[brave-heart]

From my understanding, the differences are one more motor, more HP/Torque, and rear drive vs AWD. But the downsides are considerably more weight/less range . 335HP/5.5 sec is fast enough for me, especially from instant torque. What's the main reason you choose M50 over 40?

[finn123]

The same reason as people choose X5 40i vs X5 M50i, or 530 vs m550 and so on

[Encanto]

Because I can.

[Tim Callahan]

Scandinavian winters, just got 1 feet of fresh snow, it is much easier to survive with xdrive.

[brave-heart]

Originally Posted by Encanto

Because I can.

The $8K difference vs i40 M-sport is not an issue for me. It’s the additional weight/ 10%-15% range reduction that makes me hesitated….

[Encanto]

Originally Posted by brave-heart

The $8K difference vs i40 M-sport is not an issue for me. It’s the additional weight/ 10%-15% range reduction that makes me hesitated….

Anybody with a range issue in electric cars should buy a Tesla and be done with it. You want charging stations everywhere, and only Tesla can give you that.

Otherwise, get a home charger and enjoy whatever you select.

[spool twice]

some guy did it in 5.03 seconds on Dragy's database in traction-limited winters of UK fwiw, I think the edrive40 will be plenty fast for 95% of consumers.

But I'm that remaining 5% of consumers so I sprung for the M50 and the added security of AWD.

[Staszek]

While I havent decided on the i4 yet, if I get one it will be an M50 for two reasons.

1) AWD in a winter climate
2) sub 4 seconds 0-60!

No way I am letting my wife's new X7 M50 out run me at the light

[WAY]

Money is not the issue for me as the M50 isn’t that much more with the same option that I would add in the 40 anyway. But I went for the 40 because I got bored of the AWD M cars and RS3s I had, whereas I always love my RWD cars. In Australia traction isn’t an issue as it doesn’t snow and all the reviews so far on the 40 is backing up my choice.

[Rich9600]

I have driven both, after I ordered the M50…
There was <£4000 and <30 miles WLTP range difference at my parallel specifications on both cars. MSport, most of the packs and 19" wheels. It's the 20's that kill the range on the M50!
I don't really care about 0-60mph and have never used launch control in my last two BMW's. Though, coming from RWD, and finally growing up, I wanted AWD for my next family car. My wife will not drive my RWD 340i…
Both cars drive well, ride excellently and feel balanced like a BMW should. The sheer power of the M50 made me smile and my testing indicated adequate range. In the overtaking speeds the e40 felt slow in relation to my 340i.
So, to me it's 430i - e40 and 440i - M50.

[bayarea328xit]

i4 xDrive40 will be an option starting from Nov 2022:

https://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=901686

[Rich9600]

Originally Posted by bayarea328xit

i4 xDrive40 will be an option starting from Nov 2022:

https://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=901686

This seems an odd move.
Will the RWD 40 be withdrawn and be replaced with a twin motor AWD 40?
If so, I would expect no significant range improvement in MSport trim over the M50. Also, costs would be so close at an equal spec it would almost be pointless… Unless RWD output is also increased and maintained for traditionalists…
On PCP finance the extra for the M50 at my spec was almost insignificant due to the higher GFV. More standard spec and less options to devalue…
Energy usage and motor max output do not have the 'fuel' economy implications of an ICE car in normal usage. So, EV high max motor output is almost a free run bonus…

[bayarea328xit]

Originally Posted by Rich9600

This seems an odd move.
Will the RWD 40 be withdrawn and be replaced with a twin motor AWD 40?
If so, I would expect no significant range improvement in MSport trim over the M50. Also, costs would be so close at an equal spec it would almost be pointless… Unless RWD output is also increased and maintained for traditionalists…
On PCP finance the extra for the M50 at my spec was almost insignificant due to the higher GFV. More standard spec and less options to devalue…
Energy usage and motor max output do not have the 'fuel' economy implications of an ICE car in normal usage. So, EV high max motor output is almost a free run bonus…

I agree - it will be interesting to see how BMW prices this particular model relative to M50. The added weight of the motor will likely draw the range down.

[spool twice]

I agree, I can't imagine an x-drive40 will be that much better on range over an M50 considering it takes "x" kWh discharge to reach "x" mph and also to maintain "x" speed. I would imagine it may slightly weigh less than an M50 give its different content (smaller brakes, perhaps smaller standard wheels), but in reality may not be more than 10miles off of the M50.

