RE: BMW M140i Finale says bye to rear-drive six-pot

[nickfrog]

xjay1337 said:

Camber plates probably a better option for you, the M4 LCA move the wheel forward in the arch and it looks weird.... Also increases the track which reduces arch clearance.

Although apparently the bushing in the M4 LCA is a bit stiffer, I haven't driven one fitted with the wishbone to compare.

Thx for the suggestion on the camber plates front. I assume they are £350 with perhaps £150 Labour for fitting and alignment ? More ?
At £500 they would probably be a smarter choice than LCAs. How much neg do you run ? Around -2.5 deg ?

[RobM77]

cerb4.5lee said:

R1 Dave said:

nickfrog said:

R1 Dave said:

with shockingly poor suspension

What's wrong with it ? Too soft and too much roll I assume.

It's hard to explain. It just doesn't feel like they bothered to finish engineering the chassis. It feels like the rear end isn't connected to the front (they omitted a structural brace on the later cars that had been there on the earlier ones) and it just doesn't feel like the suspension is working with the chassis to keep the car balanced. The lack of feel through the steering doesn't help either.

It's particularly bad at this time of year as the tyres don't necessarily grip as well due to the cold grimy roads.

They are great cars but the chassis is the limiting factor, the engine is fabulous, you just can't enjoy it as well as you might if the chassis was better engineered.

I felt very similar to this with my Z4M and it was as if Bmw had either given up or just couldn't be bothered to get the chassis/suspension right. If you drive a 3 series or M3 from the same era they are a world apart from the Z4 in terms of chassis/suspension for me.

I owned a Z4 Coupé 3.0si on 19" wheels back in 2009 and in 2010 changed to an E90 3 series with standard 16" wheels. Now, whilst I loved the Z4C for loads of reasons, the actual ride and handling was markedly better on the E90; the ride was in a different league, and the handling was actually better too. In terms of handling, the Z4C had final understeer in the dry and was neutral and a bit snappy in the wet, whereas the E90 could be driven neutrally in most situations, wet or dry, and remained benign throughout. Obviously wheel and tyre choice had a lot to answer for, but I also wondered whether the volume of sales on the 3 series simply meant it had a higher development budget. Ride and handling isn't simple, which is why people like Matt Becker are in such high demand.

With regard to the 140i, anyone not happy may wish to look at a Birds kit. I've put one on my 2010 E90 LCI and it transformed it. They do springs, dampers and ARBs, with an optional Quaiffe LSD too (recommended if going for the ARBs).

[xjay1337]

nickfrog said:

Thx for the suggestion on the camber plates front. I assume they are £350 with perhaps £150 Labour for fitting and alignment ? More ?
At £500 they would probably be a smarter choice than LCAs. How much neg do you run ? Around -2.5 deg ?

It can vary depending on the exchange rate.
But I paid £330 for them and had them fitted and aligned when I had the coilovers done.
I run just a shade over -2.

Don't see point in running more on a road tyre.

[Limpet]

nickfrog said:

xjay1337 said:

Camber plates probably a better option for you, the M4 LCA move the wheel forward in the arch and it looks weird.... Also increases the track which reduces arch clearance.

Although apparently the bushing in the M4 LCA is a bit stiffer, I haven't driven one fitted with the wishbone to compare.

Thx for the suggestion on the camber plates front. I assume they are £350 with perhaps £150 Labour for fitting and alignment ? More ?
At £500 they would probably be a smarter choice than LCAs. How much neg do you run ? Around -2.5 deg ?

I've never liked the way the M4 LCA moves the wheel forward. I know it's only (or mostly) an aesthetic issue, but it would irritate me, I think. Makes the car look like it's been in an accident.

[tril]

sgtbash said:

tril said:

I think a manual M1/240i will be a very sought after car in a few years as the B58 is a very good engine.

I nearly went for a 140i but I went for the RS3 instead, it's more complete and realistically a lot faster. And for how good the B58 is, the 2.5 TFSI is better.

