[eluded]

Originally Posted by kadify

I think the s4 is coming to America with a manual for the 2019 model year. Not positive but I thought I read that somewhere.

I hope you're right. Be nice to go back to the rings.

[paul e]

Hmm...I seem to remember Audi stating the manual wouldn’t integrate properly into all the nanny systems the car has.

[captainaudio]

My guess is that the next M3/4 will offer the manual transmission (actually with hill holding and auto rev matching it is becoming a semi-manual transmission but at least it will have three pedals) and the 8AT and the DCT will be dropped.

[lens]

Originally Posted by captainaudio

My guess is that the next M3/4 will offer the manual transmission (actually with hill holding and auto rev matching it is becoming a semi-manual transmission but at least it will have three pedals) and the 8AT and the DCT will be dropped.

There was a post about it, they said 6MT will be offered, DCT will be dropped for 8AT, and it's gonna be the S58 engine prob. CF roof is now standard (byebye sunroof)

[metallicpea]

Originally Posted by chaungo

There was a post about it, they said 6MT will be offered, DCT will be dropped for 8AT, and it's gonna be the S58 engine prob. CF roof is now standard (byebye sunroof)

That's a good thing. My M3 has a sunroof and it makes it very hard to find a workable seating position when you have your helmet on. I wish it had sunroof delete and I now see why E46 owners always talk about that option. But I guess the new M3 will likely be bigger - so maybe more headroom, but a helmet really jacks things up in some cars.

[MacklinUSOB]

Originally Posted by metallicpea

That's a good thing. My M3 has a sunroof and it makes it very hard to find a workable seating position when you have your helmet on. I wish it had sunroof delete and I now see why E46 owners always talk about that option. But I guess the new M3 will likely be bigger - so maybe more headroom, but a helmet really jacks things up in some cars.

Especially when paired with power adjusting seats. My car has neither and I could put a helmet on my helmet there is so much headroom, and I'm 6'2".

[Kafkaesque328]

Originally Posted by paul e

Hmm...I seem to remember Audi stating the manual wouldn’t integrate properly into all the nanny systems the car has.

Makes sense... its like trying to integrate a VHS player from 1983 with RCA outs into a state of the art home theater system

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by bavarianride

The BMW turbo engines have flat power band that requires turbo spooling between shifts, and 8AT is more efficient and effective than 6MT in working with this gen of BMW engines.

And these engines with flat power bands just do not have the same feel of the surging power bands of previous NA gens, so even with 6MT the driving experience is very different from the old school NA engines.

This argument really doesn't make much sense when you actually analyze the data. Under full throttle, the stock turbo powerband of the N54, N55, and B58 closely emulates one of a somewhat high-revving naturally aspirated (NA) small displacement V8. The torque curve starts early and is very flat and robust. Depending on the motor generation and if it has a MPPK, pneumatic or electronic wastegate, Valvetronic, etc., power peaks in the 6000-6300rpm range and maintains 80% to 95%+ of peak power through to fuel cut.

The stock powerband is completely fine for a 6MT and lends itself well to that transmission. In the N55 and B58, the powerband is such that you get the sensation of power building as the rpms close in on 7000rpms. I've calculated the ideal shifts for a stock N55 MPPK, M2 N55, and B58 and they're right around red line for optimal acceleration. Additionally, the 8AT shifts at or close to redline as well. BMW would have revised shiftpoints if they thought the powerband was dying on the topend. News flash, it's not.

When you tune these cars, the naturally-aspirated like powerband that BMW has designed in gets neutered a bit. The powerband elevates massively in the low to mid-range rpms and the peak power shifts downward. Instead of power peaking in the 6000-6300rpm range, it's more in the range of 5400-5800rpms. The powerband also dies out more dramatically above 6000-6300rpms. Essentially you make the turbo BMWs behave like a rabid pushrod Ford 5.0, meaning lots and lots of low and midrange power with reduced breathing in the upper rpms (due to the limits of the turbo). Even then, the 6MT is more than up to the task to deliver driving enjoyment and performance.

With the 6MT, you do get some perceivable lag when first mashing the gas, but that brief lag makes the driving experience a bit more exciting comparable to that of the 8AT which feels almost CVT like due to all the gears, instant shifts, and lack of much, if any, torque shock on the shifts. Also the torque converter which can unlock under light to moderate throttle, providing in sense even more "gears" between the real gears. BMW also has worked some wizardy where some boost is maintained between full throttle shifts with the 6MT. At full throttle, my M235 maintains 5-7+psi on the shifts depending on the gear.

Yes, the 8AT extracts the most performance out of these motors; however, "better" is the opinion of the driver. For some of us, faster and quicker doesn't necessarily equate to better.

[MacklinUSOB]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

This argument really doesn't make much sense when you actually analyze the data. Under full throttle, the stock turbo powerband of the N54, N55, and B58 closely emulates one of a somewhat high-revving naturally aspirated (NA) small displacement V8. The torque curve starts early and is very flat and robust. Depending on the motor generation and if it has a MPPK, pneumatic or electronic wastegate, Valvetronic, etc., power peaks in the 6000-6300rpm range and maintains 80% to 95%+ of peak power through to fuel cut.

The stock powerband is completely fine for a 6MT and lends itself well to that transmission. In the N55 and B58, the powerband is such that you get the sensation of power building as the rpms close in on 7000rpms. I've calculated the ideal shifts for a stock N55 MPPK, M2 N55, and B58 and they're right around red line for optimal acceleration. Additionally, the 8AT shifts at or close to redline as well. BMW would have revised shiftpoints if they thought the powerband was dying on the topend. News flash, it's not.

When you tune these cars, the naturally-aspirated like powerband that BMW has designed in gets neutered a bit. The powerband elevates massively in the low to mid-range rpms and the peak power shifts downward. Instead of power peaking in the 6000-6300rpm range, it's more in the range of 5400-5800rpms. The powerband also dies out more dramatically above 6000-6300rpms. Essentially you make the turbo BMWs behave like a rabid pushrod Ford 5.0, meaning lots and lots of low and midrange power with reduced breathing in the upper rpms (due to the limits of the turbo). Even then, the 6MT is more than up to the task to deliver driving enjoyment and performance.

With the 6MT, you do get some perceivable lag when first mashing the gas, but that brief lag makes the driving experience a bit more exciting comparable to that of the 8AT which feels almost CVT like due to all the gears, instant shifts, and lack of much, if any, torque shock on the shifts. Also the torque converter which can unlock under light to moderate throttle, providing in sense even more "gears" between the real gears. BMW also has worked some wizardy where some boost is maintained between full throttle shifts with the 6MT. At full throttle, my M235 maintains 5-7+psi on the shifts depending on the gear.

Yes, the 8AT extracts the most performance out of these motors; however, "better" is the opinion of the driver. For some of us, faster and quicker doesn't necessarily equate to better.

Well put. When my car was stock I was amazed at how linear the power built through the revs to the top end. Now with a piggyback, my car has assumed the more characteristic turbo I4 band, with the meaty midrange torque, and earlier peak hp leading nearly to redline, tapering off in the last thousand revs. For me, the most engaging and enthralling experience of acceleration is the torque shove coming onto boost, and it is not as easily accessed or noticed with the 8AT. Even with the fall off in boost between shifts, the twin scroll absolutely helps with spool up times/lag. My previous car had a 2.3t with a single scroll TD04 and took considerably longer to spool, but boy was it a blast once it hit. I don't drag race, and the extra .X seconds I lose between zero and 60 is trivial and not worth the trade for me. So if M340i doesn't have a stick, I guess that means I'll have to settle for a G80

As for who you replied to, the N26 is known to have a more pronounced falling off towards the end of the range in comparison to the N20, and I have read that is due to the more constrained Cat.

[kern417]

the difference that you can't compare a dyno chart with throttle response on a turbo car. when you shift an N/A car, you pick up exactly where the dyno reads at a given rpm. when shifting a turbo car, the line changes and you start from a low power/torque point and it builds as boost increases.

so when people say they want linear response, you can't get that from a turbo car. the boost increase is linear, but the response is not. you have to wait for the torque.

but i love turbo cars for the same reason i love manuals. i like feeling the boost/torque build on every shift.

[bavarianride]

Originally Posted by kern417

the difference that you can't compare a dyno chart with throttle response on a turbo car. when you shift an N/A car, you pick up exactly where the dyno reads at a given rpm. when shifting a turbo car, the line changes and you start from a low power/torque point and it builds as boost increases.

so when people say they want linear response, you can't get that from a turbo car. the boost increase is linear, but the response is not. you have to wait for the torque.

but i love turbo cars for the same reason i love manuals. i like feeling the boost/torque build on every shift.

Yes, your understanding is correct. And it is hard to explain to those who haven't experienced previous gen BMWs with NA engines + MT.

[MacklinUSOB]

Originally Posted by bavarianride

Yes, your understanding is correct. And it is hard to explain to those who haven't experienced previous gen BMWs with NA engines + MT.

For the record, I owned a 328is with a manual as well. I understand the differences between throttle response on NA and turbo applications, both absolutely have their respective benefits. However, to discourage getting a six speed because it is not "effective" is a farce.

[bavarianride]

Originally Posted by MacklinUSOB

For the record, I owned a 328is with a manual as well. I understand the differences between throttle response on NA and turbo applications, both absolutely have their respective benefits. However, to discourage getting a six speed because it is not "effective" is a farce.

What is also a farce is the belief that MT + latest gen of turbo can be faster than finely-tuned ECU + 8AT + turbo like BMW's offerings.

And the latest gen of turbo definitely does not have the same raw feel as the surging power band of yesteryears.

If one wants to feel fast, but not be fast, at least get the old school M54(e.g.) N/A and have some fun with MT. Thinking that the latest gen turbo + MT can feel fast is also a farce.

[MacklinUSOB]

Originally Posted by bavarianride

What is also a farce is the belief that MT + latest gen of turbo can be faster than finely-tuned ECU + 8AT + turbo like BMW's offerings. And the latest gen of turbo definitely does not have the same raw feel as the surging power band of yesteryears.

If one wants to feel fast, but not be fast, at least get the old school M54(e.g.) N/A and have some fun with MT. Thinking that the latest gen turbo + MT can feel fast is also a farce.

Where did I say it is faster? I already conceded that the AT was faster in raw acceleration, actually. Where did I even knock the 8AT?

The F30 is not revolutionary, much less so that a manual transmission is no longer viable, sorry to disappoint you. It can't "feel fast"? I'm certain there are countless people with countless "fast feeling" turbo manual cars, including many on this forum, that would vehemently disagree.

IMSA F30 328i #81 & #84. Six speeds.
http://www.bimmerworldracing.com/84-bimmerworld-328i/

[bavarianride]

Originally Posted by MacklinUSOB

Where did I say it is faster? I already conceded that the AT was faster in raw acceleration, actually. Where did I even knock the 8AT?

The F30 is not revolutionary, much less so that a manual transmission is no longer viable, sorry to disappoint you. It can't "feel fast"? I'm certain there are countless people with countless "fast feeling" turbo manual cars, including many on this forum, that would vehemently disagree.

Sorry to disappoint, but my experience with M54 N/A versus N26 turbo(both MT) is that, M54 feels fast, but N26 is fast. However, at least M54 feels fast, while N26 does not feel fast.

And comparing N26 MT to N26 8AT, N26 MT feels flat and cannot shift faster than 8AT, while N26 8AT feels flat but is fast.

[MacklinUSOB]

Originally Posted by bavarianride

Sorry to disappoint, but my experience with M54 N/A versus N26 turbo(both MT) is that, M54 feels fast, but N26 is fast. However, at least M54 feels fast, while N26 does not feel fast.

And comparing N26 MT to N26 8AT, N26 MT feels flat and slow, while N26 8AT feels flat but fast.

I'm sorry you had such a poor experience. Please, you or the F30 are no harbinger for manual transmissions. That's a fact.

[bavarianride]

Originally Posted by MacklinUSOB

I'm sorry you had such a poor experience. Please, you or the F30 are no harbinger for manual transmissions. That's a fact.

The BMWNA sales number is the harbinger for BMW MT, at least in the US, and that is a fact.

[captainaudio]

Technology progresses whether we like it or not. AS ATs and DCTs have gotten better and better many drivers who have driven MTs for years and who are very adept at driving MTs have made the switch.

At this point in time I own and regularly drive cars with MTs, "Conventional" torque converter ATs and DCTs. I enjoy driving all of them and if there was one I did not enjoy driving I would get rid of it. They are all fun to drive in their own way. Driving the MT Miata is a very different experience than driving the DCT M4 but they are both very engaging.

The DCT and AT cars in a sense give me the best of both worlds. I can put them in "set it and forget it" mode and let the cars decide when to shift, and when I do they are almost intuitive about being in the right gear. Or I can put them in manual mode and shift when I want to shift.

There is a lot more to high performance driving than shifting gears. If you do not think so than I challenge you to take a "self driving" DCT or AT car to your local track and sit in the car while it sets a track record all by itself.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by captainaudio

There is a lot more to high performance driving than shifting gears. If you do not think so than I challenge you to take a "self driving" DCT or AT car to your local track and sit in the car while it sets a track record all by itself.

If I was into setting lap times and winning money, I wouldn't be caught dead with a manual. However, in all other none racing situations, the auto will not deliver the same engagement and driving joy as the manual. Period.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by kern417

the difference that you can't compare a dyno chart with throttle response on a turbo car. when you shift an N/A car, you pick up exactly where the dyno reads at a given rpm. when shifting a turbo car, the line changes and you start from a low power/torque point and it builds as boost increases.

so when people say they want linear response, you can't get that from a turbo car. the boost increase is linear, but the response is not. you have to wait for the torque.

but i love turbo cars for the same reason i love manuals. i like feeling the boost/torque build on every shift.

Hmmmmm....when you dyno, you're at full throttle. On the shift with a manual, some boost is maintained so when you enter that next gear, you have a very brief moment of lag and then you're in full power. Power is power at that point. Of course you won't get truly linear power delivery with a turbo, but these BMW turbos aren't anything like those of 1980s and 1990s turbos which fell off hard on a shift and were like light switches, on or off. Hell, even my prior 2012 WRX with tune had laughable lag compared to my stock M235.

[captainaudio]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

If I was into setting lap times and winning money, I wouldn't be caught dead with a manual. However, in all other none racing situations, the auto will not deliver the same engagement and driving joy as the manual. Period.

That is a personal opinion not a universal fact and not necessarily an opinion that everyone agrees with.

In motorsports, as in most sports, the majority of the participants are not winning money, they are spending money. If you are serious about track driving, whether you are racing or just lapping, and you are using 100% of the car you are 100% engaged regardless of what type of transmission you have and the objective is to get around the track as fast as possible.

I enjoy driving my MT cars and I also enjoy driving my AT and DCT cars. They all have their good points and their bad points. AS a road car the Miata is a blast to drive and I would not want an AT in that car but the M4 DCT is also a very enjoyable road car although a very different driving experience.

[justinnum1]

ill make sure to let my GM know to pass along the message that dropping the 6mt will lose them at least one future sale.