BRZ vs E46 M3

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by 7thgear

Also if it's indeed 3200 pounds then by gosh it either has a ridiculously thick carcass or it has every known creature comfort and airbag known to man, cuz that car is small.

The 128i isn't that small. It looks to me like it's only slightly narrower and less long vs. the 3-series, but same height (or taller even). It will absolutely engulf an FRS:



The 1-series is pretty much 95% of a 3-series in terms of size/mass.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Itgb

I own an E46 M3 convertible, and it is heavy. Coupes are lighter, but still heavy relative to E30 M3s. In order to please consumers who constantly want more power, more luxury, more technology, BMW has gone that route with all of their cars. The only good thing is that this has left a gaping hole at the bottom of their lineup to bring something smaller, lighter, RWD, and fun to drive to the masses.

Yes, yes, yes, yes, and YES.

A 128i starts at 3200lbs and $32k, so it's not far off the mark. Maybe the next generation 2-series coupe will bring us closer to the E30 weight and fun factor that we all wish for.

I think the next 1- and 2-series are 4cylinder-only models, so it *would* have been possible for them to be smaller and lighter-weight. But the word is that the new 1 is going to be BIGGER! wtf...

At least they're still going to be rwd, reaction from the enthusiast BMW community turned their fwd plan around, at least for the moment...

[SVTSHC]

Originally Posted by LSxJunkie

BMW has no incentive to build another lightweight, modestly powered driver's car. They've built a brand image on balancing dynamic performance with luxury. 3ers, 5ers, and X5s practically sell themselves. The cost of developing a new car, tooling for manufacturing, marketing... not worth it when their other cars are carrying their weight in sales. Especially for such a small market. There is a big difference between people who say they will buy a car on the internet and people who will actually walk into a dealership to buy one.

Toyota is a brand whose image is boredom. That's not very compelling That is why the GT86 made sense in the home market. They sold, for the last 8 years, 12 different beige cars. Scion is a brand aimed directly at young car enthusiasts. That's why the FR-S makes sense here. Subaru has sold compelling, affordable, lightweight cars for years. That's why the BRZ makes sense.

A 2002? Where does that slot in? Under the 1er? BMW dealerships have an air of snobbery around them. That's part of what they sell. Exclusivity. They've carefully cultivated that image for the last 20 years. I can guarantee that most will dealers will cringe at the thought of putting a 28k 2002 next to a 90k 7er on the showroom floor. Even more so at the thought of having 22-25 year olds with mediocre credit coming into their store daily looking to finance the new affordable BMW.




Long story short, it makes absolutely no financial sense for BMW to do so, and BMW is first and foremost a business.

I agree with you 100%. I won't argue the point anymore with Zdan, it's like slamming my head into a wall over. Nothings getting done, nothing will get through and I'll just end up with a headache.


But on a sidenote Zdan, yes I've tracked my car. Many many times, I don't think the majority of people that bought an SVT Focus had any intention of "not" tracking the car. But have you ever worked in the business side of the automotive industry? You see it's easy to take your stand when you don't have experience dealing with target demographics and showing gains every fiscal year; but the industry is just what it is, an industry. Businesses do what is in a businesses best interest; spending money on R&D for a platform that isn't necessary and as a result won't move a large amount of units is wasted money. A LOT of wasted money.

Would it be nice if BMW made an ultra light, enthusiast tailored sports car? Sure, why wouldn't it.
Would it make sense for BMW to make an ultra light, enthusiast tailored sports car? Not in the slightest.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by SVTSHC

I won't argue the point anymore with Zdan, it's like slamming my head into a wall over. Nothings getting done, nothing will get through and I'll just end up with a headache.

I will never agree with the argument that "this is what brand X did, therefore this is what brand X *had* to do and what was BEST for them".

Corvette has held the line on size and weight over many MANY years.
Porsche has at least come close to holding the line over the past 15 or so years. (911 went from ~2800 lb. in the mid-80s to 3000+ in the mid-90s to ~3100 or so now for the lightest-weight variant), and it hasn't destroyed them.
The M3, however, went from ~2800 in the mid-80s to ~3200 in the mid-90s to 3400 in the 00's to 3700 lb. today. That's a pretty huge weight gain.

But on a sidenote Zdan, yes I've tracked my car. Many many times, I don't think the majority of people that bought an SVT Focus had any intention of "not" tracking the car.

I would bet a 6-pack that over half have never been to the track. Not a dig, I'm sure the same is true for Miatas, S2000s, etc.

But have you ever worked in the business side of the automotive industry?

I'm a stress/structural engineer, but I've developed 2- and 3-wheel electric vehicles (~25hp, 70mph) from the tires up and worked with marketing and design (styling) as well to make the vehicles as desirable as possible from a "normal" consumer's perspective, for their intended usage. Would I have rather designed/developed a cafe racer or race bike? Yes (and actually I did build one of my own), but that didn't prevent me from developing the bikes we DID produce for their intended market with the utmost enthusiasm.

You see it's easy to take your stand when you don't have experience dealing with target demographics and showing gains every fiscal year; but the industry is just what it is, an industry. Businesses do what is in a businesses best interest; spending money on R&D for a platform that isn't necessary and as a result won't move a large amount of units is wasted money. A LOT of wasted money.

So of course BMW should be building big, heavy sedans and SUVs only...
Well, OK, but it also makes BMW less relevant to enthusiasts.
They can continue down the mainstream path, but the cost is that their vehicles will become more and more Buicks and less and less "BMW's", and over time the brand's "sport" cache will be degraded.

I hope the new 1-based 2-series will be a step in the right direction and come in below 3000 lb., but based on the continuous bulking up of their product line over the past couple of decades I doubt it.

Would it be nice if BMW made an ultra light, enthusiast tailored sports car? Sure, why wouldn't it.
Would it make sense for BMW to make an ultra light, enthusiast tailored sports car? Not in the slightest.

Apart from them building an "ultra light" car, I think they could at least keep the 3-series at a realistic weight for the "small" (if no longer the smallEST) BMW. 3500+ lb. is a lot for a "compact" sport sedan! And 3200 lb. is a lot for their lightest-weight "sub-compact" 1-series.

If (and it *is* still a big "if" at this stage) Toyobaru can sell a significant number of 2700 lb. rwd coupes for $25k or so, I guarantee that BMW could do the same at $32k+, and make money doing it.

Would they take the risk? It certainly doesn't look like it. That doesn't mean it's not a risk worth taking.

Meanwhile, the Mercedes-Benzification of BMW continues...

For *some* of us, it's a shame

[KeepGuessing]

Originally Posted by ZDan

I will never agree with the argument that "this is what brand X did, therefore this is what brand X *had* to do and what was BEST for them".

This should be good..

Corvette has held the line on size and weight over many MANY years.

The Corvette is a SINGLE model in the General Motors lineup..
A SINGLE model that turns profits on a very very very inconsequential scale.

Translation: The Corvette isn't a money maker, it's a marketing tool.

Porsche has at least come close to holding the line over the past 15 or so years. (911 went from ~2800 lb. in the mid-80s to 3000+ in the mid-90s to ~3100 or so now for the lightest-weight variant), and it hasn't destroyed them.

Let's start by pointing out that "over the past 15 years" would be a qualifier for the time period of 1997-2012... So I haven't the SLIGHTEST idea why you would bring up "mid 80's" into the equation.

Now let's go into the brand itself.

You're going try and disallow BMW's need for model progression based on PORSCHE?? Are you kidding me?

Last year BMW sold 1,224,280 vehicles world wide.
Last year Porsche PRODUCED 41,949 vehicles total.

PORSCHE up until ~15 years ago, didn't have any other financially successful models...

Porshce up until 10 years ago, could for the life of them produce anything to turn a profit.

Of the ~42,000 vehicles PORSCHE produced last year...22,000 of them were Cayennes.

To try and say "Porsche doesn't change due to the market,etc so BMW has no rational excuse" is 150% preposterous. When Porsche becomes a company that actually has to make a decision based on Market demand, then you can make a long reach for the straw once more, but as is Porsche doesn't even compete on the same scale financially.

Porsche is kept afloat by using a borrowed vehicle with a jacked up MSRP.

You might as well bring Ariel into a conversation and question why Honda doesn't make Go-Karts.

The M3, however, went from ~2800 in the mid-80s to ~3200 in the mid-90s to 3400 in the 00's to 3700 lb. today. That's a pretty huge weight gain.

Once again, you're forgetting quite a bit of hugely important factors.

1. The M3 is based on the 3 series, unlike the 911 which remains it's own model.

2. It being based on another car therein provides many restrictions/constraints on design alternatives...An M3 wouldn't be an M3 if it wasn't based on a 3 series, so if they just took headlights and redesigned it from the ground up we'd have a completely different car.

3. The M3 is HUGELY successful because it manages to be such a capable performer without having a 6 figure price tag.

4. Development costs money, exotic materials cost money...If you want a M3 that's "lightweight, smaller, etc etc" It is now YOUR job to find a way to take the standard e46, the standard e90 and standard F30 bmw 3 series coupe, sedan and convertible and make their dimensions smaller to suit your desires, now you must do so WITHOUT causing the price to skyrocket through the roof, because no one will buy a 320HP german coup that's 140,000 dollars.

The M3 also went from a cast iron 4 cylinder, to numerous versions of a cast iron i6, to a aluminum alloy v8.

The M3's primary competition also went from a 2800lb i5 Coupe, to a 3800lb direct injected V8.

So you complain about the M3 gaining wait, yet have yet to reference the success of the 3 series in the global market....

What is sounds like is you want BMW to make a couple thousand 325i's without the engine...at COST...

send them to the M division..have them develop a brand new engine for the car with the accompanying gearbox...have it meet all the regulator tests etc etc.....Then chop the car to bits to lighten it up and make it smaller reduce it's internal capacities shorten it's wheelbase thin out it's front and rear track to make it more like the "older M's that you're fond of"...put their brand new engine in, and slap a 59,000 dollar price tag on it AND turn a profit.....Sounds like someone doesn't know how the world works.

I would bet a 6-pack that over half have never been to the track. Not a dig, I'm sure the same is true for Miatas, S2000s, etc.

I'm sure they haven't much like Ferrari's bugatti's etc etc etc. Since when does that matter?

[quote]
I'm a stress/structural engineer, but I've developed 2- and 3-wheel electric vehicles (~25hp, 70mph) from the tires up and worked with marketing and design (styling) as well to make the vehicles as desirable as possible from a "normal" consumer's perspective, for their intended usage. Would I have rather designed/developed a cafe racer or race bike? Yes (and actually I did build one of my own), but that didn't prevent me from developing the bikes we DID produce for their intended market with the utmost enthusiasm.

So of course BMW should be building big, heavy sedans and SUVs only...
Well, OK, but it also makes BMW less relevant to enthusiasts.

I would thank you to not put a huge generalizing statement like that towards me, as i'm sure others wouldn't like that as well.

BMW is relevant to enthusiasts. If relevance is a numerical value associated directly with a vehicles race pedigree in correlation to their size increase over the years then you'd have an argument..But it isn't, so you don't.

Lamborghini's are nothing but tarted up Audi's....Are they no longer relevant to enthusiasts?

The lack of live rear axles in popular american "hot rods goes against their standards and practices, but are they no longer relevant to enthusiasts?

You're toting your obscenely naive opinion around on your jacket like it's the truth, when really it's so far from it it just makes you sound like you don't know whats going on. I can TELL you know the happenings of the automotive world by some of the information you bring to the discussion, however i can't help but feel your harboring some animosity towards SOME point in this argument which isn't allowing you to see the "intelligent and rational thinker" side to this "ZOMG BMWS IZ FAT AND NO FUN CUZ OLD M3'S ARE LIGHTWWWAIIT" argument.

They can continue down the mainstream path, but the cost is that their knvehicles will become more and more Buicks and less and less "BMW's", and over time the brand's "sport" cache will be degraded.

Except they won't become more buicks, go drive an e90 m3.....
The F10 M5 is ONLY coming with a manual transmission in America..Why bother if it's intent on being a buick.

How many buicks have a DOT legal street slick as a tire option for their performance car?

How many car companies actually produce top tier engine after top tier engine year after year model after model JUST for their bread and butter performance vehicles?

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

Translation: The Corvette isn't a money maker, it's a marketing tool.

Wrong.

Let's start by pointing out that "over the past 15 years" would be a qualifier for the time period of 1997-2012... So I haven't the SLIGHTEST idea why you would bring up "mid 80's" into the equation.

Pointing out that other manufacturers have held the line on weight for a LONG period of time. Sick of hearing how new cars HAVE to be heavier. They do not HAVE to be much, if any, heavier.

You're going try and disallow BMW's need for model progression based on PORSCHE?? Are you kidding me?

The POINT remains the same. But I guess most BMW apologists are fine with BMW becoming ever more luxury and less true SPORT oriented.

Not going any further.

The POINT remains: BMW's have gotten much much bigger and heavier, and this was NOT necessary.

You don't care, that's fine. I think it sucks.

The End.

[ZDan]

I can assure you all that I had NO intention of derailing this thread. Thread was about comparing the FRS/BRZ with the E46, as it had been compared to the E30. The E30 M3 is actually a pretty similar car. The E46 is, well, NOT.

Anybody interested in E46-like cars should look at LSxJunkie's sig, there are some great ones in there! I was behind a 6.0 GTO on my way into work this AM, and all I could think was how much lower and sleeker it looked than the very box-like new Camaro.

But anyway, it's not like I HATE bigger/heavier cars, I've owned a few in fact. But it's a shame that there's next to NOTHING that's small/lightweight/rwd.

To me, I don't see why an E46 would be cross-shopped with an FR-S/BRZ. If you want a bigger/heavier car, there are plenty out there, new and used.

[SUB-FT86]

Zdan I don't think you derailed this thread at all. This thread was derailed on arrival because the comparison like most all the other comparison threads is pretty stupid IMHO.

[LSxJunkie]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Wrong.

Pointing out that other manufacturers have held the line on weight for a LONG period of time. Sick of hearing how new cars HAVE to be heavier. They do not HAVE to be much, if any, heavier.

The POINT remains the same. But I guess most BMW apologists are fine with BMW becoming ever more luxury and less true SPORT oriented.

Not going any further.

The POINT remains: BMW's have gotten much much bigger and heavier, and this was NOT necessary.

You don't care, that's fine. I think it sucks.

The End.

The Corvette is certainly a marketing tool. It's one of 4 cars that GM has right now that is compelling to drive, and is currently the halo car. However, they certainly don't sell them in self sustaining volume.

2006: 36,518
2007: 33,685
2008: 26,971
2009: 13,934
2010: 12,624
2011: 13,164

That is a line that is internally subsidized by selling volume like 198,770 Malibus, 75,675 Tahoes (in the US), and 370,135 Silverados (in the US) in 2010.





And with worldwide safety regulations going the way they are, modern cars either have to be heavier (same stuff, plus mandated safety equipment), more expensive (same stuff, same weight, lightweight materials), or decontented (same price, same weight, less stuff).

Originally Posted by ZDan

I can assure you all that I had NO intention of derailing this thread. Thread was about comparing the FRS/BRZ with the E46, as it had been compared to the E30. The E30 M3 is actually a pretty similar car. The E46 is, well, NOT.

Anybody interested in E46-like cars should look at LSxJunkie's sig, there are some great ones in there! I was behind a 6.0 GTO on my way into work this AM, and all I could think was how much lower and sleeker it looked than the very box-like new Camaro.

But anyway, it's not like I HATE bigger/heavier cars, I've owned a few in fact. But it's a shame that there's next to NOTHING that's small/lightweight/rwd.

To me, I don't see why an E46 would be cross-shopped with an FR-S/BRZ. If you want a bigger/heavier car, there are plenty out there, new and used.

I loved my GTOs. But they weighed 3700lbs and that was without heated seats, side impact airbags, or a sunroof. They were PIGS. And inside they were bigger than a new 6er. They also sit taller than the new Camaro and higher off the ground. Great grand tourer, but certainly not low and sleek.

[KeepGuessing]

Originally Posted by LSxJunkie

I loved my GTOs. But they weighed 3700lbs and that was without heated seats, side impact airbags, or a sunroof. They were PIGS. And inside they were bigger than a new 6er. They also sit taller than the new Camaro and higher off the ground. Great grand tourer, but certainly not low and sleek.

One thing i noticed is 90% of peoples opinions on vehicles are completely unrelated to driving/owning/dealing with on a day to day basis the vehicle in question..

I for one thought the GTO was gods gift to the American man when it debuted..Man how i longed for an Australian sourced RWD big v8 car that provided creature comforts without being a leather clad benz...

Then my good friend bought a GTO..and while it was a fantastic car and a WONDERFUL change from the American norm..His door locks worked 1/2 the time...Every part he wanted to upgrade outside of the exhaust cost 2x as much because the engine bay had 1/2 the room of the rest and he spent 1/4 of his ownership time in the garage bay being serviced..

AND this is from the tride and true can't go wrong GM formula..but somewhere in between Aussie and here the metric bolts got replaced with SAE and nothing fit right Lol..Well that's MY guess anyway..

The G8 fixed that but the GTO just scared too many people away imho..

But it's good to see someone with a reasonably good GTO experience as i still like the car, but if i were planning on getting a "daily driven" car of that nature...it'd be a camaro or G8 just based on the fact that it's had MOST of the kinks worked out state side.



ANYWHO back on to e46 and this car..COMPLETELY different venues...E46 is based on a 3 series which is a benz/audi competitor nuff said..
FRS is it's own car with nothing to be based on going up against miata's and introductory hyundais (and if Toyota would have you believe, caymans LOL)

[7thgear]

Originally Posted by KeepGuessing

ANYWHO back on to e46 and this car..COMPLETELY different venues...E46 is based on a 3 series which is a benz/audi competitor nuff said..
FRS is it's own car with nothing to be based on going up against miata's and introductory hyundais (and if Toyota would have you believe, caymans LOL)

i'll buy the cayman comparison

lateral grip is primarily a function of width, cg, weight and roll center

if all else being equal (ie, tires), then if the FRS's center of gravity is indeed low, and its suspension design properly utilizes that, then i see no reason why an FRS would not corner just as, if not faster, than a cayman.

obviously the interior and feel are TOOTTALLYYY different, but thats why this is a poormans porsche

[KeepGuessing]

Originally Posted by 7thgear

i'll buy the cayman comparison

lateral grip is primarily a function of width, cg, weight and roll center

if all else being equal (ie, tires), then if the FRS's center of gravity is indeed low, and its suspension design properly utilizes that, then i see no reason why an FRS would not corner just as, if not faster, than a cayman.

obviously the interior and feel are TOOTTALLYYY different, but thats why this is a poormans porsche

Well considering some of the information thus far has been "lies of omission/exclusion" i'd be hesitant to just feed off of what's been said about the car just yet..


for 1, the Cayman's Center of Gravity is measured with it's stock wheels/tires..
That's a 17" wheel and a 55mm sidewall tire in the front and a 17" wheel and a 50mm sidewall tire in the rear, along with however much rake the car has.....Let's not forget the car has 5" of ground clearance..

The FR-S however has multiple wheel tire size options..

The GT86 RC for example, comes with 16" wheels, the BRZ with 17" wheels and 45mm sidewalls, the toyota 20 spokes are 18" wheels with 40mm sidewalls.. So that "Lower than the Cayman's center of gravity" varies substantially before the car has even hit the car lots.

I know thusfar toyota has said it's weight will start at 26xxlbs...But now that line has been blurred with the inclusion of the Toyota GT86 RC, which is the "26xx lb" model they were talking about.

So if the car with the factual "lower than cayman center of gravity" is ALSO the RC, then chances are every car with larger selection of wheels and tires doesn't quite fit the same claims.

As for the "If all things are equal i don't see why it couldn't corner as fast" by all things equal do you mean PURELY in the tires? or do you mean going through substantial measures to get the same generalized specifications from both...

Because then we're talking optimal suspension tuning for both, because the porsche is setup for tire preservation and guel economy (being a Base Cayman and not an S) while the FR-S is not as noted by the stock cast/camber...Then you have to factor in that the FRS stock suspension setup IS a compromise for performance and economy, which is why the negative toe under hard cornering is prevalent unless addressed...etc etc..

but if we're talking JUST equal tires? no..

[serialk11r]

Uh, so different wheels don't change the ride height unless you're changing wheel diameter, or underinflating the tires. There is less than 3mm difference in tire radius across the different wheel sizes. By the way, 55 does not mean 55mm sidewall.

In addition, I believe the claim for lowest center of gravity is for the RC at 17.8" height as that number was released sometime ago, and then they came out and started saying 18.1" instead, which leads me to believe that is the figure for the non-AC/stereo/etc. delete cars. They said the Cayman was in the higher 18s, so it's likely that the center of gravity is lower.

Just looking at the height of the center of gravity and weight, with the same tires it's possible this could outcorner a Cayman. I'm not certain but I have a feeling weight distribution affects things too, although both cars are biased and not 50/50 so that might not matter as much.

[Vasilis]

M3 vs 350z vs S2000 vs Porsche Boxster 2.7 (not the S version, only 220hp)

Nice race, also nice suprise for the heritage of the GT86 in the end