A lot faster?? Well on a roll, it isnt (I have performed extensive tests between my M140 and a friends RS3) Obviously due to the 4wd it is off the line, but the fact that it's well over 10k cheaper than the RS3 and doesnt understeer like one, its a good buy

I'm not talking purely straight line, although an RS3 will still pull on a 140i in bone dry conditions from a roll which is realistically the only place a 140 will compete. As soon as it's cold, wet or from a dig, the RS3 is gone from both an 140i and A45.
When it gets twisty the RS3 will be quite a bit faster due to incredible grip but obviously the 140 is more fun.

Apples to oranges really as the cars have different purposes and one is actually a performance bargain. But the RS3 is a more complete car for me and I'll never get bored of the engine.

[RobM77]

tril said:

sgtbash said:

tril said:

I think a manual M1/240i will be a very sought after car in a few years as the B58 is a very good engine.

I nearly went for a 140i but I went for the RS3 instead, it's more complete and realistically a lot faster. And for how good the B58 is, the 2.5 TFSI is better.

A lot faster?? Well on a roll, it isnt (I have performed extensive tests between my M140 and a friends RS3) Obviously due to the 4wd it is off the line, but the fact that it's well over 10k cheaper than the RS3 and doesnt understeer like one, its a good buy

I'm not talking purely straight line, although an RS3 will still pull on a 140i in bone dry conditions from a roll which is realistically the only place a 140 will compete. As soon as it's cold, wet or from a dig, the RS3 is gone from both an 140i and A45.
When it gets twisty the RS3 will be quite a bit faster due to incredible grip but obviously the 140 is more fun.

Apples to oranges really as the cars have different purposes and one is actually a performance bargain. But the RS3 is a more complete car for me and I'll never get bored of the engine.

I think you mean traction, not grip. 4WD gives you no more grip than 2WD, it's only there to increase traction, helping you put the power down on the way out of a corner when you're traction limited (i.e. low speed corners). The corner entry and mid corner phases will in theory be the same as they just depend on the car's contact patch on the road, which is what generates the grip, and both cars have four wheels.

[DoubleD]

tril said:

sgtbash said:

tril said:

I think a manual M1/240i will be a very sought after car in a few years as the B58 is a very good engine.

I nearly went for a 140i but I went for the RS3 instead, it's more complete and realistically a lot faster. And for how good the B58 is, the 2.5 TFSI is better.

A lot faster?? Well on a roll, it isnt (I have performed extensive tests between my M140 and a friends RS3) Obviously due to the 4wd it is off the line, but the fact that it's well over 10k cheaper than the RS3 and doesnt understeer like one, its a good buy

I'm not talking purely straight line, although an RS3 will still pull on a 140i in bone dry conditions from a roll which is realistically the only place a 140 will compete. As soon as it's cold, wet or from a dig, the RS3 is gone from both an 140i and A45.
When it gets twisty the RS3 will be quite a bit faster due to incredible grip but obviously the 140 is more fun.

Apples to oranges really as the cars have different purposes and one is actually a performance bargain. But the RS3 is a more complete car for me and I'll never get bored of the engine.

Which is the most fun to drive? Thats the one to buy.

[Cups Renault]

tril said:

I'm not talking purely straight line, although an RS3 will still pull on a 140i in bone dry conditions from a roll which is realistically the only place a 140 will compete. As soon as it's cold, wet or from a dig, the RS3 is gone from both an 140i and A45.
When it gets twisty the RS3 will be quite a bit faster due to incredible grip but obviously the 140 is more fun.

Apples to oranges really as the cars have different purposes and one is actually a performance bargain. But the RS3 is a more complete car for me and I'll never get bored of the engine.

But it doesn't pull away in a straight line, older shape rs3s get left behind. Rs3 New shape from 40 the 140 pulls ahead, closes up a bit between 70-80 and then maintains above there. Pretty even. Have seen it a few times and also a few vids doing the rounds.
A great car is the Rs3 and sounds lovely, especially not being yet another 4 pot fart box but the in gear on a b58 140 is not to be under estimated........except in the wet!!

