interesting photo. in 20 years, the smallest bimmer was significantly smaller than the car that had to be invented to sit below it. I'm a fan of the 135i, but seeing this pic, I kinda wish it was lower. My first inspection compared the height of the headrests and the cowl height for how each would feel, height-wise, off the road. Then I remembered that the latest headrests are supposed to impact the head with the most forward edge between the tops of the occupant's ears and the top of the head, whereas in the e30's day, the headrests were practically neck pillows, I guess.

http://www.worldcarfans.com/110120829951/bmw-1-series-m-coupe-briefly-revealed-video

here's the link to the worldcarfans.com article and gallery the image is from. I'm looking forward to 135i prices taking a tumble in the next couple of years with a higher spec model available in the market. yay!

12/8/2010 9:04:06 PM

i remember reading that they don't weigh much less than the 335 and the 335 is significantly more aerodynamic.
I'd just get a 335... the regular 135 is too "cute" looking. The M1 thwarts that some.

12/8/2010 9:08:17 PM

Do want. That being said everyone trying to sell their e30 /// for 50k needs to wake the fuck up.

12/8/2010 9:40:53 PM

^ i agree...

the only one i think that is actually worth the 22k the owner was asking had an aluminum s54 hybrid in it.
.... Do want....

12/8/2010 9:45:19 PM

need more angles than the one in the first post

12/9/2010 8:31:09 AM

I really wanted the 135i (or at least the 128i flavor) to come in under 3,000 lbs. It was quite a disappointment.

12/9/2010 9:21:13 AM

It's sad that I could park my awd midsized car on the other side of the scale and it would balance with a compact 2door.

12/9/2010 10:18:16 AM

BMW forgot how to make light cars. So has Ferrari (though that won't ever really affect me).

12/9/2010 10:36:27 AM

you can't make a light luxury car if you want it to pass safety standards and be remotely affordable, stop holding your breath. if you want something lightweight you have to sacrifice something; luxury, safety, or price.

12/9/2010 10:53:20 AM

They can take away luxury and it's associated price as far as I'm concerned. My last e30 had a cloth interior and I wasn't complaining.

12/9/2010 11:07:42 AM

great, go buy a lotus

12/9/2010 11:09:17 AM

They are the perfect combination of practicality and affordability.
Oh wait.

12/9/2010 11:11:46 AM

Lotus doesn't make light cars anymore either.

Yeah, i actually PREFER cloth interior it holds you in better and doesn't stick to your ass on a hot day.

12/9/2010 11:13:20 AM

There's no light car anymore. What I need is a Integra with a 300hp engine.

12/9/2010 11:31:40 AM

^^^ think of it as a triangle with a constant area, you can't reduce two points. your options are luxury and price, price and weight, or luxury and weight.

12/9/2010 11:43:23 AM

^^^^^So b/c we don't care about power or heated seats, thick carpet, a sunroof, leather interior or 10+ speakers you're telling us we have to get a Lotus with a striped out interior?



If Mazda can manage to make a 2400lb car I don't think it's a stretch to ask BMW to make one for 2800-3000

[Edited on December 9, 2010 at 11:45 AM. Reason : ^]

12/9/2010 11:43:58 AM

i wouldn't call a mazda luxurious, it falls into price and weight

and i forgot about safety. if you don't care about safety you can always get yourself a super 7.

[Edited on December 9, 2010 at 11:49 AM. Reason : not rocket surgery kind of concepts here]

12/9/2010 11:49:25 AM

Is the Mazda less safe than the Bimmer?

12/9/2010 11:51:05 AM

also

Quote :

" ^^^^^So b/c we don't care about power or heated seats, thick carpet, a sunroof, leather interior or 10+ speakers you're telling us we have to get a Lotus with a striped out interior? If Mazda can manage to make a 2400lb car I don't think it's a stretch to ask BMW to make one for 2800-3000"

does not compute. its not the 80's anymore, BMW is a luxury brand. it is a stretch to ask bmw to make a stripped down racer because its not really their market. they will sell you one, sure, but the csl is going to cost you (and its still not all that light)

[Edited on December 9, 2010 at 11:52 AM. Reason : .]

12/9/2010 11:51:56 AM

and people bitching about the fuel-guzzlers nowaday. Just make the cars lighter.

12/9/2010 12:23:28 PM

THEN ADD LIGHTNESS

The house has fallen in your absence

12/9/2010 12:50:53 PM

^^asking BMW to build a 2 door coupe that weighs 2800lbs isn't asking too much. they're just lazy and don't care.

