Is the motor identical to the 35is motor?

[deshields]

First of all, anyone who thinks the BMW M is all about the motor is obviously from the E92 M3 generation of buyers-- relative newbies to the brand BMW M has always been about the cohesion between engine, chassis and driver, that includes cars like the M5 and M6.

In case you missed it, there was a horsepower/displacement war between MB, BMW and Audi in the late '90s and thats why we have such ridiculous displacement cars in the current generation of M vehicles, which actually most M enthusiasts thought was overboard and just too much engine for the cars (too american in ethos). This is not the norm and those days are over.

Now that things are coming back to the way they should be, it is funny to read these comments, from people who sound like they should be mustang owners at heart

Forget about the fact that the car has turbos, sit behind the wheel, drive the car, feel the power and throttle response, feel the way the car responds to your command, then judge if you like the motor or not. Sitting here on a forum whining about a car thats possibly going to be the most balanced M car in the last 10 years (short of the GTS?) only makes you look foolish.

After you drive the car, if the engine falls short of expectations for an M car, then we have legitimate gripes, but right now, which one of us can really talk--- only the guys who went to the special invite pre-drive event. And big surprise, they all seem to love the engine, chassis and car as a unit, who can dispute them here?

I ask all you complainers this, if a turbo I-6 engine isn't good enough for an M car, what must you think of an inline 4 cylinder engine in the E30 M3? (did you even know there was a 4 cylinder engine in one of the greatest M cars of all time, probably not-- try driving it, the car is certainly NOT focused around the engine, its focused around the driver).

If you do believe a true M car should have only a V8, then an E92 M3 or next generation M5 will surely fit your bill, if you want BMW to offer you a NA I6 1M sitting next to the turbo 335is, then you are foolish. Simple as that.

[spiderz17]

^

[Kurt_OH]

It isn't the turbos that are objectionable to many; it's that it's labeled as an ///M car, yet has the same engine as many non-M BMWs, and frankly just isn't all that powerful for a 3300lb car. They should have given it a bump in HP, even if only to keep the ///M engines superior to the non-Ms.

[marcel b]

Originally Posted by deshields

First of all, anyone who thinks the BMW M is all about the motor is obviously from the E92 M3 generation of buyers-- relative newbies to the brand BMW M has always been about the cohesion between engine, chassis and driver, that includes cars like the M5 and M6.

In case you missed it, there was a horsepower/displacement war between MB, BMW and Audi in the late '90s and thats why we have such ridiculous displacement cars in the current generation of M vehicles, which actually most M enthusiasts thought was overboard and just too much engine for the cars (too american in ethos). This is not the norm and those days are over.

Now that things are coming back to the way they should be, it is funny to read these comments, from people who sound like they should be mustang owners at heart

Forget about the fact that the car has turbos, sit behind the wheel, drive the car, feel the power and throttle response, feel the way the car responds to your command, then judge if you like the motor or not. Sitting here on a forum whining about a car thats possibly going to be the most balanced M car in the last 10 years (short of the GTS?) only makes you look foolish.

After you drive the car, if the engine falls short of expectations for an M car, then we have legitimate gripes, but right now, which one of us can really talk--- only the guys who went to the special invite pre-drive event. And big surprise, they all seem to love the engine, chassis and car as a unit, who can dispute them here?

I ask all you complainers this, if a turbo I-6 engine isn't good enough for an M car, what must you think of an inline 4 cylinder engine in the E30 M3? (did you even know there was a 4 cylinder engine in one of the greatest M cars of all time, probably not-- try driving it, the car is certainly NOT focused around the engine, its focused around the driver).

If you do believe a true M car should have only a V8, then an E92 M3 or next generation M5 will surely fit your bill, if you want BMW to offer you a NA I6 1M sitting next to the turbo 335is, then you are foolish. Simple as that.

[Technic]

Originally Posted by Kurt_OH

It isn't the turbos that are objectionable to many; it's that it's labeled as an ///M car, yet has the same engine as many non-M BMWs, and frankly just isn't all that powerful for a 3300lb car. They should have given it a bump in HP, even if only to keep the ///M engines superior to the non-Ms.

Thanks... it seems that the reading comprehension level in this thread is quite low for other members.

[deshields]

Originally Posted by Technic

Thanks... it seems that the reading comprehension level in this thread is quite low for other members.

Originally Posted by Kurt_OH

It isn't the turbos that are objectionable to many; it's that it's labeled as an ///M car, yet has the same engine as many non-M BMWs, and frankly just isn't all that powerful for a 3300lb car. They should have given it a bump in HP, even if only to keep the ///M engines superior to the non-Ms.

