Close

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 92
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    306
    Rep Points
    268.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    1 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Anyone know what the difference in turbos will be or engine internals? If the engine is the same, and turbos are not much better flowing, why get this over a much lighter 1m? Hell, I'm considering a 135 and vtt stage 3. I personally think BMW just outdid the 3 series with the 1 series.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    3,857
    Rep Points
    3,642.6
    Mentioned
    74 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    37


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    You think? I am curious about this - I have a feeling they won't drop at all. No one has a choice of a NA V-8 anymore, or an NA anything. That means nothing to some, and a LOT to others.
    Sadly, I bet 5% of m3 owners care about NA vs. FI , if it's fast and new, they'll buy it..

    So yes, I think NA m3 prices will take a nosedive
    Click here to enlarge
    ESS 6XX kit

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    3,857
    Rep Points
    3,642.6
    Mentioned
    74 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    37


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Do you see NA v8 s4's holding thier value?
    Click here to enlarge
    ESS 6XX kit

  4. #29
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    73
    Rep Points
    84.0
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bobS Click here to enlarge
    Do you see NA v8 s4's holding thier value?
    Just a TAD different. S4 V8 was a de-tuned weak v8 that put down poor numbers and was not only based on an older engine but a de-tuned version. The V8 S65 was almost a bespoke engine based on high technology and revved to 8400 which was the most ever for a bmw engine. Had high specific output and was in a unique and special class evidenced by 4 years in a row winning best engine in the 3-4l class. Audi V8 in the S4 was pretty weak with 330hp and put down 260 at the wheels. Not worth remembering

  5. #30
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    73
    Rep Points
    84.0
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DFM Click here to enlarge
    lmao
    whats so funny? lol

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    3,857
    Rep Points
    3,642.6
    Mentioned
    74 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    37


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Wannbm5 Click here to enlarge
    Just a TAD different. S4 V8 was a de-tuned weak v8 that put down poor numbers and was not only based on an older engine but a de-tuned version. The V8 S65 was almost a bespoke engine based on high technology and revved to 8400 which was the most ever for a bmw engine. Had high specific output and was in a unique and special class evidenced by 4 years in a row winning best engine in the 3-4l class. Audi V8 in the S4 was pretty weak with 330hp and put down 260 at the wheels. Not worth remembering
    True, but I seriously doubt the e9x m3 will depreciate any less bc it's the last NA car. We shall see!
    Click here to enlarge
    ESS 6XX kit

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,198
    Rep Points
    1,800.2
    Mentioned
    102 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    19


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Wannbm5 Click here to enlarge
    Have a DCT, 3600 pounds and 400 wheel hp you are looking at the best m3 ever
    Because you said this, I will not be able to take you seriously. Everything that the "M Division" is, the modern M cars aren't

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rt turbo Click here to enlarge
    Anyone know what the difference in turbos will be or engine internals? If the engine is the same, and turbos are not much better flowing, why get this over a much lighter 1m? Hell, I'm considering a 135 and vtt stage 3. I personally think BMW just outdid the 3 series with the 1 series.
    I wouldn't make any predictions, especially because they've confirmed it'll be a multi-turbo motor. At least with the 550/M5, you can make a comparison because the two cars essential have the same motor (N63 vs S63) with different turbos, turbo setup, cams, cooling, CR, intake & boost. If you want immediate results & lack patience, then buy a 1M/135 and go VTT S3 -- It'll be a little while before you see the next-gen M3/M4 get to the 700 WHP levels because it's going to require flash based tuning (which means cracking the DME & solving the logic). For comparison sake, it took COBB ~4 years to release their N54 Stage 1 OTS Maps & then another full year before the ability to PROtune was released. And now we're realizing how necessary a flash tune is to safely maximize the performance on stock turbos (with respect to fueling, ignition advance, TQ values seen by the DME/DCT, etc), let alone RBs/Vargas Stage 2-3/Single Turbos.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bobS Click here to enlarge
    Sadly, I bet 5% of m3 owners care about NA vs. FI , if it's fast and new, they'll buy it..
    Sadly, I have to agree because M cars have recently become more of a status symbol then a race bred street car.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bobS Click here to enlarge
    So yes, I think NA m3 prices will take a nosedive

    Do you see NA v8 s4's holding thier value?
    This I disagree with, just look at the Audi RS4 (which is a much more accurate comparison to the E9x M3). I understand that there have been significantly more M3s sold than RS4s here in the US, but we need to remember that this is very well might be the last M3 to be 1) have a Naturally Aspirate, High Revving Engine (a unique M-car characteristic) and 2) be the last M3 to be badged an M3, regardless of body style. The biggest variable that will damage their resale value is if people flood the marketplace with them once the F3x M3/M4 is released, but even then I expect people to snatch them up because of demand (especially for the E90s).
    COBB AP ProTune by Bren of ///Bren Tuning
    Akrapovic DP | Helix FMIC | Alpina TCM Flash | Walbro 450LPH Fuel Pump


