BMW 1M, the Modern Day Supra (MKIV)?

[TX1SERIESM]

Maybe it is just me, but the 1M reminds me of the MIV Supra in several ways. Both cars:

• Feature an inline 6, twin turbo engine
• Are both front engine, real wheel drive
• Offer a 6 speed manual transmission with limited slip differential
• Come from the factory underrated and with easy gains from a simple ECU flash
• Have access to a good selection of relatively inexpensive aftermarket parts
• Are limited edition (through both age and/or limited production)
• Had an MSRP ofroughly $50k when new
• Are halo cars and were probably sold at a breakeven/loss (in the U.S. at least)
• Both have a distinct appearance (large supra wing, bulldog M1 stance)

I had an opportunity to purchase a then new 1997 Supra Limited Edition Blue/Tan 6 Speed and passed on it. To my generation, this was one of the best driver's car in my price range and a tuner's dream. Missing out on this has always been my biggest regret it until I got the 1M.

Both cars have their differences - the 1M's boxy stance with a wide axle, short wheel base versus the heavier, less agile Supra - but to me they seem very similar. Although it is early in the game, I would also guess that the Supra would be able to make more power without going into the motor and still remain more reliable. The 1M offsets this from a daily driver perspective, as the 1M is safer and has modern electronic components that one should expect for $50k.

Ultimately their similarities will outweigh their differences for one simple reason: both cars will have a reputation as a driver's car that will be not only easy to tune but also considered a prime example of the parent company's true engineering capabilities. The fact that it is a good short/medium-term investment doesn't hurt either.

[Das Ein]

Nice observation...


I think you are spot-on!

[Venom]

This is the exact reason why I am a 1addict and why I picked my 135i. It reminded me of my uncle's old Supra MK4.

[nebby]

To me (coming from a VW/Audi world)... it's more like a modern interpretation of the Audi (B5) S4/RS4... but without the AWD. A small coupe with a twin-turbo six-cylinder motor, wide body and a true enthusiasts car.

It also reminds me of the VW R32 because it's a car that was made at the end of the model series and stuffed full of leftover/existing OEM performance bin parts and made in limited numbers. It costs more than a 1 Series (or VW Golf) should... but to those who love it, we all know that the total package is greater than the sum of its parts. VW GTI owners always said how the R32 wasn't worth it and that they could tune a GTI to be "faster/better" but even if they did, it still wasn't a "R32"... I feel the same with the 1M and a modded 135i.

[DooBs]

Wow, bringing back a legend.
That 2JZ is something else.
I still hope to tune one in the future

[MB38]

As an owner of a 1M and a '97 Supra Turbo, I can't agree.

The Supra wasn't merely a good car with the aforementioned characteristics... it was a marvel of its era. It was such a tremendous leap forward that it's difficult to compare it to many other vehicles.

The Supra was capable of 0-60 sprints in 4.8 seconds on stock tires. Remember, this was 1992... a car that goes 0-60 in <5 seconds is still "fast" by most standards. The Supra's top speed [as tested stock] was over 175 MPH.

The stock bottom end has successfully produced more than 1,000RWHP reliably. Something as simple as installing an intake and downpipe [BPU, where the term originated] would put it in the 450+BHP range, more if the ECU's safety nets were evaded. In the early 90s, this was more than enough to beat most Ferraris on the market.

The transmission is stunning, able to consistently put down 3-4x the stock power levels with nothing more than a clutch upgrade.

The stock body can support 315 section width rear tires with nothing more than rolled fenders. It's not uncommon to see 295s up front. The entire body seems to have been designed with modification in mind... from the massive space under the hood for larger turbos to the enormous free space in the front bumper. My FMIC is almost 6" thick and fit without *any* body modification. That's bonkers to me.

The Supra's stock brakes were capable of a 70-0 stop in 149 feet... again, that was in 1992 [MY93]. That stock braking record was held until 2004 when it was beaten by a Porsche Carrera GT... a $450,000 car at the time.

The suspension would happily hold onto the skid pad to .98Gs on the stock tires.

The idea of "reliable modified power" is a difficult term to nail down. Some people view it as "decades of problem-free performance" while others define it as "multiple 1/4 mile sprints without a rebuild"... and anything in between. In my eyes, the Supra still stands alone in this regard. I can think of a dozen cars that I know personally which have put 700-1,000RWHP down for tens upon tens of thousands of miles [some over 100k] over more than a decade without any rebuilds or drama... some still on stock internals.

The Supra was something else. It was decades ahead of its time. In many ways, it's still ahead of most of its modern-day equivalents almost 20 years later.


So, the specs.

Supra 0-60: 4.9
1M 0-60: 4.7

Supra 1/4: 13.3@109
1M 1/4: 13.2@?

Supra 70-0: 149'
1M 70-0: 159'


So yeah, they're close. But to be honest, as an owner of the 1M [and many other cars in between], I've always been disappointed. It's been 19 years since the MKIV Supra turned up in showrooms. Think about that. If it was released *today* with its specifications it'd still be a hot and lusted-after car at $45,000... and that's before even discussing its downright prophetic abilities as a tuner car.

I love my 1M to death... but comparing it to the Supra only makes me wonder what BMW [and every other car company including Toyota] have been doing for the past 20 years.

[MB38]

PS, my baby:

[1SerieStud]

lol not quite, even though there are similarities. As much as I love the 1M, it will never equate to the Supra. That 2jz is well capable of 600+ whp on an unmolested block, and I'm being conservative with my numbers. They are known as queens of the highway for their incredible top end once single-turboed.

Now the 1M excels in an area that the Supra would barely be able to touch - handling. Supra's are heavy, and even the ones with some major suspension work still do not handle as one would expect. In fact, even in a straight line, they begin to offer diminishing returns past a certain point. Ever heard the "what do a 400hp and 800hp Supra have in common" joke?

Regardless, I believe a car is more than just raw power; it's about power-to-weight ratio, balance, handling, connection to the road and to the driver, responsiveness, etc..and these are factors that as a package can render a car better than the other. I personally would pick the 1M over the Supra every single time.

[ZCP M3]

Yeah I'm going to disagree as well, especially on the limited edition and halo car portions. The Supra wasn't a limited edition anything, they sold as many as people purchased and the 1M is far from a halo car despite what these boards would have you think.

The Supra was a pig for it's day at >3400lbs and the 1M is a relative featherweight considering the cars BMW has been producing and the crash standards in place.

I wouldn't call 1M aftermarket parts cheap and wouldn't agree that Supra's are known for their handling, that mid-90s Japenese crown goes to the RX-7. The 2JZ motor is a beast and the strength/tunability of the N54 has yet to be determined in the high three-figure HP ranges (if it ever will be), let alone 1000 HP.

For me the 1M Coupe reminds me of the Z3M Coupe in spirit. It's car that was made after hours by a bunch of nutbag engineers from spare parts and wet dreams. A car that the top brass would usually turn down for production. But they didn't and we are blessed as a result.

[v1k0d3n]

Originally Posted by 1SerieStud

...there are similarities. As much as I love the 1M, it will never equate to the Supra. That 2jz is well capable of 600+ whp on an unmolested block, and I'm being conservative with my numbers. They are known as queens of the highway for their incredible top end once single-turboed.

Now the 1M excels in an area that the Supra would barely be able to touch - handling. I personally would pick the 1M over the Supra every single time.

Stud...I could not agree more on all these points!

[robertm]

Originally Posted by ZCP M3

For me the 1M Coupe reminds me of the Z3M Coupe in spirit. It's car that was made after hours by a bunch of nutbag engineers from spare parts and wet dreams. A car that the top brass would usually turn down for production. But they didn't and we are blessed as a result.

To a tee.

The 1M handles WAY better and can hold two more people but its only the second showroom new car I've bought in 10 years. The first being the Z3 M coupe

[ZCP M3]

Originally Posted by robertm

To a tee.

The 1M handles WAY better and can hold two more people but its only the second showroom new car I've bought in 10 years. The first being the Z3 M coupe

This will be my second showroom new car as well, the first being my current 2006 M3 Competition Coupe. I was super bummed when the rumored S65 and DCT-equipped Z4M Coupe never came to fruition but the 1M makes up for it.

[1SerieStud]

Originally Posted by ZCP M3

This will be my second showroom new car as well, the first being my current 2006 M3 Competition Coupe. I was super bummed when the rumored S65 and DCT-equipped Z4M Coupe never came to fruition but the 1M makes up for it.

Keeping the DCT out of the Z4M and the 1M is a blessing. Had they offered the 1M the other way around with only DCT, the thought of ordering wouldn't have even crossed my mind.

[ZCP M3]

Originally Posted by 1SerieStud

Keeping the DCT out of the Z4M and the 1M is a blessing. Had they offered the 1M the other way around with only DCT, the thought of ordering wouldn't have even crossed my mind.

Yeah but keeping the S65 out of the Z4M and building the X5M and X6M instead should be punishable by castration.

[1SerieStud]

Originally Posted by ZCP M3

Yeah but keeping the S65 out of the Z4M and building the X5M and X6M instead should be punishable by castration.

agreed.

[Fundahl]

I think it's closer to the modern day 300zx (Z32) because of the more square stance and parallel turbos vs the Supra MKIV's sequential turbos.

And yes, I know the 300zx is a V6.

[david.orr]

Originally Posted by MB38

As an owner of a 1M and a '97 Supra Turbo, I can't agree.

The Supra wasn't merely a good car with the aforementioned characteristics... it was a marvel of its era. It was such a tremendous leap forward that it's difficult to compare it to many other vehicles.

The Supra was capable of 0-60 sprints in 4.8 seconds on stock tires. Remember, this was 1992... a car that goes 0-60 in <5 seconds is still "fast" by most standards. The Supra's top speed [as tested stock] was over 175 MPH.

The stock bottom end has successfully produced more than 1,000RWHP reliably. Something as simple as installing an intake and downpipe [BPU, where the term originated] would put it in the 450+BHP range, more if the ECU's safety nets were evaded. In the early 90s, this was more than enough to beat most Ferraris on the market.

The transmission is stunning, able to consistently put down 3-4x the stock power levels with nothing more than a clutch upgrade.

The stock body can support 315 section width rear tires with nothing more than rolled fenders. It's not uncommon to see 295s up front. The entire body seems to have been designed with modification in mind... from the massive space under the hood for larger turbos to the enormous free space in the front bumper. My FMIC is almost 6" thick and fit without *any* body modification. That's bonkers to me.

The Supra's stock brakes were capable of a 70-0 stop in 149 feet... again, that was in 1992 [MY93]. That stock braking record was held until 2004 when it was beaten by a Porsche Carrera GT... a $450,000 car at the time.

The suspension would happily hold onto the skid pad to .98Gs on the stock tires.

The idea of "reliable modified power" is a difficult term to nail down. Some people view it as "decades of problem-free performance" while others define it as "multiple 1/4 mile sprints without a rebuild"... and anything in between. In my eyes, the Supra still stands alone in this regard. I can think of a dozen cars that I know personally which have put 700-1,000RWHP down for tens upon tens of thousands of miles [some over 100k] over more than a decade without any rebuilds or drama... some still on stock internals.

The Supra was something else. It was decades ahead of its time. In many ways, it's still ahead of most of its modern-day equivalents almost 20 years later.


So, the specs.

Supra 0-60: 4.9
1M 0-60: 4.7

Supra 1/4: 13.3@109
1M 1/4: 13.2@?

Supra 70-0: 149'
1M 70-0: 159'


So yeah, they're close. But to be honest, as an owner of the 1M [and many other cars in between], I've always been disappointed. It's been 19 years since the MKIV Supra turned up in showrooms. Think about that. If it was released *today* with its specifications it'd still be a hot and lusted-after car at $45,000... and that's before even discussing its downright prophetic abilities as a tuner car.

