RE: The new BMW M3

[Mr Whippy]

I talk too much too, but the integrity of everyone here shows that it never degrades to blows below the belt

I'm happy that BMW make the M3 full stop, just unlike the E30 and E36, this car has a wheel option in 19" that looks nicer than the 18"

Now the E30 and E36 from what I know both had one sized wheel option, and both looked very nice.

I know ultimately those who want the drive will get the 18's, but it's nasty marketing from BMW to make the people who just want looks pay more for it. If the 18's looked like the 19's BMW would probably loose out as many 'looks' buyers wouldn't see the difference.

Thats just another facet that gets me grumpy. As much as there was driver focus and engineering excellence in this car, there is, imho, far too much £££/marketing bollarks...

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

Miguel said:

Mr Whippy said:

I talk too much too, but the integrity of everyone here shows that it never degrades to blows below the belt

I'm happy that BMW make the M3 full stop, just unlike the E30 and E36, this car has a wheel option in 19" that looks nicer than the 18"

Now the E30 and E36 from what I know both had one sized wheel option, and both looked very nice.

As I said before, but this time without the sarcasrm, you think the 19's look good, but not the 18's. That may turn out to be the general consensus, but maybe not, as DoctorD pointed out. Others may like the looks of the 18's. Again, to me, all this stuff about how the rims look is pretty trivial. We can just agree to disagree.

Mr Whippy said:

I know ultimately those who want the drive will get the 18's, but it's nasty marketing from BMW to make the people who just want looks pay more for it.

Again, we'll agree to disagree here. Not only do I think that it actually makes perfect sense, with a car that is meant to be a driver's car, for it to come with the right equipment for chassis dynamics and for those who want more bling to pay for it, but just because you think that the 18's look like crap, that doesn't mean that all will think that. While we're at it, could anyone here give me a link so I can see what both these rims look like. Now I'm curious.

Mr Whippy said:

If the 18's looked like the 19's BMW would probably loose out as many 'looks' buyers wouldn't see the difference.

Here's a thought that you didn't consider: I'm not sure I agree with the above statement because, I don't know how this is in the UK and the rest of Europe, I can tell you that in the US, even if the 18's were of the same design as the 19's, you can bet that plenty of people here would still want the 19's because now large rims and very low profile tires are in. It's a fashion statement. Just seeing how European cars are offering very large diameter rims as standard with even larger ones as an option, my guess is that overseas, people are doing the same thing, so even if the 18's and 19's were identical except for size, many would still opt for the larger option.

Mr Whippy said:

Thats just another facet that gets me grumpy. As much as there was driver focus and engineering excellence in this car, there is, imho, far too much £££/marketing bollarks...

Dave

And yet you focus as much on just looks that are for your taste, not even knowing if your taste in aesthetics is what everyone would like. Aesthetics are so subjective that, as much as I can see your point when you talk just about how focused a car is or should be, I just don't when it comes to looks because somehow you think that everyone has or should have exactly the same taste as you. See Dave? I talk too much, too.

Miguel

Evo magazine, 19's on cover shot, 18's inside.

Pretty much same as the E46, the 18's had a ledged rim edge so the spokes looked significantly smaller than they really are, and they are a softer design.
The 19's are spoked right to the rim edge, have a flat face and a sharper more agressive look more in keeping with the E92 flame surfacing.

I'm not simply saying, the 18's are crap for my taste. But as a design element the 19's just fit the bill perfectly with the rest of the car. I think that is why the E46 M3 had the 19's so popular, they were just a nicer looking alloy.
Compare the 19's and the 18's and the 18 is almost designed to look smaller. The 18 and 19 would look almost identical in size (5% diameter difference) if they were the same style...

As per US market, I did consider that. The difference is 5%... no one would notice. It's the fact the styles are designed to emphasise the diameter on the 19 and subdue the size on the 18 that makes the difference visible. I'm quite sure if I edited an image with the 19's so they were 18's, you wouldn't be able to tell in isolation.

As per looks in general, I've mentioned a million times I like the form, and the 335Ci/Alpina. I don't have an aversion to the E92, infact I like it quite alot!
What gets me with the E92 M3 is the details. It's not that they are 'ugly' it's that they are poorly executed. Why does the MZ4 have pinched bonnet creases that match the flame styling of the car, yet the M3 has what looks like a blob extrusion melted on?
Why do those side vents extrude perfectly at a straight angle onto the panel gap. They don't curve to a smooth flat as they reach the edge, it's just a straight line. It's terrible really, it looks so cheap for a £55k+ car!

It's just these sorts of things that I don't like. The Z4 M'd up nicely, the E60 M'd up nicely, why has the E92 M'd up so badly? The nice proportions and sleek styling has just been sledge hammered with bad details. Like the 18" alloys, they are just not in keeping with the Bangle base, sleek and flame surfaced meets with melted chocolate design features.

Squeezebm, you really are such a funny guy! Hahaha, haha, ha, ha.... ha....

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

whoami said:

Jesus Christ, give it a ing rest.

You are not forced to read it, and it wasn't even posted for you, it was a response to someone else.

Your off topic posts having a dig at posters seem to extend elsewhere so I'll just ignore you now thanks.

Miguel said:

Dave, suffice it to say that I just don't look at a car's styling, especially one that's as meant to be driven as an M car, with the scrutiny that you do. I just want to drive it. The E60 may have M'd nicely, as you put it, but any E60 still makes me gag when I look at it. I'd still have an M5, if I could afford it, though. As for what you said about 19's vs. 18's, it's as much about bragging rights as it is about looks, so I don't agree with you there.

Miguel

So the E60 M5 makes you gag? So it's ok for you to make generalised statements on looks, but not me while giving particular focus to why?

Bragging rights? I'm sorry, but as said about four pages ago, if BMW offered THE wheel for performance in the same style as the 19" (the one we know has been styled to be more pleasing), then it would offer up both looks AND performance. They wouldn't need another option!

People are only offered bragging rights because a visibly different AND more expensive option exists that can be clearly identified as the bigger and expensive one to brag about. Remove the possibility and the issue is resolved. BMW M have marketed that in there, so yes it's about bragging rights, but only via the looks. If they looked the same it'd be harder to say they cost £1500 extra when you need a tape measure to actually be able to tell (or read the tyre wall info) hardly cool to get a tape measure out to proove to your relatively shallow car friends that you bought the bigger ones!

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

CSl had 19's, and CS, so I guess there is something to be had wrt to absolute performance.

I just think the 18's vs 19's is a bit about personal preference to the comfort on, at times, pretty crappy UK roads.

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

Miguel said:

Mr Whippy said:

Miguel said:

Dave, suffice it to say that I just don't look at a car's styling, especially one that's as meant to be driven as an M car, with the scrutiny that you do. I just want to drive it. The E60 may have M'd nicely, as you put it, but any E60 still makes me gag when I look at it. I'd still have an M5, if I could afford it, though. As for what you said about 19's vs. 18's, it's as much about bragging rights as it is about looks, so I don't agree with you there.

Miguel

So the E60 M5 makes you gag? So it's ok for you to make generalised statements on looks, but not me while giving particular focus to why?

Oh please!!! Get off your high horse, Dave. Did I say that you weren't allowed to express your views on the looks of the car? You missed my point entirely, which was that you'll go on and on about how a car is for driving, but then you seem to put even more emphasis on its looks. To me, if a car that I like to drive is good looking, I consider that a bonus, not a must. Hence, my comment on the E60 M5.

And yes, if I do make a comment on a car's aesthetics, it will be pretty general. Again, I don't harp on each and every square millimeter of its looks. You do, and that's fine, but the other point I made concerning looks was that it's a personal thing. Just because you don't like something, others may and vice-versa. You go on about a car's looks as if what you like is what everyone else should too.

Mr Whippy said:

Bragging rights? I'm sorry, but as said about four pages ago, if BMW offered THE wheel for performance in the same style as the 19" (the one we know has been styled to be more pleasing), then it would offer up both looks AND performance. They wouldn't need another option!

People are only offered bragging rights because a visibly different AND more expensive option exists that can be clearly identified as the bigger and expensive one to brag about. Remove the possibility and the issue is resolved. BMW M have marketed that in there, so yes it's about bragging rights, but only via the looks. If they looked the same it'd be harder to say they cost £1500 extra when you need a tape measure to actually be able to tell (or read the tyre wall info) hardly cool to get a tape measure out to proove to your relatively shallow car friends that you bought the bigger ones!

Dave

Just because you can't tell them apart if they look the same except for size, that doesn't mean that others can't.

Miguel

My point about looks was regards BMW's focus, not mine. I KNOW it's a drivers car, but BMW are not making it one. As much as I missed your point, you and a few others have missed my points entirely. I'm not on a high horse, I'm discussing it for fun. Not quite sure what I could prove or do anyway, just discussion and sharing my POV however limited that may be from a hands on position...

As per details and liking or not. Fine, but there is no doubt that it's cheap *when* you compare the Z4M's styling, which fit the rest of the car. I'm sure anyone who works in design could offer their view that the M additions to the Z4 fit the Z4 styling, the M additions to the E92 styling do not fit. It's not about nice or not, the buldge was nice on the E46 with a bevelled edge to the steps, but the 'sharper' flame surfaced E92 actually has a softer buldge? How does that work when the Z4M uses sharp pinched lines for the bonnet buldge? It's just not consistent.

But since it's my opinion only, I'm interested in others views why BMW settled for a blob on a flame surface car. What design ideology does that follow? Laziness?


As per wheels, just because I can't tell them apart? Eh? Did I say that? They don't even exist for me not to be able to tell them apart on size. My POINT, which you missed, gosh get off your high horse is that a 5% difference is bugger all, and I doubt any one person could tell the size in isolation, without reference to the tyre spec or another one with the larger wheels nearby!

Not a problem, but my example of another token gesture as to why BMW care about the M as more about Marketing than Motorsport, because if it was about Motorsport it'd be a smaller lighter single design option full stop, that was styled to fit with the car from the start (ie the 19" style), but in a size that is optimum for the car. Infact it's very possible the 19" wheel is the optimum for the chassis (maybe not for our roads or comfort), and it's just another 'default' option.

Also curious if the sunroof option comes for - £2000 for saving BMW the expense of a CF roof?

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

Miguel said:

Tons of things that I mostly now agree with

But I still think the wheel thing is a clear make the smaller one look less pleasing than the bigger one (not ugly, just less pleasing)...

It's all, imho here, about making the 19" a default for many, cost option!

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

sairamman said:

tiff needel has test driven the new m3 vs the audi rs4 and destroys the rs4 on the track by over 2 secs and feels the m3 has much better steering, feel , handling etc. value his opinion higher nthan most motoring journalists and less of an agenda. no contest.

Would be interesting, purely in 'ultimate driving machine' terms to put an E46 M3 CS vs a new E92 M3 against each other.

Ignore stats and lap times, but just look at pure fun/involvement. Has the new one moved that on, or is it just much the same with more comfort and bigger numbers?

Just curious... comparing with the RS4 is silly, different cars for different tastes, what is really much more relevant is old vs new imho, in the key aspects this car is more marketed at, ie, the experience/dynamics etc...

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

whoami said:

Why is the RS4 comparison silly?

It's just apples and oranges. I think you undermine the point of the RS4 and M3 as two different cars for different purposes by comparing them both in isolation together. The last Evo magazine test with the E46 M3 CS, RS4 and Merc CLK AMG was more revealling for example.

The fact one has 4wd and 4 doors and the other 2wd and 2 doors means not comparing other cars with 2 and 4 doors and drive types is a bit silly, hence why the RS4 as the only comparison is silly.

Well it's about as relative as comparing an Evo IX with the M3, thats why I think it's silly.

The RS4 will never win against the M3 when the winner has to be the more focussed driving car. That doesn't mean the RS4 isn't what people might actually want and find better for more of the time.

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

edb49 said:

Mr Whippy said:

whoami said:

Why is the RS4 comparison silly?

It's just apples and oranges. I think you undermine the point of the RS4 and M3 as two different cars for different purposes by comparing them both in isolation together. The last Evo magazine test with the E46 M3 CS, RS4 and Merc CLK AMG was more revealling for example.

The fact one has 4wd and 4 doors and the other 2wd and 2 doors means not comparing other cars with 2 and 4 doors and drive types is a bit silly, hence why the RS4 as the only comparison is silly.

Well it's about as relative as comparing an Evo IX with the M3, thats why I think it's silly.

Surely the point of group tests is to help people making a buying decision? I think the RS4, M3 and C63 are all very similar. My own choice was between M3 and C63, but a group test of them would have been very useful nonetheless.

I think if I had £60k to spend, I'd make the decision on my criteria. The RS4 is, for me at least, a different type of car to the M3. The RS models have never really been competitors for the M philosophy cars, we just like to put them side by side because of their power outputs, but thats about all they have in common.
As you say, we need the Evo IX and CLK AMG in there too, if not some more.

DoctorD said:

Mr Whippy said:

Would be interesting, purely in 'ultimate driving machine' terms to put an E46 M3 CS vs a new E92 M3 against each other.

Ignore stats and lap times, but just look at pure fun/involvement. Has the new one moved that on, or is it just much the same with more comfort and bigger numbers?

Dave

We did. It will appear in the next issue of EVO in just over 2 weeks from now. We compared the E92 M3 with every other major M-car of the last 20 years (14 cars in total). We compared them all during a 3-day test around the Brecon Beacons - normal driving, back to back in convoy and more as the everyday owner would use them.

Sounds good, I look forward to that review more than any other M3 test I've read so far!

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

DoctorD said:

Nope.

Use the parenthesis

[pic]picture234.jpg[/pic]

Edited by DoctorD on Tuesday 18th September 10:31

Still didn't work!

Dave