M3/4 in the wet
Discussion
cringle said:
the OP asked a question about M3 and M4s in the wet. not M5s. there is a significant difference in weight, power delivery and general characteristics between the two cars. perhaps you should start your own general thread about powerful RWD cars?
Is the M3/M4 a powerful & fairly heavy RWD car? Me thinks the answer is yes. Is it a BMW M car? Again i think the answer is yes. Does it share MANY characteristics with the M5? again it's a yes i'm afraid.So given i believe this thread is basically asking about traction being the M3/4 is RWD & powerful & not a nimble little sports car, i feel a small generalisation on my part around RWD vs. AWD & to include my experiences with the M3/4's bigger brother are more than justified. If you don't then fair enough
W8PMC said:
cringle said:
the OP asked a question about M3 and M4s in the wet. not M5s. there is a significant difference in weight, power delivery and general characteristics between the two cars. perhaps you should start your own general thread about powerful RWD cars?
Is the M3/M4 a powerful & fairly heavy RWD car? Me thinks the answer is yes. Is it a BMW M car? Again i think the answer is yes. Does it share MANY characteristics with the M5? again it's a yes i'm afraid.So given i believe this thread is basically asking about traction being the M3/4 is RWD & powerful & not a nimble little sports car, i feel a small generalisation on my part around RWD vs. AWD & to include my experiences with the M3/4's bigger brother are more than justified. If you don't then fair enough
Jim1556 said:
What crawled up your arse n died?
My M3 drinks V Power and gets leathered when I get the chance, my VRS diesel (I used to do 30k miles a year) does 50+mpg when I pick my nipper up on the 6hr drive. I'm not stupid enough to get disiesel all over my hands when I fill it up. Don't think that makes my existence mediocre!
Keep telling yourself that Jim, every time you slip your hand into that johnny My M3 drinks V Power and gets leathered when I get the chance, my VRS diesel (I used to do 30k miles a year) does 50+mpg when I pick my nipper up on the 6hr drive. I'm not stupid enough to get disiesel all over my hands when I fill it up. Don't think that makes my existence mediocre!
I am only saying tall his tongue in cheek, but seriously now, if you only had the one car, would it be the M3 or a derv? 
W8PMC said:
cringle said:
the OP asked a question about M3 and M4s in the wet. not M5s. there is a significant difference in weight, power delivery and general characteristics between the two cars. perhaps you should start your own general thread about powerful RWD cars?
Is the M3/M4 a powerful & fairly heavy RWD car? Me thinks the answer is yes. Is it a BMW M car? Again i think the answer is yes. Does it share MANY characteristics with the M5? again it's a yes i'm afraid.So given i believe this thread is basically asking about traction being the M3/4 is RWD & powerful & not a nimble little sports car, i feel a small generalisation on my part around RWD vs. AWD & to include my experiences with the M3/4's bigger brother are more than justified. If you don't then fair enough
The M5 is approx 400kg heavier than the M4 and has larger wheels/tyres too. OP, buy an M5! No traction issues at all!
Plenty of traction issues with the M5! Even today 16c and dry it will spin up if the surface isn't very grippy.
Got to measure the power and fed it in, it works better with MDM as full on TC is a bit blunt at times.
But I did stomp on the pedal today and it gripped and just lunged forward first time I think I've felt the full force at 6k in 2nd, it's brilliant!
The longer wheel base helps compared to the M3.
Oh and Cringle if you don't like the posts then feel free not to post anymore...
Got to measure the power and fed it in, it works better with MDM as full on TC is a bit blunt at times.
But I did stomp on the pedal today and it gripped and just lunged forward first time I think I've felt the full force at 6k in 2nd, it's brilliant!
The longer wheel base helps compared to the M3.
Oh and Cringle if you don't like the posts then feel free not to post anymore...
Edited by Wills2 on Tuesday 7th April 20:13
e21Mark said:
I've had a 2013 M3 for a few weeks now and haven't had any issues re wet weather traction. Then again, I haven't been stomping on the loud pedal expecting it not to break traction. Although I much prefer my E30 M3, there's no denying just what a competent and fast car the V8 M3 really is. Drive it like a tit and I have no doubt it'll bite though.
The thread is about concerns over the drivability that the nonlinear torque delivery in the m4 provides, the e92 v8 has no such concerns. One of the best points of the m3 has been the ability to take a chassis that tends to lose traction at the rear first and control slippage with throttle input unfortunately seems to be taking a backseat to ultimate performance/emissions.
you have a point , and I may well be leaving the dark side (A5 3lt TDi)
JNW1 said:
I do take your point but has the current M5 been criticised quite extensively for being unable to deploy its power effectively and for being a bit, err, twitchy in the wet? Not that I can recall whereas the latest M3/M4 seems to be less than well regarded in that respect. Sadly I haven't driven any of them but from the reviews I've read I'm forming an impression that BMW might have dropped the baton ever so slightly with the current M3/M4 in a way they haven't with the M5. Having said that it wouldn't put me off buying one, I'd just make sure I had a decent test drive first!
I've not noticed the M3/4 being criticised any more so than the M5 for any powerful RWD car. Saying that i could well have missed such information, but believe me the M5 is twitchy in the wet & dry as any RWD car with over 400bhp is gonna be, but modulate the throttle & apply common sense & the car's are easily drivable otherwise why would they be produced.Never bought into the thought process that because a car is AWD it can be driven at 99.9% in virtually any weather condition, we so often see the end result of that through process.
I own an F80 M3, owned an E92 M3 and have driven the M5. If you put your foot into the carpet in the wet they will struggle. If you drive to the conditions they will not. I struggled more with the E92 than the F80 due to the tyres. The F80 tyres are much more useful on a day to day basis and don't try to acquaplane when they see a puddle.
I really don't get why people have such an issue with the new car. Its on a different planet to the older car in speed, comfort and interior. With the standard exhaust and Sports+ engaged it sounds just as good. What am I missing!!
I really don't get why people have such an issue with the new car. Its on a different planet to the older car in speed, comfort and interior. With the standard exhaust and Sports+ engaged it sounds just as good. What am I missing!!
I've owned a string of M cars and other high power rear wheel drive cars over the last decade and a half and never worried for a moment about this. Two of the cars (CSL and V12V) have been on trackday-oriented tyres, but I haven't crashed them in the wet. I think some people worry rather too much. Just moderate the movement of your right foot and all will be well.
[quote=dulcinea] If you put your foot into the carpet in the wet they will struggle. If you drive to the conditions they will not.
As a 'tweaked' M4 owner I agree. The fun is reserved for the appropriate conditions. When it's wet I usually just want to get from A to B safely and in comfort. When it's dry and the roads allow, then some serious fun can easily be had. The M4 achieves both very nicely indeed.
Are people wanting to unload full power or race other cars in the wet? If this is your goal then perhaps a Nissan GTR or 911 Turbo are better options. Both are damn fine cars.
As a 'tweaked' M4 owner I agree. The fun is reserved for the appropriate conditions. When it's wet I usually just want to get from A to B safely and in comfort. When it's dry and the roads allow, then some serious fun can easily be had. The M4 achieves both very nicely indeed.
Are people wanting to unload full power or race other cars in the wet? If this is your goal then perhaps a Nissan GTR or 911 Turbo are better options. Both are damn fine cars.
W8PMC said:
I've not noticed the M3/4 being criticised any more so than the M5 for any powerful RWD car. Saying that i could well have missed such information, but believe me the M5 is twitchy in the wet & dry as any RWD car with over 400bhp is gonna be, but modulate the throttle & apply common sense & the car's are easily drivable otherwise why would they be produced.
Never bought into the thought process that because a car is AWD it can be driven at 99.9% in virtually any weather condition, we so often see the end result of that through process.
I suppose I'm basing my observation mainly around the comments made in EVO (which is the only motoring magazine I read regularly). Generally they're usually quite positive about M-cars and, even though it's been around for several years, the M5 is still their favourite in the large saloon category. In contrast, however, they've been rather lukewarm about the latest M3/M4 and the feeling I get is that the car has the potential to be a bit wayward - and perhaps even to bite - in a way its predecessors never did. I've also seen Steve Sutcliffe's test and comments on the M4 and he also gave the the impression that the car could be a bit of a handful (almost like it had to bullied into doing what he wanted it to do rather than working with him). Now I do accept that any powerful RWD car has the potential to wag its tail if provoked (in some respects that's part of the appeal!) but I also subscribe to the old theory that a well sorted car should reward a good driver and flatter a poor one and from what I hear I'm not sure the latest M3/M4 manages to do that. Like I say, mine are observations made without driving the car (and hence I could be talking rubbish) but when a number of experienced, respected, journalists are saying the same thing you can't help but think that there's no smoke without fire!Never bought into the thought process that because a car is AWD it can be driven at 99.9% in virtually any weather condition, we so often see the end result of that through process.
Tend to agree with your comment on AWD. I'm driving an F31 335d at the moment and, while it certainly has a traction advantage that's sometimes nice to have - for example when pulling out of a junction in the wet - the lateral grip and stopping ability are no better than a RWD car (arguably slightly worse due to the extra weight). I certainly wouldn't say I dislike AWD but by the same token I'm not sure I'd actually choose it in preference to RWD if there was an option to have one or the other....
GameOverMan! said:
dulcinea said:
If you put your foot into the carpet in the wet they will struggle. If you drive to the conditions they will not.
As a 'tweaked' M4 owner I agree. The fun is reserved for the appropriate conditions. When it's wet I usually just want to get from A to B safely and in comfort. When it's dry and the roads allow, then some serious fun can easily be had. The M4 achieves both very nicely indeed.
Are people wanting to unload full power or race other cars in the wet? If this is your goal then perhaps a Nissan GTR or 911 Turbo are better options. Both are damn fine cars.
AmenAs a 'tweaked' M4 owner I agree. The fun is reserved for the appropriate conditions. When it's wet I usually just want to get from A to B safely and in comfort. When it's dry and the roads allow, then some serious fun can easily be had. The M4 achieves both very nicely indeed.
Are people wanting to unload full power or race other cars in the wet? If this is your goal then perhaps a Nissan GTR or 911 Turbo are better options. Both are damn fine cars.
BritishRacinGrin said:
If you want more traction than power, buy something with 4wd or less power. M cars are for people who want more power than traction and are prepared to drive accordingly.
This absolutely nails it for me. Although driving accordingly means that I expect it to slide gracefully when I turn all the driver aids off.One of my colleagues who has been driving quick Audis for years switched to a 991 C4S recently and was surprised that it was so rear-biased. Hitting the throttle hard and turning the wheel in the Audi resulted in traction and turning, whereas the same thing in the 911 resulted in a slide requiring opposite lock to be applied. I think Audi have their market and if you want all the grip and traction then great, but if you want more excitement and involvement, the BMW/Porsche is where it's at.
bennyboysvuk said:
This absolutely nails it for me. Although driving accordingly means that I expect it to slide gracefully when I turn all the driver aids off.
One of my colleagues who has been driving quick Audis for years switched to a 991 C4S recently and was surprised that it was so rear-biased. Hitting the throttle hard and turning the wheel in the Audi resulted in traction and turning, whereas the same thing in the 911 resulted in a slide requiring opposite lock to be applied. I think Audi have their market and if you want all the grip and traction then great, but if you want more excitement and involvement, the BMW/Porsche is where it's at.
Having owned many Audi's & several RS's, your final point pretty much nails it for me.One of my colleagues who has been driving quick Audis for years switched to a 991 C4S recently and was surprised that it was so rear-biased. Hitting the throttle hard and turning the wheel in the Audi resulted in traction and turning, whereas the same thing in the 911 resulted in a slide requiring opposite lock to be applied. I think Audi have their market and if you want all the grip and traction then great, but if you want more excitement and involvement, the BMW/Porsche is where it's at.
JNW1 said:
I suppose I'm basing my observation mainly around the comments made in EVO (which is the only motoring magazine I read regularly). Generally they're usually quite positive about M-cars and, even though it's been around for several years, the M5 is still their favourite in the large saloon category. In contrast, however, they've been rather lukewarm about the latest M3/M4 and the feeling I get is that the car has the potential to be a bit wayward - and perhaps even to bite - in a way its predecessors never did. I've also seen Steve Sutcliffe's test and comments on the M4 and he also gave the the impression that the car could be a bit of a handful (almost like it had to bullied into doing what he wanted it to do rather than working with him). Now I do accept that any powerful RWD car has the potential to wag its tail if provoked (in some respects that's part of the appeal!) but I also subscribe to the old theory that a well sorted car should reward a good driver and flatter a poor one and from what I hear I'm not sure the latest M3/M4 manages to do that. Like I say, mine are observations made without driving the car (and hence I could be talking rubbish) but when a number of experienced, respected, journalists are saying the same thing you can't help but think that there's no smoke without fire!
Tend to agree with your comment on AWD. I'm driving an F31 335d at the moment and, while it certainly has a traction advantage that's sometimes nice to have - for example when pulling out of a junction in the wet - the lateral grip and stopping ability are no better than a RWD car (arguably slightly worse due to the extra weight). I certainly wouldn't say I dislike AWD but by the same token I'm not sure I'd actually choose it in preference to RWD if there was an option to have one or the other....
Likewise i've not driven one & the couple of reports you refer to may be bang on the money. I would have assumed that given the M3/4 i believe have the same drivetrain as the M5, are lighter but with less power, they would if anything be a touch more compliant in the traction dept. however perhaps BMW have got it wrong with the car which would be a real shame.Tend to agree with your comment on AWD. I'm driving an F31 335d at the moment and, while it certainly has a traction advantage that's sometimes nice to have - for example when pulling out of a junction in the wet - the lateral grip and stopping ability are no better than a RWD car (arguably slightly worse due to the extra weight). I certainly wouldn't say I dislike AWD but by the same token I'm not sure I'd actually choose it in preference to RWD if there was an option to have one or the other....
W8PMC said:
Likewise i've not driven one & the couple of reports you refer to may be bang on the money. I would have assumed that given the M3/4 i believe have the same drivetrain as the M5, are lighter but with less power, they would if anything be a touch more compliant in the traction dept. however perhaps BMW have got it wrong with the car which would be a real shame.
I test drove the M4 and found it better on the twisties than the LCI M5, it stuck to it's task very well.Dry roads though, it was to me anyway "Go Cart like".
I liked it for what it was, but seemed "Low rent" compared to my M6 GC CP.
Gassing Station | M Power | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff