyone on here - this is the bit that people on the forum don't seem to (or want to) understand. 
"perhaps they could have sold 400k last year" is an absolutely laughable statement - as if PH has enough people in the market for such a car who wouldn't buy one because of how it looks and how much it weighs, thus affecting record sales figures for M Division!? A car that's sold, around the world, should be dictated by people on a British car forum? Seriously??
Edited by mrclav on Saturday 18th May 19:57
oedipus said:
cerb4.5lee said:
You do realise this is PistonHeads and not Mumsnet don't you?
You did make me laugh/smile with the eyesight bit though thanks!
Figures that constitute brewing rights but are not realisable in all but extreme edge cases are not worth the premium. So l. Assuming you did find a couple of unrestricted roads where you could hit the max and a bit of tarmac so empty you could launch it that quick (look at me - oh there’s no one here) that is what 0.001% of the time to be quick (and be mindful that other cars are quicker) and still 100% of the time when it looks sYou did make me laugh/smile with the eyesight bit though thanks!
te. And, viv mumsnet, my SO is in agreement with the above.
I promise I’m not writing it to upset anyone. But as soon as I finished reading, I felt the urge to go to the classifieds to look for a Giulia quadrifoglio.
I find this a ugly car. Strangely proportioned, very colour dependent, an interior that doesn’t inspire me at all. I thought it would be better in the flesh, but (like the grenadier) it manages to look uglier than it is in the pictures.
The front is a big mess. The 3 (non M) series is much better and I’d rather have that with a big engine or the alpina rather than the 4.
It’s technically great and shows BMW’s craft, but I think it will be forgotten easily once they’ll come up with a new model. Hopefully without the pig nose.
I find this a ugly car. Strangely proportioned, very colour dependent, an interior that doesn’t inspire me at all. I thought it would be better in the flesh, but (like the grenadier) it manages to look uglier than it is in the pictures.
The front is a big mess. The 3 (non M) series is much better and I’d rather have that with a big engine or the alpina rather than the 4.
It’s technically great and shows BMW’s craft, but I think it will be forgotten easily once they’ll come up with a new model. Hopefully without the pig nose.
Water Fairy said:
What's the demographic of the modern M buyer these days (genuine question)? I imagine a fair chunk of them wouldn't know what an E30 is to be fair.
I'm not sure what the like-for-like is either; F80 sold nearly 120k units in its run, G80 got to 25,000 by May 2023 (production rather than sales); much as Covid and all that, it seems that the numbers are at best similar.mrclav said:
J-P said:
chunder said:
mrclav said:
GT9 said:
200k global M division sales last year says to me BMW know exactly what they are doing.
Indeed, it's clear BMW know what their customers want more than anyone on here - this is the bit that people on the forum don't seem to (or want to) understand. "perhaps they could have sold 400k last year" is an absolutely laughable statement - as if PH has enough people in the market for such a car who wouldn't buy one because of how it looks and how much it weighs, thus affecting record sales figures for M Division!? A car that's sold, around the world, should be dictated by people on a British car forum? Seriously??
Edited by mrclav on Saturday 18th May 19:57
oedipus said:
E90_M3Ross said:
Could you please translate that into English?
New iPhone. Apologies. In short, be grateful it’s that fast so you don’t have to look at it for long. But, given the chance to use that speed is so limited the rest of us will have to endure the horror for way too long. 
oedipus said:
E90_M3Ross said:
Could you please translate that into English?
New iPhone. Apologies. In short, be grateful it’s that fast so you don’t have to look at it for long. But, given the chance to use that speed is so limited the rest of us will have to endure the horror for way too long. Angelo1985 said:
I promise I’m not writing it to upset anyone. But as soon as I finished reading, I felt the urge to go to the classifieds to look for a Giulia quadrifoglio.
I find this a ugly car. Strangely proportioned, very colour dependent, an interior that doesn’t inspire me at all. I thought it would be better in the flesh, but (like the grenadier) it manages to look uglier than it is in the pictures.
The front is a big mess. The 3 (non M) series is much better and I’d rather have that with a big engine or the alpina rather than the 4.
It’s technically great and shows BMW’s craft, but I think it will be forgotten easily once they’ll come up with a new model. Hopefully without the pig nose.
The Quadrifoglio is a beautiful car. I think that it looks much better in show pics than it does IRL because I can’t handle that number plate placement. Looks weird! The G80 and G82 look much better with number plates on and much better IRL.I find this a ugly car. Strangely proportioned, very colour dependent, an interior that doesn’t inspire me at all. I thought it would be better in the flesh, but (like the grenadier) it manages to look uglier than it is in the pictures.
The front is a big mess. The 3 (non M) series is much better and I’d rather have that with a big engine or the alpina rather than the 4.
It’s technically great and shows BMW’s craft, but I think it will be forgotten easily once they’ll come up with a new model. Hopefully without the pig nose.
Edited by J-P on Saturday 18th May 21:33
I like the colour, but not much else! Although that won't bother BMW because I'm not their target market. 
I'd much rather have an F22 M2 CS with a manual gearbox, less offensive looks, smaller, less weight and thousands cheaper now with the worst of the depreciation over.
But that's just my preference, other opinions are equally valid.
I'd much rather have an F22 M2 CS with a manual gearbox, less offensive looks, smaller, less weight and thousands cheaper now with the worst of the depreciation over.
But that's just my preference, other opinions are equally valid.
pycraft said:
pacdes said:
Be grateful stuff like this is still being made, nobody else is doing it as good.
Erm... Alfa. (are you 12?)Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff