Forums
RSS
Dealers
BMW Ms Getting Four-Cylinders?
Email this page to your friend:
Today's BMW M3 does some wonderful things with a V-8 engine -- but enthusiasts, owners, and now apparently, even management think that the M cars need to get back to their small-engine roots.
Motor Authority reports that the German automaker's CEO Norbert Reithofer has some interesting plans ahead for all of BMW, not just the M cars. For the mainstream Bimmer lineup, Reithofer wants to eliminate diesel V-8 engines entirely.
But for the M cars the changes could be more drastic. Instead of moving up into V-8s and V-10s, Reithofer hinted that he'd like six-cylinder turbos, like those found in the 3-Series and 1-Series, to power future M cars. To go along with the downsized engines, the cars would also have to become lighter, which would help reduce emissions and fuel economy as well.
The original M3, if you remember back 20 years, was a flyweight powered by a four-cylinder engine. Times have changed -- and as I said in my M3 review from last summer, the new M3 is certainly faster than before, "but is it better?"
What do you think? Tell us in a comment if you'd rather see the M cars stay the way they are, or get lighter and smaller.
Responses (19 total)
By Verne | Posted: Apr 1st 2008, 02:29:08 AM
As Peter N. said on March 29th, the real future
is shrink it. I drive 2 beemers and his design
would be my next one! Simplify, lose weight,
keep quality and performance= the future.
By Jim | Posted: Mar 31st 2008, 04:11:18 PM
Mazda is showing the way. It has always held the "weight is the enemy." We'll see how the new M3 stacks up against the RX-8 in ALMS GT where they are now taking the measure of the 911s with a 1.3 liter rotary. All of the performance guys know that weight is a killer as far as performance goes. The M3 weighs 600+lbs. more than a Corvette today, 800-900 more than a Cayman S. Sure, with all of the electronic gizmos, it is fast and handles very well, but as pointed out, it one simply wants speed, the C63 is the way to go... point and shoot, no need to push the M button or others. Speed channel had a M3 test of sorts with Boris Said, Tommy Kendall, John Andretti, etc. and even they had a tough time figuring out the best settings to get the car to handle and go fast. Enough Said.
By Gerard van Dam | Posted: Mar 31st 2008, 03:29:12 PM
Surely all so-called performance cars are now far too heavy. I can't see BMW making a lighter car when they can throw in a few dozen more electric motors or computer controlled nothing in particular. Maybe they'll make the 1 Series a little less like a 1970s van to drive, probably not.
By MrClean | Posted: Mar 31st 2008, 03:12:56 PM
In our CAFE-strickened world, lighter will be a part of any future model plan. I have faith that performance will be preserved in any M-badged vehicle, but I do wonder at what cost?
By Ron | Posted: Mar 31st 2008, 03:00:02 PM
For me the 135i is the strangest car in their line up.
They should have pushed the 1series from the start into the direction of nimble handling, and small pockey engines in the first place. now it is too close to the 3-series.
And just boring. i drove a few, and it is not what it should be. Which is also shown in the sales.
They did a much better job at the mini...
By Michael D. | Posted: Mar 31st 2008, 02:47:22 PM
I hope this is wrong, I don't want to see BMW M's become humbled, dumbed down, and compromised! They're a small percentage, the M range, and they wouldn't effect any average, economy or C02. Even if a range with smaller cylinders are introduced, let it be in addition and not to replace the V8s and V10s!
Greater cylinder counts are better for the image, and lesser, smaller engines have to work harder to maintain loads and demands. Also, fours, in any shape or form, are lumpier and buzzier and lack the smoothness and confidence of the larger power-plants with greater cylinder amounts.
BMW's, especially the M range, are not about humility!
By Mark | Posted: Mar 31st 2008, 02:47:22 PM
As long as performance does not suffer, I do not care if there is a V8, a turbo V6 or a bi-turbo R4 under the hood.
By Peter N | Posted: Mar 29th 2008, 05:31:04 AM
If BMW can build M2 series with 2000-2300lb and 2 liter engine, very much the same as 1969 2002 size/weight class. A tubo 4 cyl will make it flies. It will be
in the ALpha GTA, Lotus elan/Europa nimbleness.
By ZCP | Posted: Mar 29th 2008, 01:51:25 AM
To me engine size doesn't matter. What matters to me is efficiency and driving dynamics. If they can have a turbo 4 or 6 that meets the performance needs and get better mileage than an 8 then fine. If the 4 or 6 would use just as much gas to match the performance of the 8 then what difference does it really make?
As far as weight - they should have been focused on weight reductions all along. One thing I was really impressed by with the C6 Corvette is that GM managed to keep the weight down compared to the C5. Yet the new M3 is over 200lbs heaver than my E46 M3.
A turbo 4 M3, putting out 360/300 weighing about 2700-2900 lbs would be awesome. The ceiling should be 3000lbs max.
By BC Saxman | Posted: Mar 28th 2008, 11:41:10 PM
JEM has it exactly right - the whole auto industry has been going 'gizmo crazy' for the last 10 years, but BMW has been a particularly notable offender. iDrive ... need I saw more?
It's a sad day when a Mercedes gives driver and passenger a more unadulterated experience than a BMW, but we've entered into those days. Once the Ultimate Driving Machine, BMW has so many electronic assists, sensors, and what have you that now it's simply the Ultimate Machine.
Thank God they at least seem to be getting away from the Chris Bangle 'inspired' designs. Now if the rest of the German auto industry would stop needlessly creasing their sheetmetal as well we'd be on to something (I think there must have been something in the Federal Republic's water supply in the early 2000's - perhaps an Al Queida plot to ruin the Westerm world's sense of taste).
Post a comment: