Would you like BMW to use fuel economy technology on their new 400 HP V8 powered M3 engine?

I know the technology exists. For example, have 4 cylinders shut off when you are at idle or not pushing the pedal all the way down.

They should still keep the 400 HP available but use only 4 out of the 8 cylinders at idle or at low rpm driving.

I think GMC trucks use that technology.

Even though they will probably make an excellent car, fuel prices are going up and it seems "trendy" to drive an efficient vehicle. I believe BMW would raise the bar even more by offering this technology. Power and efficiency is a winner in my books. I think Audi and MB would have to follow suite.

I don't know if BMW reads these forums but if they do let them know you would be interested by replying to this post YES or NO.

I totally agree... I've been wanted an M3 for a LONG time now and I should be able to afford one in the next 3-5 yrs however now that its going to the V8, I doubt I'll get one :(. With the price of gas going up and what not, I think i'm gonna need to go with something that has a 6 cylinder engine. I guess it will depend on the gas milage but even the e46 M3 isnt rated that high when it comes to gas mileage. :/

Not to be an a s s but the number one rule is: if you cannot afford to purchase and maintain a vehicle (fuel, insurance, maintenance, etc.) then you should be considering a different vehicle.

I found a couple links that mentions which car manufacturers use the cylinder deactivation system.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3012/is_1_185/ai_n9532648

http://car-reviews.automobile.com/news/chrysler-to-be-first-to-market-with-cylinder-deactivation-technology-in-cars/369/

I'm sure BMW and the M group could develop a more efficient cylinder deactivation system then any other car company.

There are cars for you, leave the M alone. Take your petition and stick it.

dude if ur blowing that kinda money for a car , u should nto be bitching about gas ,and economy ...if u want economy buya turbo deisel or somthing...

that thing that cracks me up is when u see m3 owners basicly really bitching on the car does not get good gas mileage etc etc ...u bought a high performance engine ......should i go on ?

I have a feeling this is going to be a short list of petitioners.

I don't mean to also be an a s s but I can afford many new M3's. I don't even want to get started on what collection of cars I currently own..... Anyways, I'm looking at it as a marketing plan for BMW. I know it's becoming trendy to drive an economical vehicle. It would feel great to drive a 400 HP V8 M3 and not have to fill up all the time. Many Hollywood celebs would buy the car and in turn promote the car.

Yeah an M3 buyer can afford the fuel costs but it's more then just affording, it's about feeling good.

It could only help BMW.

*Just reply YES or NO to the petition.*

I have a better idea, how about we petition for the V10 in the M3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Splendid idea but how practical would be anyones guess.
BMW will adopt new technology but only where it feels it will gain/add benefit to not only their hip pocket but where they can offer technology at a premimum price.
Ada///M.

The M3 is a legend in its own right, I dont think it needs exposure from celebrity ownership and get 40mpg to improve its image.

You buy an M3 to feel good about driving on of the best handling vehicles of all time. You do not buy it for feeling good about getting some ridiculous MPG...there are other choice of cars for that.

That also sounds like a good idea to petition for the V10 in the new M3.

I don't think you understand my idea. I wouldn't want BMW to sacrifice performance for fuel economy. The proposed idea would have the best of both worlds.

I'm a business man and in a marketing point of view, fuel economy would just be the cherry on top to what will be an excellent car.


*Just reply YES or NO to the petition.*
*Just reply YES or NO to the petition.*
*Just reply YES or NO to the petition.*
*Just reply YES or NO to the petition.*
*Just reply YES or NO to the petition.*

Pack Sand!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As long as it doesn't affect performance, what's wrong with fuel efficency? I don't think its about if you can afford it or not, I think its about good engineering, and making the most of our resources. One other thing, even the most self center prick who doesn't give a damn about others, isn't going to be able to drive his self centered prick's car if we run out of fuel resources.

JohneWhite,

Very well said. My points exactly.

I just don't think the self center pricks have the capacity to understand what this petition is about.

With the speed of the new SMG III I doubt the cylinder cutt off would work, if you needed to accelerate quickly who knows what trouble you might get into?

All in all personally I think this is an idea not suited for the M3. Not a bad idea, but just not aimed at the right car. Try the non M 3 series?

Anyone else find it odd that johnwhite and thinbev joined the same time and have close to the same posts and both of which seem to converge on this topic AND share the same viewpoint?

Maybe Im just cray.

We are not the same person if that's what you're trying to say.

Maybe it is not practical to apply it to the M3. But I'm a professional engineer (not mechanical or automotive) and I would be a rich(er) man if I had a dime for eveytime I heard someone say that it can't be done.

On the subject of attitude (not engineering). Does anybody know why the French Revolution came about and the results it produced? Well in case you don't, the have-nots (aka the peasants) got sick and tired of the haves (aka the royalty) hogging and wasting all the resources (aka the wealth); and to make a long story short the peasants cut off the heads of the royalty. The French Revolution is an extreme example of "Let them eat cake." or "Let them buy another car."

BTW I drive an M3 and enjoy the hell out of it. If an M3 came out that was fuel efficent and still as fun to drive, I might buy one.

I VOTE YES!!!!!

Mmgood, except for your last post, you seem to be level headed. I respect your point of view. Which I think is: Don't screw up a good thing. I just don't think that is all there is to it.

No offense but there are some rude people on here. Anywayz, I dont think this has much to do with costs. I can afford the gas, i just dont want to. I just think it would be awsome if bmw (or any manufacturer for that matter) could make a car that performs like the m3 but is more feul efficient. If you have so much money that you really dont care how much gas your using, then lucky you. Maybe one day we can all be like you and have a money tree in our back yard! :) Anywayz, I still love the M3, I just thought it was fine as a 6cylinderl. if you want bigger, get the M5. although a jump from 6cyl to 10 is a bit much. eh, whatever. I am fully for more feul efficient engines, especially in performance cars. Its easy to make an engine w/ high MPG that has no horsepower... The challenge is to make a highperformance engine that can use less gas.

Noble concept, but unlikely in an M. More and more manufactuers are using this technology of using half the cylinders when not under full load to increase enconomy; however, even Chrysler did not use this technology in the 300C SRT-8 whereas the normal 300C does. Just doesn't seem like a great idea in a high performance vehicle.

JMO

/chad

I vote YES also.

Chrysler has had some success in the 300c/Magnum with this....and all reviews say it is seamless. The new M5 has a "Power" button that reduces HP by 100 for driving around town. I haven't seen anything that says that the feature improves mileage, but who knows. If they can do it and make it work so you don't know it is happening then of course, who wouldn't want better gas mileage with equal performance....everyone would vote yes for that.

If it reduces performance at all...I would vote no.

I also agree with many posters that if you cannot afford the maintenance, insurance, etc you should look at a different car, but I don't think that was the angle that the original poster was coming from.

Iam in the oil business and my educated opinion is that oil will not continue to rise that much longer(though I do see 5.00/gal very possible soon) and it will go back down to under the 3.00/gal(2.50-3.00) mark with the next year.

But either way, I'd love it if bmw would put some sort of fuel technology in the next M3. Even if it only reduces emissions, it would still be a plus.

The cylinder deactivation is just one more thing to go wrong on the car - i think its the gayest thing in the world for one to have to push a damn button on the new M5 to get all 500hp...thats just stupid if you want good gas mileage go get a prius

hmm, sounds like a good idea if your just trucking around town, but this is an M car, picture yourself auto crossing and not flooring the gas pedal all the way, would that mean u are only running on four cylinders, i do not want my car to drive like a corolla unless i thrash on the throttle. There are advantages of the power of a v8 at all times. If u want economical, wouldnt it be better to buy a v8 for the weekend and a hybrid for everyday use?
This idea just doesnt sit right with me.

You are all being somewhat close minded. The original poster wasn't asking if it could be done or not. What if cylinder deactivation would work so well that you never even knew it was happening.

Your car doesn't feel like a corolla when the cylinder deactivation is working. It only happens when you are cruising on the highway. THose that have the 300c/magnum report that they don't even know it is on.

Again, I say of course we would better fuel economy as long as performance is not sacrificed. So, yes, if BMW could do it without any difference in performance or responsiveness then yes we would want it.

If you could feel the system working, if it slowed responsiveness of the car, if it reduced performance at all, then no.

As far as the power button.....it would be fine as long as you could program the button to be on or off when you start the car and not just default to off. If they make it like other programmable options (seat positions, mirror positions, etc) then you could program it to be on at startup.

hmm, sounds like a good idea if your just trucking around town, but this is an M car, picture yourself auto crossing and not flooring the gas pedal all the way, would that mean u are only running on four cylinders, i do not want my car to drive like a corolla unless i thrash on the throttle. There are advantages of the power of a v8 at all times. If u want economical, wouldnt it be better to buy a v8 for the weekend and a hybrid for everyday use?
This idea just doesnt sit right with me.

I don't know the parameters for the cylinder deactivation but I am pretty positive that it would not deactivate four cylinders in the middle of an auto cross unless you were REALLY taking it easy. You have to be cruising at a steady speed for it to work. Just because you don't have it floored doesn't mean that it deactivates cylinders.

Yes, doesn't hurt

No

BMW M is about performance, not fuel efficiency. Cyclinder cutout has aboslutely nothing to do with peformance. At best it has no effect on performance, and more likely performance suffers in at least one scenario as a result.

If you want to be trendy driving a fuel efficient car, get a damn Prius.

Let them eat cake!

No

BMW M is about performance, not fuel efficiency. Cyclinder cutout has aboslutely nothing to do with peformance. At best it has no effect on performance, and more likely performance suffers in at least one scenario as a result.

If you want to be trendy driving a fuel efficient car, get a damn Prius.

Let them eat cake!

So you like throwing money into the trash? If it has no effects on performance why wouldn't you want better fuel economy? :beer:

Fuel economy and performance are no longer mutually exclusive items. With the advancements in computers, both objectives can be achieved. I routinely got 24 mpg in city driving with my 345hp LS1 that had just a four speed automatic.

So you like throwing money into the trash? If it has no effects on performance why wouldn't you want better fuel economy? :beer:

Because I'm not convinced that cylinder cutout technology won't effect performance. And I'm entitled to my vote like everyone else.

I welcome fuel efficiency advancements that are part of performance advancements on the M cars, but I didn't get my M3 to start worrying about economy. I get about 18 MPG, which is better than I expected.