12/9/2010 2:55:00 PM

if they don't build me a refrigerator or a laptop is it because they are lazy and don't care? no, its just not their product, they make performance oriented luxury cars, not lightweight fanboy racers.

12/9/2010 3:29:28 PM

Quote :

"if they don't build me a refrigerator or a laptop is it because they are lazy and don't care? "

don't care? I'm going to go with a resounding yes on that one.
Difference being, BMW doesn't have a heritage of building refrigerators or laptops.
They have built plenty of moderate weight cars with excellent performance.
And when they come out with a vehicle that is supposed to be the smallest in their lineup one would reasonably assume it would be notably lighter than their much larger mid-sized vehicles.
In this case that assumption would be wrong.

[Edited on December 9, 2010 at 3:50 PM. Reason : l]

12/9/2010 3:49:32 PM

someone suggested that bmw could easily make a 2800-3000lb car. they did, it was the e30, mine weighed over 2800 lbs and there wasn't shit as far as luxury.

12/9/2010 4:45:05 PM

OP: 135i is mainly taller because it sits on 3" taller rims. (I think E30 M3 had 16"?)


as far as lightness goes....

It is in BMW's interest to make cars lighter, because it would make cars more fuel efficient and take away the stress and cost of having to come up with new technology that would increase fuel efficiency. If it were up to them they would keep E21 structure. Problem is that safety regulations are getting more stringent every year and in order to stay profitable they have to compete with ever more commercialized crash safety testing data. They are required to add more steel to the structure. Doors nowadays have diagonally positioned steel bars to meet safety regulations. Bumper supports are stronger. A/B/C pillars are way thicker and heavier. Doors are heavier. Entire structure is more rigid because they ADDED more steel. Why do you think they try to incorporate Magnesium in their N/A E90 engine blocks? It is not that BMW enjoys spending ass load of money on new technology on their mass produced vehicle. They have to do this to offset added steel in the structure and extra 8 airbags they have to put to stay competitive.

It is a business for BMW and priorities for consumer. An average family person shopping for 530i/S430/A6/G8 will not care whether the car weighs 4000lb or #3000lb. He will care though if it is safe for his kids. On their sporty cars manufacturers do want to make cars lighter, but at the same time they have to stay profitable and keep the cost down. Having lightweight BBS wheels, composite panels and lighter aluminum suspension is great, but it will jack up the price to the point it will not meet the sell quota.

[Edited on December 9, 2010 at 6:06 PM. Reason : .]

12/9/2010 6:04:08 PM

Look into the Mini Cooper's, It's made by bmw, fun to drive besides being front wheel, there is starting to get a pretty good aftermarket scene for them, they have all the bells and whistles you could want, and still come in around 2700.

12/9/2010 7:19:00 PM

Exactly give me a rwd mini call it the 1 series.

12/9/2010 7:59:15 PM

ok, argx, here's some better pics, this time from worldcarfans.com's screenshots from the latest teaser video from bmw. I just didn't have another one with an e30 m3 right next to it.



On a sidenote, c&d just arrived in the mail today, and there's a sidebar comparing the specs of the 1988 bmw m5 with the latest 328i, the theme being, "the top bimmer of 20 years ago compared with the least expensive four-door in the present lineup." The 328i has roughly identical straightline performance but is far cheaper in absolute dollars (the m5 was $65k!), let alone corrected dollars... but the amusing thing is that while the cars have very similar dimensions (the 328i is like 6 inches wider, the m5 is about 10 inches longer), the 328i weighs like 150 lbs less and, while this might be down to tire technology more than anything, the 328i has significantly better skidpad grip. I don't have the article in front of me right now, but I'm pretty confident the 328i also would have its most significant advantage in mpg.

here's the page hosting the teaser video on wcf:
http://www.worldcarfans.com/110120829951/bmw-1-series-m-coupe-briefly-revealed-video

[Edited on December 9, 2010 at 8:36 PM. Reason : grAmur]

12/9/2010 8:23:41 PM

a mini cooper is no where close to luxurious enough for a bmw brand

12/9/2010 9:03:03 PM

Official ....

http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=463733




[Edited on December 9, 2010 at 9:40 PM. Reason : p]

12/9/2010 9:32:29 PM

I really don't know how I feel about this car....

looks very ricer....straight from the factory. Front bumper looks so aftermarket it hurt.

And for $46k, once you add Nav and options you are approaching the price of a M-Sport 335i coupe!!

