[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by mirob

BMW M3 CSL (7:50)
BMW M3 GTS (7:48)
BMW M4 GTS (7:27:88)

And where is the bmw M4 in this?
M4 GTS is not the same as the m4 now is it?

But indeed the m4 gts should imho be about the spec the current m4 should have had imho. 500hp from a 3L twin turbo engine with more CF and aero development to compete with competitors it should focus at like for example a GTR (althoug rear seats in a 4 series should be placed....).
I mean in the 90's the m3 also competed with ancestors of the GTR on track; skylines.
Thats why I said that I think bmw has tuned the engine too conservative. Maybe to create a more comfortable ride together with a more comfortable suspension setup. Maybe to please buyers that dont focus on performance and more on the ride. Buyers that historically bought an 335i or an alpina. (and thus slowly transforming /Motorsport into /Marketing...)
I mean if you look at what specific HP numbers BMW put out in the past (so that's HP per Liter) compared to some of its (more expensive) competitors at the time, look at the 1995 eurospec e36 M3 with 321HP for example compared to the back then most powerful porsche 911's NA and turbo:
BMW e36 m3: 100,3 HP/liter
Porsche 911 RS (3.8) at the time: 79,2 HP/liter
Porsche 911 GT2 (Turbo) (3.6) at the time: 119,4 HP/liter

We do that comparison now with the current m3/m4 (431HP) and the 911 gt3RS and 911 turboS:
BMW M4: 143.6 HP/Liter
Porsche 911 gt3 RS (4.0): 125HP/liter
porsche 911 turbo S (3.8): 152.6HP/L

Here you can see that in the past bmw had no trouble with beating porsche on specific engine output when it came to NA engines, but that they cannot do that now with turbocharged engines. At least not in their regular model. They can however with the GTS. So in order to be on par with the competition coming from porsche now you have to buy the GTS whereas in the past you could buy the normal M3. So that engine is underpowered for the performance segment it operates in. And I think there is enough potential to tune that engine (because I think its technically a very sound constructed engine), but why hasnt bmw done that?

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

And where is the bmw M4 in this?
M4 GTS is not the same as the m4 now is it?

http://www.topgear.com/car-news/moto...80%98ring-time

7:52, per sport auto. Which are the same people that did the 7:50 in the CSL.

[mirob]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

And where is the bmw M4 in this?
M4 GTS is not the same as the m4 now is it?

No, it's not. The Civic Type-R is not the same as the Civic LX, is it?

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by mirob

No, it's not. The Civic Type-R is not the same as the Civic LX, is it?

No more than a M3/4 is a 320i

Why am I participating in a ring time discussion! I think the focus on speed/lap times is the problem!

But I do think the Type-R is more analogous to the M3 than the GTS. Type R still has no cage, AC, etc. It's still street first, track second. Once you delete the back seat, add a cage, delete AC, etc (the stuff they do in the GTS), I think that's a different category.

[mirob]

Originally Posted by Obioban

No more than a M3/4 is a 320i

Why am I participating in a ring time discussion! I think the focus on speed/lap times is the problem!

But I do think the Type-R is more analogous to the M3 than the GTS. Type R still has no cage, AC, etc. It's still street first, track second. Once you delete the back seat, add a cage, delete AC, etc (the stuff they do in the GTS), I think that's a different category.

I can see your argument in that respect...but aren't the cage and AC-delete free options on the GTS, they aren't a must...
Also, wouldn't the Civic Si be more 'comparable' on the succession ladder to an M4 in this instance?

[mirob]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

And where is the bmw M4 in this?
M4 GTS is not the same as the m4 now is it?

But indeed the m4 gts should imho be about the spec the current m4 should have had imho. 500hp from a 3L twin turbo engine with more CF and aero development to compete with competitors it should focus at like for example a GTR (althoug rear seats in a 4 series should be placed....).
I mean in the 90's the m3 also competed with ancestors of the GTR on track; skylines.
Thats why I said that I think bmw has tuned the engine too conservative. Maybe to create a more comfortable ride together with a more comfortable suspension setup. Maybe to please buyers that dont focus on performance and more on the ride. Buyers that historically bought an 335i or an alpina.

That would actually make sense, because it's heavily outgunned by competitors like the C63 AMG S and ATS-V...RS-4/5 is supposed to be a beast as well...RC-F is not worth the discussion (IMO). M3/4 have the curb weight on their side but more power would have been nice...despite the fact that it's underrated power wise as is, and already can't put the power down...but that's a whole another story...