[J4CKO]

tril said:

sgtbash said:

tril said:

I think a manual M1/240i will be a very sought after car in a few years as the B58 is a very good engine.

I nearly went for a 140i but I went for the RS3 instead, it's more complete and realistically a lot faster. And for how good the B58 is, the 2.5 TFSI is better.

A lot faster?? Well on a roll, it isnt (I have performed extensive tests between my M140 and a friends RS3) Obviously due to the 4wd it is off the line, but the fact that it's well over 10k cheaper than the RS3 and doesnt understeer like one, its a good buy

I'm not talking purely straight line, although an RS3 will still pull on a 140i in bone dry conditions from a roll which is realistically the only place a 140 will compete. As soon as it's cold, wet or from a dig, the RS3 is gone from both an 140i and A45.
When it gets twisty the RS3 will be quite a bit faster due to incredible grip but obviously the 140 is more fun.

Apples to oranges really as the cars have different purposes and one is actually a performance bargain. But the RS3 is a more complete car for me and I'll never get bored of the engine.

RS3 pulling on an M140i, like this one ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GAXEIPf9a4

[R1 Dave]

Limpet said:

nickfrog said:

xjay1337 said:

Camber plates probably a better option for you, the M4 LCA move the wheel forward in the arch and it looks weird.... Also increases the track which reduces arch clearance.

Although apparently the bushing in the M4 LCA is a bit stiffer, I haven't driven one fitted with the wishbone to compare.

Thx for the suggestion on the camber plates front. I assume they are £350 with perhaps £150 Labour for fitting and alignment ? More ?
At £500 they would probably be a smarter choice than LCAs. How much neg do you run ? Around -2.5 deg ?

I've never liked the way the M4 LCA moves the wheel forward. I know it's only (or mostly) an aesthetic issue, but it would irritate me, I think. Makes the car look like it's been in an accident.

Thanks for this, I've read about the LCAs loads of times but never read about this issue! I might just go for the B12 kit, rear brace and some ARBS.

[Scobblelotcher]

J4CKO said:

tril said:

sgtbash said:

tril said:

I think a manual M1/240i will be a very sought after car in a few years as the B58 is a very good engine.

I nearly went for a 140i but I went for the RS3 instead, it's more complete and realistically a lot faster. And for how good the B58 is, the 2.5 TFSI is better.

A lot faster?? Well on a roll, it isnt (I have performed extensive tests between my M140 and a friends RS3) Obviously due to the 4wd it is off the line, but the fact that it's well over 10k cheaper than the RS3 and doesnt understeer like one, its a good buy

I'm not talking purely straight line, although an RS3 will still pull on a 140i in bone dry conditions from a roll which is realistically the only place a 140 will compete. As soon as it's cold, wet or from a dig, the RS3 is gone from both an 140i and A45.
When it gets twisty the RS3 will be quite a bit faster due to incredible grip but obviously the 140 is more fun.

Apples to oranges really as the cars have different purposes and one is actually a performance bargain. But the RS3 is a more complete car for me and I'll never get bored of the engine.

RS3 pulling on an M140i, like this one ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GAXEIPf9a4

There’s a fair few videos showing the M140i pulling away from the new RS3 on rolling races.

The RS3 has better traction but the M140i’s engine is the better engine for me, it’s power delivery and noise is amazing and the tunning options for it are brilliant.

One thing is very clear is the RS3 isn’t worth 10k+ more.

[PorkRind]

BFleming said:

Yes.

But WHY though, its the only hatch of its type. Why would you want a fwd transverse?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Then you're in the same market as the DULL a3 and dull a45, which as much as they try to fettle with haldex, will never be as fun or rewarding a drive as the RWD setup.

Is it a space thing? A weight thing? What?!

Edited by PorkRind on Thursday 14th February 21:27

[tril]

J4CKO said:

RS3 pulling on an M140i, like this one ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GAXEIPf9a4

You'll forgive me if I don't take that seriously, and it's a PFL RS3. The FL RS3 with more power is faster.

DoubleD said:

Which is the most fun to drive? Thats the one to buy.

The one to be is whichever I want to buy. I enjoy never being limited by the amount of traction I have and being able to plant my foot whenever I want.

Cups Renault said:

But it doesn't pull away in a straight line, older shape rs3s get left behind. Rs3 New shape from 40 the 140 pulls ahead, closes up a bit between 70-80 and then maintains above there. Pretty even. Have seen it a few times and also a few vids doing the rounds.
A great car is the Rs3 and sounds lovely, especially not being yet another 4 pot fart box but the in gear on a b58 140 is not to be under estimated........except in the wet!!

My experience of a PFL RS3 vs M140i is that it's fairly even from a roll and a blowout from a dig. Again, my experience of the FL RS3 is that it will pull on a 140i but different drivers, races etc will vary and realistically they are quite even matched in the bone dry. The beauty of the RS3 is it will perform consistently whatever the weather and the 140i will not.

Scobblelotcher said:

There’s a fair few videos showing the M140i pulling away from the new RS3 on rolling races.

The RS3 has better traction but the M140i’s engine is the better engine for me, it’s power delivery and noise is amazing and the tunning options for it are brilliant.

One thing is very clear is the RS3 isn’t worth 10k+ more.

Totally disagree. The 2.5 is shockingly overbuilt from factory, there are 9 second RS3s in the US and they've only had their hands on the platform for just over a year. The tuning potential between the two isn't even close.

[Scobblelotcher]

tril said:

J4CKO said:

RS3 pulling on an M140i, like this one ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GAXEIPf9a4

You'll forgive me if I don't take that seriously, and it's a PFL RS3. The FL RS3 with more power is faster.

DoubleD said:

Which is the most fun to drive? Thats the one to buy.

The one to be is whichever I want to buy. I enjoy never being limited by the amount of traction I have and being able to plant my foot whenever I want.

Cups Renault said:

But it doesn't pull away in a straight line, older shape rs3s get left behind. Rs3 New shape from 40 the 140 pulls ahead, closes up a bit between 70-80 and then maintains above there. Pretty even. Have seen it a few times and also a few vids doing the rounds.
A great car is the Rs3 and sounds lovely, especially not being yet another 4 pot fart box but the in gear on a b58 140 is not to be under estimated........except in the wet!!

My experience of a PFL RS3 vs M140i is that it's fairly even from a roll and a blowout from a dig. Again, my experience of the FL RS3 is that it will pull on a 140i but different drivers, races etc will vary and realistically they are quite even matched in the bone dry. The beauty of the RS3 is it will perform consistently whatever the weather and the 140i will not.

Scobblelotcher said:

There’s a fair few videos showing the M140i pulling away from the new RS3 on rolling races.

The RS3 has better traction but the M140i’s engine is the better engine for me, it’s power delivery and noise is amazing and the tunning options for it are brilliant.

One thing is very clear is the RS3 isn’t worth 10k+ more.

Totally disagree. The 2.5 is shockingly overbuilt from factory, there are 9 second RS3s in the US and they've only had their hands on the platform for just over a year. The tuning potential between the two isn't even close.

You previous posts led me to believe this would most likely be the response, enjoy your RS3.

It’s hard to argue the tunning capability of the M140i’s motor, in fact when you say it’s not even close, what are you basing that on? Also feel free to postthe numbers as I’ve been close to the tunning of high power M140i’s and other platforms using that engine.

[DoubleD]

PorkRind said:

BFleming said:

Yes.

But WHY though, its the only hatch of its type. Why would you want a fwd transverse?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Then you're in the same market as the DULL a3 and dull a45, which as much as they try to fettle with haldex, will never be as fun or rewarding a drive as the RWD setup.

Is it a space thing? A weight thing? What?!

Edited by PorkRind on Thursday 14th February 21:27

Dont forget the dull Civic Type R and Megane RS.

[mylesmcd]

Scobblelotcher said:

There’s a fair few videos showing the M140i pulling away from the new RS3 on rolling races.

The RS3 has better traction but the M140i’s engine is the better engine for me, it’s power delivery and noise is amazing and the tunning options for it are brilliant.

One thing is very clear is the RS3 isn’t worth 10k+ more.

Totally disagree. The 2.5 is shockingly overbuilt from factory, there are 9 second RS3s in the US and they've only had their hands on the platform for just over a year. The tuning potential between the two isn't even close.

That completely misses the point. The RS3 is faster over a wet road, any conditions etc etc. However, the BMW is simply a better driving car.

RS models are like cheap speed boats - once you do a couple of full power take offs, you look at your passenger, smile and realize you have spent 50k to do 6 burn outs!

[HM-2]

tril said:

Totally disagree. The 2.5 is shockingly overbuilt from factory, there are 9 second RS3s in the US and they've only had their hands on the platform for just over a year. The tuning potential between the two isn't even close.

Not sure I buy this.

The 2.5 TFSI has been available to tuners since about 2010; the B58 has only been around for 3-4 years. It was only about 6 months ago they cracked the ECU.

The predecessor engine to the B58, the N55, has already hit over 1000 crank HP. The B58 platform, being closed deck and a lot tougher, should be capable of even more.

600whp is possible on the B58 at the moment on the stock fuel system and internals- the limitation appears to be fuelling, but now people are trying to bypass this by using throttle body injection in addition to direct injection. Up until recently the solution was just to throw a tonne of methanol at it via WMI.

Edited by HM-2 on Friday 15th February 14:24

[Terminator X]

Scobblelotcher said:

There’s a fair few videos showing the M140i pulling away from the new RS3 on rolling races.

The RS3 has better traction but the M140i’s engine is the better engine for me, it’s power delivery and noise is amazing and the tunning options for it are brilliant.

One thing is very clear is the RS3 isn’t worth 10k+ more.

Not to you maybe but to others it is^.

TX.

^note - ex RS3 owner here

[TomScrut]

HM-2 said:

Not sure I buy this.

The 2.5 TFSI has been available to tuners since about 2010; the B58 has only been around for 3-4 years. It was only about 6 months ago they cracked the ECU.

The predecessor engine to the B58, the N55, has already hit over 1000 crank HP. The B58 platform, being closed deck and a lot tougher, should be capable of even more.

600whp is possible on the B58 at the moment on the stock fuel system and internals- the limitation appears to be fuelling, but now people are trying to bypass this by using throttle body injection in addition to direct injection. Up until recently the solution was just to throw a tonne of methanol at it via WMI.

Edited by HM-2 on Friday 15th February 14:24

I am presuming they are talking about post facelift with 400PS which may (I don't know) have different internals/whatever.

[HM-2]

TomScrut said:

HM-2 said:

Not sure I buy this.

The 2.5 TFSI has been available to tuners since about 2010; the B58 has only been around for 3-4 years. It was only about 6 months ago they cracked the ECU.

The predecessor engine to the B58, the N55, has already hit over 1000 crank HP. The B58 platform, being closed deck and a lot tougher, should be capable of even more.

600whp is possible on the B58 at the moment on the stock fuel system and internals- the limitation appears to be fuelling, but now people are trying to bypass this by using throttle body injection in addition to direct injection. Up until recently the solution was just to throw a tonne of methanol at it via WMI.

Edited by HM-2 on Friday 15th February 14:24

I am presuming they are talking about post facelift with 400PS which may (I don't know) have different internals/whatever.

I don't think they're substantively different- same basic engine code, same bore/stroke, same block.
In fact I'm not sure what internally differs between the various (300-400bhp) versions of the 2.5TFSI.