So if my reading comprehension is serving me correctly, the fact that engine has to be unique from anything else in the BMW lineup is more important then the overall performance of the car, and is what defined BMW M, correct? That is why BMW M has "lost its way", correct?

What that basically means is that the engine (and car) is just a status symbol to you.

Id suggest moving onto a car from Modena (even the cars from Stuttgart share engines between models), if that is the case, because this isn't the first M car to use an engine based on a lowly production series car. Do your homework on the S14 in the E30 M3, the 240HP S50 and even the venerable S54 was based on the dare I say it... the M52 that you could also find in the 325i. But the E30 M3 can't be a real M car, it only had a modified cylinder head on top of a 318i engine, BMW M must have clearly lost its way back in the '80s.

I think the drivers among us will appreciate the car's performance once we get it in our hands. For the status hogs, I sincerely don't understand why you would be looking at a 1M, it is a 1-Series afterall.... <extreme sarcasm>

[Technic]

Originally Posted by deshields

So if my reading comprehension is serving me correctly, the fact that engine has to be unique from anything else in the BMW lineup is more important then the overall performance of the car, and is what defined BMW M, correct? That is why BMW M has "lost its way", correct?

What that basically means is that the engine (and car) is just a status symbol to you.

Id suggest moving onto a car from Modena (even the cars from Stuttgart share engines between models), if that is the case, because this isn't the first M car to use an engine based on a lowly production series car. Do your homework on the S14 in the E30 M3, the 240HP S50 and even the venerable S54 was based on the dare I say it... the M52 that you could also find in the 325i. But the E30 M3 can't be a real M car, it only had a modified cylinder head on top of a 318i engine, BMW M must have clearly lost its way back in the '80s.

I think the drivers among us will appreciate the car's performance once we get it in our hands. For the status hogs, I sincerely don't understand why you would be looking at a 1M, it is a 1-Series afterall.... <extreme sarcasm>

Now I know for sure that your reading comprehension is quite low.

Noboby -at least not me- is asking for a unique and brand new engine here as BMW was very clear since the very first announcement that the main selling point of this car was to be "affordability". You are the one bringing "status" as an argument, which I consider absurd.

The real argument here -again, at least to me- is that not only this has never been done before by the M Division but that they did not have to do it this way at all while keeping the production costs low. I do not know what is the problem in keeping the M Division core values intact while making more money.

[twenzel]

Originally Posted by deshields

First of all, anyone who thinks the BMW M is all about the motor is obviously from the E92 M3 generation of buyers-- relative newbies to the brand BMW M has always been about the cohesion between engine, chassis and driver, that includes cars like the M5 and M6.

In case you missed it, there was a horsepower/displacement war between MB, BMW and Audi in the late '90s and thats why we have such ridiculous displacement cars in the current generation of M vehicles, which actually most M enthusiasts thought was overboard and just too much engine for the cars (too american in ethos). This is not the norm and those days are over.

Now that things are coming back to the way they should be, it is funny to read these comments, from people who sound like they should be mustang owners at heart

Forget about the fact that the car has turbos, sit behind the wheel, drive the car, feel the power and throttle response, feel the way the car responds to your command, then judge if you like the motor or not. Sitting here on a forum whining about a car thats possibly going to be the most balanced M car in the last 10 years (short of the GTS?) only makes you look foolish.

After you drive the car, if the engine falls short of expectations for an M car, then we have legitimate gripes, but right now, which one of us can really talk--- only the guys who went to the special invite pre-drive event. And big surprise, they all seem to love the engine, chassis and car as a unit, who can dispute them here?

I ask all you complainers this, if a turbo I-6 engine isn't good enough for an M car, what must you think of an inline 4 cylinder engine in the E30 M3? (did you even know there was a 4 cylinder engine in one of the greatest M cars of all time, probably not-- try driving it, the car is certainly NOT focused around the engine, its focused around the driver).

If you do believe a true M car should have only a V8, then an E92 M3 or next generation M5 will surely fit your bill, if you want BMW to offer you a NA I6 1M sitting next to the turbo 335is, then you are foolish. Simple as that.

Thank you, you've somewhat restored my faith in this forum.

[spiderz17]

Originally Posted by deshields

So if my reading comprehension is serving me correctly, the fact that engine has to be unique from anything else in the BMW lineup is more important then the overall performance of the car, and is what defined BMW M, correct? That is why BMW M has "lost its way", correct?

What that basically means is that the engine (and car) is just a status symbol to you.

Id suggest moving onto a car from Modena (even the cars from Stuttgart share engines between models), if that is the case, because this isn't the first M car to use an engine based on a lowly production series car. Do your homework on the S14 in the E30 M3, the 240HP S50 and even the venerable S54 was based on the dare I say it... the M52 that you could also find in the 325i. But the E30 M3 can't be a real M car, it only had a modified cylinder head on top of a 318i engine, BMW M must have clearly lost its way back in the '80s.

I think the drivers among us will appreciate the car's performance once we get it in our hands. For the status hogs, I sincerely don't understand why you would be looking at a 1M, it is a 1-Series afterall.... <extreme sarcasm>

Wow, You're on a roll, keep it coming!!

You've eloquently stated what's been rolling around in my mind the entire time folks on here have been griping about an M sharing a powerplant with a lowly AG car.

[Jaguar66]

Originally Posted by Advevo

The 1M coupe is the parts bin car of bmw. The budget to make this car was very low and because of the parts bin this car exists.

So my guess is. The engine is a Z4is engine not much changed only flywheel and ecu which is rather cheap to develop.

And of course a very fast M badge on the engine cover.

I hope i am wrong.

Sorry to say, at this point, you are inaccurate. The car isn't even here, and people are already minimizing the 1M Coupe.

FYI No M badge on the engine.



What else in everyones speculation will turn out to be inaccurate?

An E46 M3 beating parts bin car, for a price less than a new E46 M3. Give me parts bin cars every day of the week.

[spiderz17]

Originally Posted by RobMason

Sorry to say, at this point, you are inaccurate. The car isn't even here, and people are already minimizing the 1M Coupe.

FYI No M badge on the engine.



What else in everyones speculation will turn out to be inaccurate?

An E 46 M3 beating parts bin car, for less than a new E46 M3. Give me parts bin cars every day of the week.

No M badge, but it does say "Powered by BMW M."

Overall, agree with your point, though.

[Jaguar66]

Originally Posted by Technic

The real argument here ... is that not only this has never been done before by the M Division but that they did not have to do it this way at all while keeping the production costs low. I do not know what is the problem in keeping the M Division core values intact while making more money.

I submit that these statements are only a point of view. Once the car arrives, I submit that the M Division core values will have been kept intact. In my opinion.

Where is the "Core Value" statement printed? I have never seen it.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by deshields

First of all, anyone who thinks the BMW M is all about the motor is obviously from the E92 M3 generation of buyers-- relative newbies to the brand BMW M has always been about the cohesion between engine, chassis and driver, that includes cars like the M5 and M6.

In case you missed it, there was a horsepower/displacement war between MB, BMW and Audi in the late '90s and thats why we have such ridiculous displacement cars in the current generation of M vehicles, which actually most M enthusiasts thought was overboard and just too much engine for the cars (too american in ethos). This is not the norm and those days are over.

Now that things are coming back to the way they should be, it is funny to read these comments, from people who sound like they should be mustang owners at heart

Forget about the fact that the car has turbos, sit behind the wheel, drive the car, feel the power and throttle response, feel the way the car responds to your command, then judge if you like the motor or not. Sitting here on a forum whining about a car thats possibly going to be the most balanced M car in the last 10 years (short of the GTS?) only makes you look foolish.

After you drive the car, if the engine falls short of expectations for an M car, then we have legitimate gripes, but right now, which one of us can really talk--- only the guys who went to the special invite pre-drive event. And big surprise, they all seem to love the engine, chassis and car as a unit, who can dispute them here?

I ask all you complainers this, if a turbo I-6 engine isn't good enough for an M car, what must you think of an inline 4 cylinder engine in the E30 M3? (did you even know there was a 4 cylinder engine in one of the greatest M cars of all time, probably not-- try driving it, the car is certainly NOT focused around the engine, its focused around the driver).

If you do believe a true M car should have only a V8, then an E92 M3 or next generation M5 will surely fit your bill, if you want BMW to offer you a NA I6 1M sitting next to the turbo 335is, then you are foolish. Simple as that.

my favorite post this week.

[gstopyra]

Originally Posted by Kurt_OH

They should have given it a bump in HP, even if only to keep the ///M engines superior to the non-Ms.

Has everyone who's demanding more HP forgotten that Torque is what accelerates a car...and pulls you out of a corner with your eyeballs rolling in the back of your head? This "overboost" is a significant feature that many seem to be overlooking, and in my opinion will more than make up for a perceived lack of HP.

Again, those who were at the pre-drive event had nothing but praise...and don't seem to be missing the extra HP or "S" designation of the motor.

As many have already stated...if you don't like it, don't buy it. Spend your money searching for a E30 or E46 M3. Doesn't bother me either way. If there were a I4 turbo that could give the desired power output, response, and feel, slapped an S# on it and dropped that in this 1M, would y'all still be as upset? I think so, but then again, less weight (up front) would make this car a beast! I can't wait to see what the next 1M (M2) with a I4T can do!

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by RobMason

I submit that these statements are only a point of view. Once the car arrives, I submit that the M Division core values will have been kept intact. In my opinion.

Where is the "Core Value" statement printed? I have never seen it.

EXACTLY the point I have been trying to make... Everyone feels like there has been some mission statement communicated by BMW M that explains what defines an M car in terms of engine design, and I've never seen such a thing.

[Kurt_OH]

Originally Posted by deshields

So if my reading comprehension is serving me correctly, the fact that engine has to be unique from anything else in the BMW lineup is more important then the overall performance of the car, and is what defined BMW M, correct? That is why BMW M has "lost its way", correct?

What that basically means is that the engine (and car) is just a status symbol to you.

Id suggest moving onto a car from Modena (even the cars from Stuttgart share engines between models), if that is the case, because this isn't the first M car to use an engine based on a lowly production series car. Do your homework on the S14 in the E30 M3, the 240HP S50 and even the venerable S54 was based on the dare I say it... the M52 that you could also find in the 325i. But the E30 M3 can't be a real M car, it only had a modified cylinder head on top of a 318i engine, BMW M must have clearly lost its way back in the '80s.

I think the drivers among us will appreciate the car's performance once we get it in our hands. For the status hogs, I sincerely don't understand why you would be looking at a 1M, it is a 1-Series afterall.... <extreme sarcasm>

Don't lump me into your weak a$$ ad hominem crap.

I also don't get what's so wrong with wanting an engine in an M that is higher performance than the non-M BMWs?

Originally Posted by deshields

Now that things are coming back to the way they should be, it is funny to read these comments, from people who sound like they should be mustang owners at heart

You mean like the Run of the mill Mustang GT that spanked the M3 in a recent road test comparison (with it's ancient live axle!)?

I wonder what the Boss 302, much less the Laguna Seca edition, is gonna do?

I hope BMW doesn't have the same dismissive attitude toward that car and other less expensive potential competition for their performance offerings; ALLEGEDLY they're looking for younger buyers. That's exactly what BOTH the 1M and Boss (along with STI, EVO and others) will appeal to.

[Graystone]

sounds like many have not driven an54, it is not the turbos of the old days u would be hard pressed to feel lag....and to me the engine is the whole bay and how the parts work as a whole, putting great minds to the weak points of a great platform motor the n 54 can only make for a fantastic reliable motor, what better to call m....they have had the upper hand on thousands of cars to pinpoint problem areas. now if the turbos ARE a little bigger that is the icing...

[Pete_vB]

I think I'm going to start a new "M3 Owner Freak-Out Thread". This will save current M3 owners a lot of time- instead of going to every individual 1M thread with their various complaints, everything can go in one place. Sub topics will include:

1. The 1M is not a real M car because: (Engine, shares too many parts with other cars, not "special" enough...)
2. The 1M will be slow because: (Engine, no DCT...)
3. The 1M is a bad value because: (Short development time, see 1 & 2 above...)
4. I don't like the 1M because: (It will be faster than my M3 with a 1K chip which makes me feel inadequate, it will out handle my car out of the box, etc...)

[Graystone]

Originally Posted by Pete_vB

I think I'm going to start a new "M3 Owner Freak-Out Thread". This will save current M3 owners a lot of time- instead of going to every individual 1M thread with their various complaints, everything can go in one place. Sub topics will include:

1. The 1M is not a real M car because: (Engine, shares too many parts with other cars, not "special" enough...)
2. The 1M will be slow because: (Engine, no DCT...)
3. The 1M is a bad value because: (Short development time, see 1 & 2 above...)
4. I don't like the 1M because: (It will be faster than my M3 with a 1K chip which makes me feel inadequate, it will out handle my car out of the box, etc...)

LoL

[Technic]

Originally Posted by RobMason

I submit that these statements are only a point of view. Once the car arrives, I submit that the M Division core values will have been kept intact. In my opinion.

Where is the "Core Value" statement printed? I have never seen it.

Do a search for BMW M Division and you will find out what the "core values" are.

[brizzom]

I will say what many have been saying all along from the beginning..

1m = completely overhyped 135is

[MrRoboto]

^^Ding