RE: Officially official: BMW 1-series M for 2011

[Terry Barr]

alock said:

aeropilot said:

Rusty-C said:

aeropilot said:

CraigGTI6 said:

This car will be a horrible compromise, as BMW will not want to make a car that's cheaper and better than their M3...

Why didn't they have the balls to stick to the tii concept and drop a nice revvy 4 cylinder motor in this car? Like a road legal version of the WTCC engine? Put it on a massive weight saving program and create a bespoke chassis, like the original E30 M3 and spend a while tuning the suspension, steering etc to perfection.

This is not a proper M car, just another half baked PR exercise from some young middle manager type who thinks he knows what an M car should be.

This could have been such a good car (I'm not saying that it'll be a bad car per se) and with petrol prices the way they are, who wants a 3 litre six? In this market segment a 120tii would surely have been a massive hit. I would have aspired to owning a lightweight, hardcore 120tii or whatever they may have called it but this? No thanks, pointless and cynical. Who runs the M department these days?

While I agree in theory......I doubt it's actually achievable in practice.

Safety legislation means it's going to be heavy.....no way would they be able to shave 2-300kg's off a 1er coupe to get down to E30 weight levels, and a 300hp n/a four cyl engine is not going to make emissions rules, which would mean you'd have as many prospective owners complaining that it not fast enough/equiped enough/whatever enough to be a real ///M .....

BMW will alienate potential owners either way, either from the it's not hardcore enough blah, blah or it's not got Sat Nav, leccy seats, quad exhausts, 50 million ///M badges etc., blah, blah.

So, I suspect they view that there's less potential 'hardcore' owners.....hence you end up with a compromise.

Safety legislation prevents cars being light? Can’t help but feel the manufacturers are feeding us a yarn – race cars are light and I know what I’d rather crash in.

Just proves you have no clue about road car design.

It's not as black and white as weight is due to safety regs. There are enough threads on PH about people who like the premium quality feel of a BMW. Go and take an electric, memory, heated, cooled, leather seat out of any premium brand car and then tell me the excessive weight is due to safety regs.

The reality is that a light weight version without the toys doesn't sell. Look at the R26R. EVO rate its handling better than any current M car at any price. Why haven't all the people on this thread wanting a light-weight version bought one? They want the BMW badge and/or the premium feel of a German barge.

They might want rear drive as well as light weight.

[haidergill]

kambites said:

haidergill said:

kambites said:

In many ways I think AMG have held more true to their ethos than M. AMGs have pretty much always been about shoehorning a huge engine into everything they can get their hands on, recently the M division seem to have started copying them.

M cars have to be everyday cars and yet still at the same time be road-racers. Evo, Scoobys and RS Porsches wouldn't be able make the grade in the refinement area. Car have evolved since the first M3 came out. We have alot more creature comforts even in an average 4 door saloon.

True, but I don't see what that's got to do with my post.

Increase in weight of creature comforts, means you can either lose that puppy fat by using carbon fibre and titanium or you use a bigger engine. Unfortunately carbon fibre and titanium are expensive. M Division have stayed true their ethos of providing everyday liveable performace cars.

[kambites]

haidergill said:

kambites said:

haidergill said:

kambites said:

In many ways I think AMG have held more true to their ethos than M. AMGs have pretty much always been about shoehorning a huge engine into everything they can get their hands on, recently the M division seem to have started copying them.

M cars have to be everyday cars and yet still at the same time be road-racers. Evo, Scoobys and RS Porsches wouldn't be able make the grade in the refinement area. Car have evolved since the first M3 came out. We have alot more creature comforts even in an average 4 door saloon.

True, but I don't see what that's got to do with my post.

Increase in weight of creature comforts, means you can either lose that puppy fat by using carbon fibre and titanium or you use a bigger engine. Unfortunately carbon fibre and titanium are expensive. M Division have stayed true their ethos of providing everyday liveable performace cars.

I wasn't really referring to things like the increase in weight of the M3/M5. I was thinking more of likes of the 5X M and X6 M plus all the body kits, etc. that you can get stuck to your 318i.

[Rusty-C]

aeropilot said:

Rusty-C said:

aeropilot said:

CraigGTI6 said:

This car will be a horrible compromise, as BMW will not want to make a car that's cheaper and better than their M3...

