[2011ninja]

Originally Posted by NightWriter

Maybe it seemed like it from some instant MPG readings during short bursts, but all else being equal, fuel economy definitely suffers at higher speeds... and at a geometric rate, no less. So as you double your speed (e.g. from 50mph to 100mph), the air resistance is actually quadrupled.

This is why even a basic 120hp crapbox can hit 100mph, but it generally requires 500+hp to hit 200mph... and 1500+hp and a lot of fancy aerodynamics to hit 300mph.

And this is why manufacturers started adding "overdrive" gears years ago, to reduce engine RPMs as much as possible to improve fuel efficiency at higher speeds. I still don't understand why BMW's sixth gear is so short.

I'm 100% sure a taller 6th gear was discussed.

One of the purists said no.

🤓 we want optimum performance no compromise.

If de driver wants better fuel economy they can drive slower….,or pick from our diesel variant.

(Ya gotta say it with an accent and like your slightly insulted by the question.) 🤣

[NightWriter]

Originally Posted by 2011ninja

I'm 100% sure a taller 6th gear was discussed.

One of the purists said no.

🤓 we want optimum performance no compromise.

If de driver wants better fuel economy they can drive slower….,or pick from our diesel variant.

(Ya gotta say it with an accent and like your slightly insulted by the question.) 🤣

Yeah, I guess. Though it was the same issue (short 6th) on my M240, which isn't a hard-core M car. I don't really get this argument, since if you don't want to (down)shift, maybe you shouldn't be buying a manual in the first place?

[Besharaf]

Rattles? I didn't even think about that. My S4 in 8 years of ownership was rock solid, wouldn't hear anything rattle except for a buzz from aftermarket exhaust.

Disconcerting!

[NightWriter]

Originally Posted by RingRing

Agree but also disagree. There is a lot more to MPG than just wind resistance. Otherwise if a Honda could get 40 mpg then any car with the same coefficient of drag should get the same or very close.

Oh of course. But since you said you didn't notice any difference in fuel economy between 80 and 100, I was trying to point out that's physically impossible.

Originally Posted by RingRing

Of course we are not really concerned about MPG that much I hope because we should not be in the M cars then.

True, no one is buying an M expecting Prius-like economy, but BMW's "efficient dynamics" mantra is actually effective. Car & Driver got 32mpg on their highway test loop, which is pretty shocking with a 500hp sports car. But that was with the 8AT; I'm just asking that 6th on the MT were nearly as tall as 8th is on the AT.

Originally Posted by RingRing

Out of curiosity I will try and do a honest mileage test this next week. I have some road trips coming up.

Cool, let us know.

[BGM-M3COMP]

I can't comment on the manual part of ownership as i have a comp but i do agree on some of the other stuff.

First off, for my car at least, i only need to hit the m2 button once to activate it. There were times at the beginning of ownership where i wasn't sure if m2 mode was activated when i pressed it so pressing it again defaults back to m1 mode. (i'll test this theory again tomorrow when i drive the car but i'm sure this is what happens if i press it twice).

Second, at 4k miles i do have a small rattle. But it's only when i hit those sharp bumps. It's hard to explain but it feels like whenever i hit those sharp bumps, i get a "buzz" type of rattle, almost sounds like as if there's a single coin in your cupholder or something. I feel like it's coming from that area but sometimes i feel like it's coming from the infotainment area. It's not annoying enough to investigate however i know as the car ages with more miles this will get louder and other rattles will pop up.

This is a lease so to comment on what was said earlier as these cars seem to be lease and return vehicles. I think that should be the case IMHO. This is NOT a knock on anyone who bought their M car. Everyone has their reasons to lease or finance. However these cars, it seems, gets quite a few revisions as BMW as a brand is known to be up to date with the latest and greatest so i can't see a reason to own this car longer than 3 years. Plus if i did want to buy this car for keep for the long term, it wouldn't be a 1st or 2nd MY. I would at least wait for an LCI to buy for long term.

