2008 BMW M3: Now In ALMS for 2008 Season

  • Thread starter Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 247 comments
  • 16,566 views
Maybe it's the angle, but the rims look smaller in the 2nd photo. They also don't look like the Competition wheels which give it a bit of a different look.
 
The car has looked very visually underwheeled from the beginning.

Glad to see the project is coming along nicely. An article about the car came in my most recent Road and Track, but sadly I was too lazy to read it. So we only have, what, 14 or 15 months to wait? I think I might be able to last that long, though it will get tough in the last couple of months. Keep it up, BMW!
 
*McLaren*
Maybe it's the angle, but the rims look smaller in the 2nd photo. They also don't look like the Competition wheels which give it a bit of a different look.
Click to expand...
You are right. It looks like a set of 15's in the second pic. :lol:
 
It still looks like a nice car, and I have to agree that the change in color helps it a lot. Show me one in electric blue, and I'm sure I'd be convinced that I'd want one...

Still, its an awfully long wait, don't you think?
 
I can't tell if it is the smaller wheels or the color change, but the red one looks infinitely better than the concept.
It also may be that the red car doesn't sit as low, or that the body kit was toned down a bit.
In any case, it is far better looking.
 
I think a different wheel design could give the impression of bigger wheels. Give me something with a bit of a dish.

I like the colour, and that first shot really does give off a feeling of a shrunken 6-series, so I do see some family resemblance. Obviously not in the face, but the general stance when it attacks a corner. It looks good, really. Also, I was under the impression CF roofs were now standard for all two-door M models. Though the M Coupe kinda goes against that, huh...
 
Toronado
I can't tell if it is the smaller wheels or the color change, but the red one looks infinitely better than the concept.
It also may be that the red car doesn't sit as low, or that the body kit was toned down a bit.
In any case, it is far better looking.
Click to expand...

Maybe it was me, but did the buldge also look slightly...smaller?
 
e92M3_vs_e46M3_front.jpg


e92M3_vs_e46M3_rear.jpg



e92M3_vs_e46M3_side.jpg


e92M3_vs_e46M3_frontquarter_02.jpg


e92M3_vs_e46M3_rearquarter.jpg


e92M3_vs_e46M3_interior.jpg


I love the E92 , and the M3 versions put why to the top of my fav BMW list
 
Wow. I was just starting to like the E92 M3's looks, and then BMW318ciC had to go and ruin it with that set of photos. :lol:

It would help if the E92's pictures were taken under similar lighting and were doctored up in a similar fashion.
 
It may just be the lighting, but I seem to like the outgoing car better. The old one seems better finished than the new and everything seems to compliment everything else. I find that those shots seem to make the new car look a bit aftermarket. But, as I said, all of this could be due to tricks of the light. I wouldn't be suprised if the new car looked more striking and better than the old when compared side-by-side in the metal, though.
 
The concept wheels probably are bigger. It's a super common hook carmakers use for concept and show cars, bigger is always nicer, but when it comes down to it, they'd like you to have better performance over the looks.
 
I quite like the white. I have recently become a fan of white Porsches and Vee-Dubs. This car is not much of an exception. How sweet would it look with the black rims of the red car...
 
Wow, the white really looks a lot better, partially due to the whole big tires > better proportions thing.

I actually have to say I like the looks of the E92 better in the side by side up there, I prefer my BMW's a little funny looking. The E46 was too.... clean cut.
 
There is a flash mini-site at BMW AG.

http://www.bmw.com/com/en/index_highend.html

There is an M3 configurator that is also 360 degree rotateable. 18" inch wheels standard, 19s optional. Melbourne Red replaces long serving Imola Red, so the red M3 above is actually Melbourne, not Imola.

The car is starting to look good to me.. all the fussy looking details are making sense now. By the gods, they need to do something about those mirrors, though.. they are hideous.


M
 
A little interesting tidbit: Despite BMW's nonstop mention of lightweight components, and how the engine weighs less than the outgoing unit, the new M3 will pork up. A lot.
Autozine.org
M3 gets fat

[SIZE=-1]Shortly after the prototype and the V8 engine, BMW has released specifications of the production M3. Basically, everything is unchanged from the prototype. However, the most interesting to us is whether it weighs more than the old car. In the press release, BMW stressed that the new M3 employs a lot of lightweight materials, such as a roof made of carbon-fiber reinforced plastic (like the previous M3 CSL and M6), aluminum front suspensions, forged aluminum rear suspensions and compound disc brakes. Moreover, the aluminum V8 engine is 15kg lighter than the old iron-block straight-6. Nevertheless, in the end the kerb weight is 1580kg (DIN), compare to the old M3's 1495kg and M3 CSL's 1385kg. So where does the extra fat come from ?

Anyway, thanks to the more powerful engine, the new car still returns a considerably higher power-to-weight ratio: 266hp/ton (old M3: 229hp/ton; old CSL: 260hp/ton). 0-62 mph is claimed at 4.8 seconds. The acceleration performance of the new car is never in doubt, but I have reservation about its braking - although the ventilated and grooved discs look big (i.e. 360mm front and 350mm rear), they are clamped by single-piston calipers like the previous generation. Now coping with the increased weight, the braking could continue to be the weakest link of M3.
Click to expand...

Linky.
If that number is true, it will now outweigh the 335Ci by a hundred pounds or so, the opposite to how it was with the E46.
[/SIZE]
 
Wtf. Single piston brake clipers?
 
Omnis
Wtf. Single piston brake clipers?
Click to expand...

I was thinking exactly the same thing...

...I mean, don't most 'performance' cars do with at-least two or more? I'm trying to remember if the Cobalt SS has two or not...

The weight issue is an interesting one. I wouldn't have expected it to jump that much over the outgoing model, particularly with the extensive use of lightweight materials. At nearly 3500lbs, it seems like a lot for a M3, much less a BMW 3-series. And with the 'cheap' brakes, I too would share my concerns with the above author with braking performance...
 
Uh... everywhere I read the E46 M3 comes in at 1570kg. Hell, an old 330Ci is 1510. So it gained 10kg... pretty decent considering the auto industry standard.

The white and 19in rims combo looks so much better. My only complaint is that the rear bumper needs to cover up that exhaust, it looks very untidy with it all hanging out in view, and not in a sporty way something like a Ferrari could pull off.
 
Toronado
A little interesting tidbit: Despite BMW's nonstop mention of lightweight components, and how the engine weighs less than the outgoing unit, the new M3 will pork up. A lot.
Click to expand...

Uh, my message to the autozine.com guys: Hello. Welcome to 2001.

1580 kg is 3483 lbs.

The E46 M3, in base US spec weighed 3450 lb. I don't know where they got 1495kg (3295 lbs.) from, but that has no basis in reality, unless it's a dry weight. Also 3450 is without the heavy electric seats (~75 lbs. each) that were an option in the Premium Package. Loaded E46 M3s were over 3500 lbs. A base US spec E46 330Ci weighed 3280 lbs. with the manual, and that the included power seats which were standard in that car. All weights expressed are Curb Weights.

If the E92 M3 is only 33 lbs. heavier than it's predecessors, we should all breathe a sigh of relief because every series M3 ever produced was always significantly heavier than the basic 3-series it was based on.

(Yes, even the E30 M3)

The M3's most obvious competition, the RS4, weighs in at ... you ready?

Get this... 3957 lbs.


Omnis
Wtf. Single piston brake clipers?
Click to expand...

The number of pistons in a caliper is not especially relevant to a car's outright stopping ability. Remember that tires are what's stopping the car. If the car can produce enough clamping force to exceed the total grip of the tires, the number of calipers doesn't matter.

My Z4 M has 'only' single piston calipers and will stop from 60 in 115 ft, which is 6 feet shorter than an RS4, 1 foot shorter than a 997 Turbo only 7 feet longer than an F430.* (Road & Track Test Summary 5/07)

The advantage of a single piston design is lower unsprung weight and simplicity, so for all you guys complaining about weight, remember that adding mass to wheel/hub assembly is the WORST place to start doing it.

However, a disadvantage is the amount of brake pad touching the disc (total swepted surface) will generally be less than that of a multi-caliper design. This is why lots of people experience brake fade at the track in their Ms. If you have less total swept area, the heat generated from repeated braking will soaking into less total volume.

Of course, switching from a stock pad to a track pad and flushing out the brake system before a track day takes care of this problem for 90% of track users.


M
 
///M-Spec
Uh, my message to the autozine.com guys: Hello. Welcome to 2001.

1580 kg is 3483 lbs.

The E46 M3, in base US spec weighed 3450 lb. I don't know where they got 1495kg (3295 lbs.) from, but that has no basis in reality, unless it's a dry weight. Also 3450 is without the heavy electric seats (~75 lbs. each) that were an option in the Premium Package. Loaded E46 M3s were over 3500 lbs. A base US spec E46 330Ci weighed 3280 lbs. with the manual, and that the included power seats which were standard in that car. All weights expressed are Curb Weights.

If the E92 M3 is only 33 lbs. heavier than it's predecessors, we should all breathe a sigh of relief because every series M3 ever produced was always significantly heavier than the basic 3-series it was based on.

(Yes, even the E30 M3)

The M3's most obvious competition, the RS4, weighs in at ... you ready?

Get this... 3957 lbs.




The number of pistons in a caliper is not especially relevant to a car's outright stopping ability. Remember that tires are what's stopping the car. If the car can produce enough clamping force to exceed the total grip of the tires, the number of calipers doesn't matter.

My Z4 M has 'only' single piston calipers and will stop from 60 in 115 ft, which is 7 feet shorter than an RS4, 2 feet shorter than a 997 Turbo only 7 feet longer than an F430.* (Road & Track Test Summary 5/07)

The advantage of a single piston design is lower unsprung weight and simplicity, so for all you guys complaining about weight, remember that adding mass to wheel/hub assembly is the WORST place to start doing it.

However, a disadvantage is the amount of brake pad touching the disc (total swepted surface) will generally be less than that of a multi-caliper design. This is why lots of people experience brake fade at the track in their Ms. If you have less total swept area, the heat generated from repeated braking will soaking into less total volume.

Of course, switching from a stock pad to a track pad and flushing out the brake system before a track day takes care of this problem for 90% of track users.


M
Click to expand...

+Rep. Great post. I was just taken aback a little bit, as the "more is better" with brakes is the usual stereotype or whatever you want to call it. Thanks for clearing up everything, though.
 
It's something one of our Nissan gurus from back when I was on the Nissan boards (Mike Kojima... some of you SportCompactCar readers might know him) stressed every now and then... multi-piston, slotted and cross-drilled big brakes don't always make for better stopping distances... just more consistent ones on track.

It'll be interesting to see the first track-test of the RS4 against the new M3... but it'll probably be a massacre. :D
 
I'm really liking this Alpine White, especially how it works out with the taillights.
 
///M-Spec
The M3's most obvious competition, the RS4, weighs in at ... you ready?

Get this... 3957 lbs.
Click to expand...

Wow. I find that kinda surprising, given that the larger GM Zeta/VE models roll in at about 4000 lbs even with the V8 and the automatic...
 
///M-Spec
Here are a couple of photos of an Imola Red E92 M3. IMO, it looks much better in this color than Chrome Shadow on the concept car.





The Dumbo side mirrors are still looking ugly to me.

Photo credits: Autoweek. Full story and more pictures HERE

Story highlights:
  • Article states the car in the picture is the production version
  • US version to appear in mid-2008 as '09 model
  • V8 weighs 445 lbs (202 kg) fully dressed. This is 33 lbs (15 kg) lighter than the iron-block S54 straight six in the E46 M3 and Z4 M Roadster/Coupe
  • Engine redline incorrectly reported at 8400 RPM (it is actually 8300 RPM)
  • Final drive is 3.82
  • Article implies CF roof panel is a keeper for the standard car (ie, it is not reserved for the CSL version)
  • Electronically adjusted dampeners will be an option --for the first time on the M3

M
Click to expand...

This car looks absolutely gorgeous 👍

I think it even looks better then the previous M3, each its own taste I guess :) Unlike others, I actually like those sidemirrors alot 👍
 
Looks like we have official word on the weight, at least in EU spec.

M3 Official Press Release at bmwusa.com

1655kg, EU unladen, which is DIN road weight (all fluids) and includes 75kg for driver and luggage.

Translating this to US curb weight: 1655-75= 1580kg

Which is 3,483 lbs.

That is 33 lbs. heavier than the E46 M3 and 88 lbs. LIGHTER than the 335i.

Which would make it the first M3 ever to weigh less than the top 3-series on which it's based.


M
 
Back