Roadfly Home | Features | Car Review Videos | Car Reviews | Cars For Sale | Used Car Parts Classifieds | Forum | Car Review Archives | Forum Archives Index


04-30-2004, 11:27 PM
What do you think about this comparison? According to GCF, the RS3 will be pushing 350hp from a twin-turbo 3.2L V6 unit.

Twin turbos, 350hp...with quattro AWD...this will be VERY fast off the line. BMW needs to step it up (especially after the RS6 plus spanked the E60 M5 before it's even released!).

BMW should really invest in a 3L+ I6 for the M2...or use the good-old turbo approach. Otherwise...BMW is really gonna feel the heat from Ingolstadt.
<table border="0" width="600" align="left" id="table2" bgcolor="#000000" style="border-collapse: collapse">
<td align="center">
<img border="0" src="" </td>
<td align="center">
<marquee style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 8pt; color: #FFFFFF; vertical-align: baseline" width="590" scrollamount="5" scrolldelay="10" height="14">2002 BMW 330i - Premium Package, Cold Weather Package, Bi-Xenons, HK, PDC, Steptronic</tr>

08-28-2004, 06:54 AM

08-28-2004, 06:55 AM
bmw will never turbo petrol engines. why do you think there's a V10 in the new M5

08-29-2004, 12:33 PM
Both Rs3 and r32 weight over 1.5 tons.A 3liter 1er series would come close to 1.5 tons too.All these modern power hatches with the big engines are compact in size but offer no significant weight advantage.
Turbo equipment on the other hand is light(just 40 pounds)and a 1.6 liter turbo would have the handling advantage of a 116i with all togther 300-400 pounds less weight on the front axle.
Their new dual turbo technology eliminates turbo lag and can produce up to 10hp/liter in a diesel,in a gasoline engine 15hp/liter should be possible.A 1.6 liter dual turbo would offer 240 hp and weight 20% less than a 330 i. Even a 1.4 liter could produce 220 hp,such a car sold as just an 114ti(without expensive M badge)for say 25 k would be my dream 1er series and a real spiritual successor to the great 2002.

08-30-2004, 12:03 PM
Much lighter. Rumors are that the 2.5L would go into it and be turbo charged. That's a rumor though, no solid proof. BMW has said though that they are looking at Turbos again.

08-30-2004, 07:13 PM
A small BMW should imho look as practical and functional as a Stihl chainsaw like the old 02 did.At least here in europe not so many people will buy a girlie micro coup with a trunk at premium prices,high school kids will lack funds and the others want serious cars for grown ups.

08-30-2004, 10:39 PM
putting a turbo in an M car would violate one of the tenants of M cars, as far as I know. they are(I believe) manual transmission, n/a engine, and one other, but I can't remember.

08-31-2004, 09:57 AM
Performance + fuel mileage + small car handling = fun

08-31-2004, 03:41 PM

09-04-2004, 03:22 AM
RS3 should be very, very fast on a straight line, quattro-traction + 350bhp (or even more), but unless it makes a major leap from the current A3-base, I doubt it will involve the driver like the M-cars do.

RS6 (and RS6+) demonstrate this well, like Mercedes' E55/E65 AMGs, they both accelerate much faster than E39 M5 but their handling is competent at best.

I don't think the M2 (or will be it be M1 now?) is even trying to out-do the RS3 in 0-60 or qm times. I think the M2/M1's real mission is to replace the E30 M3, which was an excellent handling car, but not exceptionally fast on a dragstrip or in the snow ;)!

09-04-2004, 03:26 AM
read the auto mags lately ? - S4 beats M3, old A6 beats new 530i, new A8 beats new 745i (first of 8 vs. last place for the 7). new one series stlying is ?? - new A3 styling is very nice. finally bought our first Audi after 8 BMW's. (kept the M3)

2004 S4 Avant\
2001 M3
1999 528it
1996 318ti - sold

Rick 330d
09-07-2004, 01:43 PM
I just recently began driving an A4 (2.5 TDI) after driving a 330d for nearly four years.

In my opinion the 330d beats the A4 on just about everything but ride quality.

09-07-2004, 03:50 PM

02-18-2005, 09:35 PM
I dunno...the magnesium block 3.0 I-6 is supposedly the lightest 3 liter 6 ever...

02-21-2005, 03:39 AM
although i believe this is the only model...unless you count SMG...

