PDA

View Full Version : BMW M3


Charger
02-22-2005, 08:27 AM
<A HREF="http://img205.exs.cx/img205/5886/unbenannt36fq.jpg" TARGET="_blank">http://img205.exs.cx/img205/5886/unbenannt36fq.jpg</A><br> <IMG SRC="http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/sixcms/media.php/10/Titel_150.79786.jpg" BORDER="0"> <br>source: ams

nissanjunkie
02-24-2005, 11:38 PM
Yeah this is definetly looking like a early draft of what the next gen m3 is going to look like. But in BMW tradition its going to be the expression of speed in a conservative skin.<p>Engines on the other hand thats a whole other can of worms<br>4.0l V8 = 400hp (roughly)

Tomo Motorsport
02-25-2005, 12:32 AM
This is going to stick it to the Audi RS4. I get giddy just thinking about the high revving V8

Seller Automotive
02-25-2005, 04:15 AM
not sure why you think its gonna "stick it" to the RS4... the RS4's engine revs to 8250rpm.. thats way high. the RS4 is most likely gonn have more power.. the new Torsen3 controlled Quatto is gonna be amazing.. the RS4 will also be the first Audi to use the new 'Sport Quattro'(which will be used in the mid-enigne supercar), it directs, under normal driving, 40% of the power to the front wheels, and 60% to the rear.... yet 60% of the power can go to ANY one wheel(very cool)..<p>M3 will be lighter, no doubt about that.. but by how much?? the 3 series has clearly grown, and the M3 will "make up" for a lot of its weight with the 400hp.. but its WAY too early to know if BMW comes out ahead on the "power/weight" ratio over the RS4.<p>Plus, everyday stoplights, the RS4 will kill anything when you punch it, the AWD and Torsen3 will launch you into another world... having drivin many M3's, I can already tell you on an everyday stoplight, when you punch this 400hp M3, the rear wheels will just spin, kick up loose dust, a rock here or there, and struggle to keep up with the traction/speed of the RS4.<p>Theres a reason why the RS4 is gonna cost in the $70,000's, its truly a supercar. <p>I still LOVE the M3, and i LOVE that its gonna come with a 400hp V8... but the RS4 is a different animal, in a different class.. the M3 competes with the S4.. and BMW is happy with that win, and Audi doesnt care to chase the M3 with its S4. The RS4 is really in a different league, and Audi doesnt plan to build very many of them.. unlike BMW, that will sell as many M3's as they can, over Several years. I will be shocked if Audi sells the RS4 for more than 2 years.<p><br>And if you REALLY want to compare Apples to Oranges.... wait til the Audi LeMans(A9) comes out, that will ABSOLUTELY KILL the M3.<BR><BR>
<i>Modified by Seller Automotive at 3:23 AM 2/25/2005</i>

RikfromBelgium
02-25-2005, 06:08 AM
no, just wait untill the M3 CSL comes out. Then we'll talk again about that RS4 <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/icon11.gif" BORDER="0"> <br>Although, I do think even the M3 with it's lighter body, perhaps also CF touches like the M6 to lower the gravity-point and +400Bhp V8 will at least equal the RS4. Yes, it can be the RS4 with its AWD will smoke it at the stoplight, but it has been said over and over: M is not about 0-100 and straight forward acceleration, but giving you the best handling known to man in every car they build.

velsatis
02-25-2005, 07:13 AM
M3, RS4,....Let them come the CLK DTM wipes them all <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/ylsuper.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>Regards <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/bow.gif" BORDER="0">

RikfromBelgium
02-25-2005, 07:17 AM
And your giving lessons on how to compare cars within the same segment <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/cwm13.gif" BORDER="0">

Santeno
02-25-2005, 10:34 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>velsatis</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">M3, RS4,....Let them come the CLK DTM wipes them all </TD></TR></TABLE><br>So does Naga's Tie fighter, but then again you are comparing purpose-made race cars for the street versus top of the line versions of sports sedans. Not exactly the same thing.

Tomo Motorsport
02-25-2005, 01:48 PM
"when you punch this 400hp M3, the rear wheels will just spin, kick up loose dust, a rock here or there, and struggle to keep up with the traction speed of the RS4."<p>Have you forgotten about launch control on the new M5. You think that BMW woudn't include that on the M3? Perfect launches everytime.

Seller Automotive
02-25-2005, 02:10 PM
I agree with Rik... M3 CLS and RS4 will be a much better match-up... especially if they take the E90 M3 CLS much more seriously, and actually sell the car in the US.<p>Tomo, I agree with you about traction control... but thats why AWD is far more superior.. theres a reason why Quattro was kicked out of traditional motorsports about 10 years ago.

chaserolls
02-25-2005, 06:22 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Seller Automotive</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">not sure why you think its gonna "stick it" to the RS4... the RS4's engine revs to 8250rpm.. thats way high. the RS4 is most likely gonn have more power.. the new Torsen3 controlled Quatto is gonna be amazing.. the RS4 will also be the first Audi to use the new 'Sport Quattro'(which will be used in the mid-enigne supercar), it directs, under normal driving, 40% of the power to the front wheels, and 60% to the rear.... yet 60% of the power can go to ANY one wheel(very cool)..<p>M3 will be lighter, no doubt about that.. but by how much?? the 3 series has clearly grown, and the M3 will "make up" for a lot of its weight with the 400hp.. but its WAY too early to know if BMW comes out ahead on the "power/weight" ratio over the RS4.<p>Plus, everyday stoplights, the RS4 will kill anything when you punch it, the AWD and Torsen3 will launch you into another world... having drivin many M3's, I can already tell you on an everyday stoplight, when you punch this 400hp M3, the rear wheels will just spin, kick up loose dust, a rock here or there, and struggle to keep up with the traction/speed of the RS4.<p>Theres a reason why the RS4 is gonna cost in the $70,000's, its truly a supercar. <p>I still LOVE the M3, and i LOVE that its gonna come with a 400hp V8... but the RS4 is a different animal, in a different class.. the M3 competes with the S4.. and BMW is happy with that win, and Audi doesnt care to chase the M3 with its S4. The RS4 is really in a different league, and Audi doesnt plan to build very many of them.. unlike BMW, that will sell as many M3's as they can, over Several years. I will be shocked if Audi sells the RS4 for more than 2 years.<p><br>And if you REALLY want to compare Apples to Oranges.... wait til the Audi LeMans(A9) comes out, that will ABSOLUTELY KILL the M3.<p><br><i>Modified by Seller Automotive at 3:23 AM 2/25/2005</i></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Sure hope Audi gives the RS4 a strong transmission if they expect drivers to buy it for its drag racing abilities. With its high torque, and high curb weight, this car sounds like it's going to eat transmissions for lunch. Don't launch yourself into that other world too many times or else you'll be hating Audi's not-so-wonderful service rep, checking the ECU and such for abusive behavior so they can screw you on the warranty claims<p>I on the other hand would rather take even an e46 m3 over an Audi RS4<p><br>One thing we can count on is the BMW will have better brakes, lower curb weight, better turn in, more responsive steering, and better handling (partially due to other variables)<p>Also, audi's 'sport quattro' doesn't sound anything spectacular, sounds like they finally caught up with the rest of the market. Subaru has had that same system (35F / 65R, up to 50% to any one wheel) for numerous years now. <p>With the magnesium craze that BMW's been utilizing lately, I don't expect the new m3 will weigh much more than the e46 m3, if not be lighter<p>I too have driven more e46 m3's than I can count and I absolutely love the car (incase you haven't noticed). the SMG with launch control is absolutely amazing. It will run foot for foot with any other car out there. It outlaunches STi's and S4's all day long. While the RS4 has AWD, it also has skinnier tires and a lot more momentum. With capable drivers in both cars, the launch wouldn't put one car much more in front of the other and once the car gets moving, the M3 has a serious advantage given that it's RWD and lighter. The only thing that destroys an e46 SMG M3 with launch control engaged is a GSXR1000.<p>Sorry for the rant, but just wanted both sides of the arguments to be out there<p><br>As for AWD being kicked out of traditional motorsports, same can be said about traction control. <p>I'd rather take a lotus exige (RWD) than a lambo murciellago because weight is even more important than drivetrain with highperformance cars - in my opinion<br><BR><BR>
<i>Modified by chaserolls at 5:28 PM 2/25/2005</i>

