The Myth of the "Real M Car"

"Battery Tender Unnecessary" (carac) 01/24/2014 at 14:42 • Filed to: Bmw m

80

100

On two occasions in the past week I've had brow furrowing moments where someone made reference to a "real M car." The most recent being the comments on Chris Harris' comparison of the M6 GrandCoupe, E63, and Jaguar XFR-S where someone said "Finally maybe people will respect the M5/6 as real M cars." ...this raises a lot of questions, the most obvious being "what the hell does that even mean?"

The phrase a "real M car" is used A LOT in modern automotive journalism. Watch or read any outlet's coverage on a car BMW M has touched and the phrase is bound to turn up. It is often referenced as a comparative benchmark with no explanation of what it means. In reality, it is completely subjective nonsense. But that fact doesn't stop journalists, enthusiasts, and even members of BMW's marketing department from making the assumption that everyone has settled on a mutually understood, albeit completely nebulous, standard of excellence.

Now that we've gotten how ridiculous the whole idea is out of the way...let's get down to what a majority of people are talking about when they say it. When you hear someone say "real M car" more often than not, they are referring to one of two periods in BMW M's 40 year history.

The first being a time when "M" literally meant "Motorsport"

The 3.0CSL "Batmobile" was a homologation special for the European Touring Car Championship.

The M1 was a homologation special that ended up ineligible for its class due to rule changes by the time it came out.

The E30 M3 was a homologation special for Group A Touring Car races. The ultimate form being the Sport Evolution of 1990; technically the last road car they built solely for the purpose of being able to race it.

They were "race cars for the road" in the literal sense and were built because race rules said they HAD to be. The more hardcore of the BMW M purists consider these the only "true M cars" ever made. They tend to view BMW M more as a religion that "heretics" took and perverted when they made the subsequent road cars.

The BMW 3.0 CSL, E30 M3, and M1 are spoken of in hushed, reverent tones. Modern M cars are false prophets to be denied and shamed.

These are the people that aren't going to be pleased until BMW starts selling street legal race cars again. They want the new M3 to come with a triangulated and seam welded chassis, Ohlins suspension, radio/cruise/climate delete, non-adjustable race buckets, fire supression, etc. They risk a stroke every time they look at a X5 M or M6 GranCoupe.

The next group are those that would (and do) argue that the last "real M cars" are from the early '00s. The E46 M3, the E39 M5, and the E36/8 M Coupe being the last cars made before BMW M "sold its soul for higher profits." It was a time when senior executives of BMW M were saying things like "there will never be a M SUV" and "turbocharging would fundamentally change the character of the M brand." And even with the E60 and E90 that followed, it felt like some of the old guard were still there, pushing for high-revving naturally aspirated V-8s and V-10s while their direct competition went forced induction. Then came the turbos and SUVs...and these people (myself included) threw up our hands and yelled "it's over!" Oh, THE BETRAYAL! Many of these people haven't set foot in a BMW dealership since on principle alone. They lament that luxury has begun to take a priority over sportiness in modern BMW M, that the balance has shifted the wrong direction. But they forget that when the 3-series, 5-series, etc get heavier and larger, the M variants can only do so much to combat the bloat. Current electric steering can only approximate the directness and feel of hydraulic steering. Adaptive suspension can only hide so much weight. We're still in a transition period with young tech, it will get better, but patience is part of the process.

Both groups have valid complaints about the direction of BMW M and one aspect they agree on is the that ///M has begun to feel like a trim level you spec because you want the most expensive and luxurious variant of a BMW model. You buy a M5 because you want everyone else to know you spent more on your car than your neighbor with the 550i. You buy a M6 GranCoupe because you want a M5 in a better looking $23k suit. The choice to move up to a ///M car is one of one-ups-man-ship and not a statement that you care about dynamics over comfort. There are enthusiasts that still buy into the classic idea of BMW M when purchasing new, but they are a rare breed. The question then becomes, does any of that matter as long as the cars are great? There's an argument to be made that non-sporty buyers end up babying the car and you end up getting a great deal in a few years on a M5 that hasn't been abused.

In either case, it is widely thought that BMW M doesn't mean what it used to. That the introduction of things like M-sport dilute the brand and further bring into question what it means to be a "real M car." I tend to think it is more of an issue with perception and competition. BMW M has the gift/curse of being around long enough to have an established legacy and the expectations that come with it. A brand where things once considered sacred are now long gone. So there's some merit to the perception that the principles have been thrown out in the pursuit of sales and profit. But these changes are necessary to stay competitive in a market where your competition is willing to do anything and everything to usurp you. AMG, Audi GMBH, and Jaguar have gone from out-of-their-league "also ran" cars to legitimate competition that meet or exceed BMW M in areas they once dominated. Cars like the E30 M3, E28 M5, E46 M3, and E39 M5 stand out because their contemporaries never held a candle to the driving experience they provided. The E30 had no direct competition in the US. The E28 M5 blindsided every other German manufacturer with a saloon that was outperforming Ferrari.

The RS4 and C63 challenged the E90

in ways the C43 and B5/6 S4 never did the E46

E39 M5 owners never felt heat from the E55 or (C5) S6 the way the F10 is from the E/CLS63 and RS6/7.

So while AMAZING in a vacuum, BMW M's current offerings seem less impressive compared to their direct competition this time around. If that is discouraging, remember that competition is good.

"The BMW M you once knew is gone"?...not exactly.

They can't and don't need to produce road going race cars in extremely limited quantities

The cars they're based on moved upmarket, got heavier, and areas that were considered taboo by old school BMW M were tapped to stay competitive

The other guys got better

The good news? BMW M knows they have a problem. Recent interviews with executives a ///M acknowledge the stiffer competition from AMG and Audi and that they are focusing heavily on weight reduction and the dynamic improvements that come with it.

And yes, BMW is selling more cars than ever, like that's a bad thing. No, they aren't still hand-built in Garching...and Macs aren't still built in SanFran garages. But increased production means a cheaper economy of scale, increased profit, and the ability to take chances they otherwise wouldn't. They have invested heavily in volume carbon fiber production to reduce the weight of all their cars in the future and continue to pursue tech that will likely put them years ahead of their competition. (Who doesn't want a M3/4 with a carbon tub?) They also know that with Audi and Mercedes readying relatively "affordable" RS and AMG models like the RS3 and A/CLA/GLA45 they need to have a presence in the sub-$50k market.

Am I disappointed that BMW M has "changed"? Sure. But I've also accepted that they've had to. A lot of enthusiasts act like the mere existence of modern M cars takes something away from the classics. The fact that the M5/M6 have lost some of the feel and feedback doesn't make the old cars any less appealing. In fact, it makes them even more special than they already were.

Cherish the past, accept the present, and anticipate the future. They are listening to feedback wherever feasible, but they can't repeat the past.

There is no such thing as a "real M car." It is a myth.

I just hope no one tells BMW, Audi, AMG and everyone else...because I never want them to stop chasing it.

Thanks to !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! for the header photo. !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

Twitter: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

Email: ImolaSLS@gmail.com

BrtStlnd > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 14:48

25

This is a fantastic explanation of what BMW has done and why. More importantly, it's a very accurate description of the absurdity of what many BMW 'commentators' want BMW to do with the M line... if followed, BMW would have gone the way of Saab a long time ago.

Brian Silvestro > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 14:49

7

Actually passed out laughing. Great write-up, should be FP'd.

Fed(oo=[][]=oo)uken > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 14:49

1

DEM MIRRORS!

vdub_nut: scooter snob > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 14:57

0

It was also a Lamborghini.

willkinton247 > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 15:00

1

This is fantastically written. Well done!

You also just earned a twitter follower. haha

stoke > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 15:02

13

M is in the process of becoming AMG: a high-performance division that has no pretenses of motorsport. And that certainly works for M-B, because they've never really been a driving-experience brand. Sure, there's been some racing over the years, but nobody bought an AMG for the way it devoured a mountain road. You buy them for planet-crushing power, big-ass wheels, everything on the options list and the ability to bitch-slap the ego of your snooty golf partner with the S550.

On the other hand, if BMW is going to continue to market its products as Ultimate Driving Machines, there eventually needs to be some motorsport connection. The equity that was built up over a couple of decades of M cars with extremely legit performance is now being cashed in, in the form of X5M's and the like. Unlike AMG, which can build all the G55's it wants without squandering a bit of their equity, BMW will eventually need to recenter the M brand in motorsport to maintain that racing legitimacy that powers the brand.

ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable) > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 15:05

2

Excellent article.

I have no opinion about BMW or ///M cars. I have only driven an older 330? coupe, and that wasn't able to hoon it.

I love the 1M in Forza 4. And you can tell from Clarkson's review that it was a genuinely surprising car for him.

BrtStlnd > stoke 01/24/2014 at 15:06

7

Racing legitimacy is not what powers the brand.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 15:07

0

Excellent analysis and a great write up! FP material for sure!

Fred (FreddsterExprs) > stoke 01/24/2014 at 15:12

2

AMG did start their business in motorsport and was preparing Mercedes race cars for literally all the time (private GT cars, DTM, FIA GT1, DTM again).
So I would argue that they have motorsport history and value. But you are undoubtedly right that AMG street cars became sporty somewhere around 2007 with the introduction of the W204 C63. A car that still had the "Lets throw in a huge ass engine" mentality combined with a suspension and brake set up that matched it to pace with the M3.

It even came so far that the C63 Estate demolished the much newer RS4 Avant around Hockenheim by over one second per lap.

153624 - Straight Six > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 15:21

1

Excellent post. I do have to say however that although M is certainly better now from a business perspective, none of their current cars particularly appeal to me. Now that's not to say that I wouldn't love to have a drive in one, because they produce excellent cars. Yet if I was going to spend M money on a car I would probably buy something else.

Real M to me means pre-E46. I think using that term to separate old M from new M is however a perfectly valid practice, although new M is arguably more "real". It's just a convenient way to differentiate between the philosophies that M cars have been built with.

avens > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 15:43

0

This going into jalop in 3, 2,

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 15:46

0

I don't like those curvy lines next to my car.

Those other two might be powerful and fast, but mine sure likes curvy-lined roads more than them...

Mikey > vdub_nut: scooter snob 01/24/2014 at 16:16

5

-5 points for not using "...pretty sure that's a Lambo"

Autolegend86 > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:16

0

You're skipping cars.
M530 came before the M1.