03-11-2005, 12:22 PM

03-11-2005, 12:44 PM
Won't you feel like an @$$ when BMW proves you wrong.

03-11-2005, 07:23 PM
I believe that this was the creed after the E36 auto M3. That is the reason they never made a M version of the X5.

03-12-2005, 01:43 AM
true but if i remember correctly, it was only the US model that came with an automatic, and compared to the M3 the rest of the world had, the US M3 was a little watered down.

03-18-2005, 12:45 PM

audi rs3 260kw
bmw m2 275kw

what is faster

that is roughly 370-380bhp for the m2

compared to roughly 350-360bhp for the rs3

03-18-2005, 12:48 PM
actually the m2 is faster than the rs3 by about 20-30bhp

thats 3.6litre 6cylinder 24valve
an u no beemers woop audis all day long look at the s4 and the m3 i raced an s4 and gapped him

beemers are lighter and more agile than audis i've got both an s4 an m3 the s4 is more luxurious but the m3s more racebred sporty

03-20-2005, 02:49 AM

03-20-2005, 02:50 AM

03-20-2005, 02:54 AM

03-20-2005, 02:55 AM
a 2002 Turbo that would have been very popular had it not been for the fuel crisis of the late 70's.

03-20-2005, 02:58 AM

03-20-2005, 02:59 AM
an M-truck ?

03-21-2005, 03:10 AM
coming from auto designer.


A3= design language is conservative period. Looks dated today. Not a fan of their new shield-looking front end graphics. Audis and VWs are just well executed product design more than true automobile design but they do have the best interior design in auto industry period.

1series= daring design lanugage(flame surface much more well controlled than 7,5, killer proportion). 1 is fresh/maybe too much for some people but will still look good in years to come.

03-28-2005, 10:56 PM
I had the unique opportunity to talk some BMW NA execs two years ago and one of the things I was most concerned about was the future of the M cars. I wrote down what I heard and added some of my own insights based on reactions from my conversation partners. Here it is:

1) M cars will have high-revving, naturally aspired engines. Why? Turbos and big displacement ad torque, which means a stronger (and heavier!) tranny, driveshaft, crankshaft, half shafts, etc. For the M1/M2, that will most likely mean a straight-6. The E46 M3 has a world-homologated engine that doesn't have a future home yet. Will probably be detuned to a 3.0 to start. Notice a trend? M5/M6 - 5.0 V10, E90 M3/M4 - 4.0 V8, M1/M2 - 3.0 I-6. CSL versions will most likely be coupe-only and have displacement increases of 0.5 liters.

2) The smaller an M car is, the more focus on weight distribution, handling and balance, and overall light weight. This means all M cars, especially those with 2-doors, will have things like magnesium alloy wheels and suspension components to reduce unsprung weight and carbon fiber and special plastics to reduce weight at the corners and on the roof. The M2 could end up being an ultra-light, 300 bhp car to scare even the most hardcore Lotus fans.

3) The sportiest transmissions available will be on offer. That means fast-shifting SMG all-around. I couldn't get any solid answers when it came to manual transmissions, but I felt there was a divide in the BMW ranks on the topic. Personally, if BMW doesn't offer a true manual, I won't buy.

4) Driving satisfaction is first priority. Not 0-60 or quarter mile times, not top speed, not lap times. SIDE NOTE: Those things may contribute to driver satisfaction, but they are not the same! I blame the car mags for always putting too much emphasis on the "numbers." One exception, evo magazine - best English language car mag out there. Period.

5) Throttle response = control and rolling acceleration. All M cars will do whatever necessary to maintain benchmark levels of throttle response and, thus, better car control when using the throttle pedal. Plus, in-gear acceleration will be a high priority.

6) Luxury will take second place to driver satisfaction and ultimate usability. Judging by the E60 M5, this needs no further discussion.

7) Subtle but distinct styling. BMW fans and car nuts alike will notice, but not everyone will. Sleeper cars have always been my favorite, but...

8) the engine intake and exhaust note will be noticeably BMW M. Not sure what to make of that one yet, but I hear the new M5 sounds delicious.

9) Customization through electronics. Ferrari and BMW are doing wonders for this field, and I actually think BMW is ahead. Ferrari does have that sweet active diff, though...let's just say this is a good use of technology.

10) Unique. Each M car will have its own identity. Moreover, only appropriate models will be touched by the golden hands of the M engineers. BMW still might offer M touring models, though, especially if it gives the M engineers more room to fine-tune the rear suspension.

And that's all I got.

As a reward (or rather, thanks) for reading all this, check out some
Detroit Auto Show ( pics!

03-30-2005, 01:49 PM
rest of the world knows them.

03-31-2005, 06:38 PM
They call it a Sport Activity Vehicle.

We americans call it a truck.

04-20-2005, 12:24 AM

12-10-2005, 04:14 PM
Listen boet, it all depends on the driver!!!! I've got a S4 and i gapped a M3 so far that the guy wanted to know what was under my bonnet aight??? So shut it.....

12-10-2005, 04:19 PM
You can't compare a 2.5TDI to a 330d simply because they have differing engine displacements you @$$. Unless you are trying to say that a 3.0 bmw engine cannot compete with the strength of other 3.0l manufacturers engines..... in that case, bmw sucks!!!! How do you think a 3.0TDi compares to a 330d??? Take it for a test drive and then forever hold your peace.

12-29-2005, 02:07 PM
Three weeks ago, I droped of a Euro delivery at Harms. On the way to the UBahn station I walked by the M and Individual shops. At the M shop there were several 1 class vehicles with obvious mods inside the compound. I also picked up a copy of the German Version of the BMW mag which had an extensive report of the 130 at the Nurenburgh ring, a very impressive road test. I also believe that the M version of the 1 class will have a less expensive power plant, for example the 3 liter dual turbo unit under development produces 330 HP at far lower cost than the M3 engine.CAR Nussen
E83 3.0
E46 M3
E36 M3 and 325 IS
E39 M5
E30 318IS

01-04-2006, 06:17 PM
Sure it's faster in a straight line. Remember the RS3 is still mounted in front of the front wheels and has a terible handling problem in the corners. That weight imbalance is why Audi went to AWD for a solution to the tendency to plow in the corners. Remember it ain't how fast you can go, it's how little you have to slow down: and BMW has the RS3 beat there.


1989 330is (S50B30 conversion)
1986 325es Local Motion
BMWCCA# 356800BMW CCA 356800
1989 330is (S50B30 Orca)
1987 325es (Local Motion)

01-07-2006, 02:46 PM
he's not allowed to compare handling or aesthetics because they have different engine displacements?

01-07-2006, 03:05 PM
but I guess those weren't technically 'M' cars so he has a loop hole!

Satan's M6
01-11-2006, 03:46 AM
So Where did I hear about a twin turbo biodiesel that meets California emissions through tipsy BMWNA peeps at acocktail party around an intl auto show?

01-15-2006, 06:34 PM
I work as auto designer. Also I had experienced @ VW group aka. Audi/seat/lamborghini group in Europe

01-18-2006, 01:18 AM
Are you smoking something ? The RS6 smoked the M5 before it was released ? Lol I think you are smoking the internet-rumor mill hashhish again

And M2 would likely have a 340hp i-6 engine from the e46m3/m-roadster. That should be more then enough to spank a 350hp audi.

Now for the unknowing ppl on the topic, the audi A3 chasis is well known to be pretty bad when compared in it's class. And if audi is dumb enough to put its heavy 3.2l V6 in there, that chasis will be even more of a hanful with 350hp on tap. The car will pretty much be a joke, its only use would be to sell to idiots who buy cars based on HP numbers on a piece of paper.

BMW builds cars for dynamism and speed in the real world, not on a piece of paper. Get real and think about these things first before making weird assumptions. Or maybee you think 350hp in a small, heavy and unbalanced car is cool. In that case, may I suggest you start looking at mustangs for your next car, because a BMW will never float your boat.

Mr G
01-21-2006, 04:13 PM
Uhhh, u need to drive the cars n not make assumptions based on paper! The standard A3 3.2l quatrro leaves the 130i eating dust on the track and in everyday running. The ONLY upper hand the 130i has against 3.2l is the fuel consumption. Now please tell me how u plan to make a 130i keep up with a RS3 Twin-turbo???? and yes a RS6 does give a M5 a sweaty time!

02-07-2006, 04:46 AM
is an SUV like in RAV 4 or Lexus SUV.

06-07-2006, 12:18 AM
the e30 still looks sharp (to me) today going down the road. I think the one series will look less timeless and more of just a past fad.

Roadfly Home | Car Reviews | Forum Archives Index