Why didn't they have the balls to stick to the tii concept and drop a nice revvy 4 cylinder motor in this car? Like a road legal version of the WTCC engine? Put it on a massive weight saving program and create a bespoke chassis, like the original E30 M3 and spend a while tuning the suspension, steering etc to perfection.

This is not a proper M car, just another half baked PR exercise from some young middle manager type who thinks he knows what an M car should be.

This could have been such a good car (I'm not saying that it'll be a bad car per se) and with petrol prices the way they are, who wants a 3 litre six? In this market segment a 120tii would surely have been a massive hit. I would have aspired to owning a lightweight, hardcore 120tii or whatever they may have called it but this? No thanks, pointless and cynical. Who runs the M department these days?

While I agree in theory......I doubt it's actually achievable in practice.

Safety legislation means it's going to be heavy.....no way would they be able to shave 2-300kg's off a 1er coupe to get down to E30 weight levels, and a 300hp n/a four cyl engine is not going to make emissions rules, which would mean you'd have as many prospective owners complaining that it not fast enough/equiped enough/whatever enough to be a real ///M .....

BMW will alienate potential owners either way, either from the it's not hardcore enough blah, blah or it's not got Sat Nav, leccy seats, quad exhausts, 50 million ///M badges etc., blah, blah.

So, I suspect they view that there's less potential 'hardcore' owners.....hence you end up with a compromise.

Safety legislation prevents cars being light? Can’t help but feel the manufacturers are feeding us a yarn – race cars are light and I know what I’d rather crash in.

Just proves you have no clue about road car design.

Not sure what I don't understand about road car design? Obviously road cars have requirements to make them crash-worthy and pedestrian friendly, but surely that would be far exceeded by an FIA race car (forgetting the pedestrians for a minute), which would be far lighter? Then there's the argument that light cars generate less momentum and are therefore likely to cause less damage to themselves, and other vehicles. Obviously, I understand the packaging of a road car means most (weird) people aren't going to want a dirty big roll-cage taking up space, and that multiple airbags, abs, esp and the like, expected in modern cars, add weight. I'm merely arguing that manufacturers could use a bit more imagination. Take the MP4 C12, a supercar that’s obviously light, but can withstand multiple crash tests without its main structure being damaged in anyway. Sure, most people don’t have the cash for a carbon tub, but surely the principal could be applied to lower cost metal (er carbon).

[Ne0]

Fittster said:

Zod said:

Gizmo! said:

Fittster said:

Ne0 said:

Fittster said:

It will be interesting to see how it's priced, hopefully around 35K.

Hopefully but given that a poverty spec 135i is about £30k, BMW will more than likely be looking c45k for this...

That would seem rather optimistic as it puts it head to head against a Cayman S.

Sounds about right. 360-380bhp, RWD, LSD, and with back seats it'll be slightly heavier but slightly more practical than the Cayman.

and quicker if the seats are folded down.

I must be getting tight in my old age, 45K for a 1 series coupe seems an awful lot to me. Think I'll lower my sights to the up comming Toyota coupe!

No, you're right... 45k is a lot of money for a 1 series coupe... but given that this will be a direct rival for the Cayman S and TTRS with similar, possibly/hopefully better performance, I reckon that's the type of money that BMW will ask for it. Having said that there will need to be a clear difference in performance between this and the normal 135i to justify that sort of asking price... Sounds good though, better than their recent "m" additions!

Edited by Ne0 on Thursday 3rd June 17:27

[Wills2]

aeropilot said:

R66STU said:

i went to a bmw open day a month ago. there was a FULLY loaded 1 series there, it was the 3.5 turbo. and looked really cool..

i asked how much it was and the guy said.. 'this one with all the extras will cost you 52k' to say i nearly choked on my coffee would be an uderstatment !!


i mean come on !! you can buy a base model M3 (new one with the v8) for that money

it reall takes the biscuit. so god knows hom much a 1m will cost.. let alone fully loaded.

Someone is telling porkies.....as if you tick every available option on a 135i you only just get above 40k
I know as I did this very recently for a bit of fun when I was speccing up my 135i.

I got to 43k and I guess if you could spec individual paint, leather and trim you could add a further 3k plus bits from performance catalogue and you'd get to 50k but I still find it hard to believe a dealer would spec and order a car like that...Infact you can spec it with about 14k's worth of performance kit so 53k is easily achievable

Edited by Wills2 on Thursday 3rd June 17:39

[leon9191]

haidergill said:

kambites said:

I never thought I'd see someone call the 1-series "beautiful".

I come from an artistic background and appreciate avante-garde contemporary design of the 1, discontinued Z4 and 5 series. I have no problem with old design for buildings, cars etc... I think in the future more people will come to realise how timeless Bangle's designs are. Compare the Bangle's 5 series to the old E Class. The Bangle 5 series hasn't dated. If you look at his Fiat Coupe design, it still looks modern today after nearly 20 years. I think Bangle is a visionary. Automotive design from other marques are just starting to catch up. Flame-surfacing is becoming more and more common now with pretty much all manufacturers incorportaing it into their designs.

Are you his mother by any chance?

[havoc]

Rusty-C said:

Not sure what I don't understand about road car design? Obviously road cars have requirements to make them crash-worthy and pedestrian friendly, but surely that would be far exceeded by an FIA race car (forgetting the pedestrians for a minute), which would be far lighter? Then there's the argument that light cars generate less momentum and are therefore likely to cause less damage to themselves, and other vehicles. Obviously, I understand the packaging of a road car means most (weird) people aren't going to want a dirty big roll-cage taking up space, and that multiple airbags, abs, esp and the like, expected in modern cars, add weight. I'm merely arguing that manufacturers could use a bit more imagination. Take the MP4 C12, a supercar that’s obviously light, but can withstand multiple crash tests without its main structure being damaged in anyway. Sure, most people don’t have the cash for a carbon tub, but surely the principal could be applied to lower cost metal (er carbon).

Oh lord, where to start.

1) Money? Fully-homologated race-cars aren't cheap...and pretty-much EVERY car on the road, bar a very small number of hypercars, is built to a price. And excluding the road-car-based racing series, you'll find that most non-single-seaters are steel-spaceframe with a silhouette body anyway, while the single-seaters are built completely differently from a road-car, so no point even comparing.

2) Roll-cages? Tend to form an important part of the structure of a racing car, but for some reason NCAP don't like having exposed bits of hard metal in a cabin for their dummies to hit bits of their body against. They also make ingress/egress rather more difficult - can't see your Gran getting on with a roll-cage in the car...

3) Carbon-fibre is lovely and light/strong but a bugger to build with and even worse to repair. And costs £££££ (see (1) ). Not going to be used for the next Focus or 3-series.

4) NVH. Racing cars are f'n noisy b'ggers, if you've ever been in one. You'd be surprised how much time, engineering effort, and WEIGHT goes into isolating you from every single reciprocating part in that car!

5) Kit. A racing car doesn't have movable windows, electric anything (bar the radio), or indeed any more seats than are necessary (which don't tend to be adjustable unless you've a spanner handy). Let alone airbags, leather, climate-controlled-multi-CD/DVD sat-nav HDD audio premium-20-speaker everything and a refrigerated glove-box.


...so you'll probably find that safety regs don't have as much to do with it as 'consumer demand'...and within that I'll include price - it's a LOT cheaper to make a car out of ordinary steel than it is to use the high-strength lightweight stuff, let alone extensive amounts of aluminium. But if you're happy to pay £30k for the next Ford Fiesta, then they can probably get it down under the tonne again...

[Wills2]

leon9191 said:

haidergill said:

kambites said:

I never thought I'd see someone call the 1-series "beautiful".

I come from an artistic background and appreciate avante-garde contemporary design of the 1, discontinued Z4 and 5 series. I have no problem with old design for buildings, cars etc... I think in the future more people will come to realise how timeless Bangle's designs are. Compare the Bangle's 5 series to the old E Class. The Bangle 5 series hasn't dated. If you look at his Fiat Coupe design, it still looks modern today after nearly 20 years. I think Bangle is a visionary. Automotive design from other marques are just starting to catch up. Flame-surfacing is becoming more and more common now with pretty much all manufacturers incorportaing it into their designs.

Are you his mother by any chance?

The statement about the bangle 5 series is correct the sport models do still look very fresh....as does the Z4 coupe the 7 and 6 not so much!

[kambites]

Wills2 said:

The statement about the bangle 5 series is correct the sport models do still look very fresh....as does the Z4 coupe the 7 and 6 not so much!

I think the 5 will go down as one of the more successful, influential cars of the period, although I don't actually like it myself. The Z4 is good except for the front which is terrible. The 6 and 7 are just terrible.

[leon9191]

Wills2 said:

leon9191 said:

haidergill said:

kambites said:

I never thought I'd see someone call the 1-series "beautiful".

I come from an artistic background and appreciate avante-garde contemporary design of the 1, discontinued Z4 and 5 series. I have no problem with old design for buildings, cars etc... I think in the future more people will come to realise how timeless Bangle's designs are. Compare the Bangle's 5 series to the old E Class. The Bangle 5 series hasn't dated. If you look at his Fiat Coupe design, it still looks modern today after nearly 20 years. I think Bangle is a visionary. Automotive design from other marques are just starting to catch up. Flame-surfacing is becoming more and more common now with pretty much all manufacturers incorportaing it into their designs.

Are you his mother by any chance?

The statement about the bangle 5 series is correct the sport models do still look very fresh....as does the Z4 coupe the 7 and 6 not so much!

No I agree he is bang on the money about the 5 and the Z4, but he was giving him big man love.

[Funk]

haidergill said:

kambites said:

I never thought I'd see someone call the 1-series "beautiful".

I come from an artistic background and appreciate avante-garde contemporary design of the 1, discontinued Z4 and 5 series. I have no problem with old design for buildings, cars etc... I think in the future more people will come to realise how timeless Bangle's designs are. Compare the Bangle's 5 series to the old E Class. The Bangle 5 series hasn't dated. If you look at his Fiat Coupe design, it still looks modern today after nearly 20 years. I think Bangle is a visionary. Automotive design from other marques are just starting to catch up. Flame-surfacing is becoming more and more common now with pretty much all manufacturers incorportaing it into their designs.

I used to hate the Bangle designs, but now I 'get' them. He took a while to get it right (the boot on both the old 7 and 6 really don't sit right for me). You're right when you say the 5-series hasn't aged - it hasn't. In fact, I reckon it looks better than the newer design. And whilst the new Z4 looks great, I still prefer the previous generation. The 1-series is a bit of a 'challenging' looker, but with the big rims and some M-Sport gubbins, it actually looks quite purposeful.

[tomv1to]

Fittster said:

tomv1to said:

its nice to see that there is still a manufacturer happy to put big engines in little cars whilst all other manufacturers are using smaller engines and just slapping turbo's on.

" the new baby M-car will use a more powerful version of the 135i's 302bhp turbocharged straight six for its motive power."

Sorry, wasn't paying attention to that. Still its a larger than usual turbo engine at least.

[mat205125]

haidergill said:

Deranged Granny said:

kambites said:

I never thought I'd see someone call the 1-series "beautiful".

It was their first post...

Each to their own I suppose...Do you like Mock Tudor?;)

Beautiful is a bit strong, however the 1 series coupe is the best looking body style that BMW currently manufacture IMO .... That might be more of a reflection on the state of the rest of the current lineup though.

[Jigsjigz]

shame it still looks like a Toad on wheels. awesome car tho ulgy as hell.

[the-photographer]

Audi TTRS 1450 kg / 335bhp (without driver)

Cayman S 1350 kg / 291bhp (without driver, I think)

BMW 135i 1560 kg / 302bhp (without driver, I think)

BMW 1-M ???? / ???

Should we add any others?

Edited by the-photographer on Thursday 3rd June 20:26

[aeropilot]

Captain Flashman said:

Will it have a proper diff

Yes. Photos of the test cars clearly show a proper M-Diff underneath.

Captain Flashman said:

and will they retro fit the hydraulic steering rack used in the earlier 1 series and remove the electric one they use currently?

The 135i has always had the hydraulic rack not the electric IIRC. The speculation is this M1 has the same setup as the M3 has.

[mat205125]

Since pricing has been mentioned and scale has led to comparisons with the homologation special E30, does anyone know what the original cost relative to it's contemporarys?

IIRC it was 911 money and the 190 mercs were even more!

[Andy Meads]

TheRoadWarrior said:

In general I really like how the exterior of the 1 series coupe looks, its that curving side skirt line that spoils it for me.

I totally agree. I have a 135i and it's the only aspect of its appearance that I don't like. Tell a lie: the new mirrors aren't great to look at either, but that's the EU for you.

[Dagnut]

the-photographer said:

Audi TTRS 1450 kg / 335bhp (without driver)

Cayman S 1350 kg / 291bhp (without driver, I think)

BMW 135i 1560 kg / 302bhp (without driver, I think)

BMW 1-M ???? / ???

Should we add any others?

Edited by the-photographer on Thursday 3rd June 20:26

370z??