E36 M3 officially not really an M-car

In the words of BMW Motorsport driver and 1993 BTCC champion Joachim Winkelhock:

Quote: "The M3 coupe and M5 are not only two of the most thrilling cars in the world, but also provide you with a feeling of absolute safety through their perfect handling".......  ...

and before anyone gets their knickers in a twist Im only stirring it!

Edited by Eamo

Did he say that when BMW were paying him to drive their cars ? Sounds very PR speak to me.

...it's a fair cop.....

This is a great topic that was bound to provoke a lot of response :)
On the original topic, there was a shift in what an "M" car was from the E30 to the E36. But, the E36, E46 and probably the E90 when it's released.
The new "M" cars are more "fast-road" than The more "track" focussed E30. You could even argue that the early E30's are more focussed than the later ones in an aim to get more sales.
Therefore the softer "M" has been in production for longer and in much higher quantities than the original concept.
Should we therefore not re-badge all early "track-focussed" E30 M3's as M3 GTR's or CSL's and leave the rest of the M's with their correct logo?
Just a thought.
Or only give the M badge to cars without electric windows, mirrors etc, air-con, leather, stereos and all the other luxury car niceties? Call the rest GT's, be they E30's, E36's or whatever?
Just a thought :)

Paul

Jonners wrote: the original m1/m5/m6 engine that spawned the e30 m3 engine has its origins in the Batmobile twin cam monsters. the e36 m3 engine is a souped up 325i engine - a splendid engine no doubt, but not a Motorsport engine

Don't be so bloody daft. That's like saying an E30 M3
engine is just a souped up M10 (hang on........)

Actually, the CSL racing engine was the M49 which
is very different to the later M1 unit, different head and
chamber/piston design so not comparable at all.
The S14 motor is based on a slightly modified M10
block to the extent where a 2 litre 2002 block can be
fitted with an S14 head (shortened verion of the
M5/M6) provided you sort out an external oil drain. An
M10 head bolts straight to an M3 block. To call it a
modified 16v version of the M10 518 engine is not far
from the truth.
And if truth be known, the S14 engine was a boat
anchor by 1992 and outclassed - that's why BMW
started afresh with the M42 (318iS) engine for 1993.

The M3 E36 engine is just as special and has
nothing apart from bore spacing in common with an
M50 or M52 engine. The head is a completely
different design with regard to porting, valve angles
etc. Also the M52 uses two seperate cam carriers
that fit into the head. The M3 timing chain is the
same as the E30 with the chain driving both cams.
On an M50 it drives the inlet cam which then drives
the exhaust cam via a small link chain. M50 series
cranks were all spheriodal grey cast iron with
powdered steel rods, the M3 3.0 and 3.2 all had
forged steel cranks and rods.

E30 M3 owners tend to be a snobby elitist bunch -
but when I had my Sport Evo I always gave the E36
boys a nod - as well as owners of the 3 door Sierra
Cosworth and Mercedes 190 2.3/2.5 16v - the
Evolution version of which absolutely murdered the
M3 in the early nineties on the track (just like the
Sierra did in the eighties!)

As for 'competition pedigree', well that's nonsense. I
don't recall the M5 in any shape or form being raced,
or the M635CSi. And so it is with the E36 which like
these cars is a fast and accomplished road car,
nothing more.

what can i say drew you know your stuff

M3PSM wrote: Where any of the M's raced in car showroom trim? Or, like the current touring cars and rally cars etc, were they stripped down and kitted out with new brakes, suspension, interior, tuned engine, stiffened chassis, re-maped ecu, lighter panels etc etc? This being the case, surely none of them are the race proven thoroughbreds, just tamed down sales tools for the general public.

Exactly. It makes me laugh when E30 M3 owners say
that their cars are really racers with tax discs - they
are not. A proper M3 race car would have had a
seam welded shell for a start as well as a proper
cage to absorb all the stresses - that's why old road
going M3's that have a seen a few track days are all
buckled and cracked around the front strut tops. The
E30 M3 was just as much a commercial proposition
as anything else - BMW built and sold 17'000 as a
way of reflecting some glory on the E30 and BMW as
a whole.

As for the M3 versus 325i debate - well, MOTOR
magazine compared the two and found that the 2.3
litre M3 was indeed faster around MIRA than the 325i
Sport - by a whopping .44 of a second (40.64
seconds versus 40.20). On the slalom handling
course they recorded exactly the same time.

So, faster than a 325i Sport? Think again!

Drew540i wrote: As for 'competition pedigree', well that's nonsense. I don't recall the M5 in any shape or form being raced, or the M635CSi. And so it is with the E36 which like these cars is a fast and accomplished road car, nothing more.

The M635CSi was raced in the '80s up against TWR Jag XJSs and the like in the ETCC and some trips over to Bathurst. Here's a photo. I vaguely remember seeing an E34 M5 raced by someone, but it wasn't a factory BMW entry.

Edited by Robstar

Jonners wrote: very learned, detailed and thorough but a bit off the point...

On the contrary, I thinks it's right on the mark. It appears to me, as an outsider (never owned an M car), that a lot of the E30 M3 owners are very full of the 'my cars better than yours, my cars more worthy of it's badge, my cars got a proper motorsport pedigree' mentality and what Drew is saying is that basically it a lot of tosh.

Well said Drew540

guys...

this is straightforward

the point is simply whether the e36 m3 marked a change in direction in the use of the m badge

no amount of comparisons with other cars will change history

the fact that the e36 m3 is undoubtedly a good car doesn't change history

just because some e30 m3 owners are elitist doesn't change history

the fact that a e30 325i is nearly as good doesn't change history

you guys are just soo typical of Blair's Britain - let's just all concentrate on what's emotionally appealing and forget about the truth...

nobody said the e36 is no good - or if they did it was a joke - similarly comments about the e30 m3 being better should be taken with a pinch of salt...

there's always a temptation to be the great myth debunker on these type of topics but 'pedigree' is the right word here - talk about cylinder blocks on this issue is misleading - we all know the heads are the important bit and there is a bloodline between the twin cam batmobiles and the early m5/m6/s14...

that particular bloodline stopped with the e36 - for one reason and another - not saying that's bad or good but it did change

that's the point here - not whether this or that is better or worse

one last thing - i use the word 'history' with a slight tongue in cheek - wouldn't want anyone thinking I'm taking this as seriously as famine in Africa and so forth....