12/10/2010 8:46:45 AM

i think it looks awesome!!

12/10/2010 9:33:15 AM

still lighter than a Mark IV Supra, and I never hear the fanbois calling that thing a pig

12/10/2010 9:56:38 AM

^everyone I know in my car "clique" calls them fat.

I'm not impressed with the looks at all. Even more so b/c BMW has been dragging this out so long.

Quote :

"Look into the Mini Cooper's, It's made by bmw, fun to drive besides being front wheel, there is starting to get a pretty good aftermarket scene for them, they have all the bells and whistles you could want, and still come in around 2700."

lol, I'd argue that the Mini Coopper is 200lbs overweight given it's diminutive size.

Quote :

"An average family person shopping for 530i/S430/A6/G8 will not care whether the car weighs 4000lb or #3000lb."

You're right, I'm sure the average family person loves buying big expensive tires and replacing larger brake components (both needed due to the higher weight of the vehicle).

12/10/2010 10:32:11 AM

Honestly, this should have been a 135is in my opinion....feels like it's a "half" M product. Maybe that's why it just says "M" on the back

12/10/2010 11:03:21 AM

considering it just has a boosted engine available (in very similar form) in a wide variety of other BMWs instead of a dedicated "M" engine I can see why you'd think that.

12/10/2010 11:14:00 AM

Quote :

"You're right, I'm sure the average family person loves buying big expensive tires and replacing larger brake components (both needed due to the higher weight of the vehicle)."

exactly, they don't care about it. and if they are buying a new bmw at least, they don't need to.

12/10/2010 12:55:16 PM

^^, ^^^

Not only that, but the least they could have done was boost it to at the very least 350 hp, and preferably 375 hp. It is only 35 hp more than the 135i, so the difference in performance purely due to the extra power (ignoring suspension, tires, bodykit, etc) would be very small.

And what is the OFFICIAL name of this car, anyway?

BMW M?

Because that's what it says at the back.

And have you guys seen this mysterious stuff:

http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=457707

Points to a future 135is and a 451 hp 1 M, JUST for thus US

12/10/2010 1:56:23 PM

IMO, that 451 hp is a communication error between different parts of BMW. 250 kW= 335 hp. The u.s. Model is listed on a different row as 332 kw. And we can figure that 332*1.34 hp/kw= 444.88 hp... But which is more likely... That we're getting a special edition that Europe won't get that makes 110 hp more than the Germany-bound model and which would outgun the m3 in u.s. Showrooms? Or that the 332 kw really meant 332 hp, which is 247 kw in euro-speak? Supporting evidence is that that image showing upcoming models' output is completely lacking in another line to refer to the initial u.s.-market "pyrat" that we know we WILL be getting

451 hp 1m's will exist someday, but they won't be under warranty, and the only ones that won't have blown up will have significantly more capable cooling systems.

[Edited on December 15, 2010 at 8:33 AM. Reason : Sucked to have to burst your bubble. Just figure this out myself... Not totally obvious, then...]

12/15/2010 8:30:16 AM

Nah I knew it could never happen, as they would never make a more capable model for the US. The US always gets less capable models of European cars, heck, the US also gets less capable models of GM products sold outside the US, and even less capable models of Japanese cars sold in Europe (Honda, Toyota, Mitsu, Subaru, etc).

There will be 450 hp 1-series cars one day, but that's about a decade down the road (1 will become as big as the 3 and rebadged 2-series, 3 will become halfway between current 3 and 5, and there will be new 0 and 1 series).


[Edited on December 15, 2010 at 8:50 AM. Reason : ]

12/15/2010 8:48:48 AM

Why is everyone (in general) praising a quoted 0-60 time of 4.7s? When the 135i first came out Car and Driver clocked it at 4.7 for the same task.

Or is this some conservative factory quote? In which case 4.4-4.5 sounds more realistic.

12/15/2010 4:23:53 PM

German manufacturers usually overshoot on the official 0-60 times. I never understood why, though. It is not as if they don't have capable drivers who could get the same times that magazines end up getting.

BMW (at least BMW USA) gives a time of 5 sec for the 135i. Going with that, the M should do it in 4.4 given that the official figure is 4.7.

12/15/2010 7:52:52 PM

I think the reason for Porsche, BMW, Mercedes conservatism in claimed acceleration times is down to two things:
1-not encouraging owners to attempt to replicate the times by driving a certain way (high rev standing starts) while under warranty and
2-not risk that single instance of having cut the margin of promised performance too close and risk customers wanting to return cars 2003 rx-8, 1997 mustang cobra style.... Remember those? Volvo got off lucky with those torque reduced s60r and v70r automatics.... But customers really sour when it turns out that some horses escaped during shipping.

12/16/2010 3:06:55 AM

^I understand what you're saying, but that's really an apples to oranges argument. You can't compare a measured quantity (horsepower) that has very few contributing factors to something like 0-60 times, where the driver, track conditions, and weather all come into play.

Regardless, it's my understanding that all manufacturers list conservative times.

12/16/2010 12:20:04 PM

I wish safety was optional lol.
That being said old track cars with roll bars are lighter then new cars and even with full interiors would be lighter.. I think companies could do a better job with unibody structure efficiency but i think looks weigh in too heavy so everything gets designed and then strength is engineered in the best way possible rather than a chassis being engineered and the body styled on top of it.

12/16/2010 12:41:40 PM

Don't forget about the effect that stupid European Pedestrian Law has on styling and hood height.

12/16/2010 1:12:34 PM

http://www.ausmotive.com/2010/12/14/bmw-compares-the-1m-coupe-against-its-rivals.html

Quote :

" According to a leaked BMW internal document these four cars are the models the 1 Series M Coupé has in its sights. A duo from Ingolstadt, Audi TT RS and RS3, a fighter from the land of the rising sun in the Nissan 370Z and, perhaps the toughest nut to crack, the Porsche Cayman S. What do you reckon, would you pick the 1M ahead of these? The five page document, created for BMW’s Australian dealer network, reads much like a regular sales brochure at first, listing the details and specs of the 1M. A few pages in BMW provides brief comments about the three German rivals. On the last page a table of specs compares all five cars together. Of the TT RS the document states, “Distinctive features of the Audi TT RS Coupé include a striking design and a fixed rear spoiler. However, despite providing a rear seat bench, this car is not a true four-seater.” Using practicality to push the 1M ahead of the TT RS, the info then flip-flops to counter the RS3, “with its 250 kW five-cylinder engine, it offers exactly the same amount of power as the BMW 1 Series M Coupé. While also providing high everyday usability, it cannot match the BMW M model’s emotional appeal.” Perhaps the better argument against the Audis, in particular the RS3, is given here, “Both Audi models benefit from good traction thanks to the all-wheel drive system, but also suffer from slightly top-heavy handling reflected in a tendency towards understeer. In the RS3 Sportback, Audi intends to compensate for this in an unusual manner, using wider tyres on the front wheels than on the rear wheels.” It’s also interesting to note that BMW think both Audis come standard with a 7-speed S tronic double-clutch transmission. “Both come with non-permanent quattro all-wheel drive and a dual-clutch transmission as standard, and their five-cylinder turbo engines combine high revving ability with very good fuel economy.” While true that the RS3 is only available with an S tronic box, the TT RS is fitted with a 6-speed manual as standard. The S tronic available as an option for the TT RS. Dynamically, at least, the Cayman S is probably the benchmark in this grouping, but, as you’d expect, BMW reckon they have it covered. “The Porsche Cayman S, on the other hand, is marketed exclusively as a sports car, with its mid-engine concept, rear-while drive and precise steering providing the brand’s trademark handling as well as excellent driving dynamics. Accordingly, the chassis is geared towards a sporty driving experience, with less focus on comfort. Despite its lower weight, the Porsche with its 235 kW boxer engine cannot quite match the BMW 1 Series M Coupé in terms of acceleration.” As well, the Cayman S “can only be enjoyed by two people.” It’s actually quite an interesting look inside the world of internal marketing and seeing what information manufacturers prepare for their sales staff. Generally speaking the counter arguments against each individual car stand to reason. However, if you cross-check them against each other you soon see the BMW points cancelling each other out. Is the 1M, with its four seats, practical, as they say against the Cayman S and TT RS? Or is it an emotional sports car, as against the practical RS3 hatchback? "

I don't understand how they are comparing the BMW to true 2 seater sports cars, but I digress.

12/20/2010 12:40:05 AM

Who's data are they using for the cars' 0-62 times? The Porsche and Nissan's times are both wrong.

[Edited on December 20, 2010 at 9:06 AM. Reason : ']

12/20/2010 9:06:01 AM

I though they were going with official manufacturers' figures?

(But then I looked on Porsche's site and it is 4.9 for 0-60, so 0-100 k should be 5.0)

12/20/2010 9:32:07 AM