    "The moment money becomes your motivation, you are immediately not as good as someone who is motivated by passion and internal will." -A. Senna

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Jersey City
    Posts
    3,857
    Rep Points
    3,642.6
    Mentioned
    74 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    37


    Reputation: Yes | No
    @benzy89 the rs4 is only valuable due to it's limited production (same with the 1M), sadly the rs4 still isn't that quick, although I personally love them!
    Click here to enlarge
    ESS 6XX kit

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    515
    Rep Points
    621.9
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Wannbm5 Click here to enlarge
    whats so funny? lol
    Its not really an M car (when you look at the history of their design and engineering philosophy), so it definitely isn't the best of them all!!!!

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,198
    Rep Points
    1,800.2
    Mentioned
    102 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    19


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bobS Click here to enlarge
    the rs4 is only valuable due to it's limited production (same with the 1M), sadly the rs4 still isn't that quick, although I personally love them!
    Yes, the fact that not a lot were sent to the US drives up value (~2.5k RS4s in the US), but it also helps that it has the same motor as the R8 & was basically a V8 version of the Gallardo's V10 (demand has a bigger impact on value then availability, but with the RS4 it's both variables). The S4 has awful value not only cause it was sold in a significantly higher quantity in the US, but it's also regarded as a sub-standard "sports sedan".

    VS. the 1M, which you had to buy (the RS4 could've been leased) and less than 1,000 made it to the US (out of just over 6k in total production globally).
    COBB AP ProTune by Bren of ///Bren Tuning
    Akrapovic DP | Helix FMIC | Alpina TCM Flash | Walbro 450LPH Fuel Pump


    "The moment money becomes your motivation, you are immediately not as good as someone who is motivated by passion and internal will." -A. Senna

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Rep Points
    2,017.3
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bobS Click here to enlarge
    Do you see NA v8 s4's holding thier value?
    I see the more comparable RS4 holding their value - yes. S4, not sure how they compare. Look at a 2006 E46 M3 - these are still near 30k if they have low miles and are in good condition.

    I don't understand why anyone would buy an M3 for straight line speed - that's not what they are for. Most people buy them because of their engine/what they are about. I think they will actually be special in that they are the last true M3 - most car magazines agree. IDK - I guess it depends on your POV.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Rep Points
    2,017.3
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    I see the more comparable RS4 holding their value - yes. S4, not sure how they compare. Look at a 2006 E46 M3 - these are still near 30k if they have low miles and are in good condition.

    I don't understand why anyone would buy an M3 for straight line speed - that's not what they are for. Most people buy them because of their engine/what they are about. I think they will actually be special in that they are the last true M3 - most car magazines agree. IDK - I guess it depends on your POV.
    LOL - I wrote that without seeing any of the above... Sorry.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,756
    Rep Points
    31,551.1
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Wannbm5 Click here to enlarge
    1. Stock m3 dynoes at 340-350 which is exactly 15 percent loss from its 414 hp.

    2. F80 m3 will only have "450" crank hp but will dyno at about 400 (which puts crank at about 480) just like every single other underrated turbo car. So numbers will stay nice and neat inline with where bmw wants them to appear but will have no bearing on the power actually put down. Mark my words stock m3's will be breaking 400 whp by 5-10 hp from the factory. Have a DCT, 3600 pounds and 400 wheel hp you are looking at the best m3 ever
    This will never be the best M3 ever, that's a joke.

    You can hit just about 400 whp with bolt ons in the E92, with DCT, and 3550 pounds. Does that make it the best M3 ever?