Because I'm not convinced that cylinder cutout technology won't effect performance. And I'm entitled to my vote like everyone else.

I welcome fuel efficiency advancements that are part of performance advancements on the M cars, but I didn't get my M3 to start worrying about economy. I get about 18 MPG, which is better than I expected.

So you admit you welcome fuel efficiency advancements that are part of performance advancements on M cars? Then your answer to the initial question is YES.
The initial question has always been would you like to see both fuel efficiency along with performance. You said NO initially but after reading what you said, you say you WELCOME IT? Please make up your mind and stop confusing us.
Nobody cares whether or not you got your M3 to start worrying about economy, that was not the question asked....

So you admit you welcome fuel efficiency advancements that are part of performance advancements on M cars? Then your answer to the initial question is YES.
The initial question has always been would you like to see both fuel efficiency along with performance. You said NO initially but after reading what you said, you say you WELCOME IT? Please make up your mind and stop confusing us.
Nobody cares whether or not you got your M3 to start worrying about economy, that was not the question asked....

Whatever :nixweiss:

buy yourself a gas economical beater if you're going to be this anal about fuel efficiency

Doubt they can do it without affecting A)Performance and B)Cost. If they can do it without affecting both ill vote yes otherwise No way..

buy yourself a gas economical beater if you're going to be this anal about fuel efficiency

Never said I'm anal about gas. All I did was answer the question asked. If you can get both performance and economy, hey why not?

You people 16 years old???

Would you want to be with a really hot chick with no job/money or a really hot chick that makes tons of cash?

Having the best of both worlds is not a bad thing is all I'm saying.

Many 'Hollywood Celebs' would buy it ?

BS.

I work in the Movie/TV industry. Been in it for 13 years now.
I know ALOT of major players. Not ONE owns an M3.
They all have plush luxury sedans, Ferrari's, Pcars, etc....

Yeah, there are a few 'trendy' actors driving Hybrids, but less than 1%.
BMW and any other car maker isn't going to bother with that type of percentage.

Major Hollywood players, that set trends, drive AMG's, Bentley's, Escalades and I'm sure a few will buy the new M5 as well ....

I'm on the Warner Brothers lot right now on a show.
There is ONE M3 there. Not an actors !!
7's, a few 5's, Porsche's, 2 Bentley Coupes, Aston's, 2 RS6 Audi's.
The ONE M3 on the lot is a Unit Prod. Mgr's and I know him personally.

Hollywood won't make a 'Hybrid' M3 cool... and BMW won't make one.

Eventually, there will be Hydrogen sports car motors.
I know Audi is testing one at the moment, making over 400hp with it.

kj

Jessica Alba and Adam Corrolla have M3s..........but I don't really care who else has the car that I have. I drive a car because I like it and I could care less what the guy next to me in traffic thinks of my car.

Of course there are a few actors/actresses that have them.
I was not, in anyway bagging on the car....

My point was that 'Hollywood' would NOT make a Hybrid M3 popular.

M3's are ALL OVER the LA area, without the help of Hollywood.
Most, including celebs, won't pay 70K+ for a hybrid.

And, I would certainly NOT consider Corrolla 'Hollywood'... :D

kj

If you can't afford gas for the car, maybe you should be looking at a different car. There's no way I'm going to sign a petition to put an economical motor into an M.

...You people 16 years old???...

And are you a troll??? :argue:
Yeah, I thought so.

I'll sign a petition with BMWNA banning thinbev from buying an M3.

might as well try a 'please make it cheap so I can eke out enough money to buy one' petition as well... :nixweiss:

There are cars for you, leave the M alone. Take your petition and stick it.


Hit Apex has a point.

You can go out and get a new C6 Z06 Corvette with 7 liter V8, 500+ horsepower that gets significantly better fuel mileage than the current 3.2 liter 6 M3 with only 333 horsepower. Corvette does not have a gas guzzler tax like the M3 either. And you don't have to worry about all the complexity of deactivating cylinders.

There are cars for you, leave the M alone. Take your petition and stick it.



Don't be an ass man...Money aside I would be could for the environment too if we all drove cars that are a little more fuel efficient. You sound real ignorant with your comments. That was totally uncalled for.

And are you a troll??? :argue:
Yeah, I thought so.

Whatever man,
Don't be mad because I caught you contradicting yourself. :rofl2:
So you may not be the brightest or most mature guy out there, that's OK.

Don't be an ass man...Money aside I would be could for the environment too if we all drove cars that are a little more fuel efficient. You sound real ignorant with your comments. That was totally uncalled for.


tree hugger...

I never asked for everyone's personal opinions.

It was just a yes or no question.

Please vote yes or no if you would like BMW and M to engineer a V8 motor for the next M3 with 400 HP, great performance, and fuel efficiency.

YES or NO

I'm not interested in your personal stories and opinions.

YES or NO

Ps. for those that seem to be angry at this "terrible" idea of mine, please accept my condolences for I do not wish you to have to drive a 400 HP V8 M3 with fuel efficiency...... GOD forbid!!!

Hit Apex has a point.

You can go out and get a new C6 Z06 Corvette with 7 liter V8, 500+ horsepower that gets significantly better fuel mileage than the current 3.2 liter 6 M3 with only 333 horsepower. Corvette does not have a gas guzzler tax like the M3 either. And you don't have to worry about all the complexity of deactivating cylinders.


Maybe BMW can hook up with GM and they can swap some 3.2 liters for some 26 mpg 7.0 liters. I think the GM V8s are lighter too. j/k

I'm kind of on the fence myself. I have to agree that if you truly can have the best of both worlds by having "M" performance with better fuel economy without any compromises, that could only be a good thing. I think the idea would be more popular if the fuel savings were acheived by something other than cylinder deactivation. Maybe something like a focus on reducing engine intenal friction, mechanical/pumping losses, or some way of harnessing more of the burnt fuels energy (Only 15% approx. actually drives the piston, and the other 85% is absorbed by the cooling system). I believe that a lot of people feel that, as one poster mentioned, cylinder deactivation would reduce responsiveness and the immediate torque availability of the current engine.

On the flip side, I think that what most peoples object to is the idea of BMW's Motorsport group placing emphasis on something other than pure performance, and the concern that their "pure performance" philosophy may become compromised if they decided to try to become "eco-friendly" as well. I'm sure that most would prefer that whatever fuel savings technology is developed to be used to have an increase of engine power while keeping fuel economy at current levels...

As far as the Z06 Corvette getting better fuel economy, I believe that has more to do with their "skip shift" feature, and the methods used to test fuel ecnomy. The "skip shift" feature will help tremendously in "city driving", and high gearing would help with the "highway" portion. I don't know how they test fuel economy on the highway, but I imagine that it's done by driving as conservatively as possible at a maximum speed of 55-65 mph, where the LS2/LS7's are turning maybe 1800 rpm. I imagine that a typical enthusiast won't see anywhere near the reported fuel economy. Note that I said "enthusiast". I'm sure that the guys who rarely drive their Vettes and put around when they do will get reasonable returns...

Best regards,
Matt

A petition is not needed guys. Guys is more expensive in Europe than here in the states. This car is designed in Europe....I'm sure BMW realizes the cost of gas when designing the engine. However, the M division is sure to have a gas mileage goal closer to the bottom of the list.

When the E90 M3 motor is being designed I am sure they have some very specific goals that they set out to reach.

400+HP
300+Torque
8,000 rpm redline minimum
XX MPG

I am sure that when the motor is being designed and the software that runs it, they work to maximize the fuel economy without sacrificing the other goals (HP, redline, etc).

As far as the Vette is concerned...I routinely saw 24MPG in city driving (stop and go Chicago traffic) with VERY spirited driving when I could (which was often) Any hole that opened on the expressway was quickly taken....I always stomped on the gas up to the speed limit, etc. When I would get a chance to really pound on it for a weekend without the stop and go traffic I would get around 21-22MPG. This was all with an automatic.

And for all you guys telling him to buy a different car....you missed the point.

trendy people drive prius toyota like leo dicaprio I really dont want to look like that homosexual dude in a prius.

Fuhgeddaboutit. I personally don't want any engineering time spent on the car that isn't about performance.

Now, a petition to ask BMW to give the motor 450HP, I'd sign in a heartbeat...

One other thing, even the most self center prick who doesn't give a damn about others, isn't going to be able to drive his self centered prick's car if we run out of fuel resources.

Oh, please. Once the oil companies realize that there is the economic incentive, production from tar sand, shale and other sources will pick up and fill the gaps. Even with current technology, it would be several hundred years before we even have to think about "run(ning) out of fuel resources". By then, the market will find alternatives - it always has, it always will.

But then, if the smug eco-weenie air of superiority, and the chicken-little rhetoric works for 'ya, run with it, man. :rofl2:

tree hugger...



your a ****ing moron...like it is really an insult to call me a tree hugger....you sound like such an ignorant person

If the BMW engineers decided to put a regenerative braking feature that stores energy and gives you an extra 8-10 mpg, I'm all for it, assuming no performance compromise. The electric motor like the one on the prius would drive the front wheels and produce:
Power output 67 hp @ 1200-1540 rpm (50 kW @ 1200-1540 rpm)
Torque 295 lb.-ft. @ 0-1200 rpm (400 Nm @ 0-1200 rpm)

Now drop this technology into your current M3 and it would get off the ground Very QUICK. Power is down at LOW RPMs so you will have far less traction problems launching the car. With 295 lb-ft of additional torque at 0-1200 RPM, you will probably remove close to a full second off your 0-60 times. It would be nice getting the benefits of a 4WD launch on your M3 (7900 rpm launch with minimal wheel spin!!)
Of course this will NEVER happen.....Although it is possible if they wanted to....

THE POINT IS PERFORMANCE AND FUEL EFFICIENCY CAN CO-EXIST WITH OUR CURRENT TECHNOLOGY. SOME PEOPLE ARE OPEN TO THIS, OTHERS NOT.
It shaved 0.5 seconds off the Accord's V6's 0-60 mph and that's an automatic...
It shaved 0.3 seconds off the Lexus RX-330 automatic of course

The way I see it, this is not about being a tree hugger or a senseless redneck, or any other stereotype. It's about technological innovation. The average internal combustion engine can convert only about 20% of the chemical energy in gasoline into kinetic energy. So there's still room for improvement there. Since BMW is all for technological innovation, you bet that they are constantly trying to improve their engine efficiency without compromising performance. Think E46 330 vs. E90 330 engine. Power up 15%, fuel consumption down %15. I don't understand some of you guys are so opposed to this.

peace :peace:

you should leave now

Hey guys, thinbev just wants us to vote Yes or No, so let's give him that vote!

