[bm323]

Originally Posted by bri1042

The current Honda Civic is almost the exact length and weight as a 2000 Accord. The G80 M3 is almost the same length and weight as 2000 M5 (though the G80 is significantly wider).

The Civic grew too big to be the small Honda in the US, so they brought the Fit (Jazz) over from Japan to fill the gap. The Accord fills a slot that Honda hadn't filled in past years.

The 3 and 5 grew to match the size of the of the old 5 and 7, or thereabouts, so BMW brought us the 2. The 7 became the large car that BMW hadn't sold in the past.

This is the industry trend, not a BMW trend. The models all grew and smaller cars with new names filled the gap.

I bought my G80 very aware that I was actually buying the modern version of the '99 Manual M5 that I once lusted after. The current M5 is the M7 they never built back then. I spent 2 and a half years in my M2C and I can absolutely say that if you really want a modern E46, you need an M2, not an M3.

The industry's game with moving names upsize is annoying and it causes us all to argue the wrong argument. They're all at fault for this. But it doesn't matter as long as we all buy the actual car we want rather than obsessing about the name on the back.

Edit: And thank you BMW, for making the current version of the 99 or 2000 M5 Manual so cheap. Adjusted for inflation, that car's starting MSRP would be around $106k today (not far from the starting MSRP of the huge current M5), or 30 grand more expensive than the better-performing equivalently-sized car that I just bought.

Is the Civic the pedigree of the M3??

[VIERsr]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

I keep seeing this point being repeated over and over when it has already been debunked. The F8X has in fact more/better chassis stiffening than the G8X has.

A heavier chassis to start with and less investment in weight reduction when turning it into an M are the reasons for the G8X weight increase.

Actually Bmw claims 15% more stiffness for the G8x than the F8x.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by VIERsr

Actually Bmw claims 15% more stiffness for the G8x than the F8x.

Exactly. Since the base G2X is 25% stiffer than the base F3X, the fact that the G8X is "only" 15% stiffer than the F8X means there is "less effective" stiffening over the base chassis.

[frankiebones]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Exactly. Since the base G2X is 25% stiffer than the base F3X, the fact that the G8X is "only" 15% stiffer than the F8X means there is "less effective" stiffening over the base chassis.

This reminds me of a Law School Admission Test (LSAT) logic problem and I am not sure I agree with your conclusion. This does not "Debunk" my previous statement as you suggested. In fact, it's not even my statement, it's just me regurgitating what BMW has said. They had a better starting point perhaps, but stiffer is stiffer, right?

I've seen the G80 up on a lift at my dealership and it looks substantial (although appearances can be deceiving) versus the F80.

[bri1042]

Originally Posted by bm323

Is the Civic the pedigree of the M3??

How is that even relevant to the discussion? Cars are cars. The industry trend is visible on almost every car maker.

And, yes, in some ways I would say it is. It excelled in it's class and drove the small car market for decades. It inspired legions of folk who can't afford M anything, and many of them are not happy with the size of the current Type R.

[EXE46]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

There was a time where ///M cars were also a niche product "not intended for the masses"

Good observation but that was also before the F80/F82. I mean we now have the M2C, M2CS those clearly aren't built for the masses.

[matmanx1]

I really have no skin in this game whatsoever as I am not a current BWM owner nor have I ever driven an M3 of any generation (although I did test an M2C last year). I am an enthusiast though and have owned just about every brand of fun/sports car over the last 20 years and quite a few nicer luxury cars as well (including my current E450 coupe) so I think I have some perspective on this debate.

Lighter weight in a car that is meant to be fun and engaging is always preferable but is not the be all and end all some folks make it out to be and can even be somewhat relative to other factors in terms of how much of a difference it makes.

Here's a funny comparison to help make my point. My last sports car was a base 718 Cayman with the PDK. Curb weight on that one was around 3100 pounds depending on the source you use. My wife's new Subaru Impreza 5 door also has a curb weight of around 3100 pounds yet those two cars could not feel more different when driving and there's no question which is the more fun, more agile, more engaging driving experience.