[RingRing]

Originally Posted by NightWriter

Oh of course. But since you said you didn't notice any difference in fuel economy between 80 and 100, I was trying to point out that's physically impossible.

True, no one is buying an M expecting Prius-like economy, but BMW's "efficient dynamics" mantra is actually effective. Car & Driver got 32mpg on their highway test loop, which is pretty shocking with a 500hp sports car. But that was with the 8AT; I'm just asking that 6th on the MT were nearly as tall as 8th is on the AT.

Cool, let us know.

I don't want to High Jack the thread so last comment. I sometimes don't think before writing. I agree with 80 mpg will use less fuel than 100. I really didn't see much difference between the two. So I will do some testing and start a new post next week.

But what I should really test is what is the difference in mileage between 5th gear and 6th gear at like 80 mph. Because the real question is would a taller gear be more fuel efficient. I don't think it will make much difference to add one more gear or make sixth gear taller.

But now I am curious so I will try and study both.

[Flying05]

Let's just go ahead and remove the cup holder, wireless charging, gesture control, and brake squealing first world problem complaints. If this was a major concern and reason for purchase, then maybe a Lexus or Infinity would be a better option. We buy these cars for sport and performance, not for petty things like above.

The rest, valid issues. Just had to point that out. And by the way, I like the cup holder. Works 100% well in my 6MT.

[BMWRacer523]

Oh noes.. I have to press a button twice! LOL C'mon now.. rattles on the other hand are annoying, i haven't noticed any. Cup holders have never been a major design consideration in most BMWs. Remember the flimsy ones in the e90 and e30s didn't even have cup holders. I do have 2 gripes. 1. whenever you use the winshield washer fluid, it sprays onto the mirrors and then pools around the corner of the window and mirror. It's almost like BMW didn't test that in the windtunnel testing. 2. vague steering feel. of course this was a known issue going in with the electric steering and has been this way since the f30 so no surprise there.

[hlm2c]

Originally Posted by dJt3xtbook

Silver X3 on screen at startup - I have a BSM M4, but I briefly see a silver X3 on my screen at startup about 5-7% of the time. It's very brief (second or less) before it shows my BSM M4. I get that much of the tech is shared between BMW models, but it does bother me slightly each time I see that damn silver X3 pop up on my screen.

I'll raise you one better. The M2's iDrive displays a silver base 2 series on the screen, with no current method of changing it . First world problems, I know...

[2011ninja]

Originally Posted by RingRing

I don't want to High Jack the thread so last comment. I sometimes don't think before writing. I agree with 80 mpg will use less fuel than 100. I really didn't see much difference between the two. So I will do some testing and start a new post next week.

But what I should really test is what is the difference in mileage between 5th gear and 6th gear at like 80 mph. Because the real question is would a taller gear be more fuel efficient. I don't think it will make much difference to add one more gear or make sixth gear taller.

But now I am curious so I will try and study both.

I'll save you some time…

If you have a bicycle with gears and a MPH

Try and maintain 10 MPH 1 gear lower and 1 gear higher on a flat surface

You're spinning your legs faster and more often in the lower gear using more energy

Car is no different

[zambarossa]

Originally Posted by RingRing

e to add one more gear or make sixth gear taller.

I was reading an article somewhere that BMW was researching the possibility of adding more gears to manual (more than 6), but their challenge was how to make it safe to avoid costly downshift mistakes (aka money shift). I forgot if they discussed details of what options they were considering, but if I am to guess, I'd say with the way the industry is going away from manuals and towards electrification, BMW likely did not invest much in that R&D.


As for taller gears, I suspect they wanted to optimize it for quick passing a high speeds on the autobahn vs fuel efficiency, but who knows!

[bustion.com]

Originally Posted by NightWriter

And this is why manufacturers started adding "overdrive" gears years ago, to reduce engine RPMs as much as possible to improve fuel efficiency at higher speeds. I still don't understand why BMW's sixth gear is so short.

Because it's tuned to reach 290 km/h at (approximately) max power. The rpms at all the other speeds are the linear consequence of this.

[bri1042]

Originally Posted by bustion.com

Because it's tuned to reach 290 km/h at (approximately) max power. The rpms at all the other speeds are the linear consequence of this.

It's also possible that it's influenced by the Euro mileage tests that, from what I hear, have to be done in 3rd gear. Porsche claimed at one point that the very long 2nd gear in some of their manuals was a consequence of what they needed 3rd gear to do for testing purposes.

[NightWriter]

Originally Posted by bustion.com

Because it's tuned to reach 290 km/h at (approximately) max power. The rpms at all the other speeds are the linear consequence of this.

That's a logical explanation -- and God knows Germans love logic -- but why couldn't you configure it for fifth gear at max power @ 290kph, and let 6th serve its overdrive function? Not all manuals reach terminal velocity with their top gear.

[FloridaMan_G82]

Originally Posted by zambarossa

I was reading an article somewhere that BMW was researching the possibility of adding more gears to manual (more than 6), but their challenge was how to make it safe to avoid costly downshift mistakes (aka money shift). I forgot if they discussed details of what options they were considering, but if I am to guess, I'd say with the way the industry is going away from manuals and towards electrification, BMW likely did not invest much in that R&D.


As for taller gears, I suspect they wanted to optimize it for quick passing a high speeds on the autobahn vs fuel efficiency, but who knows!

Originally Posted by zambarossa

I was reading an article somewhere that BMW was researching the possibility of adding more gears to manual (more than 6), but their challenge was how to make it safe to avoid costly downshift mistakes (aka money shift). I forgot if they discussed details of what options they were considering, but if I am to guess, I'd say with the way the industry is going away from manuals and towards electrification, BMW likely did not invest much in that R&D.


As for taller gears, I suspect they wanted to optimize it for quick passing a high speeds on the autobahn vs fuel efficiency, but who knows!

Imagine an 8speed manual 😁 id be all about it

[apace76]

I would add paint quality to this list. First BMW for me coming from multiple Audi's. 4x Audi's and minimal stone chips, my M4 has 5,000km on it and the front is already a mess (and I baby the crap out of it). I'm now putting PPF on it, but a bit late now with existing chips. I expected more resilient paint, a few chips over the life of the car maybe is OK with me, but this paint is pretty crap.

[bustion.com]

Originally Posted by NightWriter

but why couldn't you configure it for fifth gear at max power @ 290kph, and let 6th serve its overdrive function?

Because the torque applied to the wheel would be notably lower, so the car won't pull as nicely in the 5th gear.

I like your logic, but for "manual" 7 series.

[NightWriter]

Originally Posted by bustion.com

Because the torque applied to the wheel would be notably lower, so the car won't pull as nicely in the 5th gear.

It's a moot point, and we're speaking in hypotheticals, of course, but why would the torque be any lower in fifth? i.e. if fifth gear had the same gear ratio as sixth does today, and then sixth were taller, how would the overall torque at the wheels be any different?

Originally Posted by dlakatos

Imagine an 8speed manual �� id be all about it

Well, sure, Porsche does have a 7MT option for the 911, though it doesn't seem to get as much love as the 6MT in GT3. Having five columns with double-doglegs (R, 1/2, 3/4, 5/6, 7) does make it a little more trickier to learn and use.

[bustion.com]

Originally Posted by NightWriter

It's a moot point, and we're speaking in hypotheticals, of course, but why would the torque be any lower in fifth? i.e. if fifth gear had the same gear ratio as sixth does today, and then sixth were taller, how would the overall torque at the wheels be any different?

Let's assume 5th gear had the same characteristic as 6th speed has in reality.

Explanation #1:
We agree that lower gears generate higher acceleration than higher gears. That means that when vehicle is in lower gear the wheel applies higher force to the road than in higher gear. That also means that in lower gear the wheel applies higher torque on the road than in higher hear. Therefore if you have the characteristic of the 6th gear in 5th gear, the 5th gear applies lower torque on the wheel and the vehicle doesn't pull as nicely in 5th gear anymore.

Explanation #2:

P = M*ω
P... power
M... torque
ω... rotational frequency of the wheel

The power applied by the motor to the 5th gear at e.g. 6000 rpm is the same no matter what characteristic of the gear is.

Therefore if you change the characteristic of the 5th gear the way that you increase the top rotational frequency of the wheel ω (vehicle top speed in 5th gear), you get reduced torque M applied by the wheel on the road. While the max power P applied to 5th gear is the same in each case.

[NightWriter]

Originally Posted by bustion.com

Let's assume 5th gear had the same characteristic as 6th speed has in reality.

Explanation #1:
We agree that lower gears generate higher acceleration than higher gears. That means that when vehicle is in lower gear the wheel applies higher force to the road than in higher gear. That also means that in lower gear the wheel applies higher torque on the road than in higher hear. Therefore if you have the characteristic of the 6th gear in 5th gear, the 5th gear applies lower torque on the wheel and the vehicle doesn't pull as nicely in 5th gear anymore.

Explanation #2:

P = M*ω
P... power
M... torque
ω... rotational frequency of the wheel

The power applied by the motor to the 5th gear at e.g. 6000 rpm is the same no matter what characteristic of the gear is.

Therefore if you change the characteristic of the 5th gear the way that you increase the top rotational frequency of the wheel ω (vehicle top speed in 5th gear), you get reduced torque M applied by the wheel on the road. While the max power P applied to 5th gear is the same in each case.

Oh, man, this is bringing back some bad memories from high school physics. I'm probably slow, but your point is not making sense to me. The reason lower gears offer better torque is precisely because of their gearing. Low gears have the effect of dividing the engine RPM, increasing effective torque but limiting overall RPM (hence speed). Higher gears have the effect of multiplying engine RPM, increasing overall RPM (hence speed) but reducing torque.

All I'm saying is, if all else is equal, but fifth gear were taller -- the same ratio as sixth is today -- then the overall ratio for that gear (and hence torque) should be equivalent to sixth today, right?

[bustion.com]

Originally Posted by NightWriter

Oh, man, this is bringing back some bad memories from high school physics. I'm probably slow, but your point is not making sense to me. The reason lower gears offer better torque is precisely because of their gearing. Low gears have the effect of dividing the engine RPM, increasing effective torque but limiting overall RPM (hence speed). Higher gears have the effect of multiplying engine RPM, increasing overall RPM (hence speed) but reducing torque.

All I'm saying is, if all else is equal, but fifth gear were taller -- the same ratio as sixth is today -- then the overall ratio for that gear (and hence torque) should be equivalent to sixth today, right?

Yes, that's right.
I just wanted to say that such car would not feel nice to drive, since its pulling force would be low from cca 120km/h and up...

Actually everyone can simply try:
drive your car normally up to 4th gear. Then shift directly to the 6th gear.
(Surely if 5th gear would feel like 6th feels today, they would also adjust the other gears, but you would effectively drive the car with lower horsepower. Why? Because the power of the car that you feel actually comes from the energy of burned fuel; and this energy is the integral of power on the P(ω) chart, considering that in gears with higher characteristic you need more time to reach higher rpm).
(yes, I simplified the part with the fuel and let's not get into details regarding correlation of the ω and time, so it doesn't get overcomplicated)

[yousefnjr]

Originally Posted by bustion.com

…
P = M*ω
…

I know I’m an idiot because I saw that w-looking character and thought of boobs

OP I’ve never seen an X3 on my screen one time, maybe that’s something that can be fixed. Worth a trip to the dealer I think. Also double press on the M buttons is only if your custom settings have DSC off