I vote "NO", as in:

"NO, thinbev does not seem to understand what the M3 is about, does not seem to understand who or what the M3 is targetted for, and does not seem to get the fact that he should take this to a mass-market commuter-car forum where improvements in fuel economy could have a real impact."

What thinbev & the folks arguing his point don't seem to get is that there's a limited amount of resources that will get put into the creation of any car. For those of us who know what the M3's about, we want every last resource dedicated to making the car better at performance beyond what the base 3-class offers. Whatever resource on the M3 team that BMW could throw at improving fuel economy would be much better spent on making the next M3 a much better performer so it can better stack up against the competition.

Love ya guys who want to see both power and fuel economy improved - really. Especially since lessons in tuning have often shown that improving fuel economy and improving power sometimes go hand-in-hand.

But the point is -- apply that energy and effort where it's most needed. Aim at mass-market vehicles where improved fuel economy will make a big difference since there's a ton of people who own them. Leave the low-production-number M3 alone, the only focus it needs from BMW is the kind of focus that makes it faster while retaining the other amenities the M3 is known for. The last kind of message I'd want to send to BMW is that the M3 audience has fuel economy at the top of its mind rather than the next M3 having enough power, handling and looks to dominate the competition!

:wave:

Whatever man,
Don't be mad because I caught you contradicting yourself. :rofl2:
So you may not be the brightest or most mature guy out there, that's OK.

I'm not mad. I just find it pointkess to argue with you. So I'll rephrase my vote: very simply, NO!

FYI: since you're a newbie here, I'll give you that and let you know: personal attacks get you banned. I think you're treading that line.

speed demon hit the nail on the head.

No.

speed demon hit the nail on the head.

No.

Agreed. I'm with him (and you). :agree:

I'm not mad. I just find it pointkess to argue with you. So I'll rephrase my vote: very simply, NO!

FYI: since you're a newbie here, I'll give you that and let you know: personal attacks get you banned. I think you're treading that line.


Then 3-4 guys will be banned for this tread alone for personal attacks including yourself for implying I'm a troll.

my vote would be yes

but would not happen on the m3 or any for a first there would be too much r&d for bmw just for the m3.now for a revision of the 3-series or even the 5-series down the line that would be more clausable since bmw sells more 3-series vs. m3's even thou the m3 is part of the 3-series.and i am sure this is somthing bmw is looking at for the next generation (or even the current generation)i am not saying anything like get a different car butfrom a bussiness standpoint would you start on a low volume car compared to a high volume car.the same is why however much i hate it that a conventinal manual transmission will be a thing of the past in the next 10-15 years being replaced by a smg,tiptronic,e-shift etc. but also look at if gm might have royalties on this technology as well.

just my .02

Hey guys, thinbev just wants us to vote Yes or No, so let's give him that vote!

I vote "NO", as in:

"NO, thinbev does not seem to understand what the M3 is about, does not seem to understand who or what the M3 is targetted for, and does not seem to get the fact that he should take this to a mass-market commuter-car forum where improvements in fuel economy could have a real impact."

What thinbev & the folks arguing his point don't seem to get is that there's a limited amount of resources that will get put into the creation of any car. For those of us who know what the M3's about, we want every last resource dedicated to making the car better at performance beyond what the base 3-class offers. Whatever resource on the M3 team that BMW could throw at improving fuel economy would be much better spent on making the next M3 a much better performer so it can better stack up against the competition.

Love ya guys who want to see both power and fuel economy improved - really. Especially since lessons in tuning have often shown that improving fuel economy and improving power sometimes go hand-in-hand.

But the point is -- apply that energy and effort where it's most needed. Aim at mass-market vehicles where improved fuel economy will make a big difference since there's a ton of people who own them. Leave the low-production-number M3 alone, the only focus it needs from BMW is the kind of focus that makes it faster while retaining the other amenities the M3 is known for. The last kind of message I'd want to send to BMW is that the M3 audience has fuel economy at the top of its mind rather than the next M3 having enough power, handling and looks to dominate the competition!

:wave:


i totally agree with this...but to call people tree huggers or whatever else (like some people on this thread have said) is totally ignorant. I agree that the new M3 should have everything it needs to be the best car it can be, but to cut people down just because they would like to see a cleaner environment, is stupid and ignorant. I think you have a very good point about going after mass market vehicles (SUV's in particular).

Bottom line is that I would never want performance to be sacraficed for fuel economy on an M3. The M3 is for one thing and one thing only, PERFORMANCE, but to make personal attacks on people that opt for a cleaner environment as opposed to the ignorant rednecks out there, is redicilious. :peace:

Simple: Ask Alpina to shoehorn the E39 D10 motor into the E90 chassis.

Check at the bottom of the chart "D10 Bi-Turbo"

http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk/alpina.html

NO.

1) enough problems with the current levels of sophistication
2) it's an M3 not an echo

I went to the prius forum and started a petition for a V10 in a prius. As I searched for the appropriate place to start the thread, (and I am not making this up) I saw one that stated "Need help naming my Prius!!" I saw a news and info section and decided to start the thread there.

I mentioned that Toyota with deep pockets in F1 is devloping a "Super-Hybrid" capable of record fuel economy and acceleration from 0-100mph in 6 seconds. Of course I mentioned "only if it didn't sacrifice fuel economy" I also mentioned that there was a rumored limited Bob Ross edition in honor of the late nature and wilderness painter on the drawing board... Yes or No? The moderator who goes by "Mother Kittens" banned me in record time and made sure to insult my whole family before doing so.

I figured since I put in the mpg assurance and the bit about Bob Ross (hollywood appeal) it would be a resounding success. :nixweiss:

I went to the prius forum and started a petition for a V10 in a prius. As I searched for the appropriate place to start the thread, (and I am not making this up) I saw one that stated "Need help naming my Prius!!" I saw a news and info section and decided to start the thread there.

I mentioned that Toyota with deep pockets in F1 is devloping a "Super-Hybrid" capable of record fuel economy and acceleration from 0-100mph in 6 seconds. Of course I mentioned "only if it didn't sacrifice fuel economy" I also mentioned that there was a rumored limited Bob Ross edition in honor of the late nature and wilderness painter on the drawing board... Yes or No? The moderator who goes by "Mother Kittens" banned me in record time and made sure to insult my whole family before doing so.

I figured since I put in the mpg assurance and the bit about Bob Ross (hollywood appeal) it would be a resounding success. :nixweiss:
:rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2:

Maybe we should all take turns going there, posting the exact same thread, and getting banned for it. Poor Mother Kittens will loose her mittens.

I went to the prius forum and started a petition for a V10 in a prius.

The moderator who goes by "Mother Kittens" banned me in record time and made sure to insult my whole family before doing so.


Classic.

Link?

:rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2:

Maybe we should all take turns going there, posting the exact same thread, and getting banned for it. Poor Mother Kittens will loose her mittens.



lol :rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: ....I second that

I vote NO

Classic.

Link?

Sorry, I was banned. But if you need a good laugh (or want to be genuinely disturbed when you remember these are adults contributing) here is the link to help name the prius:

http://www.priuschat.com/forums/new-name-for-my-prius-vt11111.html

Sorry, I was banned. But if you need a good laugh (or want to be genuinely disturbed when you remember these are adults contributing) here is the link to help name the prius:

http://www.priuschat.com/forums/new-name-for-my-prius-vt11111.html

I'm thinking about joining with the handle GasGuzzler and becoming a complete troll. My sig would have "13 MPG City and lovin' it!" How long do you think I could last? :rofl2:

The cylinder deactivation is just one more thing to go wrong on the car - i think its the gayest thing in the world for one to have to push a damn button on the new M5 to get all 500hp...thats just stupid if you want good gas mileage go get a prius

You dont use 500 hp all the time so why have it there when it doesn't need to be. Instead of a 400hp/500hp crossover, it should have been 300/500.
**BUT** I'm not sure how this technology works. If it works by just reducing the amount of fuel going in to the engine to give less power, then fine.

You dont use 500 hp all the time so why have it there when it doesn't need to be. Instead of a 400hp/500hp crossover, it should have been 300/500.
**BUT** I'm not sure how this technology works. If it works by just reducing the amount of fuel going in to the engine to give less power, then fine.

You as the f'king driver have the responsibility for regulating the power with your foot. Why do you want to give up this control to someone else?

For the M cars... no thanks, it would take away from the experience. Especially if it was all computer controlled. Meaning if the computer decides when to cut cylinders, then no thanks. A driver selectable setting? Maybe. But I don't see the M3 needing to be trendy...

So.. vote is no...

In the October issue of the magazine, Business 2.0 there is a whole write up titled:

"Fuel Economy Gets Sexy"

They have the subject cut into 4 parts; Good mileage, better mileage, best mileage and Pick your mileage.

Under the Good Mileage they speak of the new 760Li. They mention it's 438 HP V12 motor receiving 22-32 mpg with the use of it's "direct injection" system.

"The 438 HP, $120,000 sedan gets better mileage and performance, courtesy of a "direct-injection" V-12 engine. Basically, BMW engineers redesigned the 760's fuel injectors so that they now squirt vaporized gas with such precision that the mist both cools the motor for added efficiency and combusts more rapidly for superior performance. Direct injection helps the car get 15 percent better mileage than its predecessor, and published reports suggest it has also increased the engine's power output by 5 percent. Audi, Mazda, MB and VW are starting to copy BMW and offer the same technology.



Under the Better Mileage section;

GM and Chrysler have a hybrid SUV called the graphite. They also promise by late 2007 all their SUV's will have a 25 percent better fuel economy. 26-35 MPG


Under the Best Mileage Section;

Mercedes Benz's Bionic diesel fumes get sprayed with precisely metered amounts of an amonia-based fluid that neutralizes the nasty pollutants by as much as 80 percent. MB has a problem selling the diesel engines in California, New York, and 2 other states. This Bionic Diesel technology will allow them to sell in Cali, and NY. They will start selling them within a year. 70 mpg

Under the Pick you Mileage Section;

Toyota's next act may very well resemble the Prius's alter ego. The Toyota Volta is an all-wheel-drive gas-electric supercar that despite its 408 HP and ability to reach 60 miles per hour in 4 seconds flat, it still delivers 32 miles per gallon. Company officials hint that they're tweaking the hybrid software so that, with the turn of a dashboard-mounted knob, you'll be able to instantly switch your car from miserly all-electric mode to all-out high performance. They write: "If Toyota pulls it off, you can bet that every other car manufacturer will soon be reaching for the fuel-efficiency dial."

In my opinion, BMW engineers do a better job when it comes to quality and performance. (not that a toyota is terrible either. I happen to own a 620 HP Supra and love it) But I think it's to BMW's benefit to emphesise on this very talked about subject. Yeah some of you on here say "leave that to the other car manufacturers" or "go buy a hybrid" but your redneck minds don't seem to understand that the technology is out there for better performance and increased fuel economy. Now it's just a matter of wanting it on our next purchase of the e90 BMW M3. BMW has allways led the pack when it comes to engineering, now they need to lead the pack when it comes to Fuel Economy.

Think about it and please just post YES or NO.

No offense but, I'm not interested in your personal opinions

YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO
YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO
YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO
YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO YES or NO

The X3 is comming out with a version that's goes from 0-60 in 6.7 sec and getting 20% better mileage. BMW engineers opted to go for heavy duty light weight CAPACITORS to store the charge. I like it better than using heavy batteries to store the energy.
BMW's getting into this Hybrid technology also and just a matter of time before they off it on all their models (except M models probably)

http://www.motortrend.com/autoshows/coverage/112_frankfurt_motor_show/index9.html#2

In my opinion, BMW engineers... I happen to own a... But I think it's to BMW's benefit... but your redneck minds...

Think about it and please just post YES or NO.

No offense but, I'm not interested in your personal opinions

...Yet you plague us with yours. I'm kinda new here but, does hypocrisy = ban? Also, do a little more research before you go promoting a technology that by BMW standards is considered obsolete. Hybrids are not the answer, and BMW has known this since the 70s. The H2R has set numerous world speed records using a hydrogen powered engine .

http://www.bmwworld.com/hydrogen/h2r_racer.htm

...NO

...Yet you plague us with yours. I'm kinda new here but, does hypocrisy = ban? Also, do a little more research before you go promoting a technology that by BMW standards is considered obsolete. Hybrids are not the answer, and BMW has known this since the 70s. The H2R has set numerous world speed records using a hydrogen powered engine .

http://www.bmwworld.com/hydrogen/h2r_racer.htm

Spot on Dave

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

I'm thinking about joining with the handle GasGuzzler and becoming a complete troll. My sig would have "13 MPG City and lovin' it!" How long do you think I could last? :rofl2:

That has to be the funniest chat i have ever seen... what a bunch of basket weaving tree huggers... the name section is the best but also check this one...

http://priuschat.com/max-speed-t12393.html

That has to be the funniest chat i have ever seen... what a bunch of basket weaving tree huggers... the name section is the best but also check this one...

http://priuschat.com/max-speed-t12393.html


Oh, that's the thread I would have to troll.

"Shucks guys and gals, my car (I named her Kitty Killer) went 155 MPH the other day and the tires didn't melt. Maybe you should try it now. Oh...what...sh*t, this is the Prius forum?....Bwahahahahaha!!!" :devilish:

Would you like BMW to use fuel economy technology on their new 400 HP V8 powered M3 engine?

I know the technology exists. For example, have 4 cylinders shut off when you are at idle or not pushing the pedal all the way down.

They should still keep the 400 HP available but use only 4 out of the 8 cylinders at idle or at low rpm driving.

I think GMC trucks use that technology.

Even though they will probably make an excellent car, fuel prices are going up and it seems "trendy" to drive an efficient vehicle. I believe BMW would raise the bar even more by offering this technology. Power and efficiency is a winner in my books. I think Audi and MB would have to follow suite.

I don't know if BMW reads these forums but if they do let them know you would be interested by replying to this post YES or NO.


Hel* NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.........Oh and if you did not hear me NO, NO, NO, NO.

Oh, that's the thread I would have to troll.

"Shucks guys and gals, my car (I named her Kitty Killer) went 155 MPH the other day and the tires didn't melt. Maybe you should try it now. Oh...what...sh*t, this is the Prius forum?....Bwahahahahaha!!!" :devilish:


:rofl2:

I vote NO! And apologies ThinBev, but this IS a place to post opinions. If you want to take a poll, please use the handy POLLING feature!

First the PROS:

* Of course it can be done (the technology is as old as electronic fuel injection - 20 years or so).

* You would never notice a performance issue. Don't forget that a HP rating is MAX HP. Most of the time you are driving around the engine is producing very little HP (a percentage roughly equal to the % the pedal is pushed down). "Switching" cylinders on and off is as simple as mapping 4 cylinders' injectors and ignition not to fire until a certain degree of pedal-mashing (say 1/3 or 1/2 throttle).

Now the CON's:

* It's WAAAY too late for such a petition. I am completely guessing here, but BMW is probably way past the development stage on the M3 engine and is designing tooling, sorting out production logistics, and trying to find the final bugs in the new engine. IF BMW took such a petition seriously, it probably wouldn't see daylight until a new engine design is being developed.

* Based on what I've read about BMW's M philosophy, this just doesn't fit. BMW has stated over and over that they aren't about pleasing everybody, but appealing to enthusiasts. Furthermore, I'm betting that if polled the demographic they are chasing, they would find that the development money isn't worth it (as this thread is demonstrating). M drivers don't want it, don't care about it, why spend money/time on it?

* WHY ask for it?? Ferrari doesn't. Porche doesn't. If you can't decide between saving gas $$ and having the most bad-a$$ 4 seater on the planet, the M is probably not for you.

Not to be an a s s but the number one rule is: if you cannot afford to purchase and maintain a vehicle (fuel, insurance, maintenance, etc.) then you should be considering a different vehicle.

VERY WELL SAID :beer:

I can't believe how ignorant and pig-headed some of the responses here are. Not of the M philosophy? M is only for performance? Then why in the hell does the new M5 (and M6) have the power button that decreases hp to 400? Could one of the M elitists please explain this? Unless you are driving your vehicle at its maximum capacity all the time, which none you are, not even close, then you could stand to gain some more mpg. The flick of a button and you have 100 extra hp on tap for when you need (want) more power. Hopefully this will make its way down from the 5 to the 3.

I can't believe how ignorant and pig-headed some of the responses here are.

So people aren't entitled to their own opinion -- for whatever reason -- if they don't conform to your opinion? That sounds ignorant and pig-headed to me.

So people aren't entitled to their own opinion -- for whatever reason -- if they don't conform to your opinion? That sounds ignorant and pig-headed to me.

From dictionary.com

2 entries found for ignorant.
ig·no·rant ( P ) Pronunciation Key (gnr-nt)
adj.
Lacking education or knowledge.
Showing or arising from a lack of education or knowledge: an ignorant mistake.
Unaware or uninformed.

In what way does my post show a lack of knowledge, or of being uninformed? There are a lot of people in this thread speaking of how the M doesn't suit a person who wants better fuel economy, or that the M division is only about balls out performance, or that if you want fuel economy you should go buy a hybrid. Well all of those things are simply incorrect and show a lack of knowledge about the M division as evidenced by two of the most bad ass vehicles on the road right now, the M5 and M6. Obviously the M heads also care about fuel economy.

From dictionary.com...

Did you read the first post? It's not asking people to provide a knowledgable assessment. It's asking what people would like, what they would be interested in. It's a vote. Maybe some people don't want the M5/M6 power button. So getting mad at them for not siding with what you believe makes you pig-headed. Doesn't matter whether their reasoning makes sense to you or not.

First off, no, they shouldn't economize the V8, if you can't afford the gas then why are you buying a lux sport coupe? Go buy a Prius. I understand the need for conservation; but this is a speciality vehicle for performance. If it is a around the towner car for the masses, by all means, economize it. :soapbox: Secondly, there shouldn't be a V8 in it anyway. Why break tradition and go with an 8 over a 6? All because Audi did it with the S4 doesn't meen BMW needs to do the same with the M3. BMW needs to smash some brain cells and come up with a six that'll challenge Audi's 8.

For most, it is not about what you can afford, but how they can be a little more environmently friendly. If you can afford many M's then buy the M's and use them as weekend cars. Get another fuel effecient car for you daily/travel vehical. Thats why I have another... oh wait, the M is my fuel effecient car.

...Why break tradition and go with an 8 over a 6? All because Audi did it with the S4 doesn't meen BMW needs to do the same with the M3. BMW needs to smash some brain cells and come up with a six that'll challenge Audi's 8.

There are people who believe the only true M3 is the E30, with a 4 cyl. I'm OK with BMW doing a V8 for the M3, but if it raises the cost too much, it might become a hard sell to some going against a 911.

like a valvetronic motor.... kinda like M5... uhh... NO. if you're buying an expensive car like this... don't be cheap.

that means the car price will go up even further just to accomodate for the few who are penny pinching...

for that increase.. .you can buy a nice civic as your beater

Yeah an M3 buyer can afford the fuel costs but it's more then just affording, it's about feeling good.

*Just reply YES or NO to the petition.*

I get the warm fuzzies just thinking about how much high octane gas my car is churning through at 140 in 5th gear!

Mechanical gluttony - that makes me feel good.

In case anyone wonders, I vote NO. :agree:

So, this isn't an exact science since several of the votes tallied were based on the apparent intent of the poster (not everyone said "Yes" or "No"), but here's the scorecard I have.

No: 26
Yes: 10

So, over 72% of those who made their opinions known on this thread do NOT want such a petition and are voting "No". Seems overwhelming enough to me.

Can we put this message thread to rest now, so the prius-guys can go back to their forum and not waste the M-Performance crowd's time? :takecover

Please don't take offense to that question, Prius-guys!! It would mean less time spent reading/posting on this message thread, which means less time spent on your computer, which means less electricity used, which means less coal burning to make electricity. Burning coal both hurts our air quality & global warming, plus furthers the strip-mining of coal from mother earth! :grouphug:

Speedy

Make more power. I could care less about fuel. I want want fuel economy I would buy a different car.

I have a better idea, how about we petition for the V10 in the M3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ja!!!

I wouldn't mind hybrid or similar technology in a BMW, just please, just not the M models.