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,756
    Rep Points
    31,551.1
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rt turbo Click here to enlarge
    Anyone know what the difference in turbos will be or engine internals? If the engine is the same, and turbos are not much better flowing, why get this over a much lighter 1m? Hell, I'm considering a 135 and vtt stage 3. I personally think BMW just outdid the 3 series with the 1 series.
    It's going to have a new turbo setup. I would think redesigned heads and block as well. If M hasn't completely lost their balls.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,756
    Rep Points
    31,551.1
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bobS Click here to enlarge
    Do you see NA v8 s4's holding thier value?
    Not a fair comparison the S4 doesn't have BMW M's NA tradition of the M3's for that matter. And the S4 never dominated DTM racing.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,756
    Rep Points
    31,551.1
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Wannbm5 Click here to enlarge
    Just a TAD different. S4 V8 was a de-tuned weak v8 that put down poor numbers and was not only based on an older engine but a de-tuned version. The V8 S65 was almost a bespoke engine based on high technology and revved to 8400 which was the most ever for a bmw engine. Had high specific output and was in a unique and special class evidenced by 4 years in a row winning best engine in the 3-4l class. Audi V8 in the S4 was pretty weak with 330hp and put down 260 at the wheels. Not worth remembering
    This.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,756
    Rep Points
    31,551.1
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bobS Click here to enlarge
    True, but I seriously doubt the e9x m3 will depreciate any less bc it's the last NA car. We shall see!
    If will depreciate but being the last NA V8 is something special. The volume of the E9X hurts it more than anything else.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,756
    Rep Points
    31,551.1
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by benzy89 Click here to enlarge
    but it also helps that it has the same motor as the R8 & was basically a V8 version of the Gallardo's V10 (
    Not true, the Gallardo V10 with FSI came later. The 4.2 FSI motor was just the same old 4.2 V8 reworked yet again. The original Gallardo motor was a 5.0 liter V10 with no direct injection that had nothign to do with the RS4 V8.

    Unlike the S65 and S85, the Audi V8 and the Gallardo V10 have no relation.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    73
    Rep Points
    84.0
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    It's going to have a new turbo setup. I would think redesigned heads and block as well. If M hasn't completely lost their balls.
    Best meaning the fastest around the ring, every track and in a straight line to 60 and quarter mile. It won't be the most enjoyable but the best performer which makes sense given each generation is. I do think this will offer really solid performance though with the combination of 400-410 whp stock and 3600 pounds especially if they can keep the power curve pulling to 7200 rpms or beyond like the m5. If it has poop out at 5500 like every other turbo engine bmw uses than it will be a tremendous failure

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,756
    Rep Points
    31,551.1
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Wannbm5 Click here to enlarge
    Best meaning the fastest around the ring, every track and in a straight line to 60 and quarter mile. It won't be the most enjoyable but the best performer which makes sense given each generation is.
    So that's like saying the one after this will be even better. Of course every measurement will put it ahead. Does that make it more fun to drive though?

  21. #46
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    73
    Rep Points
    84.0
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    The audi 4.2 v8 is the oldest freakin engine ever. I was dumbfounded when they released the rs5 with the engine. THe r8 was bad enough. Talk about lazy. That engine has been around with minor tweaks through the years and consistently puts down less power than it states and has a $#@! of a carbon build up problem. On paper its a nice engine but frankly aside from sounding nice, it is a real mess and way too old

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,756
    Rep Points
    31,551.1
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Wannbm5 Click here to enlarge
    The audi 4.2 v8 is the oldest freakin engine ever. I was dumbfounded when they released the rs5 with the engine. THe r8 was bad enough. Talk about lazy. That engine has been around with minor tweaks through the years and consistently puts down less power than it states and has a $#@! of a carbon build up problem. On paper its a nice engine but frankly aside from sounding nice, it is a real mess and way too old
    That's pretty much how I feel about it as well. And the RS5 just takes this same thing and gives it slightly more hp. It's an overrated antique.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    73
    Rep Points
    84.0
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Sticky I think you are putting words in my mouth! I think I just chose the wrong word. I meant give the specs for an OEM m3 with 400 plus whp and 3600 pounds, provided it has a nice power curve as well will make for the "best" (i meant best performer). Maybe an obvious claim but nonetheless stock for stock I believe it will significantly outperform the e9x as much as the e9x outperformed the e46.

    Best as in most enjoyable-well I think there is never a replacement for a high revving v8. We are aural creatures and sound is so much of our overall experience. Atleast for me I am embarrased to say how many times I redline the car and downshift in high revs. I look like a turd but I don't care because I so enjoy it! I love blasting in 3rd on the freeway from 65 mph-80 and listening to the sound of the catless e9x m3 scream. But I think if they can make a turbo car with a redline of 7500 and a linear power curve it could potentially be a pretty fun car with nice low end punch but also a nice linear pull as well. It will be different but too early to say which is more fun

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,756
    Rep Points
    31,551.1
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    To me it's as if comparing a Porsche turbo to a GT3. I know which is the one I want to drive if I have a twisty road. I don't care what they PDK launch control does in the 1/4 mile at that point.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    284
    Rep Points
    290.7
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    That's pretty much how I feel about it as well. And the RS5 just takes this same thing and gives it slightly more hp. It's an overrated antique.
    Yeah, I agree, going with the V8 was serious disappointment. Fast forward several years on and all of the big sport sedans are going to be FI. I wouldn't put my money down on a new M3 before seeing what the competition (Audi, Merc) has to offer.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •