Stats: 1M vs Competitors (Cayman S and TT RS)

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by trahsub

I watched that Boss 302 special on speed, and the engineers brought an M3 to Laguna Seca as a benchmark vehicle, but before even fine tuning the Boss it, according to them, crushed the M3. I'm curious on exactly what crushed means though.

straight line speed and power.

[Robert]

Originally Posted by manuelf

Sorry - nothing has been overlooked here.
1. Cayman has much better aerodynamics (cw x A = 0,56) vs 1M (cw x A = 0,69) - no wonder - it is a small sports car!
2. Cayman is 140kg (300lbs) lighter than the 1M - no wonder - it is a small sports car!


So simple question: What can be deduced from the effect of Turbo for emissions, when both cars have the same emissions, but one is much heavier and has worse aerodynamics? Think about it

Ding ding! That's what was hinting at. Build lighter cars instead of mitigating mpg problem with other solutions

[Robert]

Originally Posted by manuelf

Honestly - I do not understand the praising of the Cayman S in the context of the 1M at all.

So let's wait for first tests. I promise - as soon as the 1M matches or tops any of the published track times of CS I will report back in this thread

I suggest writing to the BMW marketing group. They created this comparison of TTRS, Cayman and 1M chart. Scott has also drop the CS name here and there.

I know what they are trying to do and that's what annoys me the most is that they are thinking like marketing guys instead of true enthusiast - as apparent in lack of care and basic common automotive knowledge when generating the erroneous power to weight figure.

They think of 1M buyers as performance/luxo aspirational buyer similar to Coach buyers who can't afford Hermes or Chanel yet. This is the reason why they didn't toss in other performance cars like EVO, GolfR, or STI who are priced under 1M. Only comparing up.

[M_Anthony]

Originally Posted by zimzimmerbimmer

...that UK list price translates to $63,355.00 at today's rate!

USA prices are never determined by simple currency conversion.

Taxes are different, some features/parts are different (bumpers get changed for crash testing, headlights changed for DOT spec, extra emissions changes here in the states), volume of sales is different, etc., and you wind up with a vast price difference between the states and elsewhere in the world. We pay consistently less for cars over here than the UK/EU.

FYI, starting price of a 135i coupé in the UK: £30,675.
Starting price of a 135i coupe here in the US: $36,350.

If it was a straight conversion, a 135i here would cost $48,472. You can get a 135 with every option on it and still pay a few grand less than that.

[manuelf]

Originally Posted by Robert

Ding ding! That's what was hinting at. Build lighter cars instead of mitigating mpg problem with other solutions

Sorry Robert - that was not obvious with your previous post!
You apparently questioned the justification of the turbo - you explicitely named the N/A motor of the cayman S!

The fact is: A modern turbo engine is better in mpg numbers than a N/A engine with the same power.
Of course this only holds for the test cycles done to simulate "normal" usage that are used for the official mpg or CO2/km data. Under full load there is no advantage for the FI engines anymore - every child knows this.

And what about your hint? Your hint is to only build cars that have 2 seats and are 1,2 m in height as a solution?? The Cayman S is not ultralight and has super low cw x A due to Porsches godlike skills in building cars, but only because the Cayman is a pure second car for people and does not fullfill all the requirements the 1M does on top of being fast.
From looking at the data, I have to state: What a shame that the CS has not much less CO2/kg since it is a 2 person only car, that is low as a dwarf!
The reason that both cars are despite of that equal in emissions is only due to the FI engine of the 1M.

[manuelf]

Originally Posted by Robert

I suggest writing to the BMW marketing group. They created this comparison of TTRS, Cayman and 1M chart. Scott has also drop the CS name here and there.

I know what they are trying to do and that's what annoys me the most is that they are thinking like marketing guys instead of true enthusiast - as apparent in lack of care and basic common automotive knowledge when generating the erroneous power to weight figure.

They think of 1M buyers as performance/luxo aspirational buyer similar to Coach buyers who can't afford Hermes or Chanel yet. This is the reason why they didn't toss in other performance cars like EVO, GolfR, or STI who are priced under 1M. Only comparing up.

I think we both could agree that such "comparisons" are always weak and marketing tries to suggest something that is questionable. I don't give any sh*t on these numbers, since I don't need BMW marketing to give me these numbers - I already know them, because I am a car enthusiast.
I also know the differences, pros and cons the different cars have.
The only point I try to make (but it seems that I totally fail here - may be my language deficiency ):

- Cayman S is a much more focused sports car (lighter, lower, sharper)
- 1M - according to the tradition of ///M is based on a mainstream car platform and therefore naturally not so focused.
- 1M has therefore many advantages in every day usage
- 1M is much cheaper
- 1M seems (as stated ->wait for tests) to be unexpectedly on par in certain driving dynamics!

The last point is the one where I place my emphasis on. This is the point ///M is all about: Built a car based on a mainstream platform that has capabilities to be driven as an everyday car and give pure sportscars that are much more expensive a strong competition.
And this is exactly what the 1M does in my opinion. I hope the official test results that will come up next year will prove me right

[Robert]

Originally Posted by manuelf

- 1M seems (as stated ->wait for tests) to be unexpectedly on par in certain driving dynamics!

The last point is the one where I place my emphasis on. This is the point ///M is all about: Built a car based on a mainstream platform that has capabilities to be driven as an everyday car and give pure sportscars that are much more expensive a strong competition.
And this is exactly what the 1M does in my opinion. I hope the official test results that will come up next year will prove me right

Having N54 as power plant already gives it plenty of upside potential. Tuner will love this car. With a few trackday reinforcement mods I see a upcoming challenger. I am waiting to hear initial owner's review and day to day experience from maintenance cost to unscheduled service, and from everyday driving to track days. After owning a 135i, I want to see if some of the older bugs still linger.

[BMWPower06]

I think this car will go down in history as another fail from BMW ///M, similar to how the US Spec E36 M3s are viewed today, but at least those cars had an engine of their own. The 1 M uses the exact same engine as the Z4 sDrive35is, nothing special at all...

[Robert]

Originally Posted by manuelf

Sorry Robert - that was not obvious with your previous post!
You apparently questioned the justification of the turbo - you explicitely named the N/A motor of the cayman S!

The fact is: A modern turbo engine is better in mpg numbers than a N/A engine with the same power.
Of course this only holds for the test cycles done to simulate "normal" usage that are used for the official mpg or CO2/km data. Under full load there is no advantage for the FI engines anymore - every child knows this.

And what about your hint? Your hint is to only build cars that have 2 seats and are 1,2 m in height as a solution?? The Cayman S is not ultralight and has super low cw x A due to Porsches godlike skills in building cars, but only because the Cayman is a pure second car for people and does not fullfill all the requirements the 1M does on top of being fast.
From looking at the data, I have to state: What a shame that the CS has not much less CO2/kg since it is a 2 person only car, that is low as a dwarf!
The reason that both cars are despite of that equal in emissions is only due to the FI engine of the 1M.

Sorry for being vague, I was trying to lead people to the conclusion of achieving fuel efficiency through attacking curb weight but didn't want to straight out say it.

I don't think anyone who owns a 1M will buy a Cayman S as a 2nd car. Perhaps a 911 because it's a major upgrade. CS will feel significantly underpowered in everyday driving compared to the torquey 1M turbos and don't justify enough performance for another 45-75k. (used/new) It's a different breed of drivers CS tailors to and there aren't much of them (me) out there. Once you are addicted to the torque it's hard to go back.

[lasovan]

official specs is 340bhp
https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/press...tem=node__2224

[Madozu]

Originally Posted by lasovan

official specs is 340bhp
https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/press...tem=node__2224

In the English version of the press release, they list 250 kW and 340 bhp ... one of those two figures is wrong:

250 kW = 335 bhp = 340 PS
254 kW = 340 bhp = 345 PS

The German version of the press release mentions 250 kW and 340 PS.

[ND40oz]

Originally Posted by Madozu

In the English version of the press release, they list 250 kW and 340 bhp ... one of those two figures is wrong:

250 kW = 335 bhp = 340 PS
254 kW = 340 bhp = 345 PS

The German version of the press release mentions 250 kW and 340 PS.

It's probably underated for any the posted figures, so they just put a nice even number for each figure depending on the market.

[Kurt_OH]

I don't buy these comparisons at all. Those cars are both 50% more expensive and 2-seaters.

That's what makes the 1M so appealing: it's as fast as cars like those, that are cool, fairly dedicated sporting hardware, yet has a back seat, even if it is Mustang-sized.

In fact, I'd say it should be compared to a Boss 302 for example. A supersport version of a sporty standard model.

[Sugarphreak]

Originally Posted by Kurt_OH

I don't buy these comparisons at all. Those cars are both 50% more expensive and 2-seaters.

That's what makes the 1M so appealing: it's as fast as cars like those, that are cool, fairly dedicated sporting hardware, yet has a back seat, even if it is Mustang-sized.

In fact, I'd say it should be compared to a Boss 302 for example. A supersport version of a sporty standard model.

I think it is all in the eye of the beholder, if you are not looking at price but rather something fun and sport for the weekend; the 1M would be put up against other 2 door performance tuned coupes... the Cayman S, the TT RS, conceivably the Shelby/Boss Mustangs and other domestic muscle cars that have been dramatically improving for handeling lately.

On the other hand if you were to look for something more a little more functionality as you are making a case for; the Evo and Sti are vastly more useful when it comes to cargo space and handeling adverse weather conditions.

No, I don't think it is really any of those... mostly because the 1M doesn't fit snuggly into the price/performance model.

If I had to pick the most direct competitor whose market they are cutting into, it would be the Nisimo 370Z... and I think they have done a good job.

[Robert]

What strike me the other night is 1 series is basically the baby of BMW. The lowest of the low, lower than 3 series and by no means I am stating it's a inferior product. If it was a Mercedes it will sit between A class and C class but all of sudden it's a M car it's being compared to high premium cars priced in the 60-75k range. Seems like a far stretch.