Jonathan Harper > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:17

6

I'm so perfectly happy driving CCCs stripped/caged/dropped/and cam'd former race car of an E30 M3. Then again, I'm also so perfectly happy driving the E60 M5 manual with my iPod integrated easily and my phone linked up via Bluetooth.

Wait, I'm perfectly happy driving pretty much any BMW. Or mostly any car.

Mikey > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:17

3

This now sits at the top of my greatest gifs of all time list. Yes, I keep records. They'll all in my head. Promise.

Dukes_of_Atlanta > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:19

0

A "Real M-car" is one that isn't a standard 3/5 series with an ///M badge slapped on it.

Cyrus > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:20

6

To me, ///M has always meant exceptional N/A motors that were not seen in the rest of the BMW lineup. The era of N/A BMWs is apparently now over, as every motor is now turbocharged. So, to me, ///M is dead.

X-cchannel-M > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:23

0

"Thanks you, Battery Tender!"

StevenG > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:24

0

Can we all at least agree no cars they make today look as good as the models before 1999?

Siman > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:24

1

My two cents on M model BMWs. No matter the M3 to the M6 they all preform the damn near the same as each other. Who would have ever known that by a bigger engine into a heavier car will get to almost the same performance numbers as the lighter car with less horsepower... shhh don't let the BMW engineers know. Only difference in them is the top speed and the cornering abilities. thats it

Kate's Dirty Sister > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:25

12

I always found it funny to see arm chair car specialists constantly telling BMW how they should run their business.
Great write-up

James Harris > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:31

0

To me the real M cars are the ones with race pedigree or the early screaming in-line 6s.

DIRTEE30 > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:32

0

I feel that they bastardized the M badge by mainly doubling or more horsepower than their lesser models. This move is about as ancient and meat headed as the way Americans go after performance. It's all about 0-60 and 14 mile times when you place your main emphasis on large displacement/horsepower/torque. Fun, yes. But what about handling, driving dynamics, road feedback, etc?

That's why the purists argue that the M cars died a long time ago. Take the E30 and the E28 M cars, for example. Yes, the power was increased, but done intelligently. It gave you enough increase to feel the difference, and to perform what it needs to do, while the emphasis is on handling, and the way the car feels when pushed hard. There's a great amount of neutrality in those cars, and they were great on the track, or on backroads, because you know what to expect. The car communicates with you on every single move. The new M cars take on the philosophy of the muscle cars of the 60s. Shitload of power, but you'll end up in a ditch without even knowing what the hell just happened.

Mikey > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:33

2

Oh, I think there surely is such a thing as a "real M car." Just because there's no standard definition doesn't mean it never existed. Both of the definitions you give have cars that meet them.

My own definition is basically just a list of models:

-e30 M3

-e28 M5

-non-USA e36 M3 (Euro S50 motor)

-E34 M5 (mainly for the engine)

As awesome as the e39 M5 is, I don't know if I can consider it a "real M car" because it was full of compromise, even if it was compromise done as well (or better) as is possible.

BrtStlnd > Cyrus 01/24/2014 at 16:33

4

The change in aspiration to get performance is an industry-wide thing. They need to meet EPA requirements. So... nearly all performance cars are now dead to you also.

UKPDXWRX > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:34

6

Mostly I get annoyed by the grinding complete irrelevance of this whole debate.

Automakers are businesses. Successful businesses build for the market. If a product is doing well (which M is) and you don't like it then they are a succesful business and you are not the market.

If you are not the market then your opinion is completely irrelevant to that business .

Now I'm not saying anyone's wrong, I agree with much of what is said - I just think it's really really silly to spend more than 5 seconds thinking about it. It's like thinking about that person you don't care for who's having a happy productive life - they're probably not thinking about you so why do you care so much?

But again, as a topic for pedantic gearhead discussion, I'm on board. But the fact of the matter is BMW is a great car company - by all measures of a business. If you expect BMW to fall on some ideological sword and sell less cars to appease a min... nevermind it's too silly of a line of thought to even finish that sentence.

James Harris > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:35

1

This is how I felt when I learned of the in-line 6 making a comeback, albeit turbo-charged. http://garglinggas.com/2013/09/06/bmw…

Mikey > Autolegend86 01/24/2014 at 16:35

0

And M535is came before M5, right?

Mikey > Siman 01/24/2014 at 16:36

0

On paper, the heavier ones corner better than the lighter ones... I'd still prefer an older one though.

twelvehappymen > Siman 01/24/2014 at 16:37

0

BMW ///M cars have always been about the same in a straight line (actually, the M5 has usually been quicker than the M3) but the real special sauce is the handling. Even the "That's not an M3 because no ITBs!" E36 was as fast around a race track as a 964/993C2 in similar levels of prep. That's a sedan bitch-slapping a 911 on a race track, and doing it with a much worse power to weight ratio. The M3 always punched way above its weight due to how frickin' good the chassis was.

Not sure if that's necessarily true anymore, given how far other cars have come and how much more GT-ish the 3-series is. But yeah, the motorsports division is about making cars that handle better than you can imagine.

Cyrus > BrtStlnd 01/24/2014 at 16:37

4

I completely understand that, but it's not impossible to remain naturally aspirated with modern emissions regulations (see Porsche). I had just hoped BMW would try to remain N/A with the ///M line.

Humpty-D > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:38

1

I think they have lost their edge, but this is mostly the fault of consumers who want all the newest features and an automatic transmission. I think the biggest hit to "real m cars" was the E36 m3. I viewed it as a pure attempt at profits considering it's bland styling (especially when compared to the E30M vs. base cars), the fact that they offered it in every configuration including convertibles, automatic transmissions and 30 "M" logos slapped all over the car. The E46 looks prettier, but in no way do I think it was an improvement, especially considering the added weight.

The last car they made that really struck me as a true homage to the E30M was the 1M. Clearly there is a big demand for that kind of car, I just really hope that they do something with the new 2 series and offer a super lightweight M with a balls-out motor, suspension and box flairs... even though I know that last part is a pipe dream.

Devlin Munion > willkinton247 01/24/2014 at 16:40

0

I totally agree.

BrtStlnd > Cyrus 01/24/2014 at 16:43

0

Porsche makes a car called the 911 Turbo.

Tom McParland > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:43

1

Bravo! One of the best pieces I've read this month.

zzoldan > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:45

1

This needs to be FP'd. And not in "best of oppo", it needs its own legit post. Very, very good read.

J "oppo" Zeke > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:45

2

If you can't define what an M Car is, then yes it's a myth.

Except that line is cranky BS, because as long as there's an M Car, and it's good to drive then there is a definition.

Definitions are moving targets, you never define an automotive segment for all time. You merely define a category in the time in which it sells. The E30 was the definitive M Car, as was the E34 M5, or the E92. The X6M is not a definitive M Car, simply because in the context of its age it was not the best M Car to drive.

Temporal status defines all things as it does cars. This applies to the "Real Mustang/Camaro" or the "Real S-Class" or even "Real Camry." The perception of the passage of time, the success of the product therein, and the competitive relevance to all others is what defines their essence. So while there may not be an absolute (for all time) M Car until the last M Car rolls off the line, as long as there are cars/BMWs/M Cars then the Real M Car is a moving target that most definitely exists.

notaduc > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:51

0

What about verts? No vert sould ever be an "M"...

shitheelandtoe > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:51

1

The last M car was the latest one you can afford.

Also true of all BMWs.

ttr888phoenix > stoke 01/24/2014 at 16:52

0

LOL considering that AMG was first to the game in 67 and M wasn't founded until 72, you're full of shit. MB/AMG has way more racing heritage than BMW/M without a doubt. Ex. MB in F1 since the 30's and BMW joining F1 in the 50s. Let's see who is still legitimate in terms of the ultimate form of racing, F1, Mercedes not BMW.

As for the road, the difference I think is this: BMW makes sporty road cars that feature luxury to try to prove that they can be both things, MB makes luxury cars that have the capability to be sporty but don't need to try to prove anything. BMW is throwing the M badge on everything they can (admittedly Mercedes as well), but what BMW needs more than anything else is a proper sports car, something special. They don't make anything that has come close to the R8, SLS, SL65BS, or SLR. Their move towards tuning SUVs is a mere copy of MB; X5M following years after the ML55/ML63. As well as the 4 door coupe CLS copied by BMW and Audi in the form of the A7 and 6GC.

Let's not forget the M cars with their stupid fake engine noises because they don't sound anywhere as good as AMG engines do.

Vintage1982Benz > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:52

0

Great article, and strong finish -

"Cherish the past, accept the present, and anticipate the future. They are listening to feedback wherever feasible, but they can't repeat the past."

Well said.

shitheelandtoe > UKPDXWRX 01/24/2014 at 16:53

0

Couldn't be said better. Amen.

CCC (formerly CyclistCarCoexist) > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:53

0

I agree. There are now so many m cars, there isn't actually a pure one. The e36 was good but wasn't fast in the states. Kinda seems more like a heavier FRS to think of. The m1 was probably the closest, but wasn't pure. the e46 refined, and made the e36 better than before. And the other ms nowadays are pretty fat. And just carry a m badge for questionable reasons sometimes.

Blze001 > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:54

0

For me, it used to be that the M3 and M5 were the looney siblings to the refined and precise 3 series and 5 series. Kind of how the STi is the Impreza's twin who has to wipe the cocaine off his nose for family photos. Now... they just feel like a 3 or 5 series with aggressive window dressing.

Louis Obispo > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:54

1

Pish posh. BMW as religion? That's both an insult to something fact based (BMWs exist) and ridiculous hype (they're not that great) at the same time. I owned an E46 M3 and it was only the 5th best car I've owned so far.

The M means nothing other than higher output than its regular counterpart. The fastest 3 series is the M3. The M3 is the fastest 3 series.

Pdexter > Cyrus 01/24/2014 at 16:58

0

I believe what you are seeking is already dead, and if not shot to the head yet, it just just matter of time before it is death and it wont take long.

BMW, like others need to follow that global taxation and legislation put to them.

Tom Hegedosh > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 16:59

0

No mention of the Z4M? shame . shame shame. we ALWAYS get left out.

burglar can't heart click anything > BrtStlnd 01/24/2014 at 17:01

11

But they should dig out the E30 stamping dies from the archives and fire the four cylinder assembly line back up! And they should sell the e30m3 redux for $7000! In a wagon version too!