No shade on the Scooby as I find it to be an impressive daily driver that is quiet, comfortable, roomy, efficient, safe and decent to drive for a car that only costs around $25k brand new. But despite weighing basically the same as the Cayman it's much slower, much softer and much more numb in terms of chassis feedback. It hasn't been developed to be a sports car and it's been built to a price that is agreeable to the mass market and it accomplishes what it sets out to do rather well. The Cayman, of course, is a completely different experience in a car. It's been purposely designed to be a mid-engine sports car and if you let two people who didn't know better drive them both back to back and then asked them which car weighed less I can bet that an extremely high percentage of them would pick the Cayman as the much lighter car despite the fact that it isn't.

Meanwhile my daily (a rear while drive E450 coupe) is just over 4,000 pounds and drives like it's encased in silk. Despite the ~5% weight difference between it and the new G series M cars I can guarantee that those two vehicles would feel nothing alike and that the M car would feel like a rabid animal in comparison. So while weight is a factor it is far from the only factor or even the most important factor. In my opinion we shouldn't let weight (or any other single number on a spec sheet) dictate our interest (or lack of) in an enthusiast product. Go drive it first and let the sum of all the parts be the deciding factor.

Looking at the new G series M3 and M4 from a holistic perspective that includes many factors I can say that I am more interested in perhaps owning one of them than any other past M car that I can remember. But that's just me and of course I can't claim to speak for anyone else!

[EXE46]

Originally Posted by frankiebones

This reminds me of a Law School Admission Test (LSAT) logic problem and I am not sure I agree with your conclusion. This does not "Debunk" my previous statement as you suggested. In fact, it's not even my statement, it's just me regurgitating what BMW has said. They had a better starting point perhaps, but stiffer is stiffer, right?

I've seen the G80 up on a lift at my dealership and it looks substantial (although appearances can be deceiving) versus the F80.

All we can ascertain is that perhaps the E90/92 was just not rigid enough or new advancement in materials after is what made that impact moving to the future model. There are limitations and cost constraints as to how stiff a dual purpose luxury road car can be. We already know the G80 is a better performer than its predecessor, ultimately that's what matters the most.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by Dog Face Pony Soldier

You're missing my point. The car weighs what the car weighs. My question specifically is about the utility of the data provided by the scales. I understand corner weighing a car with adjustable suspension, but weighing a road car seems entirely pointless when there's zero action taken with the information.

He did it because people wanted to know the real-world weight. Since most of us who use the cars as intended do actually weight the cars for corner balancing, it's a good reference point.

Thanks OP!

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by frankiebones

This reminds me of a Law School Admission Test (LSAT) logic problem and I am not sure I agree with your conclusion. This does not "Debunk" my previous statement as you suggested. In fact, it's not even my statement, it's just me regurgitating what BMW has said. They had a better starting point perhaps, but stiffer is stiffer, right?

I've seen the G80 up on a lift at my dealership and it looks substantial (although appearances can be deceiving) versus the F80.

Well based on my engineering studies, this is fairly straightforward math .

See here: https://g80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...2&postcount=48

And you are interpreting BMW statements, not just "regurgitating" them, I am sure they taught you that in law school too . I do not recall hearing or reading anywhere BMW being specific that there is more stiffening in the G8X than there is on the F8X. There is quite extensive bracing and stiffening on the F8X. And again, I am not saying that this is a bad thing regarding the G8X, I am just saying that additional bracing is not justification for the weight increase over the F8X.

[frankiebones]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Well based on my engineering studies, this is fairly straightforward math .

See here: https://g80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...2&postcount=48

And you are interpreting BMW statements, not just "regurgitating" them. I do not recall hearing or reading anywhere BMW being specific that there is more stiffening in the G8X than there is on the F8X. There is quite extensive bracing and stiffening on the G8X.

My statement was that the added weight went to "bracing." That's their statement not mine.

I do appreciate your perspective.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by matmanx1

I really have no skin in this game whatsoever as I am not a current BWM owner nor have I ever driven an M3 of any generation (although I did test an M2C last year). I am an enthusiast though and have owned just about every brand of fun/sports car over the last 20 years and quite a few nicer luxury cars as well (including my current E450 coupe) so I think I have some perspective on this debate.

Lighter weight in a car that is meant to be fun and engaging is always preferable but is not the be all and end all some folks make it out to be and can even be somewhat relative to other factors in terms of how much of a difference it makes.

Here's a funny comparison to help make my point. My last sports car was a base 718 Cayman with the PDK. Curb weight on that one was around 3100 pounds depending on the source you use. My wife's new Subaru Impreza 5 door also has a curb weight of around 3100 pounds yet those two cars could not feel more different when driving and there's no question which is the more fun, more agile, more engaging driving experience.

No shade on the Scooby as I find it to be an impressive daily driver that is quiet, comfortable, roomy, efficient, safe and decent to drive for a car that only costs around $25k brand new. But despite weighing basically the same as the Cayman it's much slower, much softer and much more numb in terms of chassis feedback. It hasn't been developed to be a sports car and it's been built to a price that is agreeable to the mass market and it accomplishes what it sets out to do rather well. The Cayman, of course, is a completely different experience in a car. It's been purposely designed to be a mid-engine sports car and if you let two people who didn't know better drive them both back to back and then asked them which car weighed less I can bet that an extremely high percentage of them would pick the Cayman as the much lighter car despite the fact that it isn't.

Meanwhile my daily (a rear while drive E450 coupe) is just over 4,000 pounds and drives like it's encased in silk. Despite the ~5% weight difference between it and the new G series M cars I can guarantee that those two vehicles would feel nothing alike and that the M car would feel like a rabid animal in comparison. So while weight is a factor it is far from the only factor or even the most important factor. In my opinion we shouldn't let weight (or any other single number on a spec sheet) dictate our interest (or lack of) in an enthusiast product. Go drive it first and let the sum of all the parts be the deciding factor.

Looking at the new G series M3 and M4 from a holistic perspective that includes many factors I can say that I am more interested in perhaps owning one of them than any other past M car that I can remember. But that's just me and of course I can't claim to speak for anyone else!

The difference is that the M3/4 is also NOT a purpose built sports car, it is a pedestrian 3 series tweaked and tuned to be a sports sedan.

We are not comparing a G80 to a E450, we are comparing a 3600lb G80 to a 3900lb G80-a potential G80 to the actual G80.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by frankiebones

My statement was that the added weight went to "bracing." That's their statement not mine.

I do appreciate your perspective.

No, that was not quite your statement. This is was your statement:

Originally Posted by frankiebones

However what they chose to do differently this time was rather than deploy weight-saving measures, they chose to use extra bracing to stiffen the chassis and improve the driving.

[frankiebones]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

No, that was not quite your statement. This is was your statement:

As per usual, you're as argumentative as you are technologically knowledgeable.

I stand by my statement. It is stiffer. It is heavier. Does one not have to do with the other?

What weight saving measures could they have taken in your expertise? I mean that as you are very technologically handy and I have certainly learned a lot from reading your posts.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by frankiebones

... you're as argumentative ...

I know, professional deformation I guess . I am sorry if it gets annoying sometimes, but believe me, there's no malicious intention behind it. Simply the quest for "the truth" and improving collective knowledge.

I do appreciate that you find some of my contributions useful. I got to learn a lot from this community and I am always happy when I can contribute back .

Originally Posted by frankiebones

I stand by my statement. It is stiffer. It is heavier. Does one not have to do with the other?

They can, but indirectly. It mainly depends what is being compared to what. For example a CF structure can be made quite stiffer than a steel one while being significantly lighter at the same time.

• For the F8X, they made it ~78% stiffer than the F3X while making it lighter than the F3X 340i.
• For the G8X, they made it ~64% stiffer than the G2X but they also made it heavier than G2X M340i in the process

Originally Posted by frankiebones

What weight saving measures could they have taken in your expertise? I mean that as you are very technologically handy and I have certainly learned a lot from reading your posts.

I would not know where to start, there are just so many opportunities, mainly regarding the use of lighter weight materials. I do not have sufficient knowledge of the G8X design and architecture to elaborate much here without a lot of speculation though.

[solstice]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

A bit off topic here, but I believe you hit the nail on the head. The G80 is really the spiritual successor the the E39 M5 in intended purpose. And they made it more powerful, lighter and with way more luxury and tech to boot. It is really a great car from that perspective.

I think this is only half of the story.

Yes the G80 now seem as capable as the E39 M5 as an Autobahn commuter, business executive and performance family road trip car.

But it is also likely a true M3 on the track. A car built to be robust enough to be beaten on a full track day. A car that feel at home on the track and excels over the M3 competitors. Something the M5 never aspired to.

I suspect it is now an M3 and an M5. Next level M car.

[frankiebones]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

I know, professional deformation I guess . I am sorry if it gets annoying sometimes, but believe me, there's no malicious intention behind it. Simply the quest for "the truth" and improving collective knowledge.

I do appreciate that you find some of my contributions useful. I got to learn a lot from this community and I am always happy when I can contribute back .

They can, but indirectly. It mainly depends what is being compared to what. For example a CF structure can be made quite stiffer than a steel one while being significantly lighter at the same time.

• For the F8X, they made it ~78% stiffer than the F3X while making it lighter than the F3X 340i.
• For the G8X, they made it ~64% stiffer than the G2X but they also made it heavier than G2X M340i in the process

I would not know where to start, there are just so many opportunities, mainly regarding the use of lighter weight materials. I do not have sufficient knowledge of the G8X design and architecture to elaborate much here without a lot of speculation though.

Thank you for your response.

[solstice]

Originally Posted by frankiebones

Thank you for your response.

Not directly related but at some stage you have to wonder what good it makes to keep arguing paper negatives of a car that in practicality excels on all fronts which so far seems to be the case...

[frankiebones]

Originally Posted by solstice

Not directly related but at some stage you have to wonder what good it makes to keep arguing paper negatives of a car that in practicality excels on all fronts which so far seems to be the case...

You are correct. His point always is that they could have done better and chose not to.

I do worry about brake wear and tear because I plan on tracking this thing a lot and I generally only get 1 set of brakes per lease covered under warranty (my Service Adviser and I have a deal lol).

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by solstice

I think this is only half of the story.

Yes the G80 now seem as capable as the E39 M5 as an Autobahn commuter, business executive and performance family road trip car.

But it is also likely a true M3 on the track. A car built to be robust enough to be beaten on a full track day. A car that feel at home on the track and excels over the M3 competitors. Something the M5 never aspired to.

I suspect it is now an M3 and an M5. Next level M car.

I am really looking forward to test drive a G8X on track.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by solstice

Not directly related but at some stage you have to wonder what good it makes to keep arguing paper negatives of a car that in practicality excels on all fronts which so far seems to be the case...

It is another to be blissfully positive in argumentation about something to the point of fanboism.

[matmanx1]

Originally Posted by jmg

The difference is that the M3/4 is also NOT a purpose built sports car, it is a pedestrian 3 series tweaked and tuned to be a sports sedan.

We are not comparing a G80 to a E450, we are comparing a 3600lb G80 to a 3900lb G80-a potential G80 to the actual G80.

Oh I see. So you are saying it's better to compare something that doesn't exist or exists only as a potentiality whereas I was trying to give a real world example. I think you also might have missed the point where I said there are far more important factors than weight.

But if weight, or potential weight, is what's most important to you then so be it. Who am I to say otherwise.