BMW is playing the same mentality Mini played with Porsche. You are getting a great bang for the buck but then they aren't willing to accept EVO/STI/370Z as comparable competitors because those are below us.

[Kurt_OH]

Originally Posted by Sugarphreak

I think it is all in the eye of the beholder, if you are not looking at price but rather something fun and sport for the weekend; the 1M would be put up against other 2 door performance tuned coupes... the Cayman S, the TT RS, conceivably the Shelby/Boss Mustangs and other domestic muscle cars that have been dramatically improving for handeling lately.

Any of those could offer a LOT of smiles. I guess we all discuss topics like this from our own perspectives. For me, the extra $25k to a Cayman S matters. So does the reduced functionality.

On the other hand if you were to look for something more a little more functionality as you are making a case for; the Evo and Sti are vastly more useful when it comes to cargo space and handeling adverse weather conditions.

Do those two really have that much more space?

As for weather, my general theory is that if it's so bad that a properly equipped (snow tires) Bimmer can't get through the snow easily, then I don't want my nice car out in it anyway; time to break out the beater. Even if I can stay exactly where I want, there are plenty of derelicts in 13 year old Explorers with bald all-season tires, or worse yet, stupid soccer moms with their X6-M with performance tires drifting sideways through the lanes.

No, I don't think it is really any of those... mostly because the 1M doesn't fit snuggly into the price/performance model.

Agreed.

If I had to pick the most direct competitor whose market they are cutting into, it would be the Nisimo 370Z... and I think they have done a good job.

Another car I like. Still the 2-seater thing puts it in a different class. If it's REALLY a weekend/toy, there's no way I'm getting a car with a back seat. If it's really a driving toy, it's a Lotus at the top of my list, possibly followed by a P-car.

[Land_Shark]

Originally Posted by manuelf

I think we both could agree that such "comparisons" are always weak and marketing tries to suggest something that is questionable. I don't give any sh*t on these numbers, since I don't need BMW marketing to give me these numbers - I already know them, because I am a car enthusiast.
I also know the differences, pros and cons the different cars have.
The only point I try to make (but it seems that I totally fail here - may be my language deficiency ):

- Cayman S is a much more focused sports car (lighter, lower, sharper)
- 1M - according to the tradition of ///M is based on a mainstream car platform and therefore naturally not so focused.
- 1M has therefore many advantages in every day usage
- 1M is much cheaper
- 1M seems (as stated ->wait for tests) to be unexpectedly on par in certain driving dynamics!

The last point is the one where I place my emphasis on. This is the point ///M is all about: Built a car based on a mainstream platform that has capabilities to be driven as an everyday car and give pure sportscars that are much more expensive a strong competition.
And this is exactly what the 1M does in my opinion. I hope the official test results that will come up next year will prove me right

10

[Land_Shark]

Originally Posted by BMWPower06

I think this car will go down in history as another fail from BMW ///M, similar to how the US Spec E36 M3s are viewed today, but at least those cars had an engine of their own. The 1 M uses the exact same engine as the Z4 sDrive35is, nothing special at all...

1

[M3 Adjuster]

Land Shark eh? The original lived in Utah at one time but it was Landshark

[rogerdiaz]

I would prefer the Cayman S for aesthetics. Porsche website says Cayman S 0-60 4.9sec. Want to buy a used low mileage one in 3-4 years.

[krnnerdboy]

I'd cross shop the 1m w/ a mustang gt w/ track/brembo package. Those mustangs are really starting to appeal to me, minus the rental car status

[tyorll]

Originally Posted by BMWPower06

I think this car will go down in history as another fail from BMW ///M, similar to how the US Spec E36 M3s are viewed today, but at least those cars had an engine of their own. The 1 M uses the exact same engine as the Z4 sDrive35is, nothing special at all...

Part of the design principles for the 1M was to entice younger buyers into the market for an M range BMW sports car which for many is beyond their budget. It was about making a vehicle with M characteristics/performance available to a younger (read poorer) generation of drivers.

The fact that an 1M can be purchased for less than the starting price of other BMW models means that it will likely be a more popular car than other M models.

For that reason, I doubt very much that the 1M will be lauded as a fail. A BMW enthusiast may argue differently based on the fact that it doesn't have a specific engine or that the performance gains over the 135i do not befit the M heritage in other model ranges, but I feel that the market/volume of sales will argue otherwise.

Anyway, it remains to be seen. Personally I love the 135i. The idea of an M package to improve on the already brilliant platform with more bells and whistles is very appealing. The downside to me is that the new flared wheel arches and intakes are ugly. The 135i looks much more refined. The 1M unfortunately looks like a japanese civic car cult has had their way with it and jazzed it up to their liking. It is not to my tastes. The quad exhaust is a nice addition however I'd vote for the "Black chrome" tips that come standard on the current model 135i as opposed to the silver chrome tips, espeically on a black car!