RE: Driven: BMW 1 Series M Coupé

[the-photographer]

pilchardthecat said:

The Boxster is pretty much the same weight as the old Z4M Roadster

No idea what the new Z4 weighs.

BMW Z4 sDrive35is 1600 kg / 340bhp (7-speed DSG) including driver

[aeropilot]

pilchardthecat said:

No they aren't and no it doesn't. The manufacturers have eco st to adhere to across the range.

If the EU are preventing BMW from making a high-revving 6 pot like the e46 M3 without taking on these enormous compromises, how come the world is still full of Porsches and Ferarris and v8 supercharged Jaguars and AMGs and all the rest?

No, it's not average across the board, it's engine specific.
Euro V emissions comes into force in Jan next year, which is why BMW have killed off the V10 and Honda have dropped the V-Tec 'R' engine from EU sale from the end of this year, as neither engine complies with Euro V regs.
Don't forget, it's not just CO2 values but other noxious particles that high performance n/a engines produce.

And Merc-AMG have also already announced that they will be also going the smaller capacity turbo route as well in the near future.
And if you think that Jag, Ferrari, Porsche etc won't be as well, you arn't living in the real world.
Even more stringent Euro VI comes into force on 1st Jan 2015, after which I seriously doubt ANY manufacturer will have a high performance n/a engine in production.

Oh, and the precise EU legislation wording is....

As soon as the Euro 5 and Euro 6 standards enter into force, Member States must refuse the approval, registration, sale and introduction of vehicles that do not comply with these emission limits.

[beanbag]

I can't wait! This is most definitely my next car!

I've currently got a 1 series hatchback on lease and that ends in just under 3 years. By then, there will be a few good 2nd hand examples lying around for me to take my pick!

[3ftandclean]

beanbag said:

I can't wait! This is most definitely my next car!

I've currently got a 1 series hatchback on lease and that ends in just under 3 years. By then, there will be a few good 2nd hand examples lying around for me to take my pick!

Me too. I think it'll be a belter.

[geoffracing]

the-photographer said:

pilchardthecat said:

The Boxster is pretty much the same weight as the old Z4M Roadster

No idea what the new Z4 weighs.

BMW Z4 sDrive35is 1600 kg / 340bhp (7-speed DSG) including driver

With 75kg of freight, fuel at 90%, no options:
Z4 23i manual: 1480kg (automatic: 1505kg)
Z4 30i manual: 1490kg (1505)
Z4 35i manual 1580kg (1600)

Max total:
1735kg (automatic: 1760)
1745kg (1760)
1835kg (1855)

[Guvernator]

It looks nice enouugh, somehow infinitely better looking than the 1 series it is based on. Perhaps the extra width has evened out the otherwise very odd proportions of the 1. I'm sure it will also handle very well, however the engine sounds very disappointing and not M like at all. An M is all about screaming to the red line down your favourite B road or track, however this article suggests a totally different power delivery for this engine which isn't characteristic of "M" at all.

The frustrating thing is that turbocharged cars can be made to rev, my previous Subaru and Skyline both pulled like a train to their 8000rpm+ redlines and this was 10 years ago. Disappointing from M if this isn't improved for the final production model.

[Dagnut]

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

Have to agree with inkiboo, it's the same st every time a car is released. Just accept that cars are heavier now and people who want lightweight specials are in the minority. Lexus couldn't even get the £350,000 LFA under 1500kg. Mainstream lightweight cars are gone, thing of the past

It's not the weight for me, it's the crappy engine.

But it's the same thing with emissions, BMW's hands are tied, the car HAS to meet certain standards or it won't be sold.
OK we all know in reality this car won't be any more economical and the testing is biased but again BMW's hands are tied. BMW IMO held on to the N/A approach as long as possible, You all act like M engineers are turning there back on you, do you honestly think that guys who created the E46 CSl aren't complaining themselves at these regulations? These are the sh!tty times we live in to produce a high volume performance car.

No they aren't and no it doesn't. The manufacturers have eco st to adhere to across the range.

If they EU are preventing BMW from making a high-revving 6 pot like the e46 M3 without taking on these enormous compromises, how come the world is still full of Porsches and Ferarris and v8 supercharged Jaguars and AMGs and all the rest?

I'm sure that some of the engineers are complaining, but as fas as an individual model is concerned the compromise is because of a corporate direction, not a regulatory one

I mean there hands are tied in the sense that its a high volume 1 series.People who go to buy the 1 series, be an M car or not, will be looking at Co2 emission, for obvious tax reasons etc. Can you honestly see BMW going to market with high CO2 figures in this car? was anyone really expecting an updated S54 for this car?