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by mirob

No, it's not. The Civic Type-R is not the same as the Civic LX, is it?

You dont get context, dont you?
the civic lx was in its days the fastest civic contester to the e36 m3 as I wrote.
That comparison back then would be the same as the m4-civic TR now, and illustrates how far honda has come with a simple cheap car like the civic and where bmw seems to be lagging in its technical cq. performance progression.
What dont you understand about that?

Originally Posted by Obioban

Why am I participating in a ring time discussion! I think the focus on speed/lap times is the problem!

Why is focussing on speed/laptimes a problem? It's just something I highlight. I never said that should be the reason why someone should buy a car. Everyone has its own reasons. For all I care you buy a pickup. But speed/laptimes do tell something about how a car handles/drives on a track. I think it's a good benchmark for track performance. The beginning of my part in this thread was that the m3 should be about being ahead of the competition, where /M stands for /Motorsports. People who didnt find that important in the past and were looking for a powerful luxury cruiser, bought an alpina in the past/90's (or a 335i or even better an 550i).
But nowadays it seems that the average m3 buyer is an old guy that seems to be afraid that he looses his denture if the suspension becomes too hard or the ridequality is compromised in order to gain track potential. Or at least some reactions here seem to point that way imho. And bmw seems to adapt their performance models to that, simultaniously/consequently binding in on track performance imho.

[mirob]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

You dont get context, dont you?
the civic lx was in its days the fastest civic contester to the e36 m3 as I wrote.
That comparison back then would be the same as the m4-civic TR now, and illustrates how far honda has come with a simple cheap car like the civic and where bmw seems to be lagging in its technical cq. performance progression.
What dont you understand about that?

I was actually giving you some credit above because you made some sense for once...

I now realize that you're on here just for the sake of arguing, this is leading nowhere despite facts...since this discussion is no longer constructive I'm going to end it right here. Don't bother replying, I'm done discussing this with you.

Have a good day.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by mirob

I now realize that you're on here just for the sake of arguing,

No, I'm explaining what I wrote back then, what you didnt seem to understand:

"Can you imagine a 1995 comparison in nordschleife lap times between the 321hp e36 M3 and the fastest civic at the time, a 160hp 1.6 civic."

But every time you misread something and someone explains what was written, you see that as a personal insult or something.

[mirob]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

No, I'm explaining what I wrote back then, what you didnt seem to understand:

"Can you imagine a 1995 comparison in nordschleife lap times between the 321hp e36 M3 and the fastest civic at the time, a 160hp 1.6 civic."

But every time you misread something and someone explains what was written, you see that as a personal insult or something.

I understand what you're saying...but maybe, just maybe BMW is no longer the upper echelon of performance vehicles (if it ever was)...maybe M is no longer the most powerful letter in the world...maybe BMW is no longer the ultimate driving machine...

I understand you...it sucks that a Civic is as fast or faster than an M3/M4 when even 5 years ago the idea of that would have been funny...

10 years ago, the 3-series had no competition worth mentioning, now there is a ton of cars that perform as good if not better in it's class...

I understand...

2 things happen when your at the top for too long...1) you become comfortable and everyone catches up, and 2) everyone is gunning for you...

There was a time, long ago, when an M3 could beat a GTR and 911 Turbo in a comparison test...
***DISCLAIMER*** I don't want to argue the legitimacy of this test!

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...mparison-tests

I'm not happy about the direction they're going in either, but I learned to let go...it's still easily my favorite brand...it's just not as hardcore or driver oriented as it once was...times change...they're just adapting.

[SakhirM4]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

No, I'm explaining what I wrote back then, what you didnt seem to understand:

"Can you imagine a 1995 comparison in nordschleife lap times between the 321hp e36 M3 and the fastest civic at the time, a 160hp 1.6 civic."

But every time you misread something and someone explains what was written, you see that as a personal insult or something.

The U.S. M3 only had 240hp - much less difference

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by mirob

I understand what you're saying...but maybe, just maybe BMW is no longer the upper echelon of performance vehicles (if it ever was)...maybe M is no longer the most powerful letter in the world...maybe BMW is no longer the ultimate driving machine...

.

That's exactly my point. And also what the TS asks'/questions so totally on topic:

"
IDK, maybe it's me, but I think it's about time for people to start giving BMW a break for not being the same exact cars they made in the 1980s-1990s...

Thoughts?????" (quote from the TS)

Should we give bmw a break?
As real petrolheads, does bmw as a brand and as an image still tick the boxes?
I mean for one thing they make an m4 that is not 'really leaps ahead on the competition', and they dont develop a car with reasonable price point that is/could be (the m4 GTS is made of unobtainium and not very practical).
The m2 might/could have been that car, but imho it should have gotten the m4 engine. Keeping that in mind bmw is clearly reserving that for the more expensive m4 thus selling out. A bit like the boxster-911 story.
So no real track or /Motorsport performance oriented car. Yet they choose to develop middle of the road 2 series tourers/grand tourers. Stuff that toyota and skoda makes.
I think BMW is selling out on its roots and is trying too hard to become a large volume seller of nondescript cars. Whereas some brands (like renault and Honda), who make loads of nondescript dull cars still have a real motorsport division that's trying to put out hardcore performance oriented models for the enthousiast. That used to be bmw's territory. And they do that at a really affordable price.
I think BMW is really loosing its identity, too busy with sales numbers, too little with identity and petrolhead love.
If I was living in the US and had to spend M4 money... I'd probably buy a corvette. And if it's an m4 with options... I'd buy a Z06 (where I live they are far too expensive sadly, I live on the diesel continent)

[mirob]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

That's exactly my point. And also what the TS asks'/questions so totally on topic:

"
IDK, maybe it's me, but I think it's about time for people to start giving BMW a break for not being the same exact cars they made in the 1980s-1990s...

Thoughts?????" (quote from the TS)

Should we give bmw a break?
As real petrolheads, does bmw as a brand and as an image still tick the boxes?
I mean for one thing they make an m4 that is not 'really leaps ahead on the competition', and they dont develop a car with reasonable price point that is/could be (the m4 GTS is made of unobtainium and not very practical).
The m2 might/could have been that car, but imho it should have gotten the m4 engine. Keeping that in mind bmw is clearly reserving that for the more expensive m4 thus selling out. A bit like the boxster-911 story.
So no real track or /Motorsport performance oriented car. Yet they choose to develop middle of the road 2 series tourers/grand tourers. Stuff that toyota and skoda makes.
I think BMW is selling out on its roots and is trying too hard to become a large volume seller of nondescript cars. Whereas some brands (like renault and Honda), who make loads of nondescript dull cars still have a real motorsport division that's trying to put out hardcore performance oriented models for the enthousiast. That used to be bmw's territory. And they do that at a really affordable price.
I think BMW is really loosing its identity, too busy with sales numbers, too little with identity and petrolhead love.
If I was living in the US and had to spend M4 money... I'd probably buy a corvette. And if it's an m4 with options... I'd buy a Z06 (where I live they are far too expensive sadly, I live on the diesel continent)

Yeah, it's sad...I'm hoping that some of the profits from these nondescript vehicles will circle back to the M division. Supposedly there is a M2 GTS in the works but judging by the current pricing trend, it will carry a $100K price tag...

I was born on that continent myself so I know the struggle...

The C7 is nice, no doubt, but I don't think I'm in love...my last American car was a 2000 WS6 TA, and will likely be the last...

For me, BMW does still tick all the boxes.

[OutlawX3M]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

I think BMW is really losing its identity, too busy with sales numbers, too little with identity and petrolhead love.

If I was living in the US and had to spend M4 money... I'd probably buy a corvette. And if it's an m4 with options... I'd buy a Z06 (where I live they are far too expensive sadly, I live on the diesel continent)

The first quote does seem to apply to BMW IMO. I think it also applies to the other German manufacturers as well to some degree. It's a curse on all 3 of them as they race for the sales lead.

As for "spending M4 money" in the US, not sure what your criteria is but wouldn't the CTS-V coupe be a more appropriate comparison or even the ATS-V? Then again, you might just be thinking "the best for $xxxx" which is fine.

[Bbb34]

Originally Posted by Outlaw M3

I think it also applies to the other German manufacturers as well to some degree. It's a curse on all 3 of them as they race for the sales lead.

And this sums it up for me.

As I said before, this seems to be the trend in the industry, focus mostly on numbers, gas mileage and "features" more than "driving involvement". Sure they still handle great and are faster than ever, but just don't quite feel "one" with the driver as much as some of the previous models have.

But, while I agree that they have lost their way a bit, overall I think they are still either competitive or slightly ahead of competition as a whole package.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by Outlaw M3

The first quote does seem to apply to BMW IMO. I think it also applies to the other German manufacturers as well to some degree.

I dont know. If I look at a brand like mercedes, they dont have a real track oriented past with their consumer models. No small, nimble cars. They do however have a past of large engines in luxury cars. And they still have a c63amg. Not anymore with the awesome 6 liter, sounding really juicy, but the current one still more or less embodies a 'european musclecar'. Its still a pretty good sounding v8 even with the turbo's
Audi to me is a brand without real identity. They seem to circle around their vague steering enginelocation and quattro system (it gets better though) and shaving off every detail that a car can identify leaving them looking all the same. Easy if you have to decide which you like best. just pick the right size. They make/have made some good v6/v8 engines though.
The audi's I like best are the A2 and the first A8. They were technically advanced and set new standards in their own niche. and the urquattro obviously (there's even a homologation ur quattro I think, 200pcs or so very rare)

As for "spending M4 money" in the US, not sure what your criteria is but wouldn't the CTS-V coupe be a more appropriate comparison or even the ATS-V? Then again, you might just be thinking "the best for $xxxx" which is fine.

Yes maybe but Cadillacs are so very ugly. But mechanically the concept is interesting. I think most US cars in the US have a good bang for your buck situation. Looking at all the v8 camaro's, mustangs etc.
Here (europe) we have (depending from country to country) insane CO2 emission taxes so a v8 mustang or corvette etc is way to expensive. All v8's (and especially the US ones) perform really bad in the euro lab emission test cycle.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by SakhirM4

I had a 2006 E46 M3 for eight years before I got my M4. I loved that car and hated to see it go, but after I got the M4 I never looked back. The M4 is just so superior to the E46 M3 in every aspect, except maybe size.

Originally Posted by Obioban

Size, steering feel, size, throttle response/lag, size, ability to be worked on, size.

Don't think any of those are subjective.

Subjectively, I find the engine worse than... Any other M3, except maybe the US e36 M3 engine.

Originally Posted by SakhirM4

Your opinion - not mine.

Originally Posted by Obioban

In your opinion...
Does any generation M3 have worse steering feel than the f8x?
Does any generation M3 have worse throttle response than the f8x?
Is any generation M3 harder to work on than the f8x?

Originally Posted by SakhirM4

There is nothing wrong with the steering feel on my M4 - enjoy canyon carving with it as much as my E46 M3.

The throttle response in my M4 is excellent and with the torque, when you touch the throttle something happens - best of any BMW that I have owned.

I really don't care about working on it - I don't do my own work, but in 2 years it hasn't required any work.

I bet you are a lot of fun at car club events.

To be clear, this concisely explains what I meant by throttle response being objectively (not subjectively) worse in the F8X.

Start at 3:13 if you want to get to the meat of what I'm talking about.

... and that wasn't using a good throttle response NA car to start with (unlike a traditional NA M engine, all of which had AWESOME response).

[KevinM]

You've all been there...you come late to a thread and don't have the stomach to read all the posts (in this case 7 pages)...you realize that every point you could possibly make has already been made at least twice...you probably shouldn't post...but, what the hell.

Cars are becoming more homogeneous both for market reasons and due to regulatory mandates. I remember growing up - Mercedes was the "luxury sedan" brand and BMW was the "sports sedan" brand. They just were, and both brands were OK with that. Now every similar car company is trying to cover all the market niches. I mean who really thought that Mercedes couldn't build a sports sedan if they wanted to and that BMW couldn't build a luxury sedan if they wanted to? Engines used to distinguish brands, but now they are all turbocharged with flat torque curves. Steering used to distinguish bands but now they are all electric (although improving). Many companies are making some damn good cars.

For me, the main thing that distinguishes BMW currently is the ability to buy a high-performance rear-wheel drive, manual sports sedan - only Cadillac and Alfa (if you count that as its not on the market yet) offer something similar. So that is what i bought. And while I'll have a much better impression when I get the car back from ED, I drove it enough in Europe to say that it still feels like a BMW to me (as a BMW driver since 1999). And that is a good thing.

Hell, in a few years, most people won't even be driving their cars...

P.S. I'm glad I'm not on the Porsche forums as they react to all the NA engines becoming turbocharged and the new Boxter and Cayman getting a turbo four...

[r3dbimmer89]

Originally Posted by KevinM

You've all been there...you come late to a thread and don't have the stomach to read all the posts (in this case 7 pages)...you realize that every point you could possibly make has already been made at least twice...you probably shouldn't post...but, what the hell.

Cars are becoming more homogeneous both for market reasons and due to regulatory mandates. I remember growing up - Mercedes was the "luxury sedan" brand and BMW was the "sports sedan" brand. They just were, and both brands were OK with that. Now every similar car company is trying to cover all the market niches. I mean who really thought that Mercedes couldn't build a sports sedan if they wanted to and that BMW couldn't build a luxury sedan if they wanted to? Engines used to distinguish brands, but now they are all turbocharged with flat torque curves. Steering used to distinguish bands but now they are all electric (although improving). Many companies are making some damn good cars.

For me, the main thing that distinguishes BMW currently is the ability to buy a high-performance rear-wheel drive, manual sports sedan - only Cadillac and Alfa (if you count that as its not on the market yet) offer something similar. So that is what i bought. And while I'll have a much better impression when I get the car back from ED, I drove it enough in Europe to say that it still feels like a BMW to me (as a BMW driver since 1999). And that is a good thing.

Hell, in a few years, most people won't even be driving their cars...

P.S. I'm glad I'm not on the Porsche forums as they react to all the NA engines becoming turbocharged and the new Boxter and Cayman getting a turbo four...

Yes, it still feels like a BMW but a "new" age BMW. I love my F8X for many of its pros as it is truly an awesome car but let's all be honest here..it has its faults...it doesn't have as much "emotion" and yes, "steering feel" as the past. Call me old fashion but that is what made me fall in love with BMW. The mechanical connection to the road. The F80 grips and grunts and farts all the way down the freeway but goes about it in a somewhat more isolated experience than before. Now my point is, what is the point in buying a BMW now? I mean I might as well get a Merc if I want to be isolated as the Mercs do luxury better... on top it of it the W205 and new W213 really give BMW a run for its money. Let's not even talk about Porsche.... a whole other story even after the turbo additions.

[KevinM]

Originally Posted by r3dbimmer89

Yes, it still feels like a BMW but a "new" age BMW. I love my F8X for many of its pros as it is truly an awesome car but let's all be honest here..it has its faults...it doesn't have as much "emotion" and yes, "steering feel" as the past. Call me old fashion but that is what made me fall in love with BMW. The mechanical connection to the road. The F80 grips and grunts and farts all the way down the freeway but goes about it in a somewhat more isolated experience than before. Now my point is, what is the point in buying a BMW now? I mean I might as well get a Merc if I want to be isolated as the Mercs do luxury better... on top it of it the W205 and new W213 really give BMW a run for its money. Let's not even talk about Porsche.... a whole other story even after the turbo additions.

Well, I only drove the car for 10 days, but I was impressed. I'm sure part of that was the whole new car/ED delivery/driving in Germany glow. I'm looking forward to doing a number of back to back driving experiences with the F80 and my E39 M5, which will likely always be the benchmark sports sedan for me. However, as a DD, I'm also going to consider some of the new tech, etc., in my comparisons. For me, the point of buying the F80 was I wanted a manual transmission four-door sports sedan with decent power. As the Alfa is not available yet (and I personally wouldn't buy that in its first year of production), that left the ATS-V, which is not for for me, or the M3. No question, if I was looking for a new two seater sports car (or 2+2), Porsche would be my likely choice. If Mercedes offered a C63 with a manual, I certainly would have considered it.

[bd307]

Late to the party, but here are my 0.02.

A successful company creates a demand.

Can you say the same for BMW and its products? I would say yes. They created the demand for sport sedans and now trying to create a demand for luxury electric cars. Perhaps a luxury electric/hybrid sport sedans. I do not think Tesla is a luxury brand, but a technology company selling high priced tech. products.

Can BMW keep up the demand with their customers and enthusiasts? Maybe not because the competition and technologies are so much better now in the sport sedan segment. Other companies who were playing catch up are pretty caught up with them by now.

To continue with their legacy, they should be looking out and create another demand and I think BMW has been doing that but still in progress.

[OutlawX3M]

Reading through this thread again today and there's several great comments. Yes, BMW is growing marketshare and yes, they're doing it in a way that's anathema to it's roots. Regulations are strangling the auto industry from C02, to Pedestrian safety and beyond.

Yet isn't the ///M brand supposed to fly in the face of all that? Isn't it the sub-brand where BMW lets loose FOR the enthusiast? Or is BMW selling just as many M versions of each model that it statistically skews things for them?