Close

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 54
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    311
    Rep Points
    182.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
    I do not agree. marketing has nothing to do with keeping M5 the more powerful car and M3 the less powerful car. It's traditional.
    Surely M5 is more expensive, but numbers of M3's is quite bigger. reasoning say if it was marketing, they should have given M3 the same output as M5 if not more because there are more M3's out there and more M3's = bigger profit.
    considering the M6 is somewhat synonymous with the M5, the M6's market would be crushed by a car that is cheaper, lighter, and faster than it. It absolutely defeats the purpose of an M6 if the M3 is the faster car. These cars, as you should know, are now more status symbols than they are purist performance machines.

    considering this, how would you feel in an M6 if the M3 next to you could overtake you in a straight line and if that same M3 could outturn you. Would you be satisfied with the extra money you spent on the M6, or M5?
    Click here to enlarge
    Current:
    2010 CTS-V Sedan

    Previous:
    2007 e92 335i

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    311
    Rep Points
    182.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Only thing we can do is organize a protest to get people to stop buying M5's until BMW stop holding the M3 back. I don't think it will go well but BMW will only respond to dollars.
    I would personally wish that BMW made all bmw M cars with the same engines. Kinda like buying a 335, 535, (635?) etc. If you tear down the notion that says that your car is a better performer, it would not matter that one car is faster than the other, considering you KNOW that you chose the chassis that best suits you. For agility and performance, you would choose the 3 series chassis or body, whilst comfort and a smaller compromise in performance would land you in an M5. That way, you are not buying "the top dog" but rather the most suitable car for your specific wants and needs, with certain compromises based on the choices you make. And the higher price of the M5 would be justified by the higher number of standard options, etc.
    Click here to enlarge
    Current:
    2010 CTS-V Sedan

    Previous:
    2007 e92 335i

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    286
    Rep Points
    291.7
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    I am almost 100% sure that this will be a Valvetronic 3.0L Tripple Turbo engine, using two small on the manifold and a big one blowing into the two smaller ones.Expected power will be 500hp/650nm and decent fuel consumption.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    395
    Rep Points
    245.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    I totally agree with Sveinn here, 3000cc inline 6, triple turbo with valvetronic and an estimated power of around 500hp and crazy good fuel consumption and very good emission control !

    I am hoping that they will go this route, and make it "race-ready" suspension and brake-wise (Carbon Ceramic brakes anyone?)

    An V8 M3 vs V10 M6.... i'd take the M3... as i'm not that big a fan of the M6... nobody seem to get the concept of a 6 series, it is a Grand Tourer... it's not in any way in the same class as the M3 !

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,648
    Rep Points
    -167.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by alq80 Click here to enlarge
    considering the M6 is somewhat synonymous with the M5, the M6's market would be crushed by a car that is cheaper, lighter, and faster than it. It absolutely defeats the purpose of an M6 if the M3 is the faster car. These cars, as you should know, are now more status symbols than they are purist performance machines.
    what i'm saying is if BMW was just looking for money, they should have make M3 as best as it could be. Money is in M3's segment, not in M5 or M6's. the profit BMW gains from M5 and M6 combined is still less than what the gain from M3. Therefor saying BMW cares more about M5 drivers just because of money isn't right.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    282
    Rep Points
    245.6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Squirrels are efficient and ​aerodynamic:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4Eb1Nt6WIE
    Click here to enlarge

    2009.5 AW E90 335i ZMP - SOLD
    2013 E92 M3 6MT ZCP - Space Grey/Fox Red Click here to enlarge

    Want to Buy: 1977-89 Porsche 911 Turbo Coupe (930)

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,648
    Rep Points
    -167.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    haha, damesh garm.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    311
    Rep Points
    182.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
    what i'm saying is if BMW was just looking for money, they should have make M3 as best as it could be. Money is in M3's segment, not in M5 or M6's. the profit BMW gains from M5 and M6 combined is still less than what the gain from M3. Therefor saying BMW cares more about M5 drivers just because of money isn't right.
    You are right to a certain extent, but wouldn't that mean that the 1 series M would have gotten a V8? It is not that BMW care about M5 drivers more, but they do not want M5 drivers to feel like they got the inferior car when they paid more for it. It's not a hard concept to grasp, simply saying, the customers that pay for the higher priced product from your product range should be getting the better product. Now, when you are marketing M3,5 and 6 as M division high perofrmance track focused cars (I would call the 6 series a GT, not the M6), it makes sense that the higher priced vehicle, would outperform the lower priced vehicle.

    I am not saying that bmw only cares about money, because marketing is also maintaining a certain image with your customers, as there will be customers who only want to spend big, and they will appreciate little things like this.
    Click here to enlarge
    Current:
    2010 CTS-V Sedan

    Previous:
    2007 e92 335i

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,590
    Rep Points
    2,018.0
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Not sure if you guys have heard it - but here is the latest F3/80 M3... People are saying it's a V6 from the sound - I cannot be sure. It has a very burbly sound.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,648
    Rep Points
    -167.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by alq80 Click here to enlarge
    You are right to a certain extent, but wouldn't that mean that the 1 series M would have gotten a V8? It is not that BMW care about M5 drivers more, but they do not want M5 drivers to feel like they got the inferior car when they paid more for it. It's not a hard concept to grasp, simply saying, the customers that pay for the higher priced product from your product range should be getting the better product. Now, when you are marketing M3,5 and 6 as M division high perofrmance track focused cars (I would call the 6 series a GT, not the M6), it makes sense that the higher priced vehicle, would outperform the lower priced vehicle.

