RE: BMW M Division Wants A 1-series M
Discussion
havoc said:
RobM77 said:
I would say that special is a combination of outright ability and rarity.
EFA (IMHO) - a car doesn't need to have massive performance to be special, but it does need to have a lot of composure and real involvement.
ks I'm afraid. Special really is just rare or unusual to be honest.havoc said:
Marquis_Rex said:
It's not a comparison :GT3 vs CSL not quite sure where you keep getting that from- I view the cars with respect to their lineage and what went before as I already explained. The CSL was smaller volumes for one in the same way the 993 RS was also. Its not that difficult a concept to understand. It's my opinion- and the fact that it's not shared by many also explains why folks spuff themselves over the GT3.
Porsches have become more market focused and slightly less engineering focused, wiedekings focus was as much on engineering as manufacturability and cost of manufacture. Post 993 cars are set up for much higher volume production. He was very successful in bringing Porsches market share up. Whether that means his actions benefitted the enthusiast in the way that the old range (when they weren't making money) did- is another matter. And that ultimately is what I was getting at before all the inevitable nit picking began.
BMWs are far from small volume- the E36 wasn't nor is the E46 and much higher volume than the Porsche 911s which makes the CSL stand out more considering it's base.
I can't agree with your logic there, MR.Porsches have become more market focused and slightly less engineering focused, wiedekings focus was as much on engineering as manufacturability and cost of manufacture. Post 993 cars are set up for much higher volume production. He was very successful in bringing Porsches market share up. Whether that means his actions benefitted the enthusiast in the way that the old range (when they weren't making money) did- is another matter. And that ultimately is what I was getting at before all the inevitable nit picking began.
BMWs are far from small volume- the E36 wasn't nor is the E46 and much higher volume than the Porsche 911s which makes the CSL stand out more considering it's base.
By the same logic, the Integra Type R is at least as special and stand-out as the CSL, because it was engineered so far beyond the high(er)-volume base that it was developed from (same basic platform underpinned the EG and EK Civics...which are among the biggest-selling cars in the world!). And even I'd say that's patent b'll'cks, despite having huge regard for a car I've bought two of...
havoc said:
RobM77 said:
I would say that special is a combination of outright ability and rarity.
EFA (IMHO) - a car doesn't need to have massive performance to be special, but it does need to have a lot of composure and real involvement.Marquis_Rex said:
havoc said:
Marquis_Rex said:
It's not a comparison :GT3 vs CSL not quite sure where you keep getting that from- I view the cars with respect to their lineage and what went before as I already explained. The CSL was smaller volumes for one in the same way the 993 RS was also. Its not that difficult a concept to understand. It's my opinion- and the fact that it's not shared by many also explains why folks spuff themselves over the GT3.
Porsches have become more market focused and slightly less engineering focused, wiedekings focus was as much on engineering as manufacturability and cost of manufacture. Post 993 cars are set up for much higher volume production. He was very successful in bringing Porsches market share up. Whether that means his actions benefitted the enthusiast in the way that the old range (when they weren't making money) did- is another matter. And that ultimately is what I was getting at before all the inevitable nit picking began.
BMWs are far from small volume- the E36 wasn't nor is the E46 and much higher volume than the Porsche 911s which makes the CSL stand out more considering it's base.
I can't agree with your logic there, MR.Porsches have become more market focused and slightly less engineering focused, wiedekings focus was as much on engineering as manufacturability and cost of manufacture. Post 993 cars are set up for much higher volume production. He was very successful in bringing Porsches market share up. Whether that means his actions benefitted the enthusiast in the way that the old range (when they weren't making money) did- is another matter. And that ultimately is what I was getting at before all the inevitable nit picking began.
BMWs are far from small volume- the E36 wasn't nor is the E46 and much higher volume than the Porsche 911s which makes the CSL stand out more considering it's base.
By the same logic, the Integra Type R is at least as special and stand-out as the CSL, because it was engineered so far beyond the high(er)-volume base that it was developed from (same basic platform underpinned the EG and EK Civics...which are among the biggest-selling cars in the world!). And even I'd say that's patent b'll'cks, despite having huge regard for a car I've bought two of...
Marquis_Rex said:
havoc said:
RobM77 said:
I would say that special is a combination of outright ability and rarity.
EFA (IMHO) - a car doesn't need to have massive performance to be special, but it does need to have a lot of composure and real involvement.
havoc said:
Marquis_Rex said:
havoc said:
Marquis_Rex said:
It's not a comparison :GT3 vs CSL not quite sure where you keep getting that from- I view the cars with respect to their lineage and what went before as I already explained. The CSL was smaller volumes for one in the same way the 993 RS was also. Its not that difficult a concept to understand. It's my opinion- and the fact that it's not shared by many also explains why folks spuff themselves over the GT3.