[Encanto]

Originally Posted by Rich9600

This seems an odd move.
Will the RWD 40 be withdrawn and be replaced with a twin motor AWD 40?
If so, I would expect no significant range improvement in MSport trim over the M50. Also, costs would be so close at an equal spec it would almost be pointless… Unless RWD output is also increased and maintained for traditionalists…
On PCP finance the extra for the M50 at my spec was almost insignificant due to the higher GFV. More standard spec and less options to devalue…
Energy usage and motor max output do not have the 'fuel' economy implications of an ICE car in normal usage. So, EV high max motor output is almost a free run bonus…

The eDrive40 will be replaced by the eDrive35 and the xDrive40.

[Straycatndc]

Is it fair to expect the eDrive40 to be not so bad in the snow as it is a heavy vehicle with even weight distribution front to rear.

[Ken7]

Originally Posted by Encanto

Anybody with a range issue in electric cars should buy a Tesla and be done with it. You want charging stations everywhere, and only Tesla can give you that.

Otherwise, get a home charger and enjoy whatever you select.

Not if you're looking for a well-built EV in the luxury category. Tesla is a fail in that respect.

[Ken7]

Originally Posted by bayarea328xit

i4 xDrive40 will be an option starting from Nov 2022:

https://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=901686

That move makes zero sense to me. Some, like me, are picking the e40 for the range advantage it offers. Others are picking it because they specifically want RWD. Going to a 2 motor e40 kills both of those advantages. Weird.

[Ken7]

Originally Posted by Straycatndc

Is it fair to expect the eDrive40 to be not so bad in the snow as it is a heavy vehicle with even weight distribution front to rear.

Having driven a RWD Tesla MS, yes, it should be better in the snow than a conventional RWD car. The low slung, heavy battery, gives it a lower center of gravity that should help.

But with that said, it will still not be as good as an AWD car. I still went with the e40 for range. We have another car for those rare snow days where AWD or FWD is necessary.

[Rich9600]

Originally Posted by Ken7

That move makes zero sense to me. Some, like me, are picking the e40 for the range advantage it offers. Others are picking it because they specifically want RWD. Going to a 2 motor e40 kills both of those advantages. Weird.

It makes no sense to me either. Hopefully they will keep both 40 options open.
But, a twin motor e40 will probably be twin small motor and lighter than the M50.
Like spec 19" wheeled e40 and M50's are 20-30 miles different in range depending on the testing regime. So, a pair of smaller lighter motors might only loose 10-20 miles vs one big rear motor only, and give better weight distribution. The e40 is presently slightly rear biased.
The RWD e35 may be the best handling…

[mtech8]

A noob question.

Obviously the M50 is faster than the 40. But in normal driving, where a person doesn't floor it. But rather presses down on the accelerator say 50% of the way down. Would the cars deliver the same amount of power/speed? Is it noticeably different?

I was test driving a Tesla M3P vs M3LR. If you floor the car, the power difference is clear. But just driving normal to 50mph, the M3P didn't seem that much faster. Felt like I had to press the pedal to the same amount to get the same speed.

[Rich9600]

Originally Posted by mtech8

A noob question.

Obviously the M50 is faster than the 40. But in normal driving, where a person doesn't floor it. But rather presses down on the accelerator say 50% of the way down. Would the cars deliver the same amount of power/speed? Is it noticeably different?

I was test driving a Tesla M3P vs M3LR. If you floor the car, the power difference is clear. But just driving normal to 50mph, the M3P didn't seem that much faster. Felt like I had to press the pedal to the same amount to get the same speed.

Until you use the power you do not notice it… This is true with ICE and EV. You quickly calibrate your right foot to what you have under it.
Once up and running and at set speed there isn't a huge difference. Though, I did drive similar spec'd up cars and not back to back. Both MSport and had adaptive dampers etc. Though, M50 on staggered 20's and e40 on less staggered 19's.
Reviewers suggest the e40 is more nimble, I would not disagree. However, nearly all reviews and my rest drive are on the 20" super grippy wheel option in the M50. In my experience staggered wheels reduce the perceived nimbleness.
The M50 is AWD and accelerates out of a slippery junction better. Given the tyres, the e40 has less than half the traction and RWD characteristics. Both are very capable at road speeds. However, the overtaking performance of the M50 is much stronger. The e40 felt slower 50mph plus than my present notably lighter RWD 340i, even with similar power.
You really need to drive both to see for yourself. But, both have solid road performance.