Close

    • More 2014 BMW F82 M4 spyphotos and further details including targeting E46 M3 weight

      More and more F82 M4 (new M3 coupe) testing photos are making their way onto the internet. What we know since we last saw the car testing is that under the hood there is a turbocharged six cylinder featuring a water/air intercooler. Rumors flying around suggest that BMW is targeting E46 M3 weight for the F80 M3 which is at least a step in the right direction considering how heavy new BMW models are getting.

      No new M cars have shown any weight reduction over their previous models and in the case of the new F10 M5 in particular they have shown a severe weight gain. The news of BMW targeting E46 M3 curb weight figures has a lot of enthusiasts rejoicing although the E9X M3 really only weighed in the 35XX range meaning it was only heavier than the E46 M3 by about 150 pounds.

      It is likely that the new F80 M3 and F82 M4 will not undercut the E46 and it is doubtful there will be much if any improvement on the weight of the E92 M3 but judgement is reserved until it is here. Just don't start buying into the hype/rumors as BMW models have gotten very, very fat despite promises of Efficient Dynamics and lightweight materials.













      This article was originally published in forum thread: More 2014 BMW F82 M4 spyphotos and further details including targeting E46 M3 weight started by Sticky View original post
      Comments 52 Comments
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bobS Click here to enlarge
        The gap has widened now days...the e9x m3 needs more power in stock form.
        Compared to what? The Z06? The GTR? The 911 turbo? It doesn't compete with those cars, it isn't one of those cars.

        It beats everything in its class all the time. The C63 AMG doesn't get this kind of talk and I don't get why. They have a $120k C63 Black Series that is a few MPH faster than the M3 in stock form through the 1/4 mile and much heavier. M3 sure looks good when compared to that and especially when compared to the stock C63. The RS4 isn't even mentioned.
      1. bobS's Avatar
        bobS -
        Actually for the 96-99 e36 m3, tq increased to 240, so that would be 75 pound feet per liter, same as the s65.....
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bobS Click here to enlarge
        Actually for the 96-99 e36 m3, tq increased to 240, so that would be 75 pound feet per liter, same as the s65.....
        Yes, and makes your point rather irrelevant doesn't it? But what about the S65 HP per liter in comparison? More yet still the same torque per liter with a higher redline? One motor must have an amazing curve...
      1. bobS's Avatar
        bobS -
        And the new motor will have a even better hp/tq curve
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bobS Click here to enlarge
        And the new motor will have a even better hp/tq curve
        How? Does the N54 have a better curve than the S65?
      1. bobS's Avatar
        bobS -
        Well who knows what the final specs will be, but I'm hoping it has power like a n54 with RB turbos and a higher redline...
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bobS Click here to enlarge
        Well who knows what the final specs will be, but I'm hoping it has power like a n54 with RB turbos and a higher redline...
        We'll see, but my point is you are severely discounting the E92 M3.
      1. lughed's Avatar
        lughed -
        *bobS*, your talking about two very different engines and you first need to understand why the s50 made the hp to tq numbers in comparison to why the s65 makes its hp to tq numbers.
        A couple rule of thumbs:
        1: revs favor hp > e92
        2: "cylinder" displacement (not engine displacement) favors tq > equal
        3: flow favors hp & tq > e92
        Using these rules you can see why these engines make the hp/tq ratios they do. Of course there are more variables with the most important one being they are manuefacturer design/production engines

        Dont get cought in the hype that tq wins races. That only applies when your talking about two of the same cars with one having equal hp but more tq (petrol vs deisel is a clare example of this)!
      1. inlineS54B32's Avatar
        inlineS54B32 -
        This is one of the reasons than an M3 is faster than other cars producing a higher peak torque. The high redline in the car would be pointless if it had no effect on performance. It would be detrimental in fact - more wear and tear. There is a reason for this - it's to take advantage of gearingb- the engine is still producing torque at high RPM - where most engines run out of breath.

        This article is a good read - BMW M does this for a reason, as does an F1 manufacturer: http://www.rehermorrison.com/blog/?p=201
      1. BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
        BlackJetE90OC -
        Limp modes with the new turbo M3 at tracks days will happen. I can see people complaining on the forums in the future.
      1. BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
        BlackJetE90OC -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        We'll see, but my point is you are severely discounting the E92 M3.
        I think some people just haven't spent quality time on the track with the S65. Revving the sh*t out of it. It is an amazing powerplant.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
        There is a reason for this - it's to take advantage of gearingb- the engine is still producing torque at high RPM - where most engines run out of breath.
        Exactly and people just don't get this.