Can't see many people having one of these on a company car scheme.

What will it be, 28mpg? It could have been 26mpg and NA and it would have been twice the car.

Not just the company car scheme in the UK, through out Europe cars are taxed on their C02 output.

Which might be 5% maybe 10% better because of this enormous car-ruining compromise.

I think "car ruining" is a bit of a hysterical response considering you haven't driven it and all the press reviews have been positive. It will be much more than 5-10% btw. Would I prefer an N/A?Yes, would I take this over BMW scrapping a mini M car altogether? absolutely. There was never an chance of the S54 being resurrected for this project, you might as well bemoan the loss twin Webber carbs.

[Liquid Knight]

Box of jaffa cakes to the first person to put an M3 V8 in one.

[pilchardthecat]

Dagnut said:

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

Have to agree with inkiboo, it's the same st every time a car is released. Just accept that cars are heavier now and people who want lightweight specials are in the minority. Lexus couldn't even get the £350,000 LFA under 1500kg. Mainstream lightweight cars are gone, thing of the past

It's not the weight for me, it's the crappy engine.

But it's the same thing with emissions, BMW's hands are tied, the car HAS to meet certain standards or it won't be sold.
OK we all know in reality this car won't be any more economical and the testing is biased but again BMW's hands are tied. BMW IMO held on to the N/A approach as long as possible, You all act like M engineers are turning there back on you, do you honestly think that guys who created the E46 CSl aren't complaining themselves at these regulations? These are the sh!tty times we live in to produce a high volume performance car.

No they aren't and no it doesn't. The manufacturers have eco st to adhere to across the range.

If they EU are preventing BMW from making a high-revving 6 pot like the e46 M3 without taking on these enormous compromises, how come the world is still full of Porsches and Ferarris and v8 supercharged Jaguars and AMGs and all the rest?

I'm sure that some of the engineers are complaining, but as fas as an individual model is concerned the compromise is because of a corporate direction, not a regulatory one

I mean there hands are tied in the sense that its a high volume 1 series.People who go to buy the 1 series, be an M car or not, will be looking at Co2 emission, for obvious tax reasons etc. Can you honestly see BMW going to market with high CO2 figures in this car? was anyone really expecting an updated S54 for this car?

Can't see many people having one of these on a company car scheme.

What will it be, 28mpg? It could have been 26mpg and NA and it would have been twice the car.

Not just the company car scheme in the UK, through out Europe cars are taxed on their C02 output.

Which might be 5% maybe 10% better because of this enormous car-ruining compromise.

I think "car ruining" is a bit of a hysterical response considering you haven't driven it and all the press reviews have been positive. It will be much more than 5-10% btw. Would I prefer an N/A?Yes, would I take this over BMW scrapping a mini M car altogether? absolutely. There was never an chance of the S54 being resurrected for this project, you might as well bemoan the loss twin Webber carbs.

I've spent a lot of time in the 135i, and this thing sounds like it has all the same limitations based on the article above.

The rest of your post is a straw man so i'm going to ignore it.

[TheRoadWarrior]

otolith said:

kambites said:

I just think it's a shame that one of the last companies who actually tried to produce drivers' cars has given up, even if I do accept that it was entirely the right thing for them to do from a commercial prospective.

Completely agree - and with the people who said that BMW's engineers probably don't like it much either.

kambites said:

I think the days of (relatively) affordable drivers' cars from mainstream manufacturers are over.

That is definitely the way the wind has been blowing for a while. The ability to spin decent driver's machines off mainstream platforms has been compromised by demand in the mainstream market for bigger, safer, taller, more comfortable cars which aim to minimise driver involvement, and the bland downsized, down-cylindered, down-speeded blown engines that the need to haul that weight around and meet environmental pressures force. I don't think journalists moaning about anything that needs revs helps there either.

Chink of light is that the high water mark of lard may have been reached, with an increasing focus amongst manufacturers on making their next models lighter than the cars they replace.

The other hope is that if mainstream spin-offs get crap enough, the enthusiasts will stop buying them and breathe some life into the market for real sports cars instead.

Trouble is the public naturally want cars that cost less to run due to the ever increasing costs of fuel and tax etc, so manufacturers are working overtime to produce cars that do better on the EU drive cycle so their product is seen as being more efficient than the competition's. Trouble is the cycle has little to do with everyday driving, and manufacturers are getting ever better at producing cars that do well on the cycle. Which results in stuff like the polo GTI- 1.4l twincharged motor and 7-speed DSG box. Who the fk wants a 7-speed auto type box in a car like that??! It's madness!

When you think about the effort involved in designing, engineering and building new cars with the sole aim of getting some number on a particular test higher, then the cost and effort for the consumer buying this wonderful new machine only to find it's no more efficient than their 10-yr old car they had before, just heavier and less rewarding to drive.. it really is a shocking waste of effort all round.

/rant

[Dagnut]

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

pilchardthecat said:

Dagnut said:

Have to agree with inkiboo, it's the same st every time a car is released. Just accept that cars are heavier now and people who want lightweight specials are in the minority. Lexus couldn't even get the £350,000 LFA under 1500kg. Mainstream lightweight cars are gone, thing of the past

It's not the weight for me, it's the crappy engine.

But it's the same thing with emissions, BMW's hands are tied, the car HAS to meet certain standards or it won't be sold.
OK we all know in reality this car won't be any more economical and the testing is biased but again BMW's hands are tied. BMW IMO held on to the N/A approach as long as possible, You all act like M engineers are turning there back on you, do you honestly think that guys who created the E46 CSl aren't complaining themselves at these regulations? These are the sh!tty times we live in to produce a high volume performance car.

No they aren't and no it doesn't. The manufacturers have eco st to adhere to across the range.

If they EU are preventing BMW from making a high-revving 6 pot like the e46 M3 without taking on these enormous compromises, how come the world is still full of Porsches and Ferarris and v8 supercharged Jaguars and AMGs and all the rest?

I'm sure that some of the engineers are complaining, but as fas as an individual model is concerned the compromise is because of a corporate direction, not a regulatory one

I mean there hands are tied in the sense that its a high volume 1 series.People who go to buy the 1 series, be an M car or not, will be looking at Co2 emission, for obvious tax reasons etc. Can you honestly see BMW going to market with high CO2 figures in this car? was anyone really expecting an updated S54 for this car?

Can't see many people having one of these on a company car scheme.

What will it be, 28mpg? It could have been 26mpg and NA and it would have been twice the car.

Not just the company car scheme in the UK, through out Europe cars are taxed on their C02 output.

Which might be 5% maybe 10% better because of this enormous car-ruining compromise.

I think "car ruining" is a bit of a hysterical response considering you haven't driven it and all the press reviews have been positive. It will be much more than 5-10% btw. Would I prefer an N/A?Yes, would I take this over BMW scrapping a mini M car altogether? absolutely. There was never an chance of the S54 being resurrected for this project, you might as well bemoan the loss twin Webber carbs.

I've spent a lot of time in the 135i, and this thing sounds like it has all the same limitations based on the article above.

The rest of your post is a straw man so i'm going to ignore it.

I don't understand the expression "straw man".

[Mermaid]

beanbag said:

I can't wait! This is most definitely my next car!

+ 1, at circa 18 months old.

[Guvernator]

They didn't need to resurrect the S54 as that engine is rather dated now but they could have made this rev a bit better, turbo'd cars can be made to rev.

[squeezebm]

1st bmw that would tempt me back to the marque

[Guvernator]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I think that is the exact type of car that most of us car enthusiats were hoping for. I've got a lot of time for the N52 lump, efficient, likes to rev and sounds great doing it. Unfortunately this sounds like it's being aimed at another market, a sort of junior M3 grand tourer rather than the tantilising Tii which we saw a while back.

[Herman Toothrot]

Sad that all these new cars are so weighty.

I was reading up about the 1962 Daimler V8 Saloon earlier 1375kg. A V8 Luxo Barge from the 60's - 200+Kgs lighter than a cutting edge, year 2010 small performance saloon.

Edited by Herman Toothrot on Tuesday 12th October 17:05

[pilchardthecat]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

It's an Audi TT.

[130R]

£40k is right at the top end of what I would pay for this car personally. If it comes in at more than £40k it is overpriced IMO. I mean what is a Cayman S? £45k?

[Guvernator]

I reckon this will be pitched right between a Cayman S and a Audi TTRS pricewise which is it's natural competition. I just wish the ethos of how it drives is more Cayman S then Audi TT. The Cayman is a cracking car to drive and I'd be in one now if it weren't for the fact that I can't stand the looks of the thing.

[shoestring7]

Inspired by the 1st gen M3 my arse. Its only inspiration was some marketing geek's chart showing a gap inthe market for a slightly faster 1 series, costing slightly less than an M3, and adding the 'performance' st the Sceptics like to think makes their cars better.

I bet there's a frustrated cabal of BMW engineers in Munich with an 1100kg, turbo 2l 1 series twinkle in their eye.

SS7