M1 vs competition

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

That's the trouble with the Cayman/Boxster. They go about doing their job in such a good way that they don't feel like they're exerting themselves that hard. Yet if you go to a track and try to keep pace with one, even in a significantly faster car, you realize how that balance really comes into play.

I don't find them to be that fun as street cars, but they're a very quick and competent package that go about doing all things well, rather than putting emphasis on one or two things. I personally would have never been able to pick the 135i over a Cayman, much less a Cayman S, but I wanted a cheaper and more practical car. Now for replacing my M Coupe, a Cayman would be just about perfect.

Yes, but even with all that balance on the track, they're priced well above their performance level. By the time you option an "S" model, you're in Z06 and GT-R territory, and both those cars will absolutely slaughter a Cayman on a road course.

Then there's also the cost of modify them (which is always a consideration for me), which is downright absurd.

[NYC6]

Originally Posted by grant

What are your definitions of Sportscar and Muscle Car?

For myself and the most of the World these are pretty much it. They're long but a good read, especially for those who dont care much for American Sports/Muscle cars. Its wise to know ones enemy.lol

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_car


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Viper

[bmwzone]

Originally Posted by BForbes

I love the GT for the same reasons. You dont have to convince me. I'll definitely give one a test drive. I just wholeheartedly believe the M1 serves its purpose.

What's the purpose of the M1? Serious question.

[BForbes]

Originally Posted by bmwzone

What's the purpose of the M1? Serious question.

The 1 series met BMW's sales expectations for its first year. Its first purpose is to provide its loyal customers a true product from their coveted Motorsports division. That is enough reason in itself. The 135i is lacking in many aspects of all out performance. Its secondary purpose is to bring new prospective performance buyers into the fold. The M Boss himself stated they wanted to make it known that M products are not completely out of reach financially. The cheapest M coupe is 58k and that is barebones car. I'm not talking sedan b/c some people prefer one over the other.

Bringing an M product shows that they are committed to the 1series. We do not fully know what the next generation has in store. All we know is that it is coming. This first gen is no less deserving to have one than the next generation. You talk about 1er sales in comparison to the 3. Look at the rest of BMW's sales sheets. The 1 series still outsells a good number of BMW's. I get from you that the M1 should not exist b/c an Mustang GT would be close in performance and far in price. It dosen't matter. Porsche shouldn't exist b/c several trims of Vettes can match or come close. Range Rover shouldn't exist b/c the Cadillac Escalade does almost better for 30k less. An M3 sedan shouldn't exist either because an EvoX can perform too close for half the price. This list goes on.

[AlBel1214]

^^^ well said!

[BMW86]

Originally Posted by bmwzone

What's the purpose of the M1? Serious question.

The M1 will fill the void left by all the previous M3's... E36, E46 and so forth. The E90/2 M3 is a much bigger and heavier GT car made by the M division. At the moment it's the lightest, and most nimble raw M car that BMW makes. For some of us, the M1 is exactly what we need.

[HondaGoneRogue]

Originally Posted by BMW86

The M1 will fill the void left by all the previous M3's... E36, E46 and so forth. The E90/2 M3 is a much bigger and heavier GT car made by the M division. At the moment it's the lightest, and most nimble raw M car that BMW makes. For some of us, the M1 is exactly what we need.

I just hope BMW shares that logic. Right now I am a little skeptical.

[bmwzone]

Originally Posted by BMW86

The M1 will fill the void left by all the previous M3's... E36, E46 and so forth. The E90/2 M3 is a much bigger and heavier GT car made by the M division. At the moment it's the lightest, and most nimble raw M car that BMW makes. For some of us, the M1 is exactly what we need.

Huh? That's the 135i. Been out since 2008. If you want closer than that good luck and enjoy spending 50k?

[bmwzone]

BForbes. The "M" should be "attainable" ? So Porsche should have a 25k 1-Porsche? Come on man. This is grasping.

I believe the opposite is true - the M1 is going to be 50k +- 5-10k depending on equipment. Good luck selling more than 2,000 units. But cool if they want to. I'll enjoy dusting them in my $350 buck per month 5.0 mustang.

[AlBel1214]

^^^ But if a JB3(or some PnP tune) for the M1 comes out and is cheap you won't be dusting them...

Unless of course you get a blower for thousands more than a simple tune (and still will keep you wayyyyy below the cost of a stock m1)... however going that route it is just a bit more work then plugging in a couple wires...

Either way yeah I agree your paying much less per month but with a simple tune the M1 is gonna rock... and the stangs gonna rock...

[BMW86]

Originally Posted by bmwzone

Huh? That's the 135i. Been out since 2008. If you want closer than that good luck and enjoy spending 50k?

The 135i is a fantastic car, it excels in almost every aspect and ticks all the right boxes but it's not a hardcore sports like the rest of the M range. It's detuned, soft suspension, rides on run-flats and has no LSD. I think the M1 will be a worthy track car and I have no doubt it will steal some of the M3's thunder. However, until final pricing is released, I still see the 135i as the pick of the bunch in terms of value and performance. It will be always be a true modders car due to the high potential power output of the N54 engine and the value it brings to the table.

[amdmaxx]

Since I am upset that M1 won't be shown @ Geneva, here is more fire (it's all game now that next M1 probably won't even be offered in Manual):

Next gen SLK55 AMG will most like get that 5.5TT V8.

http://www.motorauthority.com/blog/1...-5-5-liter-v-8

It will be rated at 537 horsepower at 5,500 and 590 pound-feet of torque over a wide band of revs stretching from 2,000 rpm all the way up to 4,500 rpm. This is substantially better than the 525 horsepower at 6,800 rpm and 464 pound-feet at 5,200 rpm in the 6.2-liter V-8.

Other details include a final weight of around 450 pounds and a combined fuel economy of about 22.4 mpg when paired with AMG’s seven-speed dual clutch transmission.

Naturally aspirated purest, looks like Audi's 4.2 V8 is your only choice left. How times have changed..
Old times: BMW - naturally aspirated, Audi - Turbo, MB - Supercharger..
Now/Future: BMW and MB - Turbo. Audi: naturally and Superchargers.

[lacrosse]

By not showing the M1 at Geneva doesn't this discussion become moot? We may never see a M1.

[Robert]

Originally Posted by bmwzone

BForbes. The "M" should be "attainable" ? So Porsche should have a 25k 1-Porsche? Come on man. This is grasping.

It's called a Miata

[Robert]

Originally Posted by lacrosse

By not showing the M1 at Geneva doesn't this discussion become moot? We may never see a M1.

Not necessary because M's biggest market is NA. Detroit or LA may be where it debuts. The only for sure way is to determine whether building M1 makes sense for the company. Generate revenue? Or promote the brand? I think the reason why its delayed is it doesn't fit the efficient dynamic theme, by clobbering on a regenerative braking they can now claim its green but pushes out release.

[bmwzone]

Maybe they are rethinking the M1 since rumor has it BMW won't survive in the next decade. They can't compete as a standalone against global powerhouses like VWG Ford Toyota Hyundai Group GM.

I mean come on the economy is crap and the entire world is facing a lower standard of living and here comes the $55k M1.. LOL.

[adc]

I'll enjoy dusting them in my $350 buck per month 5.0 mustang.

No you won't.

Just as the M3 is significantly faster than the Shelby 500 Whatever on track despite a 100 BHP+ disadvantage, the M1 will show a clean pair of taillights to the 5.0GT on track.

I love it how for basically the last 4-5 years Ford has been doling out slow so called performance vehicles to the American public, selling pretty nostalgia on the same crappy 10 year old platform. Shame on them for not bringing this miraculous new motor to the market from the get-go.

And now that they will finally make a (hopefully) quick car, all these people are coming out of the loyalty woodwork, cocky as hell and strutting their newfound presumed speed. Guess what, it ain't over until the fat lady sings.


As to the monthly payment, that's like the argument for a $50 whore vs. a $500 escort - they both provide the same service but in very different ways. Just a matter of taste and wallet at the end of the day...

Maybe they are rethinking the M1 since rumor has it BMW won't survive in the next decade. They can't compete as a standalone against global powerhouses like VWG Ford Toyota Hyundai Group GM.

Oh please. Last I looked, it was Ford that was deeply in the crapper and went begging to the US government, not BMW.

I mean come on the economy is crap and the entire world is facing a lower standard of living and here comes the $55k M1.. LOL.

Idk, my standard of living hasn't changed. If it did and I decided I needed to downgrade to a $20-30k car, I'd still go for a nice used E46 M3, not a new Mustang.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by adc

No you won't.

Just as the M3 is significantly faster than the Shelby 500 Whatever on track despite a 100 BHP+ disadvantage, the M1 will show a clean pair of taillights to the 5.0GT on track.

.

The M3 was two tenths of a second faster than the old GT500 around VIR, dispite being significantly lighter and more expensive. The new GT500 is getting an aluminium block, and will loose about 200lbs. Would you care to put a little money on the M3 against it in the same test next year?

The standard GT with the track pack will very likely give the M3 a run for its money, for about half the cost. The M1 won't likely be faster than the M3 based on what we've been told so far, so I think you should re-evaluate that statement.

Originally Posted by adc

Oh please. Last I looked, it was Ford that was deeply in the crapper and went begging to the US government, not BMW.

Source? Ford never took any bailout funds, and is currently the highest selling automaker in the US. I'd hardly call that "the crapper".

The German government dumped significant amounts of taxpayer money into their economy to prop up the auto industry, and BMW most certainly benefited from it.

[adc]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

The M3 was two tenths of a second faster than the old GT500 around VIR, dispite being significantly lighter and more expensive.

...and despite being significant lower in power. The Gt500 has about 25% more HP yet only weighs about 10% more - so the difference in track times is almost exclusively due to the handling, and the way it puts the power down.

The new GT500 is getting an aluminium block, and will loose about 200lbs. Would you care to put a little money on the M3 against it in the same test next year?

Against an M3 ZCP, anytime. Would you?

The standard GT with the track pack will very likely give the M3 a run for its money, for about half the cost.

Sorry, but this is not based on anything concrete, pure - and wildly optimistic - speculation. What's the GT going to do, grow wings?

The M1 won't likely be faster than the M3 based on what we've been told so far, so I think you should re-evaluate that statement.

The M3 is faster around the track than the M5 - any track. So don't bet against the M1 out-lapping the M3, despite what BMW puts in their press releases to save the M3's face.

The M3 will have more HP, and since I drive one I truly know what a great torque curve it has - but the M1 has the potential to completely destroy it. From what I understand of Scott2x's comments, they went for a torquey feel, much like the 135i but a notch above.

The M1 will also weigh around 400-500lbs less and sport a very similar tire footprint, and will also brake better.

So yes, I believe it will lap faster than the M3.

Source? Ford never took any bailout funds, and is currently the highest selling automaker in the US. I'd hardly call that "the crapper".

They sure as hell went to Congress, hat in hand, with the other 2. Now they may have changed their minds later on, but they were in a sufficient bind to ask for it. Which was my point - that Ford has been much closer to the wire than BMW, and the other poster should worry more about Ford than BMW.

The German government dumped significant amounts of taxpayer money into their economy to prop up the auto industry, and BMW most certainly benefited from it.

They had a similar cash for clunkers program that we had in the US, so in general everybody benefited from it, US and European auto makers alike. But also as a general rule, the brands with the cheaper products benefited the most - nobody turned in a 20 year old Peugeot for a 7 series. Also, Ford Europe took advantage of that honey pot too.

So overall most likely Ford benefited more than BMW from these government subsidies. I don't think you have a valid argument here...

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by adc

...and despite being significant lower in power. The Gt500 has about 25% more HP yet only weighs about 10% more - so the difference in track times is almost exclusively due to the handling, and the way it puts the power down.
..

You make no sense. The GT500 is cheaper, and heavier, and dispite those disadvantages it's still almost as fast. The only way HP would give the GT500 an advantage is if it made it faster in a straight line, and it's not. The M3 is faster in a straight line than the GT500 by a significant margin, so why don't you tell me where the difference is being made up.....the Mustang damn sure isn't running the BMW down on the straights, now is it?


As for the rest of that post, it's not even worth responding to. Come and talk to me when we can actually buy an M3 ZCP here, and then lets talk about the price tag that come with it.

[adc]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

You make no sense. The GT500 is cheaper, and heavier, and dispite those disadvantages it's still almost as fast. The only way HP would give the GT500 an advantage is if it made it faster in a straight line, and it's not. The M3 is faster in a straight line than the GT500 by a significant margin

Says who?

As for the rest of that post, it's not even worth responding to. Come and talk to me when we can actually buy an M3 ZCP here, and then lets talk about the price tag that come with it.

I'll be patient with you if you stop rolling your eyes - the ZCP is the $2500 upcoming Competition package, available on the M3 in a couple of months. That's all the M3 will need to spank the new GT500.

But if you think my posts are not worth responding to, please feel free not to respond to them. I guess we'll have to wait and see what spanks what next year - my personal guess is Ford lovers may be in for some heartbreaking news.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by adc

Says who?


.

Ummm.....everyone who's ever tested the two?!

The GT500 is slower through the 1/4 mile than the M3 in just about any source you'd care to look at. So what that means is that the GT500 is actually GAINING ground on the M3 in the turns, or is able to brake harder.

Originally Posted by adc

I'll be patient with you if you stop rolling your eyes - the ZCP is the $2500 upcoming Competition package, available on the M3 in a couple of months. That's all the M3 will need to spank the new GT500.
.

So you really think a remapped stability control system and a slightly lower ride height is going to overcome the GT500 loosing 200lbs of weight in the nose?

I guess we'll have to wait and see, but again, you're talking about a car that for all practical puposes is $15-20k more expensive. Does it really make you feel special that your M3 is a couple of ticks faster around a track than a factory Mustang?