Porsches have become more market focused and slightly less engineering focused, wiedekings focus was as much on engineering as manufacturability and cost of manufacture. Post 993 cars are set up for much higher volume production. He was very successful in bringing Porsches market share up. Whether that means his actions benefitted the enthusiast in the way that the old range (when they weren't making money) did- is another matter. And that ultimately is what I was getting at before all the inevitable nit picking began.
BMWs are far from small volume- the E36 wasn't nor is the E46 and much higher volume than the Porsche 911s which makes the CSL stand out more considering it's base.
I can't agree with your logic there, MR.Porsches have become more market focused and slightly less engineering focused, wiedekings focus was as much on engineering as manufacturability and cost of manufacture. Post 993 cars are set up for much higher volume production. He was very successful in bringing Porsches market share up. Whether that means his actions benefitted the enthusiast in the way that the old range (when they weren't making money) did- is another matter. And that ultimately is what I was getting at before all the inevitable nit picking began.
BMWs are far from small volume- the E36 wasn't nor is the E46 and much higher volume than the Porsche 911s which makes the CSL stand out more considering it's base.
By the same logic, the Integra Type R is at least as special and stand-out as the CSL, because it was engineered so far beyond the high(er)-volume base that it was developed from (same basic platform underpinned the EG and EK Civics...which are among the biggest-selling cars in the world!). And even I'd say that's patent b'll'cks, despite having huge regard for a car I've bought two of...
while you guys are stuck in Brum with speed cameras, chavscum and various other parasites 
Marquis_Rex said:
Unbelievable as it may sound, I don't use yours and your cohort, Caboosemooses assessment of my opinions as a measure of my credibility (especially seeing as you're a lowly accountant). I do however revel in the fact that I'm in California near the beech in 20 deg C conditions while you guys are stuck in Brum with speed cameras, chavscum and various other parasites
:yawn: All that Californian arrogance must be contagious...you're even sounding like a typical shallow Septic now...glad you've finally found your vocation though! while you guys are stuck in Brum with speed cameras, chavscum and various other parasites 
havoc said:
Marquis_Rex said:
Unbelievable as it may sound, I don't use yours and your cohort, Caboosemooses assessment of my opinions as a measure of my credibility (especially seeing as you're a lowly accountant). I do however revel in the fact that I'm in California near the beech in 20 deg C conditions while you guys are stuck in Brum with speed cameras, chavscum and various other parasites
:yawn: All that Californian arrogance must be contagious...you're even sounding like a typical shallow Septic now...glad you've finally found your vocation though! while you guys are stuck in Brum with speed cameras, chavscum and various other parasites - Californians are shallow-probably some truth in that: 60% truth-doesnt apply to transplants from other parts, most of those in SD are transplants like myself.
- People who buy Jap cars are shallow-more true for the run of the mill Camrys and Avalons- so overall very true-80% truth in this- soul less cars designed to often get you from A to B- like an appliance with minimal drama
- accountants are shallow as they see the world in narrow terms of figures, balance sheets and loss and gains- not understanding emotions
- You drive a Japanese car AND are an accountant-
QED
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Lets see now, Bespoke cam profiles- pushing accels of 83 radians per degree accels i.e not used else where in the range and different to the S54, "Alpha N" engine management system (no MAF sensor unlike the S54) lowering the intake manifold depression, higher compression ratio, carbon fibre air box with reshaped bell mouths, straightened and retuned exhaust manifolding, remapped ECU to suit. That's pretty bespoke and the outnumbers speak for themselves. In this day and age it's pretty unheard of to tune and homologate an engine for such a low volume application (which the GT3 isnt BTW). If you can't or wont understand that you're even stupider than your post make you out to be.The vehicle itself has some mods also including 2.7 turns lock to lock rack and pinion steering versus the stock M3s 3.2, Bigger brakes, lighter weight components.
Now if you come back with your other nit picking gem of comparing the CSL to the GT3 persisting that I did-when I never did- then read what my profile says.
If you still don't understand why I assess the CSL to be more special in it's own context compared to the more mass produced GT3 (when compared to it's illustrious predessors)- I'll make it easy for you:
"If I suddenly fall silent in a flame war within a thread- it's unlikely you've changed my opinion or that I'm miraculously 'taught' the error of my ways. I'm too arrogant for that. More likely I've written you off as irretrievably stupid and moved on."
Edited by Marquis_Rex on Thursday 19th November 23:42
Marquis_Rex said:
*Californians are shallow-probably some truth in that: 60% truth-doesnt apply to transplants from other parts, most of those in SD are transplants like myself.
QED
You really seem to have a hang-up about accountants, don't you?!? Were you abused by one as a child? Did he have a big pencil, and make you endure double-entry??? - People who buy Jap cars are shallow-more true for the run of the mill Camrys and Avalons- so overall very true-80% truth in this- soul less cars designed to often get you from A to B- like an appliance with minimal drama
- accountants are shallow as they see the world in narrow terms of figures, balance sheets and loss and gains- not understanding emotions
- You drive a Japanese car AND are an accountant-
QED
Anyway, back to the debate:-
Marquis_Rex said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Lets see now, Bespoke cam profiles- pushing accels of 83 radians per degree accels i.e not used else where in the range and different to the S54, "Alpha N" engine management system (no MAF sensor unlike the S54) lowering the intake manifold depression, higher compression ratio, carbon fibre air box with reshaped bell mouths, straightened and retuned exhaust manifolding, remapped ECU to suit. That's pretty bespoke and the outnumbers speak for themselves. In this day and age it's pretty unheard of to tune and homologate an engine for such a low volume application (which the GT3 isnt BTW). If you can't or wont understand that you're even stupider than your post make you out to be.The vehicle itself has some mods also including 2.7 turns lock to lock rack and pinion steering versus the stock M3s 3.2, Bigger brakes, lighter weight components.
- Bespoke cam profiles - yes
- Higher compression - yes
- Different airbox - yes
- Different exhaust manifold - yes
- Different ECU - yes
- Removed insulation - yes
- Bigger brakes - yes
- Re-tuned suspension - yes
- Lighter wheels - yes
- Lighter seats - yes
...and how about
- Unique pistons (which are now forged)
- Oval-profile valve-springs to save space
- Lighter valves
- Re-oriented valve-seat openings (45-degrees not 60)
- Titanium springs and other internals to save weight
- Re-balanced camshaft
- Bespoke con-rods (titanium also, I think)
- Torsen LSD fitted
- Closer-ratio gearbox with lower FD
And as far as specific output goes, the 112bhp/litre of the CSL isn't that far off the 104bhp/litre of the UKDM ITR or the 109bhp/litre of the JDM ITR.
...so while I agree with you that the CSL is quite a special animal, from an engineering and development perspective, I've got to say that it's not unique. I'd also suggest that Caboose is right in one regard - put the GT3-RS (996 or 997) next to a stock 911, and the list of 'tweaks' isn't that far off either the CSL or the ITR...it's just starting from a 'better' base-car.
havoc said:
Marquis_Rex said:
*Californians are shallow-probably some truth in that: 60% truth-doesnt apply to transplants from other parts, most of those in SD are transplants like myself.
QED
You really seem to have a hang-up about accountants, don't you?!? Were you abused by one as a child? Did he have a big pencil, and make you endure double-entry??? - People who buy Jap cars are shallow-more true for the run of the mill Camrys and Avalons- so overall very true-80% truth in this- soul less cars designed to often get you from A to B- like an appliance with minimal drama
- accountants are shallow as they see the world in narrow terms of figures, balance sheets and loss and gains- not understanding emotions
- You drive a Japanese car AND are an accountant-
QED
Anyway, back to the debate:-
Marquis_Rex said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Lets see now, Bespoke cam profiles- pushing accels of 83 radians per degree accels i.e not used else where in the range and different to the S54, "Alpha N" engine management system (no MAF sensor unlike the S54) lowering the intake manifold depression, higher compression ratio, carbon fibre air box with reshaped bell mouths, straightened and retuned exhaust manifolding, remapped ECU to suit. That's pretty bespoke and the outnumbers speak for themselves. In this day and age it's pretty unheard of to tune and homologate an engine for such a low volume application (which the GT3 isnt BTW). If you can't or wont understand that you're even stupider than your post make you out to be.The vehicle itself has some mods also including 2.7 turns lock to lock rack and pinion steering versus the stock M3s 3.2, Bigger brakes, lighter weight components.
- Bespoke cam profiles - yes
- Higher compression - yes
- Different airbox - yes
- Different exhaust manifold - yes
- Different ECU - yes
- Removed insulation - yes
- Bigger brakes - yes
- Re-tuned suspension - yes
- Lighter wheels - yes
- Lighter seats - yes
...and how about
- Unique pistons (which are now forged)
- Oval-profile valve-springs to save space
- Lighter valves
- Re-oriented valve-seat openings (45-degrees not 60)
- Titanium springs and other internals to save weight
- Re-balanced camshaft
- Bespoke con-rods (titanium also, I think)
- Torsen LSD fitted
- Closer-ratio gearbox with lower FD
te' mode there.What makes a car special is very subjective and a combination of factors, including rarity, brand, herritage. yes- for me 'brand' is important which makes this assesment all the more subjective and this continual demand for rationalisation-ridiculous. For me, specially since moving over here- with all the pathetic Jap-crap worshipers I wouldn't consider getting something Japanese at all ever (where as I was in Germany). So the ITR isn't special to me. I have respect for them, as I do S2000s but they're not special. Since moving to the USA Brand has become more important to me.
I don't understand why you and your retarded brother are trying to get me to rationalise something that I've already deemed as quite subjective. When it comes to things out of work, to do with buying a house or car I don't need to rationalise my decisions. This isn't a debate about with Mac Pherson struts are better than double wishbones or 2 valves are better than 4.
I didn't realise how many people agree with me (usually those not overly hung up on track times) regarding how my opinion of how the GT3 isn't that special- judging by the emails I've gotten.
Marquis_Rex said:
So by your reckoning an ITR is more 'special' than a CSL and perhaps by a GT3 also. Sorry that's my caboose 'talking ste' mode there.
What makes a car special is very subjective and a combination of factors, including rarity, brand, heritage. yes- for me 'brand' is important
1) I was using your rationale from the last page, but we'll gloss over that.te' mode there.What makes a car special is very subjective and a combination of factors, including rarity, brand, heritage. yes- for me 'brand' is important
2) No, I agree it's not. It's superb at what it does (and I've not driven another fwd car which matches it's feel/involvement from 2/10ths to 10/10ths - yet to drive the much-vaunted R26 and Focus RS Mk2 though), but it's certainly not as 'special' as those two...although I'd venture that in the real world, on real roads (not the N'ring), it's closer than you'd think...
3) That's where we differ - I couldn't care less about brand - to me, my NSX is as special as a friend's 355. Heritage I understand better*...but if e.g. Hyundai suddenly build a world-beating sports-car, then I'd give it a serious look.
* Still doesn't mean I'm any more interested in the modern stuff if it's not up to scratch...
PS - "ricer" culture in the US - can understand that being a turn-off...would probably have the same effect on me!
Anyway, back on topic...
According to this month's EVO mag a BMW source makes the following claims about the likely new 1-series M:
Tweaked version of the -35i engine producing an impressive sounding c.400hp
7-speed dual clutch 'box, rwd
c.70kg shaved from the 135i's weight
Priced equidistant from the 135i and M3 (£29k and £51k respectively, so lets say c.£40k)
Could be a winner.
According to this month's EVO mag a BMW source makes the following claims about the likely new 1-series M:
Tweaked version of the -35i engine producing an impressive sounding c.400hp
7-speed dual clutch 'box, rwd
c.70kg shaved from the 135i's weight
Priced equidistant from the 135i and M3 (£29k and £51k respectively, so lets say c.£40k)
Could be a winner.
adycav said:
Anyway, back on topic...
According to this month's EVO mag a BMW source makes the following claims about the likely new 1-series M:
Tweaked version of the -35i engine producing an impressive sounding c.400hp
7-speed dual clutch 'box, rwd
c.70kg shaved from the 135i's weight
Priced equidistant from the 135i and M3 (£29k and £51k respectively, so lets say c.£40k)
Could be a winner.
Or same old same old.... It wasn't long ago that M3s cost 40k.According to this month's EVO mag a BMW source makes the following claims about the likely new 1-series M:
Tweaked version of the -35i engine producing an impressive sounding c.400hp
7-speed dual clutch 'box, rwd
c.70kg shaved from the 135i's weight
Priced equidistant from the 135i and M3 (£29k and £51k respectively, so lets say c.£40k)
Could be a winner.
Cut the price, cut more weight, major on feel and interaction rather than horse power, a N/A engine and a 30k price tag imho.
dom180 said:
Cut the price, cut more weight, major on feel and interaction rather than horse power, a N/A engine and a 30k price tag imho.
But they wouldn't make as much profit per unit, and they wouldn't sell as many as most people with £40-50k to spend don't tend to want stripped-out "involvement", they want Pub-bragging-rights stats, peon-humbling straight-line pace, a nice badge and lots of toys...havoc said:
dom180 said:
Cut the price, cut more weight, major on feel and interaction rather than horse power, a N/A engine and a 30k price tag imho.
But they wouldn't make as much profit per unit, and they wouldn't sell as many as most people with £40-50k to spend don't tend to want stripped-out "involvement", they want Pub-bragging-rights stats, peon-humbling straight-line pace, a nice badge and lots of toys...dom180 said:
Fair point - I guess the mass market just wants toys and poke! They might sell more though if they widened the gap between M1 and M3 - if you can afford a 40k M1 a 50k M3 isn't so far away and thus they can't make the M1 too good...
Deja-vu with the Cayman, n'est-ce-pas?!? Smaller, lighter car deliberately hamstrung to avoid embarassing its halo-badged big-brother!Cocks.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff