RE: BMW M3 tester's notes: PH Blog
Discussion
ArmaghMan said:
BMW totally lost the plot after the E39 M5.
The F10 M5 has a shocker of a gearbox.
The E90 M3 has a terrible range and has to be revved to the stratosphere to deliver.
The current M5 has synthetic sound.
New M3 has synthetic sound, and still sounds like a diesel.
Oh God, the E39 M5 sitting in my garage is going to be worth £50 grand by XMas as the last proper M car.
Oh look .... Porcus Aeronauticus!!
Do explain how the universally praised DCT in the M5 is a shocker The F10 M5 has a shocker of a gearbox.
The E90 M3 has a terrible range and has to be revved to the stratosphere to deliver.
The current M5 has synthetic sound.
New M3 has synthetic sound, and still sounds like a diesel.
Oh God, the E39 M5 sitting in my garage is going to be worth £50 grand by XMas as the last proper M car.
Oh look .... Porcus Aeronauticus!!
cerb4.5lee said:
I am happy to stick with my opinion that the E92 M3 is a turkey as a daily...unless you have a race track in the back garden to exploit its 8400rpm redline then you are fine.
This new M3 appeals to me in a big way, so much so I'll be putting down a dipper today for a March 2015 delivery. It's going to be hard to part company with the Mini though.
P
Edited by paulmon on Saturday 17th May 10:59
Mermaid said:
Patrick Bateman said:
Mermaid said:
RS4/R8 better torque delivery than the the E92 M3. However the RS4 & the E92 both great packages.
Even with peak torque at 5500rpm?RS4 - 400nm at 2500, max at 5500 but higher
Feel free to correct me.
P1H said:
cerb4.5lee said:
Patrick Bateman said:
eliotrw said:
I for one can totally see why Harris took his stance on the situation. It does seem rather underhand to heckle from the sidelines wearing a mask, to me anyway..
What I will say is that I have read all of the reviews of this car, everyone I have read, has read like a easy 5 stars review. Most of them try to make some irrelevant to the real world point however about how its turboed and therefore worthy of a lower score. Im not sure most people care, heck, im a car nut and i don't, my friend who swapped a e92 cab for a Focus RS might be pleased though...
All of the reviews ive seen have noted that yes the engine is so so in terms of sound, mainly at idle. Now if you actually think about how a lot of performance engines sound at idle, like say the E60 M5, or a Porsche flat six there are others, this isnt an exhaustive list... then you would find it not that relevant, in my view anyway. I give zero $#£@s about what my car sounds like when idling to be honest.
Maybe the mid range isn't great either, i'm not particularly bothered about that, what about the top end? It sounds quite good to me? The e92 though, do i think that is the best sounding M3, really? to be honest, no... Sorry thats a bit controversial isnt it!? But i don't, i genuinely prefer how ALL the previous M3s sound in comparison.
The point i'm trying to get across i think is that on this matter, the turboed M car, i find almost every journo about is trying to hard to be "cool" by saying "its lacking character" or whatever the hot topic of the month is rather than being honest about the e92 and accepting that maybe its the awkward transitional step car that was never quite right in the first place. It sounds to me like this car has righted all the wrongs of the previous model and in 2014, with the way things are going that makes me very pleased indeed.
Or...maybe that's what they actually think? A screaming n/a V8 with an 8400rpm redline will be hard to beat in terms of character and thrills.What I will say is that I have read all of the reviews of this car, everyone I have read, has read like a easy 5 stars review. Most of them try to make some irrelevant to the real world point however about how its turboed and therefore worthy of a lower score. Im not sure most people care, heck, im a car nut and i don't, my friend who swapped a e92 cab for a Focus RS might be pleased though...
All of the reviews ive seen have noted that yes the engine is so so in terms of sound, mainly at idle. Now if you actually think about how a lot of performance engines sound at idle, like say the E60 M5, or a Porsche flat six there are others, this isnt an exhaustive list... then you would find it not that relevant, in my view anyway. I give zero $#£@s about what my car sounds like when idling to be honest.
Maybe the mid range isn't great either, i'm not particularly bothered about that, what about the top end? It sounds quite good to me? The e92 though, do i think that is the best sounding M3, really? to be honest, no... Sorry thats a bit controversial isnt it!? But i don't, i genuinely prefer how ALL the previous M3s sound in comparison.
The point i'm trying to get across i think is that on this matter, the turboed M car, i find almost every journo about is trying to hard to be "cool" by saying "its lacking character" or whatever the hot topic of the month is rather than being honest about the e92 and accepting that maybe its the awkward transitional step car that was never quite right in the first place. It sounds to me like this car has righted all the wrongs of the previous model and in 2014, with the way things are going that makes me very pleased indeed.
As far as I can see there is little or no effort required to change down gears, especially with the auto variants. So what is the problem with a high revving naturally aspirated car for daily driving? I'm confident the E92 M3 engine can pull sufficiently under 5k to keep up with fast moving traffic.
The criticisms of such engines seem to be:
- "Turbo hatches will cause you problems" - will they give you problems if you use the appropriate gear? I think this comes down to the insecurity people have that someone might try and 'go for it' without them being ready and in the right gear, therefore leaving them behind.
- "Changing gears often is a chore" - seems a strange criticism from a car enthusiast even when we are talking about a daily driver.
- Fuel consumption - various posts in this thread about the reality of buying a performance car.
- "You can't tap into the character without losing your licence" - I understand this in the sense that second goes up to 70mph so on public roads, driving enthusiastically and at the top of the rev range, you are only likely to use 2nd and 3rd. But I don't see why this is a problem, in both the E92 M3 and the M4 you are only going to be accelerating on the move for for 4 or 5 seconds before being well over the speed limit. I don't think the gear is important,but the drama is.
Perhaps it is none of these and more of a case of perception of speed, I.e being able to feel the torque is there all the time. I suppose this is also handy when wanting to push on with others in the car without looking like a madman revving up to 8500rpm.
Has anyone got another way of looking at this?
A few months ago however, I purchased my first straight six turbo (M135i) because it's simply the way the world is going and that is an inescapable fact I've now come to terms with I'm afraid due to EC regulation.
The point in all this though is that the six pot turbo is faster than all the others, has the best gearbox and still sounds good (I hadn't even noticed that it was 'piped' actually) maybe not quite so good a sound as either the Maser or Fezza but good enough and I think the new M3/4 would suit me very well, and that's speaking as a current V8 guy.
Biggish Turbo's are here to stay lads and I guess we will just have to get used to it, but it ain't all bad.
As an E92 M3 owner I can't believe some of the comments here.
You guys make out like the S65 has the torque of a first generation Nissan Micra under 4000rpm.
It pulls perfectly fine for daily driving, still far more than is needed in the low end.
Also, the car comes with something as standard called a gearbox. Change down gears and you have all the pull you'll need. Weird isn't it?
I think the people making this complaint should stick to a 6L V8 where you can stay in 3rd gear for every situation.
If it helps my last car was a 997 Turbo, so don't think I don't know what real torque is...
You guys make out like the S65 has the torque of a first generation Nissan Micra under 4000rpm.
It pulls perfectly fine for daily driving, still far more than is needed in the low end.
Also, the car comes with something as standard called a gearbox. Change down gears and you have all the pull you'll need. Weird isn't it?
I think the people making this complaint should stick to a 6L V8 where you can stay in 3rd gear for every situation.
If it helps my last car was a 997 Turbo, so don't think I don't know what real torque is...
Edited by piston3461 on Saturday 17th May 07:55
mikebrownhill said:
It's all very interesting and for what its worth my input would be that three of the last four cars that I have purchased new have been N/A V8's - a Monaro CV8 (loads of torque but didn't likes revs), a Maserati Granturismo (could do with more torque but loves revs) and a Range Rover Sport (very comfortable and capable off road due to its V8 grunt) and all used as DD's. I also have a Ferrari N/A V8 (348) but it was purchased second hand (loads of torque and loves revs as well) and its a weekender.
A few months ago however, I purchased my first straight six turbo (M135i) because it's simply the way the world is going and that is an inescapable fact I've now come to terms with I'm afraid due to EC regulation.
The point in all this though is that the six pot turbo is faster than all the others, has the best gearbox and still sounds good (I hadn't even noticed that it was 'piped' actually) maybe not quite so good a sound as either the Maser or Fezza but good enough and I think the new M3/4 would suit me very well, and that's speaking as a current V8 guy.
Biggish Turbo's are here to stay lads and I guess we will just have to get used to it, but it ain't all bad.
Agreed with every word until you said the M135i "has maybe not quite so good a sound as either the Maser....." I've owned cars with both engines - the straight six is good but the V8 in the Maser is in a completely different league or star system :-)A few months ago however, I purchased my first straight six turbo (M135i) because it's simply the way the world is going and that is an inescapable fact I've now come to terms with I'm afraid due to EC regulation.
The point in all this though is that the six pot turbo is faster than all the others, has the best gearbox and still sounds good (I hadn't even noticed that it was 'piped' actually) maybe not quite so good a sound as either the Maser or Fezza but good enough and I think the new M3/4 would suit me very well, and that's speaking as a current V8 guy.
Biggish Turbo's are here to stay lads and I guess we will just have to get used to it, but it ain't all bad.
ArmaghMan said:
BMW totally lost the plot after the E39 M5.
The F10 M5 has a shocker of a gearbox.
The E90 M3 has a terrible range and has to be revved to the stratosphere to deliver.
The current M5 has synthetic sound.
New M3 has synthetic sound, and still sounds like a diesel.
Oh God, the E39 M5 sitting in my garage is going to be worth £50 grand by XMas as the last proper M car.
Oh look .... Porcus Aeronauticus!!
have you ever driven an E60, E92 or F10 M car (short test drives don't count) or are these just the usual regurgitated soundbites?The F10 M5 has a shocker of a gearbox.
The E90 M3 has a terrible range and has to be revved to the stratosphere to deliver.
The current M5 has synthetic sound.
New M3 has synthetic sound, and still sounds like a diesel.
Oh God, the E39 M5 sitting in my garage is going to be worth £50 grand by XMas as the last proper M car.
Oh look .... Porcus Aeronauticus!!
Zod said:
ave you ever driven an E60, E92 or F10 M car (short test drives don't count) or are these just the usual regurgitated soundbites?
Zod makes a fair point - all too often, people make comments baed on what they "heard" from a mate, a short test drive (limited speeds & revs), what they read - the sound characteristic grows on you.Zod said:
ArmaghMan said:
BMW totally lost the plot after the E39 M5.
The F10 M5 has a shocker of a gearbox.
The E90 M3 has a terrible range and has to be revved to the stratosphere to deliver.
The current M5 has synthetic sound.
New M3 has synthetic sound, and still sounds like a diesel.
Oh God, the E39 M5 sitting in my garage is going to be worth £50 grand by XMas as the last proper M car.
Oh look .... Porcus Aeronauticus!!
have you ever driven an E60, E92 or F10 M car (short test drives don't count) or are these just the usual regurgitated soundbites?The F10 M5 has a shocker of a gearbox.
The E90 M3 has a terrible range and has to be revved to the stratosphere to deliver.
The current M5 has synthetic sound.
New M3 has synthetic sound, and still sounds like a diesel.
Oh God, the E39 M5 sitting in my garage is going to be worth £50 grand by XMas as the last proper M car.
Oh look .... Porcus Aeronauticus!!
Mermaid said:
E65Ross said:
How is the gearbox in the F10 M5 rubbish? It's regarded as one of the best dual clutch boxes out there! It's so smooth and fast it's unreal.
It is awesome- super seamless, and iMO better than the PDK from Porsche.Mermaid said:
Patrick Bateman said:
Mermaid said:
RS4/R8 better torque delivery than the the E92 M3. However the RS4 & the E92 both great packages.
Even with peak torque at 5500rpm?RS4 - 400nm at 2500, max at 5500 but higher
Feel free to correct me.
The utter drivel that is continually spouted about the s65 is mind numbing.
Wills2 said:
You're not factoring in weight or the gearbox, so they are utterly irrelevant numbers.
The utter drivel that is continually spouted about the s65 is mind numbing.
What intriques me is that you never hear of anyone complain about the torque on the RS4. But you often hear that of the E92? The utter drivel that is continually spouted about the s65 is mind numbing.
Different characteristic, horses for courses IMO. As I have said before, both amazing.
Mermaid said:
What intriques me is that you never hear of anyone complain about the torque on the RS4. But you often hear that of the E92?
Different characteristic, horses for courses IMO. As I have said before, both amazing.
Hear from who? People on the internet that have read a review from someone like Sutcliffe? (yes Cerb.lee I know you thought it was gutless!) Different characteristic, horses for courses IMO. As I have said before, both amazing.
Have a look at the s65 torque curve and see how long and flat is it is, it gives the car wonderfully long legs and goes and goes and keeps on going.
The s65 produces 90% of its torque between 2500-8000rpm (for most of that range it's at 95%) and produces maximum torque at little over 40% of available engine revs.
Its peak torque is comparable to the 335i and m135 etc.. cars that are not seen as "gutless" yet gives an additional 100hp into the bargain.
People read something like this "for the engine to really sparkle you have to be beyond 6k rpm" they then think there is nothing below that which is inaccurate IMHO.
It's a great engine below 6k but a stunning one after.
k99 said:
mikebrownhill said:
It's all very interesting and for what its worth my input would be that three of the last four cars that I have purchased new have been N/A V8's - a Monaro CV8 (loads of torque but didn't likes revs), a Maserati Granturismo (could do with more torque but loves revs) and a Range Rover Sport (very comfortable and capable off road due to its V8 grunt) and all used as DD's. I also have a Ferrari N/A V8 (348) but it was purchased second hand (loads of torque and loves revs as well) and its a weekender.
A few months ago however, I purchased my first straight six turbo (M135i) because it's simply the way the world is going and that is an inescapable fact I've now come to terms with I'm afraid due to EC regulation.
The point in all this though is that the six pot turbo is faster than all the others, has the best gearbox and still sounds good (I hadn't even noticed that it was 'piped' actually) maybe not quite so good a sound as either the Maser or Fezza but good enough and I think the new M3/4 would suit me very well, and that's speaking as a current V8 guy.
Biggish Turbo's are here to stay lads and I guess we will just have to get used to it, but it ain't all bad.
Agreed with every word until you said the M135i "has maybe not quite so good a sound as either the Maser....." I've owned cars with both engines - the straight six is good but the V8 in the Maser is in a completely different league or star system :-)A few months ago however, I purchased my first straight six turbo (M135i) because it's simply the way the world is going and that is an inescapable fact I've now come to terms with I'm afraid due to EC regulation.
The point in all this though is that the six pot turbo is faster than all the others, has the best gearbox and still sounds good (I hadn't even noticed that it was 'piped' actually) maybe not quite so good a sound as either the Maser or Fezza but good enough and I think the new M3/4 would suit me very well, and that's speaking as a current V8 guy.
Biggish Turbo's are here to stay lads and I guess we will just have to get used to it, but it ain't all bad.
From a performance point of view though I think the signs are good that bigger turbo sixes will give us both low end torque and power at high revs, only one of my V8 cars does that well and its the one that's 25 years old! - but with no emission control gear, not even cats, and its serious thirst, it is a thing of the past.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff