[Moflow]

Originally Posted by OSee

This is not true. Mercedes invented the formula that BMW is now using. And their enthusiast community was equally split.

Most of Mercedes’ 43 and 53 cars are not “real” AMG cars. And they are covered in AMG badges.

C43 = m340i
C63 = M3

Ask any c63 owner if they think the c43 is a real AMG or ask the same question to a e63 owner about the e53. It would look a lot like this conversation.

I disagree, as there is historical precedent for Mercedes having multiple levels of AMG car sitting on the same chassis.

In the 90’s we had the SL300/SL500/SL600 non-AMG cars and then the SL55 AMG and the SL65 AMG. Both 55 and 65 models were full on AMG, just like the CL55/CL65 and the S55/S65 were all AMG cars.

[ky0u]

Originally Posted by BMWCCA1

You're forgetting that the "s" designation in the E30 didn't get you any more power from the engine, just sport seats, air dam, trunk-lip spoiler, and a couple of other touches. In the E36 "is" simply meant it was a 2-door car instead of the 4-door. Don't remember any "is" designation in the E46 and even the ZHP option didn't offer a separate model designation though it purportedly offered more power than the standard car. It wasn't until the E92/93 that 335is actually meant more power.

My recollection is that when BMW offered LSD, you didn't need to order a different package to get it in most cases. It was just an option. I know in my E28 535is most of those came with it but it was still the same option as it was in the regular 535i.

Was the lsd offered on the standard "i" trim e30s? I hunted down an IS specifically because I'd wanted the LSD and better seats. I don't recall ever seeing a regular 325/318i with a factory LSD

[blamped.e92]

If it comes from the factory and has the M badge ( door sits, steering wheel), perfectly fine, adding it yourself. Big no no

[TrevorM3]

sad we're actually asking this question.

[dscabra]

dh

[TEGRITY]

I have been on both sides TBH.

When I had a F32 440i and installed MPPSK and almost all M performance visual mods, I considered it as M440i. (The actual M440i wasn't out then). I couldn't afford a new F82 then and had to choose a new F32 and did the upgrades progressively. I felt included in the M category although I knew very well that mine wasn't a real M car and oversold my car's status many a times. I used to really wonder why those real M car owners couldn't agree on baby Ms and just leave us be.

But.... When I got an F82, I flipped like bipolar. My wife still mocks me on this point. But so proud that she can spot most models/ variations including fakery in a jiffy

Guess it comes down to BMW Marketing and Sales strategy to tap more customers and let us poor souls debate on and on while they bring out more baby M like baby boom in the COVID era.

P.S. M sports package is NOT an M in any planet and what a time pass reading this thread

[e92hunter]

Originally Posted by Moflow

I disagree, as there is historical precedent for Mercedes having multiple levels of AMG car sitting on the same chassis.

In the 90’s we had the SL300/SL500/SL600 non-AMG cars and then the SL55 AMG and the SL65 AMG. Both 55 and 65 models were full on AMG, just like the CL55/CL65 and the S55/S65 were all AMG cars.

The point of AMG is that they handbuild their engines... the SL55 and SL65 both had handbuilt engines. The CLA45 AMG is a real amg because it's handbuilt, the CLA35 AMG is not. Multiple AMG's is meaningless, they literally went from E450 one day and the next day started slapping E53 AMG badges on it the next day. Read more before you make wrong comments like this.

[celsdogg]

Originally Posted by ky0u

Was the lsd offered on the standard "i" trim e30s? I hunted down an IS specifically because I'd wanted the LSD and better seats. I don't recall ever seeing a regular 325/318i with a factory LSD

My e30 is not an iS but it has a factory LSD. At that time, a LSD could be optioned apart from any package.

[Busa Dave]

For me it is like the difference in Tudor and Rolex. A Tudor is just that a very nice watch but different from a Rolex by design.

[Moflow]

Originally Posted by e92hunter

The point of AMG is that they handbuild their engines... the SL55 and SL65 both had handbuilt engines. The CLA45 AMG is a real amg because it's handbuilt, the CLA35 AMG is not. Multiple AMG's is meaningless, they literally went from E450 one day and the next day started slapping E53 AMG badges on it the next day. Read more before you make wrong comments like this.

Wrong comments? There’s nothing factually wrong about my comment, I just have a different opinion. Don’t be like that.

I know exactly what Mercedes did, my point was that they own the name, they can do whatever they want with it. AMG used to be an outside tuning house and there are plenty of people who don’t consider anything built after ‘99 when Mercedes purchased the company to be “true AMGs.” Some people consider everything after 1990 “not a real AMG” since that’s when they signed their co-operation agreement with Mercedes.

If you want to draw the line at hand built engines, that’s on you, but understand that it’s a completely arbitrary place to draw it. There are plenty of points from a fan perspective where you can say “they’re no longer real AMGs.” Or you could just listen to AMG themselves on the matter. AMG used to mean many things that are no longer true anymore and hand built engines are just one of those things.

[ky0u]

Originally Posted by celsdogg

My e30 is not an iS but it has a factory LSD. At that time, a LSD could be optioned apart from any package.

Oh wow learn something new everyday. Those sound like the golden days of BMW for sure.

[e92hunter]

Originally Posted by Moflow

Wrong comments? There’s nothing factually wrong about my comment, I just have a different opinion. Don’t be like that.

I know exactly what Mercedes did, my point was that they own the name, they can do whatever they want with it. AMG used to be an outside tuning house and there are plenty of people who don’t consider anything built after ‘99 when Mercedes purchased the company to be “true AMGs.” Some people consider everything after 1990 “not a real AMG” since that’s when they signed their co-operation agreement with Mercedes.

If you want to draw the line at hand built engines, that’s on you, but understand that it’s a completely arbitrary place to draw it. There are plenty of points from a fan perspective where you can say “they’re no longer real AMGs.” Or you could just listen to AMG themselves on the matter. AMG used to mean many things that are no longer true anymore and hand built engines are just one of those things.

You are just being defensive but my point is factual and not an opinion like yours. Mercedes AMG brand tagline is "One Man, One Motor". Everything you are describing is just marketing. Like my example above, an E450 was randomly swapped to E53 AMG the next month without any change on the body/powertrain. This is purely marketing and not based on facts.

Same reason an M340i is not a real M, no "S" engine code. Audi at least labels it properly with A/S/RS, no one claims their S5 is built by the RS team which you are insinuating with AMG and their 53 AMG/43 AMG series.

[SteveinArizona]

In the great scheme of things...who cares! There are more important things to worry about then the labeling of a car.

[srbs73]

Originally Posted by e92hunter

The point of AMG is that they handbuild their engines... the SL55 and SL65 both had handbuilt engines. The CLA45 AMG is a real amg because it's handbuilt, the CLA35 AMG is not. Multiple AMG's is meaningless, they literally went from E450 one day and the next day started slapping E53 AMG badges on it the next day. Read more before you make wrong comments like this.

Hand built = bolts tightened by hand as opposed by robot

[Moflow]

Originally Posted by e92hunter

You are just being defensive but my point is factual and not an opinion like yours. Mercedes AMG brand tagline is "One Man, One Motor". Everything you are describing is just marketing.

Wow. So to summarize, you think your opinion is fact and mine is regurgitated marketing and to prove this point you give me...AMGs marketing tagline (before once again accusing ME of describing marketing.)

let’s agree to disagree.

[MA///M5]

No No No No No No. But, is what it is. Mercedes, Audi do the same thing. My wife's "S Line" A6. Not sure what that means other than the it says so in the door sills.

[kyrix1st]

S54 was never based on M54, or S52 US for that matter. It was based on S50B32 euro engine, and the S50 euro engine was an evolutionary engine to the inline 6 used in M1. S14 of E30 M3 was two cylinders "chopped off" of M1's inline 6 for lighter weight. So S55 was the first M engine based on a regular production engine N55.

With regards to S85 and S65, they become quite reliable M engines with the simple rod bearing swap and can last 200K+ miles with occasional track usage, so I am not sure what the fuss is. You should see how many AMG/Audi/Porsche V8 engines are grenaded simply due to a poor oil lubrication and piston clearance design which are not an issue with M cars.

BMW M never bothered with turbo engines until S55 because engineers perceived them as laggy, cheap and unimaginative way to gain horsepower, as high compression naturally aspirated engines are much harder to build correctly and require significant engineering exercise. That approach provided distinct character, performance and fuel efficiency over its competition. The reason S65 is two cylinders off S85 is not because of cost, more because the F1 inspired engine is well designed it can run competitive races for hours, and so did the S65.

Originally Posted by chris719

It's not financially feasible to design a completely different engine any longer. I mean, it's arguable that it wasn't ever a good idea. S54 and S52 are not that far off of the types of changes we see in S55. S85 and S65 may not have been the wisest decisions. S85 is a great engine, but the character IMO never suited a 5 series, and they blow up at an alarming rate. S65 was more on-target for the car but still not exactly the high point of BMW engine reliability. Probably could have used more low-end torque in such a heavy car but cost forced them to chop 2 cylinders off of S85 and run with it. People love the 1M, and if they had gone the turbo route for S65 I think people would have still been happy with the E9x M3.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by kyrix1st

S54 was never based on M54, or S52 US for that matter. It was based on S50B32 euro engine, and the S50 euro engine was an evolutionary engine to the inline 6 used in M1. S14 of E30 M3 was two cylinders "chopped off" of M1's inline 6 for lighter weight. So S55 was the first M engine based on a regular production engine N55.

With regards to S85 and S65, they become quite reliable M engines with the simple rod bearing swap and can last 200K+ miles with occasional track usage, so I am not sure what the fuss is. You should see how many AMG/Audi/Porsche V8 engines are grenaded simply due to a poor oil lubrication and piston clearance design which are not an issue with M cars.

BMW M never bothered with turbo engines until S55 because engineers perceived them as laggy, cheap and unimaginative way to gain horsepower, as high compression naturally aspirated engines are much harder to build correctly and require significant engineering exercise. That approach provided distinct character, performance and fuel efficiency over its competition. The reason S65 is two cylinders off S85 is not because of cost, more because the F1 inspired engine is well designed it can run competitive races for hours, and so did the S65.

I didn't say S54 was based on M54, but the departure wasn't radical departure or clean-sheet design like the S85 was. You're right that the degree of parts sharing is much higher now obviously.

S65 and S85 are not reliable, period. Throttle actuators, main bearings, rod bearings, S85 vanos... When you have to say "except the rod bearings" you don't have a reliable engine. The main bearings tend to go, too. These are IMO not regular wear items on a street car and this is still a street car.

The fuel efficiency claim is laughable too. There's almost no quicker way to an inefficient engine than to spin it quickly. S85 and S65 get horrific fuel mileage even compared to their contemporaries. I really love S85 and S65, but they are not perfect. Pretending the R&D cost saved by chopping two cylinders off of S85 is not a factor is a bit naive.

[DanG]

Originally Posted by e92hunter

You are just being defensive but my point is factual and not an opinion like yours. Mercedes AMG brand tagline is "One Man, One Motor". Everything you are describing is just marketing. Like my example above, an E450 was randomly swapped to E53 AMG the next month without any change on the body/powertrain. This is purely marketing and not based on facts.

Same reason an M340i is not a real M, no "S" engine code. Audi at least labels it properly with A/S/RS, no one claims their S5 is built by the RS team which you are insinuating with AMG and their 53 AMG/43 AMG series.

S engine code does not make an M car. The 1M and M2 both do not have an S engine. But both are real M cars.

[kyrix1st]

Originally Posted by chris719

I didn't say S54 was based on M54, but the departure wasn't radical departure or clean-sheet design like the S85 was. You're right that the degree of parts sharing is much higher now obviously.

S65 and S85 are not reliable, period. Throttle actuators, main bearings, rod bearings, S85 vanos... When you have to say "except the rod bearings" you don't have a reliable engine. The main bearings tend to go, too. These are IMO not regular wear items on a street car and this is still a street car.

The fuel efficiency claim is laughable too. There's almost no quicker way to an inefficient engine than to spin it quickly. S85 and S65 get horrific fuel mileage even compared to their contemporaries. I really love S85 and S65, but they are not perfect. Pretending the R&D cost saved by chopping two cylinders off of S85 is not a factor is a bit naive.

I never said high revolution is fuel efficient. Higher compression engines are more fuel efficient. I do not recall RS4 or C63 getting better fuel economy than S65.
You should also re-read what I said about the comparative reliability. There are very few engines that are as strong in motorsport applications as M engines and are reliable at the same time. Throttle actuators should be considered 60-70K wear items, very cheap as well. With engines that see regular OCI (3k-5k km/1yr) there has been little reported cases where the main bearing wear was the main culprit of engine failure; they do wear but at much slower rate than rod bearings. I am referring mostly to S65, S85 did go through a series of revisions over time.

[cant drive 55]

MSport on a 328i is just aerodynamics. It has nothing to do with power. On the other hand M performance is different.

[230iZTR]

I'd have significantly preferred to see BMW make use of the ti moniker instead of M-sport. But in the end, I don't really care. BMW enthusiasts know the difference between a "real" M car and an M-sport car, but BMW strengthened its overall positioning and brand recognition by making its lesser models sportier and more fun to drive.