I love my 1M to death... but comparing it to the Supra only makes me wonder what BMW [and every other car company including Toyota] have been doing for the past 20 years.

Well articulated nonetheless

[DooBs]

Originally Posted by MB38

As an owner of a 1M and a '97 Supra Turbo, I can't agree.

The Supra wasn't merely a good car with the aforementioned characteristics... it was a marvel of its era. It was such a tremendous leap forward that it's difficult to compare it to many other vehicles.

The Supra was capable of 0-60 sprints in 4.8 seconds on stock tires. Remember, this was 1992... a car that goes 0-60 in <5 seconds is still "fast" by most standards. The Supra's top speed [as tested stock] was over 175 MPH.

The stock bottom end has successfully produced more than 1,000RWHP reliably. Something as simple as installing an intake and downpipe [BPU, where the term originated] would put it in the 450+BHP range, more if the ECU's safety nets were evaded. In the early 90s, this was more than enough to beat most Ferraris on the market.

The transmission is stunning, able to consistently put down 3-4x the stock power levels with nothing more than a clutch upgrade.

The stock body can support 315 section width rear tires with nothing more than rolled fenders. It's not uncommon to see 295s up front. The entire body seems to have been designed with modification in mind... from the massive space under the hood for larger turbos to the enormous free space in the front bumper. My FMIC is almost 6" thick and fit without *any* body modification. That's bonkers to me.

The Supra's stock brakes were capable of a 70-0 stop in 149 feet... again, that was in 1992 [MY93]. That stock braking record was held until 2004 when it was beaten by a Porsche Carrera GT... a $450,000 car at the time.

The suspension would happily hold onto the skid pad to .98Gs on the stock tires.

The idea of "reliable modified power" is a difficult term to nail down. Some people view it as "decades of problem-free performance" while others define it as "multiple 1/4 mile sprints without a rebuild"... and anything in between. In my eyes, the Supra still stands alone in this regard. I can think of a dozen cars that I know personally which have put 700-1,000RWHP down for tens upon tens of thousands of miles [some over 100k] over more than a decade without any rebuilds or drama... some still on stock internals.

The Supra was something else. It was decades ahead of its time. In many ways, it's still ahead of most of its modern-day equivalents almost 20 years later.


So, the specs.

Supra 0-60: 4.9
1M 0-60: 4.7

Supra 1/4: 13.3@109
1M 1/4: 13.2@?

Supra 70-0: 149'
1M 70-0: 159'


So yeah, they're close. But to be honest, as an owner of the 1M [and many other cars in between], I've always been disappointed. It's been 19 years since the MKIV Supra turned up in showrooms. Think about that. If it was released *today* with its specifications it'd still be a hot and lusted-after car at $45,000... and that's before even discussing its downright prophetic abilities as a tuner car.

I love my 1M to death... but comparing it to the Supra only makes me wonder what BMW [and every other car company including Toyota] have been doing for the past 20 years.

Wow. Well put. You had something in there that really caught me off guard, but something I 100% agree to.
If a brand new Supra was being sold I would still pick it up.
Lets hear more about your car!
What have you done? What's it pushing? Alcohol? Nitrous? Stripped out? Quickest time? What competition have to demolished?

[cenix]

MB38, your post was spot on. great post and insight and all true.

[pearlwhites]

Someone figure out what a new Supra would cost in today's dollars. I'm guessing it's pricier than a 1M by a decent margin.

It was a great car in it's day but I don't see anything in common with the 1M other than the fact that they both had turbos.

[IGoFast1589]

Supra's make better drag cars and Texas mile monsters than they do road course cars. Other than those Japan GCT cars that used to compete awhile back you really don't see them on a road course and those things are custom chassis cars so you can't really compare it to a factory chassis Supra. It's not easy to make them good road course cars, but besides that they're ridiculously good at everything. Plus, they arguably make the craziest sound out of any car...

[ZCP M3]

What cost $50000 in 1993 would cost $74480.09 in 2010.

Supras are in Cayman R territory when you factor inflation into the equation.