Seller Automotive
02-25-2005, 11:20 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I'd rather take a lotus exige (RWD) than a lambo murciellago because weight is even more important than drivetrain with highperformance cars - in my opinion<p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>With the lotus you'd also be taking the far UGLIER girl.. ha<p><br>Strippers and Murcielagos for me.. thanks

Top Secret
02-26-2005, 12:00 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Seller Automotive</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">not sure why you think its gonna "stick it" to the RS4... the RS4's engine revs to 8250rpm.. thats way high. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>8250rpm - the M5's V10 revs up to that limit. No doubt the M3 will have similar or even higher revs than that.<p>I think the new M3 will NOT look like the CGI, but it will certainly be a beast - easily able to take it up to the RS4 and C55 AMG.

JBlair
02-26-2005, 12:04 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Top Secret</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">8250rpm - the M5's V10 revs up to that limit. No doubt the M3 will have similar or even higher revs than that.<p>I think the new M3 will NOT look like the CGI, but it will certainly be a beast - easily able to take it up to the RS4 and C55 AMG. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I seriously think that the M3 will have more competition than it can handle when it is released. Heck, based on the specs of the RS4, that car is more of a competitor for the M5 than anything else. (it should smoke it in a straight line AND be a useable family sedan at the same time)

Tomo Motorsport
02-26-2005, 01:18 AM
Cant wait till all the journalists start the comparisons on these puppies. That will be something. I think that even though the competiotion is tough, the Merc and the Audi just lack the raw appeal that BMW has. What can I say, it just has it.

Top Secret
02-26-2005, 01:19 AM
I think everyone said the same thing about the upcoming E60 M5 when the E55 AMG was released, it certainly raised the benchmark for sedans - but what happened when the M5 finally came out? It slienced all the ciritcs.<p>I'm sure the M3 would do that as well. It should be a corker of a car - but the thing is that they will have to be very careful about not stepping on it's bigger brother's toes. That performance time alone will cause some headaches at M HQ. 4.8 for the RS4, the RS6 will certainly be faster, about 4.3-4.5. And then the M5 does 4.7, but in order to beat the RS4, the M3 will certainly have to be faster than that....

gone with the wind
02-26-2005, 02:34 AM
I think that within 1-2 years there will be a 7 speed DSG availeble in the RS4.<br>And than the gearbox is no longer the weakspot of the RS4.<p>wfg, Hans.

gone with the wind
02-26-2005, 02:41 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Top Secret</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> I think the new M3 will NOT look like the CGI, but it will certainly be a beast - easily able to take it up to the RS4 and C55 AMG. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>More something like this. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/biggrin.gif" BORDER="0"> <br><IMG SRC="http://www.audiforum.nl/phpBB2/files/e90_m3.jpg" BORDER="0"><p>wfg, Hans.

Top Secret
02-26-2005, 03:12 AM
Oh God no. That is way too extreme - and it is way off, it was a CGI from about a year back; it doesn't have the proper lights...

Nick
02-26-2005, 03:41 AM
well, the current M3 does 0-60 with SMG in like 4.6 right? So technically the new one should have no problems beating the current ones numbers...

Top Secret
02-26-2005, 04:14 AM
. . . 4.6? Where did you pull that figure off? Even the CSL version doesn't go that fast! The official figure is 5.2sec

RikfromBelgium
02-26-2005, 10:20 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JBlair</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I seriously think that the M3 will have more competition than it can handle when it is released. Heck, based on the specs of the RS4, that car is more of a competitor for the M5 than anything else. (it should smoke it in a straight line AND be a useable family sedan at the same time)</TD></TR></TABLE><p>The C-class AMG's ( 32 and 55 ) have shown that being a sedan doesn't guarantee succes in sales.

Seller Automotive
02-26-2005, 11:05 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Top Secret</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I think everyone said the same thing about the upcoming E60 M5 when the E55 AMG was released, it certainly raised the benchmark for sedans - but what happened when the M5 finally came out? It slienced all the ciritcs.<p>I'm sure the M3 would do that as well. It should be a corker of a car - but the thing is that they will have to be very careful about not stepping on it's bigger brother's toes. That performance time alone will cause some headaches at M HQ. 4.8 for the RS4, the RS6 will certainly be faster, about 4.3-4.5. And then the M5 does 4.7, but in order to beat the RS4, the M3 will certainly have to be faster than that....</TD></TR></TABLE><p>The previous RS4 did 4.2 0-60's.. and Audi has already said the new one is faster.. So expect atleast a 4.2 0-60.. my guess is some magazines will get 4.0-4.1.

Top Secret
02-26-2005, 08:09 PM
I need proof that it did 4.2. I seriously doubt that time though. Why would Audi post such an off time then? I know German's are conservative in their performance times...but nearly a second off? I doubt it.

Seller Automotive
02-26-2005, 08:17 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Top Secret</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I need proof that it did 4.2. I seriously doubt that time though. Why would Audi post such an off time then? I know German's are conservative in their performance times...but nearly a second off? I doubt it.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>They posted the current S4 at 5.6 0-60... and many magazines got flat 5.0's. So thats 0.6 seconds off..<p>You need proof for the past RS4 hitting 60 in 4.2's? The car has been out for ever, evidence is all over the place.. its not a "disputed number".. it was really that fast. And again, Audi has said publically they would not make a "new RS4" that was slower than the previous version.<p>Consider this, current S4 does a 5.0 0-60... RS4 is 200 pounds lighter, has 80hp more, and has a new Torsen3 differential drive system, 40% front, 60% rear... all that stuff put together, you could EASILY knock a full 1.0 seconds off the S4's time. So I feel a 4.0-4.1 0-60 for the RS4 is VERY reasonable.<p>All manufacturers quote numbers WAY slower than the cars really are.. and theres a good reason.. if they "promised" a 4.2 0-60 in the RS4.. And if magazines couldnt get a 4.2, by law, people would have the right to completely return their vehicles, and ALL their money refunded. Something similar happened in 1999 with the Ford Mustang Cobra, Ford quoted it had a certain Horse Power, but it turned out to have about 15hp less, because of that people were allowed to return there cars, no matter how long or how many miles they had put on it.. and guess what, MANY PEOPLE DID... <BR><BR>
<i>Modified by Seller Automotive at 7:23 PM 2/26/2005</i>

Top Secret
02-26-2005, 08:27 PM
I've looked high and low for performance times for the old RS4 and <B>not one</B> of them quote a time of 4.2sec. Please show me where you saw this number. <p>Unless you show me proof I will not believe it.

phi
02-27-2005, 08:02 AM
the old rs4 has the 0-100km/h in 4.9 seconds - the new one in 4.8 seconds.<p>look here -&gt; <A HREF="http://www.auto-motor-sport.de/d/76860/d_ams_news_special_ha" TARGET="_blank">http://www.auto-motor-sport.de...al_ha</A>

Seller Automotive
02-27-2005, 01:55 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>phi</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">the old rs4 has the 0-100km/h in 4.9 seconds - the new one in 4.8 seconds.<p>look here -&gt; <A HREF="http://www.auto-motor-sport.de/d/76860/d_ams_news_special_ha" TARGET="_blank">http://www.auto-motor-sport.de...al_ha</A></TD></TR></TABLE><p>4.9 for the old and 4.8 for the new are Audi's numbers.<p>I'll look for past european magazine tests of the old RS4 later today.<p><br>As I look, keep in mind that the older S4 had 250hp, while the older RS4 had 380hp.. thats a HUGE difference, and the RS4 had wider tires (no clue if the car was lighter)..

Spock
02-28-2005, 05:06 AM
I found an article about M3 on Germancarfans<p>Link : <A HREF="http://www.germancarfans.com/spyphotos.cfm/spyphotoid/6050228.001" TARGET="_blank">http://www.germancarfans.com/s...8.001</A>

badman
02-28-2005, 06:40 AM
<IMG SRC="http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/sixcms/media.php/23/bmwm3_450.jpg" BORDER="0"><p><i>Source: AMS</i>

crash2k
02-28-2005, 09:42 AM
hi guys, about the M3 E90...<p>found these on german car fan:<p><A HREF="http://www.germancarfans.com/spyphotos/6050228.001/6050228.001.1M.jpg" TARGET="_blank">http://www.germancarfans.com/s...M.jpg</A><p><A HREF="http://www.germancarfans.com/spyphotos/6050228.001/6050228.001.Mini1L.jpg" TARGET="_blank">http://www.germancarfans.com/s...L.jpg</A>

fubar
02-28-2005, 11:44 AM
MMMMMMMM four-doors. Thank you BMW

Verdegrrl
02-28-2005, 11:53 AM
A few answers for all:<p>The RS4 comes only with a regular manual, simply because there is no other transmission that can take not only the power, but also the driveline shock since there is no wheelspin or power disabling traction control like in 2wd cars. The tranmission (and most importantly the clutch) is the fuse in the driveline so to speak. Extensive testing was done on the RS4 tranny, and it is not a weak point. The clutch is made from exotic materials, so although you can still toast it, it will be harder to do so.<p>Part of the reason the RS6 is in limbo is not only because QTR GmbH can't decide whether to use a modified V10 or turbo V8, but also what transmission to use, since none of the automatics or manuals can take the torque of the maximum potential of either engine, inertia of a large car, and the driveline shock. They are watching BMW's delayed launch of the M5 very closely. It's a well known fact that the SMG in that car is not holding up well under the (surprisingly low for the engine size) torque, and they don't dare launch the car with the manual, since all the bragging numbers were produced with the SMG. New owners if they chose to go with a manual, would go out and find they couldn't reach the published numbers.<p>The thing to remember in 2wd cars is that feedback is usually better than awd cars because the front wheels don't have any "corrupting" inputs to muddy things, but by the same token, you need ideal traction to achieve anything like the published numbers. The real driving world doesn't see ideal surfaces very often. Traction control is known as a disabling device, since when traction is not optimal, it reduces power until traction is gained. Quattro gives you two more traction options by powering the front wheels, meaning that it an enabling device. It doesn't take away power like traction control, it finds a more effective way to lay it down.<p>Pricing on the RS4 is expected to be around $70K with virtually every option already in place. The new M3 is expected to cost in the same range, if not more when optioned out. The CSL, if it comes, will top $100K. That makes a very compelling argument for the Audi, unless it badge/brand appeal you're looking for.<p>In any case, it will be interesting to see if BMW can avoid adding technological fripperies of the 7 and 5, and keep the M3 line pure. M3 used to mean a pure out of the box race car. They really lost it with the porky E46, which isn't seen nearly so much in the hands of individuals dueling at race tracks, and has slowly picked up in the bigger budget race teams. I see the occasional E30 M3, plenty of E36, but almost no E46 on the track. The new 3 series is even heavier than before (as heavy as the A4 3.2 QTR, which is considered heavy!). It's going to take some serious dieting to make it a real track bred monster. When I think M3, I think of a direct lineage to the old DTM racers. I hope BMW chooses that path, and doesn't make another boulevard status cruiser with a impressive pedigree.<p>Sorry if that ruffles some feathers. Some of the younger forum members probably haven't driven the old M3s (especially on the track), and don't realize what a joy those old cars were, and what a disappointment the newer ones have been when you contrast them.

chaserolls
02-28-2005, 01:46 PM
Verdegrrl - if you're a girl and not already married, will you please marry me?<p>You're from southern cali right? So you go to Buttonwillow I assume? Maybe you tend to roll with more professional-racer-types, but whenever I go out there for porscheclub events or whoever is sponsering the open track days, I see way more e46's M3s than e36's or e30's combined. I admit that I have seen more race-spec e30's than the other two models, with one or two e36's from time to time and I'm yet to see a race-spec e46, but I expect this is due to the price disparity between the various models, not because the e46 is less capable than the others. <p>Also, the e46 is only barely more heavy than the e36, but it's brakes and engine are incomparable. The e36 was a touring car while the e46 is a GT car. Really, I don't think there's any comparing the e46 M3 with the previous models, other than possibly the e30, with capable, trained drivers in both cars and on a mid-speed or high-speed track, the e46 would leave the other m3's in the dust. <p>Of course everyone has their favorite models, but I have driven many BMW's on the streets of willow and I'd take the e46 over any of its predecessors, even over the 2001 m coupe with the s54 engine. <p>As for traction control . . . back in the day it used to only cut power from the engine as a means to maintaining stability, but now the more adaptive stability control programs don't cut power from the engine, instead they apply the brakes to individal wheels without affecting the power. I have driven the e46 m3 with and without traction control, and it's DSC or whatever it's called is very archaic, I agree, but the c5 z06 (my favorite track car) has a very very good traction control program that does not severely hurt lap times when engaged. Albeit, the e46's traction control sucks, other than launch control, but I am sure that the program in the next M3 will be on par or better than the program in the c5 z06. <p>As for the transmission in the S6 or the RS4, I don't see why they couldn't use the transmission from the bently GT or the murciellago, those cars weigh around the same as a S6 and probably have around the same torque numbers. <p>I agree that at 70k, the RS4 sounds like a good price and will probably prove to be strong competition for the M3, but as for which car is more race-inspired or will post better lap times . . . that is yet to be decided, but I'd put my money on the M3 and I guarantee it'd be more fun to drive while posting those lap times too, but that's just me. <p>As for the minor details, yes, I am aware of the problems that BMW has faced with the SMG transmissions, but I have faith in their latest applications. <p>

RikfromBelgium
02-28-2005, 01:48 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Verdegrrl - if you're a girl and not already married, will you please marry me?<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>lol <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/1orglaugh.gif" BORDER="0"> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/1orglaugh.gif" BORDER="0"> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/1orglaugh.gif" BORDER="0">

Tudor
03-01-2005, 12:06 AM
seems a little extreme, but I really like it.

Verdegrrl
03-01-2005, 12:16 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Verdegrrl - if you're a girl and not already married, will you please marry me?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>That's very sweet, but I'm taken. Hubby is an Alfa lunatic like myself <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/bow.gif" BORDER="0"><p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">You're from southern cali right? So you go to Buttonwillow I assume? Maybe you tend to roll with more professional-racer-types</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Used to live in SoCal, but run mostly at Willow Springs, Laguna Seca, etc. We run mostly with the Alfa club, but consists of maybe of 30% Alfas, and the remainder anything under the sun from Ferrari Challenge cars to home grown hand built racers, including some people from tuner magazines. Mostly experienced time trialers. <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Also, the e46 is only barely more heavy than the e36, but it's brakes and engine are incomparable. The e36 was a touring car while the e46 is a GT car.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Could you enlighten me as to why it took so long for the E46 to work it's way onto the track on the personal level? The BMW fans I've encountered, have said the E46 was too heavy and required both weight reduction and/or equipment upgrades to deal with it. I even heard this from someone on Will Turner's team at the Speed Challenge when they came to Laguna. They went from being competitive, to having a long learning curve. It looks like the E36 weighed around 3175lbs. The E46 weighed 3458lbs.<p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">As for traction control . . . back in the day it used to only cut power from the engine as a means to maintaining stability, but now the more adaptive stability control programs don't cut power from the engine, instead they apply the brakes to individal wheels without affecting the power.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Do you call that traction control? I think that is considered the first level of traction control (or last in some cases) and it is used in both axles of the the Audi as well. It's not really traction control IMHO, but a form of electronic LSD. Cheaper to build, maintain, and control than mechnical LSD, it makes good sense IMHO. <p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I have driven the e46 m3 with and without traction control, and it's DSC or whatever it's called is very archaic, I agree, but the c5 z06 (my favorite track car) has a very very good traction control program that does not severely hurt lap times when engaged. Albeit, the e46's traction control sucks, other than launch control, but I am sure that the program in the next M3 will be on par or better than the program in the c5 z06. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>You are right, they are always getting better. The latest stability control from Alfa is amazing, and actively sends power to wheels to change trajectory, not just braking. It's a variation of the ground breaking 164 Q4, which was a very pro-active awd system. In that respect they beat everyone to market, but didn't market it effectively. I've driven them, and it's the best of all worlds IMHO, combining good feedback, predictable handling, and adjustable cornering attitude.<p> <A HREF="http://www.italiancar.com.au/pilot/feature012.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.italiancar.com.au/pilot/feature012.htm</A> <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">As for the transmission in the S6 or the RS4, I don't see why they couldn't use the transmission from the bently GT or the murciellago, those cars weigh around the same as a S6 and probably have around the same torque numbers. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>The S6 will get the AL600 transmission from the Bentley. The RS6 makes way more power (especially torque). The AL600 is very large though, which prevents it from going into the RS4 - since it would require floorpan/firewall redesign. The Murci has an entirely different trans and layout.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I agree that at 70k, the RS4 sounds like a good price and will probably prove to be strong competition for the M3, but as for which car is more race-inspired or will post better lap times . . . that is yet to be decided, but I'd put my money on the M3 and I guarantee it'd be more fun to drive while posting those lap times too, but that's just me. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Don't disagree with you there. I have to work really hard to keep up with those E36 M3s in my Alfa <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0"> It also takes a certain driving style to make awd in cars like the Audi work for you, and most people don't bother to learn it. Of course most people buy M3s and RS4s for bragging rights and to win, not just the tactile feedback. In that rarified atmosphere, it comes down to personal preference. There will be plenty of takers.<p>Good luck in your hunt for a racer chick! <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/beerchug.gif" BORDER="0">

Seller Automotive
03-01-2005, 12:37 AM
you writing a book Verdegrrl?

hokman
03-01-2005, 02:10 AM
seller automotive, you're right. The new RS4 is much improved and has a surprisingly high redline compared to audi traditions (higher than the much advitised M5).<p>You can't declare the new m3 is better than rs4, just because it used to be.

badman
03-01-2005, 10:02 AM
I would like to know where the $70k figure for the E90 M3 is coming from? The E46 M3 bases at less than $50k, so that would be quite a steep price increase.

Verdegrrl
03-01-2005, 11:58 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>badman</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I would like to know where the $70k figure for the E90 M3 is coming from? The E46 M3 bases at less than $50k, so that would be quite a steep price increase.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>The dollar to Euro exchange, the price increases seen in the current 5 series, the fact that no doubt the new M3 will get a V8 and some other exclusive technology. <p>Presently when you spec out an M3 coupe on Edmunds, adding in most options (remember the RS4 will only come with a couple of options, but otherwise be complete), the base price starts at $47K and climbs to $62,800 with competition package, premium package, moonroof, sound system, xenons, power seats, etc. An S4 has a base of around $46K, and runs around $51,700 with bells and whistles like premium package, audio package, and enhanced interior package. The previous S4 started around $38K, and came in around $45K when optioned out.<p>So if the present M3 is realistically in the low $60K range, it makes sense that the next M3 will average in the $70K range.

Seller Automotive
03-01-2005, 02:23 PM
On top of what Verdegrrl said... BMW can get away with pricing the next M3 at $70,000..<p>It will have more power and probably be faster than both the Porsche 911 S and Aston Martin V8 Vantage... 400hp V8 (which 1 year ago was "acceptable" in a $160,000 Ferrari 360 Modena coupe).<p>So BMW SHOULDN'T be criticized if they give the M3 a $70,000 pricetag (eventhough im sure criticism will be all over the place)<p>The only people that will complain are the ones that bought/own an E46 M3, that all of a sudden cant AFFORD to play the M3 game anymore.. ha, thats a shame.

chaserolls
03-01-2005, 02:38 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Used to live in SoCal, but run mostly at Willow Springs, Laguna Seca, etc. We run mostly with the Alfa club, but consists of maybe of 30% Alfas, and the remainder anything under the sun from Ferrari Challenge cars to home grown hand built racers, including some people from tuner magazines. Mostly experienced time trialers. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Sounds like you run with some pretty experienced people, must be refreshing to be on the track with all SCCA certified drivers who actually know what they're doing. <p>I am typically out there with weekend-warriors/racers who have had little or no formal training, thus weight reduction isn't even a consideration for these people since they are driving their 2nd or 3rd car out on the track all day. The most race-prep they might do would be getting a set of r-compound tires or upgrading their sway bars. <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Could you enlighten me as to why it took so long for the E46 to work it's way onto the track on the personal level? The BMW fans I've encountered, have said the E46 was too heavy and required both weight reduction and/or equipment upgrades to deal with it. I even heard this from someone on Will Turner's team at the Speed Challenge when they came to Laguna. They went from being competitive, to having a long learning curve. It looks like the E36 weighed around 3175lbs. The E46 weighed 3458lbs. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Base trim curb weight e36 = ~ 3200lbs<br>Base trim curb weight e46 = ~ 3400lbs<p>I agree that 200lbs is substantial when you're racing with people who are pushing their cars to the limit and know what they're doing. For this same reason you probably see many more EVOs than STis, but with the weekend racer crowd I run with, curb weight and lateral acceleration probably aren't much of an issue.<p>As for why the e46 took so long to replace the e36 on the personal level . . . well, it is heavier, but in it's stock/unmodified form, i still think it's a better race car. It's brakes are amazing and so is it's engine. It's manual tranny is very sloppy and it's suspension could use some stiffer swaybars, but the e36 has softer suspension from the factory with more body roll and much worse brakes IMO of course. I expect the e30 took longer to replace the e36 when the e36 first came out. <p>This might be a bit of a false assumption, but since time-trials voids your warranty, I expect that the people out there racing BMW's aren't driving stock cars, I expect that they have modified their cars in one way or another to make them better on the track and possibly considerably less drivable on the everyday roads. If you buy the BMW as a platform for a race-car, the e30 would probably be one of your best bets being that it's so much lighter and accepts engine swaps quite readily. <p>I know a lot of people wait until their warranty is already over before they start tracking their car or modifying it, this could be one reason why the e46 took a little while to be received on the track by personal racers. Also, it is a pretty expensive platform for a track car and BMW offers a nice free scheduled maintanence program as long as you don't track the car. As the prices for used e46s drop into the 30k price range where the e36 was when the e46 came out, i expect you'll see many more e46s and less e36's, although in a highly modified form, the difference between the cars would be negligable <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Do you call that traction control? I think that is considered the first level of traction control (or last in some cases) and it is used in both axles of the the Audi as well. It's not really traction control IMHO, but a form of electronic LSD. Cheaper to build, maintain, and control than mechnical LSD, it makes good sense IMHO. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>unfortunately, the e46 m3's DSC just cuts power to the driving wheels, and it brakes simultaneously, but it doesn't have a competition-mode or race-mode where it only applies brakes and keeps the power on, so in that respect the Audi's electronic LSD sounds better. I am not familiar with Audi drivetrains, but I am very familiar with subaru ones and they sound very similar and it is an absolute blast to drive on the track. I drove a slightly modified Version 8 US-Spec STi with a stiffer swaybar in the back on MountainSprings Raceway for about a weekend and it handled amazing, in the corners nothing could touch it, but then on the straight away it couldn't keep up with the z06's and SRT10's I was driving with. We weren't doing time trials, it was just an open track day. <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>You are right, they are always getting better. The latest stability control from Alfa is amazing, and actively sends power to wheels to change trajectory, not just braking. It's a variation of the ground breaking 164 Q4, which was a very pro-active awd system. In that respect they beat everyone to market, but didn't market it effectively. I've driven them, and it's the best of all worlds IMHO, combining good feedback, predictable handling, and adjustable cornering attitude. </TD></TR></TABLE> <br>That program sounds very promising, I am not nearly as well versed in the programs as you appear to be, but I maintain that the e46's DSC doesn't stand up to the more race-inspired versions like the one found in the c5 z06. I post faster laptimes with the competition-mode adaptive stability control turned on in the z06 than with it off. When it's on, I can't tell that it's on unless I look down at the LCD screen as I'm hard on the brakes while turning into the apex. <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Don't disagree with you there. I have to work really hard to keep up with those E36 M3s in my Alfa <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><br><B>modified</b> e36 m3 i assume<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br> It also takes a certain driving style to make awd in cars like the Audi work for you, and most people don't bother to learn it. </TD></TR></TABLE> I have driven a 2001 S4 on the track and . . . understeer was crazy, but nothing that a little inside wheel liftoff couldn't fix. The 2004 S4 is still way too heavy and doesn't have nearly good enough brakes to compete on the track with the e46 m3. The RS4 sounds a lot better, especially if it has brakes on par with the RS6's, which I saw at Willow Springs onetime, the owner said they were OEM and I was very impressed. <br><BR><BR>
<i>Modified by chaserolls at 2:57 PM 3/1/2005</i>

Seller Automotive
03-01-2005, 03:11 PM
chaserolls, stop humping verdegrrl's leg.

chaserolls
03-01-2005, 04:01 PM
just comparing the track-abilities of each car<p>0-60 times have little or nothing to do with a car's track abilities ; ) The only way the RS4 can compare with the M3 is if they can drop the curbweight considerably<p>the current S4 weighs 3825 lbs . . . for this reason it heats up it's brakes way faster than the M3, not to mention how much more prone to fading the S4's brakes are than the M3's. The RS4 would need brakes on par with or better than the Murciellago with it's curb weight around 3700 (what I expect). Then comes the issue of lateral acceleration, i know there's a lot more to consider than just G-forces, like suspension design and aerodynamics and tires, but just from a theoretical standpoint, the audi's 400lbs weight difference is going to seriously affect it's entry and exit speeds, even if it can put more of it's power to the ground, it's still going to have to go around the turn considerably slower, riding it's brakes and turning it's momentum into heat exchange, heating up the brakes, brake fade, slower entry now, so forth and so on <p>also, don't forget the parasitic drivetrain loses above 40mph<p>i don't know how accurate this is (probably not very) but: <A HREF="http://www.fourtitude.com/news/publish/Audi_News/article_1061.shtml" TARGET="_blank">http://www.fourtitude.com/news...shtml</A><p>it says it has a power to weight ratio of 3.93 kilos per bhp, and it has 420bhp so that makes it's weight - 1650.6 kg = 3631 lbs <p><br>Random question that just occurred to me: Verdegrrl, did you ever work at Commonwealth Audi as a saleswoman? I knew a saleswoman there who was a big alfa fan and also very race/car knowledgable<p><br><i>Modified by chaserolls at 5:47 PM 3/1/2005</i><BR><BR>
<i>Modified by chaserolls at 5:58 PM 3/1/2005</i>

Denali
03-01-2005, 04:30 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>velsatis</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">M3, RS4,....Let them come the CLK DTM wipes them all</TD></TR></TABLE><p>is the CLK in the same group <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/nixweiss.gif" BORDER="0">

Verdegrrl
03-01-2005, 06:54 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">just comparing the track-abilities of each car<p>0-60 times have little or nothing to do with a car's track abilities ; ) The only way the RS4 can compare with the M3 is if they can drop the curbweight considerably</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Totally agree. Weight is the enemy. That is why I consider the V8 S4 more of a GT like the current E46 M3. Yes, the E46 has a slight edge in performance on the track, thanks in part to carrying around less weight than the S4. It looks like the E90 330i is 3362lbs. Whether the new M3 can maintain that weight, or gain some due to the V8, is only something we can speculate about for the moment. After all, they need to leave some headroom for the CSL, if they make one.<p>In the end though, my sales experience tells me that most sales are made based on magazine 0-60 and hp numbers. The finer points of dynamics are often lost in the hype.<p>The Torsen3 found in the RS4, and soon to be in the rest of the Audi line-up, will help reduce the learning period for rwd drivers to adapt to awd. The regular Torsen2 can work just fine as you noted, but drop throttle over-streer is the only way to get the car to rotate effectively. The DRC system first seen in the now discontinued RS6, is also found on the RS4, and is a very simple, yet effective way to eliminate dive, roll, etc. Not sure if BMW is going to offer active roll stabilization on the new M or not. Do you know?<p> <A HREF="http://wardsauto.com/ar/auto_audi_launches_newgeneration/index.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://wardsauto.com/ar/auto_a...x.htm</A><p> <A HREF="http://www.carpages.co.uk/audi/audi_rs6_quattro_29_10_04.asp?switched=on&echo=656757459" TARGET="_blank">http://www.carpages.co.uk/audi...57459</A> <p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Random question that just occurred to me: Verdegrrl, did you ever work at Commonwealth Audi as a saleswoman? I knew a saleswoman there who was a big alfa fan and also very race/car knowledgable</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yes, that is me. Thanks for the kind words :)<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I am typically out there with weekend-warriors/racers who have had little or no formal training, thus weight reduction isn't even a consideration for these people since they are driving their 2nd or 3rd car out on the track all day. The most race-prep they might do would be getting a set of r-compound tires or upgrading their sway bars.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Thankfully the Alfa club allows all manner of cars to run, but the drivers must have SCCA or equivalent training. They do schools twice a year as well. Like you mention though, a few hundred pounds isn't going to matter to most people - except when braking. All track newbies brake too much :) <p>BMW does offer some great brakes, and having less weight to stop, helps. This isn't likely to change on the E90, but the RS4 is no slouch with 365mm cross drilled vented front brakes, and 324mm vented rear discs.<p>You may be right about the warranty aspect, and people waiting until it is over before they go to the track. Although people who buy the Subarus and Evos don't seem nearly so bothered by that. Not sure if it's a demographic or something else.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">unfortunately, the e46 m3's DSC just cuts power to the driving wheels, and it brakes simultaneously, but it doesn't have a competition-mode or race-mode where it only applies brakes and keeps the power on, so in that respect the Audi's electronic LSD sounds better. I am not familiar with Audi drivetrains, but I am very familiar with subaru ones and they sound very similar and it is an absolute blast to drive on the track. I drove a slightly modified Version 8 US-Spec STi with a stiffer swaybar in the back</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Since the Audi has 4 driven wheels, the ABS sensors just work in reverse to use the brakes to slow a spinning wheel. Since the diffs at each end of the car are open, this fakes power into going to the other wheels (it's called EDL - electronic differential lock). Up to 67% of the total available power can be channeled to one wheel. EDL stops working at 55mph so as to not smoke the brake pads. A larger rear anti-sway is very helpful in rotating the Audis as well.<p>I'm sure BMW will have a very clever and effective way figured out for the power to find a way to the ground. AWD just gives you two more options of getting power to the ground when fiction surfaces are minimal. <p>While I have not driven the ZO6, they do compete very effectively in the club, and I have driven the new C6. That is an incredible car. <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">modified e36 m3 i assume</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yes :) Taking a little break from the track now and building a monster Alfa to try and clobber the next generation of M3 and RS4 <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0">

chaserolls
03-02-2005, 04:51 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Totally agree. Weight is the enemy. That is why I consider the V8 S4 more of a GT like the current E46 M3. Yes, the E46 has a slight edge in performance on the track, thanks in part to carrying around less weight than the S4. It looks like the E90 330i is 3362lbs. Whether the new M3 can maintain that weight, or gain some due to the V8, is only something we can speculate about for the moment. After all, they need to leave some headroom for the CSL, if they make one. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>RS4 curb weight ~ 3650 lbs<br>M6 curb weight ~ 3750 lbs<p>e46 M3 curb weight ~ 3400lbs<br>e90 M3 curb weight ~ ??? but we can expect the magnesium composite v8 will not weigh considerably more than the s54 engine currently in the M3<p>Given MEL's supply agreement with BMW, they using magnesium instead of aluminum, which is why the e90's 3.0L is consierably lighter than the e46's. We can likely expect the same in the e90 M3, I think we'll all be pleasantly surprised at it's curb weight<p> <br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>BMW does offer some great brakes, and having less weight to stop, helps. This isn't likely to change on the E90, but the RS4 is no slouch with 365mm cross drilled vented front brakes, and 324mm vented rear discs. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Those are some very big brakes, the M6 has cross drilled 348mm fronts and cross drilled 345mm rears, which should provide fade-free stopping from 62-0mph in less than 120ft. Not bad for a 3700lbs car<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>I'm sure BMW will have a very clever and effective way figured out for the power to find a way to the ground. AWD just gives you two more options of getting power to the ground when fiction surfaces are minimal. <p>Not sure if BMW is going to offer active roll stabilization on the new M or not. Do you know? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>The upcoming M3, like the M6 will feature a Dynamic Stability Control system with 2 settings, one for everyday driving and an M-mode, which will allow up to 15 degrees of YAW before kicking in and likely certain trajectory-assisting features like those mentioned in alfa's 164 Q program. Traction control has come a long way in the last few years and BMW is pulling out all the stops<p>The next M3 will not feature active-roll stabilization, but it will come with Electronic Dampening Conrol, which has three modes: comfort, normal, sport. This unit constantly adjusts the suspension to suit the driving conditions<p>Also, the next M3 will have the variable M differential lock, which is currently being used on the M5 and the M6<p><i>source: Sterling Salesrep and some press releases </i><BR><BR>
<i>Modified by chaserolls at 4:19 PM 3/2/2005</i>

velsatis
03-02-2005, 07:17 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>RikfromBelgium</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>The C-class AMG's ( 32 and 55 ) have shown that being a sedan doesn't guarantee succes in sales.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>You forgot to mention the M3 E36 of 1993, anyway we cannot talk about success sales in this class since these versions are directed to a niche and being so, they do not represent a big market in their line. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/bow.gif" BORDER="0">

Tomo Motorsport
03-03-2005, 01:29 AM
I do not think that the new M3 will add much weight over the E46 M3. With the current trend BMW is going in building its engines, I think it's a safe bet that the V8 will be very heavy. Look how things have been going with BMW currently: the M5 V10 weighs about the same as the V8 it replaces. The new I-6 is supposed to be the lightest 6-pot engine in the world.(although I think they forgot about the Mazda 1.8 V6) Plus, with the use of composites and light weight metals, the new M3 should not weigh as much as the RS4. Since the 7-Speed box is actually smaller than the conventional manual, and it won't have 4WD. All things considered, I will say that the new M3 will probably weigh in at about 3300lbs - 3500lbs

erzhik
03-03-2005, 12:16 PM
man...M3 is good, but RS4 is so much better and more aggresive than M3..I know they don't go into one class, but still...

RikfromBelgium
03-03-2005, 01:26 PM
which M3 are uou talking about? E90 or E46?

Verdegrrl
03-03-2005, 08:20 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>RS4 curb weight ~ 3650 lbs<br>M6 curb weight ~ 3750 lbs</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Coupe vs sedan? Price of the M6? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0"> Will the E90 M3 come in sedan and touring versions? I see official weight of the M6 quoted at 3771lbs.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>e46 M3 curb weight ~ 3400lbs<br>e90 M3 curb weight ~ ??? but we can expect the magnesium composite v8 will not weigh considerably more than the s54 engine currently in the M3</TD></TR></TABLE><p>The problem with magensium is that it burns even under water - although certain alloys are more resistant to such problems. One reason Porsche and GM (Corvair) stopped using large quantities of magnesium in their primary engine parts. Once it goes, the whole car is gone. Nothing you can do. Magnesium warps with a passion too, so parts must be carefully shaped to resist this. Aluminum is also stronger, as seen with vintage wheels where magnesium wheels are quite fragile, while aluminum wheels remain much more stable over time and stress. Given the cylinder lining fiasco among a few other spectacular engine blunders, I really hope BMW has got this figured out.<p><A HREF="http://www.key-to-metals.com/Article78.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.key-to-metals.com/Article78.htm</A> <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The next M3 will not feature active-roll stabilization, but it will come with Electronic Dampening Conrol, which has three modes: comfort, normal, sport. This unit constantly adjusts the suspension to suit the driving conditions</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Have you picked up the latest issue of Automobile magazine and read the 3 series review? They lavish great praise in the car, but indicate it a step, in 3 series progression, but not a leap. They also mention that increased ability at the limits, has come at the expense on driver enjoyment at lesser speeds. This is true of all modern cars unfortunately <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emsad.gif" BORDER="0"> With greater "refinement" it seems cars are less fun at ordinary speeds. In any case, I shall look forward to more reviews and finally driving the car when it gets here (got a fellow Alfa nut who sells BMWs <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0"> )<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Also, the next M3 will have the variable M differential lock, which is currently being used on the M5 and the M6</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Is the latest M diff lock mechnical or electronic - or a bit both? (I mean is like a Torsen or Quaiffe mechnaical diff, or a fancy version of a traditional clutch type LSD, or will it use the brakes only to slow a spinning wheel and fake an open diff into sending power to the wheel that actually has more grip?) It looks like the E46 uses a variation of the traditional clutch type system, but uses a pump attached to each side of the rear axle, to supply pressure via a viscous fluid to the clutches when a wheel slips on either side instead of running the system with a slight bit of preload like in my more primative Alfa. The advantage looks like smoother control in extremely slippery conditions, and 100% locking ability.<p>

chaserolls
03-03-2005, 10:09 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Coupe vs sedan? Price of the M6? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0"> Will the E90 M3 come in sedan and touring versions? I see official weight of the M6 quoted at 3771lbs. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Don't know why I tried to pull that one over, you're right, it's closer to 3800 lbs. That along with various other factors, especially price, make it an irrellevent point to compare it to the RS4<p>As for a sedan version of the E90 M3, they are still toying with the idea of a Z4M, I haven't heard anything about a sedan version of the E90 M3, but anything is possible<p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>The problem with magensium is that it burns even under water - although certain alloys are more resistant to such problems. One reason Porsche and GM (Corvair) stopped using large quantities of magnesium in their primary engine parts. Once it goes, the whole car is gone. Nothing you can do. Magnesium warps with a passion too, so parts must be carefully shaped to resist this. Aluminum is also stronger . . . Given the cylinder lining fiasco among a few other spectacular engine blunders, I really hope BMW has got this figured out. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>"The weight reduction target for the magnesium-intensive powertrain is 15% for each magnesium cast component. Since the launch of the MPCC Project in 2001, further worldwide advances have taken place with regard to powertrain applications of magnesium, the BMW composite engine being the most recent. The BMW engine comprises an aluminum core, around which is cast a magnesium shell. This rather expensive approach is based on an inline engine, which has the structural advantage of enabling through bolting to further minimize engine distortion. Other reported engine programs also rely on inline designs, whereas the MPCC engine is built around a V block."<p>As we all know, the E90 will have a V8 (unfortunately IMO). The aforementioned study was published in 2003, so it's a little outdated. <p><A HREF="http://www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels" TARGET="_blank">http://www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels</A>/ pdfs/alm04/3_advanced_materials.pdf<p>From the time of the last MPCC progress report, Noranda Engineers have found the ideal chemical composition for the alloy used by BMW. They were previously using AL52x, and have now decided to use AL62x.<p>The AJ62x alloy was selected because of its adequate<br>bolt-load retention, high fatigue limits, and<br>overall mechanical performance. The AJ62x alloy,<br>with composition Mg-6Al-2Sr, offers improved die<br>castability without significant degradation of creep<br>resistance or high-temperature properties.<br>The strontium content was raised from 2.25% in<br>AJ52x, to 2.38% in AJ62x-2, in order to avoid precipitation<br>of Mg17Al12.<br>A low-strontium version, AJ62Lx, contains 2.14%<br>strontium. It was formulated to slightly raise the<br>amount of dissolved aluminum and thereby increase<br>the tensile strength.<p><A HREF="http://www.asminternational.org/pdf/spotlights/auto.pdf" TARGET="_blank">http://www.asminternational.or...o.pdf</A><p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Have you picked up the latest issue of Automobile magazine and read the 3 series review? They lavish great praise in the car, but indicate it a step, in 3 series progression, but not a leap. They also mention that increased ability at the limits, has come at the expense on driver enjoyment at lesser speeds. This is true of all modern cars unfortunately <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emsad.gif" BORDER="0"> With greater "refinement" it seems cars are less fun at ordinary speeds. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Completely agree, apparently refinement means taming the vehicle unfortunately. I don't like how the M3 has tried to go upmarket in the luxury segment, it's only getting father away from it's E30 roots. <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Verdegrrl</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Is the latest M diff lock mechnical or electronic - or a bit both? (I mean is like a Torsen or Quaiffe mechnaical diff, or a fancy version of a traditional clutch type LSD, or will it use the brakes only to slow a spinning wheel and fake an open diff into sending power to the wheel that actually has more grip?)<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>BMWs Variable M Differential Lock incorporates a shear pump spontaneously building up pressure as soon as the drive wheels start to run at a different speed. This pressure is transmitted via a piston to a multiple-plate clutch conveying drive forces to the wheel with better grip as a function of the difference in speed.<p>

Jimmyjack
03-03-2005, 10:38 PM
I hope that BMW gets the proportions right on the M3. I havent been able to judge the styling of any recent models until i have had the chance to see them in the metal at my local bimmer dealer<p>In my opinion the Z4 and X3 are lacking in maturity when compared to newer mercedes and audi designs. For me at least, the styling aspect of the M3 is far more important than for many of the more mainstream BMW models because it is a luxury performance flagship. All previous M3s have gradually matured and the current model is subtle and well proportioned. If this changes I think that many will run to the opposition for a more mature design. <p>

velsatis
03-04-2005, 08:15 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>RikfromBelgium</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">which M3 are uou talking about? E90 or E46? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Your the expert in bmw so you must know which was the one back in 1993 no? I am sure that you know of the existance of this 4 door model of M3 <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/nixweiss.gif" BORDER="0">

velsatis
03-04-2005, 08:20 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Denali</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>is the CLK in the same group <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/nixweiss.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Of course they are in the same class, ok, you may say that the CLK DTM is a more extreme version of a street racer but still it's the same class of a M3 CLS or an RS4, it just took the extreme higher both in performance and price (for obvious reasons) <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/driver.gif" BORDER="0">

Verdegrrl
03-04-2005, 01:53 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>As for a sedan version of the E90 M3, they are still toying with the idea of a Z4M, I haven't heard anything about a sedan version of the E90 M3, but anything is possible</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I hope they do offer a 4 door M3/4 if for no other reason that it will broaden the appeal to people who can have only one car (for a variety of reasons). It doesn't need to be heavier - just easier to get baby seats and passengers out of the back. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0"> Competition makes the breed/competing brands better.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>As we all know, the E90 will have a V8 (unfortunately IMO).</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Pressures of the market unfortunately. The block manufacturing seems very complex. I hope they've got the long term reliability down pat, since grass roots racers will likely still be feilding these cars in 10 years. Thanks for the links. Very interesting.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Completely agree, apparently refinement means taming the vehicle unfortunately. I don't like how the M3 has tried to go upmarket in the luxury segment, it's only getting father away from it's E30 roots. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>It's the gadget factor. I saw it at work all of the time. Sure, the horsepower and 0-60 times got people into the showroom, but more often than not, people equate value with how many toys a car is equipped with. People would say, 'sure it's got 250hp, but do you have *insert gadget* standard or as an option?' Gadgets sell. Gadgets add weight. Only Lotus seems to be able to charge for adding lightness (with the exception of the Porsche Club Sport and BMW CSL models).<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>chaserolls</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>BMWs Variable M Differential Lock incorporates a shear pump spontaneously building up pressure as soon as the drive wheels start to run at a different speed. This pressure is transmitted via a piston to a multiple-plate clutch conveying drive forces to the wheel with better grip as a function of the difference in speed.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Hmmmmm. So it sounds basically like a 2WD Haldex system<p> <A HREF="http://www.haldex-traction.com/technical_information/design_info/basic_function.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.haldex-traction.com...n.htm</A>

Hornbag
03-04-2005, 04:28 PM
All this technical talk is REALLY starting to hurt my head...<p>How about we just look at pictures, im good at that! LOL

protocatcher
03-05-2005, 04:23 AM
...............hmmmm.....isnt this the Spyshot section ???<br>Please discuss the diff between RS4 and M3 somewhere else, thanQ

Verdegrrl
03-05-2005, 10:55 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>protocatcher</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...............hmmmm.....isnt this the Spyshot section ???<br>Please discuss the diff between RS4 and M3 somewhere else, thanQ</TD></TR></TABLE><p>How is comparing the just announced RS4 and as of yet unrevealed new M3 not appropriate? Just because there are no good real pictures of the new M3, doesn't mean technical details haven't been leaked.

scott26
03-14-2005, 12:13 PM
BMW M3 : <p>Available as proposed coupe , sedan , high performance touring version.<br>High-Rev V8 evolved from the V10 , 440 BHP unlimited to 190mph. seven speed SMG . <p>Coupe is expected to follow M6 with carbon fibre roof - As it will be positioned as the top M3 variant. More use of cabrbon fibre and plastic as seen with M6 . <p>The Coupe-Cabrio will be known as the 4er . An M4 variant will follow later.

Uberwagon
03-14-2005, 12:39 PM
The carbon-intenvise coupe sounds like a great plan. As the more "track-ready" model of the M3 lineup, the coupe will be positioned as the "ultimate" version. A CSL version, above and beyond the others. <p>440 hp is unreal! Can you believe the first M3 only had 192? The second 240 (in US trim)? I like this trend! Go BMW, go!

RikfromBelgium
03-14-2005, 01:27 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>scott26</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">BMW M3 : <p>Available as proposed coupe , sedan , high performance touring version.<br>High-Rev V8 evolved from the V10 , 440 BHP unlimited to 190mph. seven speed SMG . </TD></TR></TABLE><br>Good lord, does it need al that power?<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Coupe is expected to follow M6 with carbon fibre roof - As it will be positioned as the top M3 variant. More use of cabrbon fibre and plastic as seen with M6 . </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yes, exactly what I wanted ( and predicted if I may say <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/bow.gif" BORDER="0"> )<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>The Coupe-Cabrio will be known as the 4er . An M4 variant will follow later.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>mmmh, so a 3 series cabrio and a 4 series CC. So they're just adding a model. I'm still not sure about the CC thing, but if the customer can still choose for a canvas-top, I think i could live with it.

T.B.
03-14-2005, 01:45 PM
Nice. BMW can not afford Audi wins a HP war. So 440bhp seems reasonable from marketing view ... <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>Carbon fibre roof - superb move. It looks like it's going to be more and more used in BMW cars. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>4er as CC with hard (carbon fibre?) folding roof. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>M3 as a coupe, sedan and touring, but no cabrio. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> <BR><BR>
<i>Modified by Tine at 12:14 AM 3/15/2005</i>

Micko
03-14-2005, 01:49 PM
Scott26 said earlier, that M3 will have 407hv. Maybe Audi RS4 has something to do with M3 power increase from 407--&gt;440hv...

T.B.
03-14-2005, 02:17 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Micko</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Scott26 said earlier, that M3 will have 407hv. Maybe Audi RS4 has something to do with M3 power increase from 407--&gt;440hv...</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I bet it does. That's not the first time BMW is reacting to Audi moves.<p>Audi (Novulari concept and the A3 Sportback) was the main reason BMW changed the rear lights shape of the new 3-series in the last minute b/c they look too familiar to new Audi's rear lights. Original idea was E90 rear lights would look like these:<p><IMG SRC="http://totalcar.index.hu/images/testbemutato/bmw305bem/galeria200/bmw305bem_195.jpg" BORDER="0"><p><IMG SRC="http://totalcar.index.hu/images/testbemutato/bmw305bem/galeria200/bmw305bem_198.jpg" BORDER="0"><p>

Naga Royal Guard
03-14-2005, 07:14 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>scott26</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p><br>The Coupe-Cabrio will be known as the 4er . An M4 variant will follow later.</TD></TR></TABLE><p><br>thats a first <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emcocktl.gif" BORDER="0">

RikfromBelgium
03-15-2005, 09:24 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Tine</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I bet it does. That's not the first time BMW is reacting to Audi moves.<p>Audi (Novulari concept and the A3 Sportback) was the main reason BMW changed the rear lights shape of the new 3-series in the last minute b/c they look too familiar to new Audi's rear lights. Original idea was E90 rear lights would look like these:<p><IMG SRC="http://totalcar.index.hu/images/testbemutato/bmw305bem/galeria200/bmw305bem_195.jpg" BORDER="0"><p><IMG SRC="http://totalcar.index.hu/images/testbemutato/bmw305bem/galeria200/bmw305bem_198.jpg" BORDER="0"><p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>that explains that empty body-shell that leaked on the net before the 3 series came out and gave us the first look of the E90.

JBlair
03-15-2005, 09:35 AM
That makes perfect sense now. I still like the other rear lights better (the ones they didn't use), but their reasons are good ones.

Fcuke
03-28-2005, 07:44 AM
I can't wait for this car! It's going to be awesome.<p>Even tho the RS4 has more HP than the upcoming M3, i think the M3 will ave better comfort and better acceleration. But hey, an Audi-fan will buy the RS4, and the BMW-fan will buy the M3. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0">

RikfromBelgium
03-28-2005, 07:49 AM
If sources are true and M3 gets 440Bhp, it will have more power AND weigh less than the RS4 <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/icon11.gif" BORDER="0">

Fcuke
03-28-2005, 07:54 AM
Oh. Really? That's good news! from what I've heard it will have 406-416. But 440 is good!<p>I think BMW made a smart choice not letting all the new 3-series out at the same time. As Audi did.

Aidan
03-29-2005, 02:02 AM
<A HREF="http://www.thecarconnection.com/images/gallery/tmb/9388_image.jpg" TARGET="_blank">http://www.thecarconnection.co...e.jpg</A><p><A HREF="http://www.thecarconnection.com/images/gallery/tmb/9389_image.jpg" TARGET="_blank">http://www.thecarconnection.co...e.jpg</A><p>btw i heard that the 4er project was cancelled! i may be wrong though! <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/bonk.gif" BORDER="0">

Fcuke
03-29-2005, 07:40 AM
You are right <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0"> There will not be a new 4-series. just a 3-series coupe. no difference really, but i think it is a good thing. Traditions is good.<p>Woulda been to change the BMW's grill. :S

RikfromBelgium
03-29-2005, 07:54 AM
To my knowlegde there will be a 3 series coup, a 3 series cabrio softtop and a 4 series CoupConv.<br>Ofcourse intel has been a little confusing and I'm not sure anymore. Maybe Ascariss or Scott26 can help us out.

T.B.
03-29-2005, 09:19 AM
No 3-series cabrio!!! 100% sure. There will be only a coupe-cabrio with a folding hard top, and it will be labeled as 4-series.<p>3-series will be a sedan, sports wagon and coupe. No more cabrio!<p>Think: it doesn't make sense to have 2 almost identical cabrios (a soft top and a hard top cabrio) in the same segment. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/bonk.gif" BORDER="0">

Seller Automotive
03-29-2005, 09:37 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Tine</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Think: it doesn't make sense to have 2 almost identical cabrios (a soft top and a hard top cabrio) in the same segment. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/bonk.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>It wouldnt be the same segment.. the 4 Convertible would use a detuned M3 V8 engine. to bring it up model with the likes of the Mercedes CLK Convertible.

chaserolls
04-01-2005, 04:51 PM
don't know if these pictures have been posted yet . . . but here it is in camo at the ring<p><A HREF="http://forums.streetfire.net/showthread.php?p=1653#post1653" TARGET="_blank">http://forums.streetfire.net/s...t1653</A>