I just went and built an M5 on the website. I was very happy to see the manual still offered as an option, but my as configured price of $102,125 means I cannot add to the take rate. Ouch. Also the new M3 looks absolutely fantastic, bigger or no.

BJDonnellan > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:02

0

Great read

Autolegend86 > Mikey 01/24/2014 at 17:02

1

Long list.

http://classicandvintagebmw.tumblr.com/e12

SpencerE30 > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:02

3

"The BMW 3.0 CSL, E30 M3, and M1 are spoken of in hushed, reverent tones. Modern M cars are false prophets to be denied and shamed."

I definitely fall into this group. (Probably because I drive an E3o) I feel like any ///M car after the E30 just doesn't have the same amount of passion. Modern ///M's definitely are not even on the same scale as the E30 M3. They seem like they could be totally different automakers. But thats just my opinion, definitely not the same as everyone else's.

BrtStlnd > burglar can't heart click anything 01/24/2014 at 17:04

7

Take heart in knowing that you wouldn't have been able to afford a new e30 M3 either.

GARedE34 > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:04

1

Very nicely written article. I'll throw in another way of looking at it though. The "Real M car" definition, right or wrong, I think primarily applies to Ms that were only available with manual transmissions PLUS the E36 and E46 M3 when equipped with a manual. I realize those two exceptions comprise a massive amount of cars, but I don't see many people pining for the E36 M3 automatics, and when the SMG E46 M3 came out it was much more of a novelty than that style of transmission is now.

The cult around the E39 M5 will likely always overpower the E60 M5 fans due largely to the fact that to drive one, you had to know how to drive a stick. No lawyer bought their wife an E39 M5 so she'd have the most expensive BMW. Ditto with the previous M5s, the M Roadsters and Coupes, etc. Plenty of people walk into their BMW dealer now and pick out a X5M over a lesser model simply because they want the most expensive thing there, and then they proceed to drive that car just like they'd drive a Camry. Many a D-bag scooped up an E9x M3 so they could say they have an M3. Then they all proceeded to drive them slowly up and down the most fashionable street in town to see and be seen. We've seen that more commonly with AMG in the past since AMG hasn't offered stick shifts. I propose that you wouldn't have the examples offered above if those cars came only with three pedals.

My point is that driving an M car used to require a certain level of dedication and involvement and it doesn't have to now. That doesn't mean the current crop isn't faster, can't get around a track better, and doesn't offer a much improved stereo; far from it. But there's a little bit of magic lost in the brand for someone like me who drives an older M5 and sees an elderly woman tooling absently along in a new one or a guy with a flat billed hat zoned out on his phone going slower than the flow of traffic in the left lane of the highway in a new M3.

ConnorW > Mikey 01/24/2014 at 17:09

0

This is pretty much how I feel, though the E36 barely makes my list, if at all. The story goes something like it was the first BMW designed by CAD, so they built everything to exact tolerances, which turned out to be too thin. Hence all the blown out rear strut mounts, etc. The E34 was the last hand-built M car, which makes it a different kind of special.

It's a "Porch-uh" > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:09

1

The E46 M3, the E39 M5, and the E36/8 M Coupe being the last cars made before BMW M "sold it's soul for higher profits."

Finally, somebody validated my choice in automobiles!

Kidding aside, nice article. I'd go as far as saying that really, an M-car is exactly what it stands for, so any one not developed as a street derivative of a racecar is not a "real M car." That includes my beloved E39 M5.

seoultrain > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:10

1

Great insight here. I choose to draw the line at automatic transmissions. It's gonna take a lot to convince me that SMG/DCT in any BMW can be considered a "Real M Car". However, I'm pretty much cool with any M car with a stick. If the X5M/X6M were available with manual transmissions, I might respect them a little.

ddavidn > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:11

0

This is... quite good. But you really think the M6 is better looking than the M5?

colorfulyawn > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:11

4

I'd add a third group/period in the M-car timeline.

Early M cars, whether homologation models or not, were built on a separate assembly line by dedicated crews. The last M-car of that era was the E34 M5. Beginning with the E36 M3, that changed, and they began building M-cars on the regular production lines.

This change, more than anything else, represents a fundamental difference between a special model built in the skunkworks versus a trim line on a regular production model. To me, that is a real, definable dividing line between a "real" M-car and, well, something else, because the M Division was more of a separate entity from BMW.

Of course, it's really an evolution that occurred over time, but the end result is that today's M-cars really are significantly different from the early ones. Maybe that change really was unavoidable, and maybe it's not entirely a bad thing. Today's M-cars probably are about as M as BMW can make them these days. But the fact remains that there has been a trade-off in the form of diluted character.

Whether that makes them less desireable is for the individual to decide.

ukw > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:12

1

Personally I don't really get it why some people complain about M cars. Did the performance went down? I'd understand you'd complain that they lost their performance but its there and even more they are cars you can use everyday and if you wanna put a smile on your face you do it when you want it. Stop complaining. This is the present, leave the past where it belongs or just buy an old E30 or w/e and be happy.

burglar can't heart click anything > BrtStlnd 01/24/2014 at 17:12

3

$74,639 in today's dollars. For 190hp. Kids these days have it so good.

rovert94 > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:14

0

Although I agree with this completely, cars like the X6M have no right to have an M badge. This might be more a problem with the X6 itself, but perhaps they should make a separate "off road" M division, if you can call an X6 an off road car.

The last "real M car" in my mind is the BMW E46 M3 CSL. That was a thoroughbred near race car. I'm not saying they need make their cars like that, but it would be nice if they had a limited production, balls out, race car like Porsche does with the GT3/GT2. Just to keep the brand image alive.

whycantirememberpasswords > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:16

2

Really excellent piece. The M division is very much a victim of its own success. You hit on the main issues: competitors caught up, the rules of the game changed, and expectations are higher.

I'd take the "expectations" thing a step further. Sure, there are many enthusiasts who truly mourn the naturally-aspirated M car. There are many who have actually driven both old and new M cars and don't like the extra weight or the feedback from the electric steering.

But there are many, many more folks who hate the new cars without having been inside of one—and maybe have never even driven an E28 or E30 either, for that matter. They hate them simply because car enthusiasts (like enthusiasts of every other stripe) all have their inner hipsters. To varying degrees, we're all kind of turned off by things once they become mainstream—once they become something that everybody knows about. We want to have been hip to awesome trends before everybody else.

And as car enthusiasts, we obviously want to have known about M cars before the dipshit middle-manager down the block did.

But anyway, again... great piece.

CuNHvN > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:16

2

After 33 years in the retail automotive business, most of it with AutoNation, along with 9 trips to the IAA Frankfurt Auto Show with press passes obtained by accident 22 years ago because they mistakenly thought my BMWCCA card was a press pass and my German wife is smoking hot, the only car I had to have and could not sleep without was an 88 M6. My 52000 mile Cinnabar Red with Natur E24 is the true "M" car ! Take it on the TOTD and you will understand. Its not a myth ! Blue & White Auto house in Coral Gables had the car for 4 years while I was out of the country. Now at 397 HP and close to 485 + Torque with close 20 + K in the suspension - wheels and tires I am truly in "M" car nirvana heaven !!!!!!!!!

M3C4N1K > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:25

1

Look at modern DTM compared to the competition that the E30 M3 was designed for and you'll see that motorsport ain't what it used to be. The vaguely stock body looking single seaters share more with an F1 car than with an M4... even the GT3 Z4 shares nothing with its roadgoing analog. But, take a look at the racing tech (SMGs, V10 E60, 14K redline in the S1000RR, "air curtain" front spoiler) that has crept into modern M cars and you might get a different idea. I recall an outcry when the current batch of turbo motors was announced, M purists saying "NA all the way" even though forced induction won BMW the F1 world championship in the 80s! On the other side of the coin, safety, reliability, luxury and comfort requirements have pushed the whole model range well out of the racing realm, and the M division is not immune. I wish BMW hadn't bought into the arms race with Merc and Audi so completely, but the M badge still represents the technological frontier for a brand that puts driving dynamics first and foremost. Times change, but in context, M = M.

TheCraigy > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 17:28

2

Rose-colored glasses. That's all it is.

Most of the folks whining seem to draw the line between the E46 and the E92. Somehow, the E46 was magical while the E92 is fat, bloated, and lost its way since it got a naturally aspirated high revving 4.0L V8 and about 90-100lbs more weight, not to mention being loved by almost every journalist that drove it. Yeah, right.

Then there are those that draw the line earlier with the E36 M3 being the last great M car. Please. I know we got shafted in the states on the E36, but to put it plainly, the market does not agree with you, and that's the reason you can get an E36 M3 for sub-$10k.

The E46 & E92 are fantastic automobiles, and miles and miles beyond the E36, and not even comparable to the E30. The original M3's are certainly special, unique cars worthy of appreciation, but if BMW started pumping more out and selling them at your local dealer they would sit indefinitely. They were great cars for the time and they are collected as such.

I can understand being opposed to forced induction on the new cars, but with no turbo lag, more torque across the range, more power and less weight, let alone killer looks, I hardly understand complaining about the new M3 & M4.

Mike Kopstain > Cyrus 01/24/2014 at 17:32

0

I hear you and I appreciate what you're saying but the new forced induction engines are magical. I had a 2006 M5 and have a 2010 535. The 535 is tuned and running E85 gas, a $600 investment. That nets me 470hp, a dab over 400 at the wheels with equally staggering amounts of torque.

It's smoother than my M5 was, blows it out of the water for gas mileage and absolutely shreds it for torque. In any situation other than a high speed roll race the 535 is exponentially faster as well. Do you get that V10 sound? No but the inline 6 sounds great in it's own rite and the car is just SO much better on a day to day basis than the M5 was. Couple that with the active suspension of the sport package and some M6 wheels with 285mm meat on them and you have an all around competent car that's incredibly fast.

And I'm not saying this all just to brag about my car (yes I am). These are incredibly drivetrains all by themselves even when they're not compared to the older naturally aspirated engines. And this is where BMW is going and it's where Audi is going and honestly, I have no problem with it as long as the cars can keep some of their soul and as a previous M5 owner, a previous owner of a 550 with a 6 speed manual and the owner of so many V6 Taurus SHOs I lost count, I can say that as an enthusiast the engines are still amazing, just different.

Battery Tender Unnecessary > TheCraigy 01/24/2014 at 17:55

2

Fun fact, US E30 M3s sat on dealership floors for months when they were new. People had a hard time justifying a higher price for a smaller engine. If only they knew...

Z4MCeed > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 18:02

1

Here's what differentiates my Z4MC from other nice cars I've had: My M Coupe is AWESOME to drive hard. Everything from the seating position, the steering wheel placement, the sound and ferocity with which the engine picks up revs, to the solid build of the car (I don't feel like I'm hurting it by driving it hard) all add up to making each drive an experience.

I think this is what the M engineers are trying to design - sensation.

That means that if they can deliver that sensation with a 4-cylinder diesel/electric, 4,000 lb., 6-door SUV, then that's still an M-car.

freeputz > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 18:04

0

Look no further than the M235i for a car that isn't a real M car. BMW is whoring out the M badge and eventually "M" will stand for nothin more than "Marketing."

Axel-Ripper > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 18:33

3

I use this car a lot to explain "What car never needed to exist." However, for the sake of all the "M IS NO MORE" crowd, I'm glad it exists. It's so completely bonkers (for lack of a better word) to have a 555 hp AWD 4 door coupe SUV. If you define the M line as doing things that no one thought of rather well and making that thing fast as hell, well, the X6M is kinda the mac-daddy of that, no?

font9a > stoke 01/24/2014 at 18:40

0

Yes, but what high-profile motorsports does BMW actually compete in, anymore? Other than DTM, which is nearly invisible in the USA... (And really, the Z4 as the racing car?) See ya WTC. No BMW-Williams/Sauber F1... Bye bye Le Mans... At least M-B AMG competes in Austrailian Supercar

font9a > Axel-Ripper 01/24/2014 at 18:42

0

Well, Porsche Cayenne Turbo.

e_dash > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 18:55

0

To be fair to current M Cars, although they might not all be manual, rwd, naturally aspirated track cars, a lot of reviewers still love them for being more engaging then the competition.

I love the sound of the E65, and the style and clinical performance of the RS7, but I still think I might rather have an F10 M5 sitting in my garage.

NITEMOVES > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 19:03

0

alexotics > Jonathan Harper 01/24/2014 at 19:20

1

Great point. The perfect two car BMW garage would be something along the lines of an F10 M5 and a race prepped E30 M3.

Who cares if the F10 M5 is heavy, not very nimble, and quite far removed from the original M pedigree. I'm comfy, sometime I just want to be comfy. And fast. With my hands and butt warm and my iPod playing my jams.

chicagoE36 > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 19:22

0

Why is there ZERO mention of the e24 M6?

EMPoweredBMW > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 19:26

1

Thank you! Jesus, is this so difficult for people to get?

Imbeciles - "Ermergerd ders anerther berdge on der EmThrerrr! Badge Whores! Too merch berdy rerll!"

Me -

Foo2rama > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 19:33

1

Drive an e39, e30 or e46 M car and you will understand. Unless you have driven one you will never get it. Those cars are special, feel special, and beg you to be a bad boy in a way not so few cars ever do.

David Brown > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 19:50

0

The E28 is the first M car, in terms of BMW. It was the first, non-limited production run M car that wasn't as exclusive as the E30 M3. Probably the first M3 M car was the E36. The E30 was too rare and too valuable, and because of its race pedigree too iconic. The E34 and E39 M5s were amazing, hand built cars, but owe everything to the E28. The 2002 or Ti were too exclusive, like the E30. And the M1 is so exclusive it almost doesn't exist.

Jonathan Harper > alexotics 01/24/2014 at 20:06

0

PRECISELY!!

alexotics > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 20:26

0

If that's your current E30 M3 on the right, did you at one point own this E39 M5?

MachtSchnell > TheCraigy 01/24/2014 at 20:44

3

I've driven many M cars and the E46 M3 is unquestionably in my top 3 cars I've ever driven as an overall, everyday car. I've also driven an E92 M3 and it is a car whose dynamics, powertrain, and driving experience are almost laughably wonderful. Except for preferring the intimacy of the e46's interior and quicker and lighter steering rack, the E92 is better in almost every way. Just opining here

Axel-Ripper > font9a 01/24/2014 at 20:45

0

Yes, but that has a more functional back seat....

ellomdian > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 20:51

0

Any argument about a 'real' M car by someone who hasn't driven one (or whose experience is based on a 5th owner ratted out 36) is irrelevant. I would even argue that not having driven one of it's peers to appreciate the 'M-ness' makes most owner's arguments invalid. You can talk about the e39 or e61 not being 'real M cars' until you are blue in the face, but I enjoy running an e30 (or better yet my 190e16v) around a road course because it's delicate and precise (but in reality frighteningly slow,) and I enjoy putting the e63 around the track because it's batshit insane. M cars may have been born of a racing heritage, but they grew and matured as the ultimate expression of their mechanical ideals - whether that was a NA V10, or an absurd torque-vectoring diff.

brisance > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 21:22

0

A "race car for the streets" is an idealization that is not economically feasible for the car makers. How many people are out there buying Lotus cars? Radicals? Ariel Atoms? How many people are prepared to pay for the M235 Racing to be made street legal?

Porsche almost ran out of money and had to compromise by producing the monstrosity that is the Cayenne. This allowed the company to continue to make Boxsters and Caymans and GT3s.

fcvkvrfxxligns > Humpty-D 01/24/2014 at 21:22

0

If you think the 1M is the last true M car, then you're probably very mistaken. After driving the 1M, I think that car is far from perfect. The car is very unstable and tail happy, heat soaks like crazy, loses significant power before redline, etc.. There's just too much hype built around the 1M. Most overrated production car in the last decade.

zumjosh > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 21:30

0

And so did the E28 M5, and so did the 2002 turbo, and so did the E9 3.oCSL.... I'm not seeing any relevancy to your statement.

Adrian G > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 21:31

0

You make a valid point, the RS4 did compete with the E90, but why then compare the flagship e46 M3 to the B5 S4? The second fiddle? Maybe due to the limited run of the V6 RS4. but then again, the C6 RS6 is omitted to compare the e39 M5 to the C6 S6, not the flagship RS6/+.

It'd be like saying the B5 RS4 was better than a 330ci, or the e60 540/550 isn't as good as the comparable era RS6. Why did you omit the RS versions for those two models?

n777athan > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 21:41

0

No one's really asking for a M3 with triangulated and seem welded chassis, no radio/cruise/or climate control and non-adjustable buckets. It would be awesome if they would build a car like the E30 M3 again though. Just basic recaro manual bucket seats, non-climate control AC/Heating, hydraulic power steering, Ohlins (or manually adjustable) suspension, big brakes, and a highly advanced 4 cylinder (preferably NA). All the rest of the R&D and price of the car should be focused on making the chassis/body as light, stiff, and aerodynamic as possible. They should stop with the M sport packages too; what happened to the "is" badge? 135is was a great start and they ruined it with the M235i.

ZiptieMcBumper > Mikey 01/24/2014 at 22:04

0

Someone needs to take the time to 'shop Raptor Jesus behind the wheel.

Kin Polaj > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 22:45

3

I think as long as the current and future ///M cars are still ahead of the competition in terms of handling and power, or atleast a combination of the two, then they are still true "M" cars.

Complain all you want about them getting bigger and heavier, and losing hydraulic steering. It's all irrelevant. Why? Because EVERY car manufacturer is making cars bigger, heavier, with electric steering, more electronic aids, no manual transmission.

I absolutely cannot stand how people knock on BMW and completely ignore ever other auto maker. Last time I checked MB doesn't make a single manual trans car in the US. Last I checked, most AMG models and all RS models are AWD. Meanwhile ///M is still RWD and producing manuals.

Screw the haters.

DollaMoneyAve > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 23:08

0

Excellent piece.

RadiuM > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/24/2014 at 23:38

0

best.. gif.. ever!!!

M3Collector > colorfulyawn 01/25/2014 at 00:35

1

Yes! I always felt the car was more special if I saw it was built in Regensberg, Dingolfing, or Garching. You only saw WBA coming from Munich for the most part... and the WBS should be revered when it comes from any of the other three cities.

That may not be the case now though. Ah, yesteryear... :(

n777athan > Louis Obispo 01/25/2014 at 01:40

1

You're the worst kind of person.

flatplanecrank > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/25/2014 at 02:41

1

I've owned a succession of M products (including a number of the hallowed greats) and my current daily driver e92 m3 is the best M car yet. The combination of an 8k rpm V8 and the most neutral handling of any M I have driven along with all the creature comforts I could dream of make the current generation M3 everything I want in a car. Beyond seeing the M badge stuck on the back of an X5/6, I'm not sure what all the fuss is about.

Roundle79 > Battery Tender Unnecessary 01/25/2014 at 02:42

1

BMW M (or BMW Motorsports, or BMW M-Sport) is a separate legal entity.

And a bit of history about said legal entity:

BMW M-Sport was founded by a staff of Ford Racing Team hired away from Ford in the 70s. Ask Jochen Neerpasch, whose family owned a Ford dealership, and who founded BOTH the Ford German Racing Department, as well as M-Sport!

We should all be thanking Ford for the " real" BMW Ms. :)

j.davism5 > Mikey 01/25/2014 at 06:06

0

I know I stand at a somewhat bias perspective, but the E39 was less compromised than you think. It had an engine used widley throughout motorsport, and I think S62 was actually in use within Daytona prototypes up until last season. The E39 platform allowed luxury to come as standard, but also came with the ability to bolt on honed, race trim parts. And the fact that it was manual only stopped the posers dead in their tracks. i will concede that it's use in motorsport was somewhat limited to a few random euro touring car series, but consider that it was designed as a drivers car for a person that wanted everything, but not at the compromise of driving joy. Which is what I think M cars should offer above all else. I believe that the M car formula allows for all the ancillary things (Epic sound system, navigation blah blah) to disappear into just a steering wheel, a gear lever, some pedals an epic engine with a soundtrack that stirs the soul, and a driving experience that feels like a race car, with approachable, exceed able and controllable limits that mean that everyone can draw something special, but the best can extract every thing. I think e30 and e39 as well as the beloved clown shoe do exactly that. Just my take on an indefinable quantity.