RE: New BMW M3 - details

[E38Ross]

pilchardthecat said:

I'm cautiously optimistic. Redline is very high for a mass produced forced induction car. Anything north of 400bhp is plenty, as long as it's delivered in the right way - i just hope it's making more power at 7,500rpm than it is at 6,500rpm

The litmus test - does it have one of those silly sound symposer things that plays fake engine noises through the stereo? or have BMW found their mislaid plot again?

Well, the power figure quoted is peak at 7500rpm, unlike the M5 where peak power is developed across a range of about 1k rpm. I'm hoping, like you, that this is the case.

Edit - it is, I saw some power curve graphs and it does appear the power just keeps rising to about 7.5k

[pilchardthecat]

Zod said:

The engine noise through the stereo is not fake. It's the sound of the real engine. I'd rather they did it by removing sound-deadening materials, but at least it's not actually fake.

Can you turn it off? it's a deal breaker for me (irrational maybe but i just couldnt live with a car that's lying to me)

[Guvernator]

pilchardthecat said:

I'm cautiously optimistic. Redline is very high for a mass produced forced induction car. Anything north of 400bhp is plenty, as long as it's delivered in the right way - i just hope it's making more power at 7,500rpm than it is at 6,500rpm

The litmus test - does it have one of those silly sound symposer things that plays fake engine noises through the stereo? or have BMW found their mislaid plot again?

If I am reading the specs right, peak torque arrives very early but peak power doesn't arrive until 7500rpm which sounds VERY promising as it means it's more likely that the engine will behave like the proper revving turbo engines from the 90's era rather than the diesel alike crap we get today. I hate that most modern turbo engines seem to run out of puff past 5500 when in years gone by they would keep pulling harder and harder to the redline and you'd have to be on your toes to stop them banging into the rev limiter, proper power delivery!

[Zod]

pilchardthecat said:

Zod said:

The engine noise through the stereo is not fake. It's the sound of the real engine. I'd rather they did it by removing sound-deadening materials, but at least it's not actually fake.

Can you turn it off? it's a deal breaker for me (irrational maybe but i just couldnt live with a car that's lying to me)

My understanding is that you can turn it off. It's not lying though. It's just playing the real sound through speakers.

Personally, I'd rather have teh full engine sound, whcih is why I drive with the windows open whenever I can, but not everyone is like people here.

[Wills2]

pilchardthecat said:

I'm cautiously optimistic. Redline is very high for a mass produced forced induction car. Anything north of 400bhp is plenty, as long as it's delivered in the right way - i just hope it's making more power at 7,500rpm than it is at 6,500rpm

Looking at the power graph it makes the same at 6.5 as it does at 7.5

[pilchardthecat]

Guvernator said:

pilchardthecat said:

I'm cautiously optimistic. Redline is very high for a mass produced forced induction car. Anything north of 400bhp is plenty, as long as it's delivered in the right way - i just hope it's making more power at 7,500rpm than it is at 6,500rpm

The litmus test - does it have one of those silly sound symposer things that plays fake engine noises through the stereo? or have BMW found their mislaid plot again?

If I am reading the specs right, peak torque arrives very early but peak power doesn't arrive until 7500rpm which sounds VERY promising as it means it's more likely that the engine will behave like the proper revving turbo engines from the 90's era rather than the diesel alike crap we get today. I hate that most modern turbo engines seem to run out of puff past 5500 when in years gone by they would keep pulling harder and harder to the redline and you'd have to be on your toes to stop them banging into the rev limiter, proper power delivery!

My god, someone who agrees with me on this subject!!!!!!!!

Very interesting if peak power is really at 7.5k - if it has that linear power delivery to the red line i might well buy one.

[RobM77]

Kawasicki said:

161BMW said:

Is funny how most people on hear are glad they are offering manual. Yet those buyers of E92 M3 and there are a lot on Pistonheads mostly strongly prefer DCT paddleshift over BMW Manual Gearbox .... Why ?

Maybe because most people see the majority of their driving as a chore?

I'm happy that they are offering a manual gearbox. I'll also be happy if I can fully switch off driver aids.

I think it's a little short sighted to assume that all petrolheads love changing gear themselves with three pedals and a gearstick. There are so many aspects to driving a car and people enjoy them all in varying amounts. The E92 M3's DCT box was a very good one indeed, so I can well understand why if a single clutch stick shift isn't a 'must have' for a particular owner why they'd go for DCT. I don't think a decent DCT box like BMW make is the lazy option, it's just a different way to change gear, and it'll appeal to some people more than others.

[Dagnut]

Guvernator said:

If I am reading the specs right, peak torque arrives very early but peak power doesn't arrive until 7500rpm which sounds VERY promising as it means it's more likely that the engine will behave like the proper revving turbo engines from the 90's era rather than the diesel alike crap we get today. I hate that most modern turbo engines seem to run out of puff past 5500 when in years gone by they would keep pulling harder and harder to the redline and you'd have to be on your toes to stop them banging into the rev limiter, proper power delivery!

Not sure what cars you where driving in the 90's but I'm pretty sure no turbo cars were making peak power at 7500! barely any N/A cars where doing that

[Guvernator]

Dagnut said:

Not sure what cars you where driving in the 90's but I'm pretty sure no turbo cars were making peak power at 7500! barely any N/A cars where doing that

Subaru Impreza and Skyline GTR are two cars I've owned where peak power was well up in the rev range, oh and both cars revved to 8250rpm as standard, the way the rev counter used to shoot for that stratospheric redline was unreal and very rewarding. The cars just seemed to keep piling on boost and power the closer you got to it. Yes you had more turbo lag and a higher boost thresholds back then but I feel we've lost something by chasing the low down torque characteristics that they seem to want to foist on us these days, modern turbo cars power delivery feels very anodine in comparison IMO.

Hopefully this new engine might fix some of that though although it seems it's taken us 20 years to catch up, that's progress for you, probably caused by stupid EU regulations no doubt

Edited by Guvernator on Thursday 26th September 17:03

[krallicious]

Kawasicki said:

161BMW said:

Is funny how most people on hear are glad they are offering manual. Yet those buyers of E92 M3 and there are a lot on Pistonheads mostly strongly prefer DCT paddleshift over BMW Manual Gearbox .... Why ?

Maybe because most people see the majority of their driving as a chore?

I'm happy that they are offering a manual gearbox. I'll also be happy if I can fully switch off driver aids.

I tried a DCT for a day at the behest of a dealer who was trying to show me it was better than my manual. Now, if you are constantly pushing for the best lap time on a trackday or have to commute through London everyday, it makes sense but I found it very boring after an hour or so.

Looking forward to sorting a test drive in a manual car ASAP.

[Zod]

I've commuted in London in both SMG and manual cars and I really don't find a manual car any trouble for the purpose.

[torres del paine]

Frankly, I find manual transmission tedious these days. My e46 M3 is great but crikey, faffing about between 1st, 2nd and 3rd around town is not rewarding anymore for me, especially when it's cold.

My next car will be DCT for faster driving, which is what I'm in it for. But then I'm a modernist and like change. Bring on the M4 with turbos, tuning potential, more grunt and aggression. I like that it's a million miles away from the E30 and normally aspirated engines of the past. bring it on!

[Mermaid]

torres del paine said:

My next car will be DCT for faster driving, which is what I'm in it for. But then I'm a modernist and like change. Bring on the M4 with turbos, tuning potential, more grunt and aggression. I like that it's a million miles away from the E30 and normally aspirated engines of the past. bring it on!

The E30 wasthe 80's environment, the M4 suits today's better - for me anyway.

[E38Ross]

pilchardthecat said:

My god, someone who agrees with me on this subject!!!!!!!!

Very interesting if peak power is really at 7.5k - if it has that linear power delivery to the red line i might well buy one.

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Shared/GalleryLightbox/GalleryLightbox.aspx?PageId=20099&Keywords=makeBMW%2bmodel3-SERIES%2bBodyStyleCoupe%2bSectionNews%2bTypeMotor+Industry%2bEngineTypePetrol&Image=2&KeyValuePairs=kvManufacturer%3dBMW%3bkvModel%3d3SERIES%3bkvBodyStyle%3dCoupe%3bkvSection%3dNews%3bkvType%3dMotorIndustry%3bkvEngineType%3dPetrol%3bkvPrice%3d5060%3b


hmmmmm, it does look like it doesn't peak.

Either way BMW can't really win.....nice high revving NA engine:

not enough torque

turbo charged engine:

doesn't feel like a nice NA engine (despite the fact LOADS of reviews claim the 1M and M5 engine feel very, very good....and sounds like this M3/4 engine is going to be quite an improvement in terms of speed of response etc).

[whp1983]

DCT or manual.....just nice to have the choice to be fair!

Also lots of comment on improved fuel economy, I have an e92 m3 and yes it's thirsty but at 29mpg the new m4 is hardly a game changer!.....does anyone really think 'I love that car but at 22mpg no way, if only it did 7mpg more?! ' I understand this thinking on a golf but not a £60k sports car.

[Fidgits]

to be fair, i managed to get 27.7 out of my E92 M3 last night...

[Gary C]

AdeV said:

I guess the entire performance engine industry is wrong then, eh?

I'll just go tell 'em.

Adev, you are obviously not an engineer.

Power is a function of torque and rpm and effectively quantifies them both. One without the other is meaningless. Power gives an easy measure to compare the potential of two engines.

That said it does not describe the characteristic of an engine which is why people then tend to include a description of its torque curve.

[MNut]

Fidgits said:

to be fair, i managed to get 27.7 out of my E92 M3 last night...

Wow I bet that was an exciting drive......

The thing with the e92 is you have to drive it ever so gently to get any decent mpg figures from it.

I bet this new turbo motor will be much more frugal without even trying to drive it economically.

I for one can't wait to chop in my e92 for one, not just for mpg but also for the tuning potential.

[Gary C]

MiseryStreak said:

Actually what you said makes no sense, power is just torque multiplied by engine speed. A car with 430bhp and 450 ft lbf torque between 1500-5000rpm will be quicker than a car with 430bhp and 350ft lbf at a peak rpm. Peak figures don't tell the whole story (hence why diesels aren't as quick as their max torque figures show due to lower revs and longer gearing) but like for like a torquier engine with the same peak power will be more accelerative.

No not quite.

If the 350 car has a sufficiently flat torque curve around that peak, then as it is revving higher (to produce the same power) and is therefore geared lower, then the torque on the gearbox output shaft is the same at the peak torque. If the area around the peak of torque is flat enough to cover then gap between gear ratios the performance would be very similar. The car with the flatter and higher torque car would be easier to drive fast but not necessarily faster.

[pilchardthecat]

E38Ross said:

pilchardthecat said:

My god, someone who agrees with me on this subject!!!!!!!!

Very interesting if peak power is really at 7.5k - if it has that linear power delivery to the red line i might well buy one.

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Shared/GalleryLightbox/GalleryLightbox.aspx?PageId=20099&Keywords=makeBMW%2bmodel3-SERIES%2bBodyStyleCoupe%2bSectionNews%2bTypeMotor+Industry%2bEngineTypePetrol&Image=2&KeyValuePairs=kvManufacturer%3dBMW%3bkvModel%3d3SERIES%3bkvBodyStyle%3dCoupe%3bkvSection%3dNews%3bkvType%3dMotorIndustry%3bkvEngineType%3dPetrol%3bkvPrice%3d5060%3b


hmmmmm, it does look like it doesn't peak.

Either way BMW can't really win.....nice high revving NA engine:

not enough torque

turbo charged engine:

doesn't feel like a nice NA engine (despite the fact LOADS of reviews claim the 1M and M5 engine feel very, very good....and sounds like this M3/4 engine is going to be quite an improvement in terms of speed of response etc).

That curve is a lot better than the 135i/1M/M135i though - at least it isn't out of puff in the last 1000rpm.

Anyone know what the price tag on the M4 is going to be? I am starting to develop some wantage