http://www.topgear.com/blogs/drives/079-bmw-m3/

Their thoughts?

 

cool

 

I want one. Anyone have a spare $60,000 layin around??

 

The review here isn't all that good >>

Another so-so first drive review from CAR magazine >>

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/first_d...sid=841&page=1

 

Whenever I read M3 reviews, I always have to remind myself that it's a sedan. Once I remember that, I'm somewhat impressed and would like to try one someday.

 

Since when do sedans come with two doors?

 

The TopGear review wasn't 100% positive either:

By the way, the UK price of £51k is the equivalent of $102k. At least the US mags shouldn't complain about the price.

 

This has always been a part of the problem with high revving, mega-hp, no-torque engines. Gas mileage is awful far more often than not, especially when compared with other methods of extracting the same amount of hp. Further take into consideration the fact that these things have to be geared out the ying-yang to go fast since there is no large supply of torque to use as leverage to get up to speed faster and I fail to see the fascination.

A nice compromise can be struck in a naturally aspirated engine between a nice torque curve and high hp per liter, as can be seen in Ferrari's 599, but the M3 is one of several modern cars that takes this further than is truly desirable IMO. If it's as elemental as the current AMG Black model apparently is I'll be far more interested in Mercedes' upcoming C63 AMG a car which will employ an engine that is better in every way but sheer hp per liter than this.

 

The E92 M3 seems to have gone up market and a bit more refined than my E46 M3. Seems like a hugely impressive motor, a lot of the same 3.2 I6 S54 engine tech applied to a larger 4.0 V8 to great effect, i.e., 420 hp vs 333 hp.

As for gas mileage and torque, I can speak for my M3 in that it does pretty well in both counts, getting remarkably good mileage -- I've seen close to 33mpg highway -- for a 333hp engine pushing a 3400lb car (general efficiency and good aerodymics help here). Yeah, of course it'll drop quite a bit in the city, it is a 333hp motor pushing a 3400 lb car after all, but that's purely a function of your right foot there and I often get 22-24mpg if I show priestly restraint.

It's got great torque too (263 lb/ft) for but a naturally aspirated 3.2 liter motor (11.5 CR helps here). Yeah, the peak is somewhat high, 5900 rpm, but it actually is a remarkably broad torque band (VANOS helping here), hardly some gutless Honda VTEC down low. And given how smoothly and eagerly it does rev, that's more treat than trauma. And given an M3 might barely take a Mustang (stock for stock) in the quarter mile, despite spotting it nearly a liter and a half displacement shows its putting out some serious beans.

But yeah, early returns seem to indicate that, despite the stellar motor, the hard, ultra-pure sporting edge of the E46 has been honed down a touch. Hardly a Buick, but perhaps more a GT car than a 4-seat sports car the E46 was.

Perhaps now, they might stick the S54 motor in the upcoming 1-Series, stripped down and ultra focused as an M1???

 

Well it sure doesn't look like a sports car to me, but if you want to call it a $60k "sports car", then I'm even less impressed.

It's just a hopped up 3 series, and I think most people consider the 3 series a sedan. I'm probably technically wrong though. Maybe it's a sporty coupe or something... either way, to me it looks like a sedan.

Ok ok, so maybe I'm being a bit harsh... I admit I have it out for the M3 a little bit. I just don't think it deserves that massive cult following it has. You say "M3" and girls get wet and all the boy racers cream their shorts.

 

I can't get used to the idea of an M1 badge on anything but...well, an M1 if you know what I mean.

 

tru'dat, not that there are to many M1 purists out there to go nuts over something else being called an M1.

 

All BMWs are overrated, IMO.

Great dynamics and rock solid build structure, to be sure, but very dodgy when it comes to electricals and overall reliability.

I speak from experience as I know many people who have them.

Hell, the other evening I was out at a local beachfront park, and a guy with a well maintained '01 740 couldn't get his car to start. He only had 50K miles on it. He said he'd had it in to the dealership once, and they gave him some gobbledigook answer about the sophistication of the computerized starter system - one they couldn't seem to fix, BTW - and I couldn't begin to make head nor tails of his rendition of the story, mostly because I don't think HE could make head nor tails of what they told him.

A six year-old car with barely 50K miles on it and it left him stranded. That's BS.

Yeah, it's the utlimate driving machine...when it's actually driving. Many owners understand this and get rid of their cars after the warranty (or extended warranty) is up.

Depreciation on BMWs is really bad, too...just as bad as Ford.

I appreciate the engineering (one might argue OVER engineering) that goes into them, but I've NEVER had any desire to own one.

 

Win a track day at the Nürburgring with the new M3:

http://www.topgear.com/bmwm3/