    I am not saying that bmw only cares about money, because marketing is also maintaining a certain image with your customers, as there will be customers who only want to spend big, and they will appreciate little things like this.
    agreed completely.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,648
    Rep Points
    -167.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Not sure if you guys have heard it - but here is the latest F3/80 M3... People are saying it's a V6 from the sound - I cannot be sure. It has a very burbly sound.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jEokuh46ks
    I said it multiply times there. We can't really say it's a V6 unless we hear some WOT footage.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,426
    Rep Points
    32,121.4
    Mentioned
    2107 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
    I do not agree. marketing has nothing to do with keeping M5 the more powerful car and M3 the less powerful car. It's traditional.
    Surely M5 is more expensive, but numbers of M3's is quite bigger. reasoning say if it was marketing, they should have given M3 the same output as M5 if not more because there are more M3's out there and more M3's = bigger profit.
    It's a combo of both. The M5 is marketed as the big dog which is traditional.

    More power in the M3 does not equal more sales necessarily. They sell plenty as is.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,426
    Rep Points
    32,121.4
    Mentioned
    2107 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by alq80 Click here to enlarge
    I would personally wish that BMW made all bmw M cars with the same engines. Kinda like buying a 335, 535, (635?) etc. If you tear down the notion that says that your car is a better performer, it would not matter that one car is faster than the other, considering you KNOW that you chose the chassis that best suits you. For agility and performance, you would choose the 3 series chassis or body, whilst comfort and a smaller compromise in performance would land you in an M5. That way, you are not buying "the top dog" but rather the most suitable car for your specific wants and needs, with certain compromises based on the choices you make. And the higher price of the M5 would be justified by the higher number of standard options, etc.
    I like your thinking and agree with it but the problem is because does not give a $#@! about building the best car they can.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    522
    Rep Points
    122.9
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    I tried hard to guess the engine based on the vid, but just can't put a finger on it. Sometimes I thought I heard a strage v8, others I thought I heard a hint of the s54 race car vid posted recently.just not sure

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    115
    Rep Points
    169.9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Looks pretty beefy from the rear, not too crazy about the sound though.
    Any news when they will be releasing it?

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    10
    Rep Points
    5.5
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    i reckon they are going the way of making more sales. like having an M across all range of cars, same as Audi having S & RS across all ranges just to appeal to customer segments.

    im quite traditional at heart thus i do feel the M3 shld be the only M and the others should have other naming conventions. For BMW touted track focused road cars, the other chassis and car types won't cut it, only the M3 is considered the pure track focused car.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    311
    Rep Points
    182.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    the prototype does sound turbocharged... the low end is beefy and gets more silenced when it moved faster. Whether it was a 6cyl or 8cyl i think is very hard to tell... but either way, the aftermarket for the next gen M3/5s will be much more interesting than before.

    nice find on the video btw!
    Click here to enlarge
    Current:
    2010 CTS-V Sedan

    Previous:
    2007 e92 335i

  18. #43
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    522
    Rep Points
    122.9
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BTX Click here to enlarge
    im quite traditional at heart thus i do feel the M3 shld be the only M and the others should have other naming conventions.
    um...what? you know there was an m1 and m5 before the first m3, right?

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    311
    Rep Points
    182.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    wasn't the new 3er supposed to be unveiled at frankfurt btw? it's supposed to go on sale soon yet its still to be shown to us!
    Click here to enlarge
    Current:
    2010 CTS-V Sedan

    Previous:
    2007 e92 335i

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,426
    Rep Points
    32,121.4
    Mentioned
    2107 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by black bnr32 Click here to enlarge
    um...what? you know there was an m1 and m5 before the first m3, right?
    Yep, well said.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    10
    Rep Points
    5.5
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    yups. there are definitely the M1 and M5 before.

    read a bit about them. anyone knows if they made it into the race circuit?

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,426
    Rep Points
    32,121.4
    Mentioned
    2107 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BTX Click here to enlarge
    read a bit about them. anyone knows if they made it into the race circuit?
    The M1 was based on racing.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    522
    Rep Points
    122.9
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    and the 3.0csl was successful in racing way before them. try reading about it, and then tell me how traditional you are.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    885
    Rep Points
    8.0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Why does everyone think that adding more turbos is going to do something positive?


  25. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    804
    Rep Points
    607.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by alq80 Click here to enlarge
    considering the M6 is somewhat synonymous with the M5, the M6's market would be crushed by a car that is cheaper, lighter, and faster than it. It absolutely defeats the purpose of an M6 if the M3 is the faster car. These cars, as you should know, are now more status symbols than they are purist performance machines.

    considering this, how would you feel in an M6 if the M3 next to you could overtake you in a straight line and if that same M3 could outturn you. Would you be satisfied with the extra money you spent on the M6, or M5?
    I disagree and agree with you. I disagree that the M6's market would be crushed if the M3 was a better performer, because it already is. Putting aside the M6's 3-4 tenths of a second advantage in the 1/4 mile (for stock cars) the M3 is known as the more dynamic car.

    M6 owners probably don't buy their cars because they can out-drag an M3. They buy them, number one, for status. Number two, for the V10 engine, which is amazing.

    I don't think M6 owners want an M3, otherwise they would have purchased one.

    M6 owners -- who can afford to purchase the cars new -- will not want to go down in price range.

    I do think M6 owners would be a little upset if the less expensive M3 was quicker/faster... but, what if the M3 was even lighter and it had 30 more hp and 50 ft/lbs extra torque than it does now? Then, the M6 -- assuming it keeps the same power levels [500 hp] -- would still be more powerful, but the M3 would just be quicker. I don't think M6 owners would be reconsidering their purchase if the M3 used lighter-weight rotors, wheels, hood, and maybe seats.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •