"M" for Marketing??

[BoxMan]

Is anyone else disappointed with BMW M dropping a standard engine from the z4 3.5is into the new 1-series M? don't get me wrong, i think it looks the muts nuts and sure will drive well but over the years the engine has always been the defining feature of M cars and almost alone worth the premium over the regular cooking top end MSport models. For me the masterpiece engines are the main reason why I have bought various M powered cars over the years (the best of which has to be the e60 M5's v10) but it seems the shift may well be towards a BMW M having a bigger styling budget than engine development. I can appreciate the pressure manufacturers are under with emissions etc but surely a bespoke turbo charged engine for M models only could have been developed Just as Audi did with the 5cyl turbo in TTRS/RS3?

[Funk]

You can thank the EU and their stupid emissions regulations, and the cost of engineering, testing and approving an entirely new engine for what will be a niche, run-out model is kind of pointless. You can bet that M-division would've loved nothing more than to put a rorty nat-asp engine in it though.


And unfortunately it's only going to get worse. Sadly the only way to hit emissions rules (which are utterly pointless anyway) is to downsize and turbo- or supercharge.

Edited by Funk on Thursday 16th December 00:25

[cpufreak]

its not just the EU regs to blame.

Going with a mostly stock engine means its easy for them to import it into the US

Lots of complaints from them over the fact most of the interesting low volume cars don't go there.

[dan101smith]

BoxMan said:

...but surely a bespoke turbo charged engine for M models only could have been developed ...

And what, exactly, would the changes to the engine need to be? If you're unhappy with the power, remap it up to 380bhp+.

[Steff]

You could argue the "M" stood for marketing ever since this came out -

[BoxMan]

dan101smith said:

BoxMan said:

...but surely a bespoke turbo charged engine for M models only could have been developed ...

And what, exactly, would the changes to the engine need to be? If you're unhappy with the power, remap it up to 380bhp+.

Your missing the point which is M cars have always had bespoke high performance engines with a different character which set them apart from everything else BMW produce - powered by M Power was always, for me, an emotive thing knowing the depth of engineering that goes into making these wonderful engines. To have an M car now which is powered not by M Power, but cooking BMW engines just doesn't sit right with me. I hope the next M5 has a doesn't follow suit!

Edited by BoxMan on Thursday 16th December 13:19

[dan101smith]

BoxMan said:

Your missing the point which is M cars have always had bespoke high performance engines with a different character which set them apart from everything else BMW produce - powered by M Power was always, for me, an emotive thing knowing the depth of engineering that goes into making these wonderful engines. To have an M car now which is powered not by M Power, but cooking BMW engines just doesn't sit right with me. I hope the next M5 has a doesn't follow suit!

So what you mean is that because this engine doesn't only deliver its power at the top end it's not worthy of being in an M car?

So I'll repeat the question - what exactly would you change on this engine to make it "worthy"?

[BoxMan]

[/quote]

So what you mean is that because this engine doesn't only deliver its power at the top end it's not worthy of being in an M car?

So I'll repeat the question - what exactly would you change on this engine to make it "worthy"?
[/quote]

I'd give it a bigger rev range. An M car with 7k max revs and by all accounts not much in the way of power above 6k rpm is not in the spirit of M division. If M engines have to be turbo I'm sure M division could develop an engine which revs and has top end power as well as the low down torque the 3.0 turbo engine no doubt has. Just look at Mclaren with their new MP-12-c supercar - 3.8l v8 twin turbo with 8500 rev range - it can be done !

[Slurms]

dan101smith said:

BoxMan said:

Your missing the point which is M cars have always had bespoke high performance engines with a different character which set them apart from everything else BMW produce - powered by M Power was always, for me, an emotive thing knowing the depth of engineering that goes into making these wonderful engines. To have an M car now which is powered not by M Power, but cooking BMW engines just doesn't sit right with me. I hope the next M5 has a doesn't follow suit!

So what you mean is that because this engine doesn't only deliver its power at the top end it's not worthy of being in an M car?

So I'll repeat the question - what exactly would you change on this engine to make it "worthy"?

It needs some individuality, something that sets it apart from the herd.

Powered by M used to mean that there was something special about it.

There is no dispute that it's a decent engine but it isn't special and that's what an M badge is all about.

[dan101smith]

Is it possible that what is special about it is the way it drives?

THAT is the crux of a good M car, the rest of it is just the marketing spiel.

We've all been moaning about the advent of turbocharged M cars for a while now, with the new M5 and next M3 likely to be turbo lumps - it's quite possible that they'll have similar "character" to this engine. I don't know, but it's possible.

The only review of the 1M I've seen is Chris Harris, who has given it a big thumbs up. Not conclusive, but a good indication that it's a decent steer. And at £40k not bad value.

M cars have always had good engines (although they tend to be comparitively fragile) but it's about the complete package. The fact that this shares a lump with the Z4 is only really a problem down the pub.

[tjlazer]

If it keeps the costs down and is as good as Chris H hints at I think it'll still be special enough to wear the badge, where else were they going to go? If you want the screaming 6 pick up the e46 instead...

[KENZ]

That's why the old model's are worth keeping. They are the real M cars.

[dan101smith]

KENZ said:

That's why the old model's are worth keeping. They are the real M cars.

Hmmm. No-one said that about the E36 when it was launched. That got slated for being too heavy and not having enough steering feel.

[TEKNOPUG]

dan101smith said:

KENZ said:

That's why the old model's are worth keeping. They are the real M cars.

Hmmm. No-one said that about the E36 when it was launched. That got slated for being too heavy and not having enough steering feel.

That's definitely an "M" for marketing. Originally intended to be a 330i, some bright spark thought that "M3" might sell well, on the back of teh original E30 M3 - even though the 330 E36's were never properly raced and therefore were never "Motorsport" 3's. The Evo model came some way to addressing the issue and making the car more deserving of the moniker.

I don't think that any other "M" cars, other than the M1 and E30 M3 were ever homologated for motorsport and thus becoming "M"s. So really, they are ALL "M" for Marketing.

Edited by TEKNOPUG on Friday 17th December 13:00

[BoxMan]

I've been thinking about this and perhaps this is a good way to demonstrate what I mean. Up until 6months ago my wife ran a 335i cab - nice car and lovely engine with bags of mid range pull (I had it remapped BTW) but no top end fireworks (never much point ringing out to red line) and it just lacked ocassion compared with my e92 M3's v8 when really pushing on. I would not have bought my m3 if it had the 335i's engine in it (even remapped), the engine is as important as the handling is to the all round "m" experience. It seems BMW M are now content with lifting regular turbo lumps out of other models (I hear the next M5's V8 is basically the same engine in the 550i) and compensating by over styling. With AMG designing bespoke turbo engines for AMG cars only - why can't BMW M??

Edited by BoxMan on Friday 17th December 18:00

[dan101smith]

I don't know if I think the 1M is "over styled" - the wide arches are there for function, not form. Without them it wouldn't have been possible to fit the M3 rear axle.

The vents in the bumpers don't do anything for me aesthetically, but again if they serve a purpose then I can live with them.

As I said, I'm a big fan of M cars of the past, but if the only way to get this one out at £40k was to use the engine from another model then so be it - personally, I'd rather they had used the development budgets of the X5M and X6M to develop something bespoke for the 1M, but if it is this or nothing then this wins every time.

I'd be keen to drive one, certainly.

[BoxMan]

I'm also a big "M" car fan, which I guess where the dissapointment stems from. Like you say, certainly keen to drive the new 1M - I hope I'm worrying about nothing and the M hallmarks of power,noise,throttle response and willingness to rev are all intact turbos and all!