[Jason]

[Eddien123]

Can't really wrap my head around why you'd ever get the i4 if you were vaguely interested in the M3. It's clear that even the full blown M version of this will be well over 5,000lbs. Why would you want 1,000 more lbs of car in something that's supposed to be nimble and agile. It does good with what it has but we're not talking about buying a 320 vs an i4 here. We're talking about a person deciding to go EV or M3 and if these two were my options the i4 isn't even close. Tech has a bit more to go before I think it'll genuinely replace the M3.

Consider also how poor that range is when you rip it on a track. Probably sub 50 miles

[KoenG]

Originally Posted by Eddien123

Can't really wrap my head around why you'd ever get the i4 if you were vaguely interested in the M3.

Here's why: TCO M3c = 2 x TCO i4M

And:

I would like to stop funding fundamentalism in the middle-East and in Russia. With electricity, we actually no longer have to fund extremist regimes.

And:

environment.

[M2Cmtl]

It’s not even close to being twice the TCO. In Canada anyways the cars are 10-15% apart in MSRP. Then most of the fuel costs are offset by the much higher resale value of the M3…sure it’s more expensive over 5 years or so but not by that much.

And we can debate about the environmental impacts of EVs all day…

[cruzer666]

This is a tomatoes vs oranges comparison, one's better with the main course, one's better with desert.

Whoever followed the i4 M50 closely knows it's slightly faster on the public roadways and it hides its weight extremely well, but it's not really a track car vs M3 that is a true M car that belongs on the track.

[hotrod182]

I wonder if the Edmunds 0-60 times includes a roll out or not. With roll out and 19"s, the i4 M50 has been clocked by Car & Driver at 3.3 sec, and confirmed on the Dragy. A 11.9 sec quarter mile time is also quite a bit slower than the 11.6 Car & Driver results and confirmed 11.59 on the Dragy. The test i4 unfortunately is likely hampered by the bigger 285 section 20" tire combo. I think with the 19's you can get the 120 mph trap speeds like C/D and the Dragy results. And hopefully they had the SOC above 90%.

View post on imgur.com

[Maverik259]

Originally Posted by KoenG

Here's why: TCO M3c = 2 x TCO i4M

And:

I would like to stop funding fundamentalism in the middle-East and in Russia. With electricity, we actually no longer have to fund extremist regimes.

And:

environment.

LMAO. Relax homie. You're not saving anyone driving an electric car.

[techwhiz1]

Originally Posted by Eddien123

Can't really wrap my head around why you'd ever get the i4 if you were vaguely interested in the M3. It's clear that even the full blown M version of this will be well over 5,000lbs. Why would you want 1,000 more lbs of car in something that's supposed to be nimble and agile. It does good with what it has but we're not talking about buying a 320 vs an i4 here. We're talking about a person deciding to go EV or M3 and if these two were my options the i4 isn't even close. Tech has a bit more to go before I think it'll genuinely replace the M3.

Consider also how poor that range is when you rip it on a track. Probably sub 50 miles

So I've owned multiple M cars and non-M BMWs.

My last car was a close to FB0 N54 335i with a full brembo retrofit, limited.slip, etc. It was track prepped and before being totaled it was destined to be my full time track car.

I was going for an M4 Until I saw the i4 M50 last year in the press release. My money went in the pre-order queue on day 1.

You are absolutely wrong about what people are cross shopping. I have never looked at the weight of my cars and my E30 weighted about half of the i4.

The i4 hides it's weight well. It doesn't feel much different than a 5 series. Actually it is about the same dimensions as a E39 5.

Its a blast to drive and other than a driving school, I wouldn't take any of my cars on the track. An M3 is okay on the track after you gut it and rove the rear seats and dump the bloat and put a proper roll cage in. If you want a track car, you buy a stripper.

Anyway the i4 is plenty good enough and if you are driving it at anything above 7/10ths on public roads you won't have a license.

[Ilyam5]

Originally Posted by Eddien123

Can't really wrap my head around why you'd ever get the i4 if you were vaguely interested in the M3. It's clear that even the full blown M version of this will be well over 5,000lbs. Why would you want 1,000 more lbs of car in something that's supposed to be nimble and agile. It does good with what it has but we're not talking about buying a 320 vs an i4 here. We're talking about a person deciding to go EV or M3 and if these two were my options the i4 isn't even close. Tech has a bit more to go before I think it'll genuinely replace the M3.

Consider also how poor that range is when you rip it on a track. Probably sub 50 miles

right on.. it is not even close... maybe it competes with M340 but weight of i4 is going to kill the handling.

[stulio2181]

Originally Posted by KoenG

Here's why: TCO M3c = 2 x TCO i4M

And:

I would like to stop funding fundamentalism in the middle-East and in Russia. With electricity, we actually no longer have to fund extremist regimes.

And:

environment.

Cool story.

[NightWriter]

Originally Posted by hotrod182

I wonder if the Edmunds 0-60 times includes a roll out or not.

It does not, and I 100% agree with their rationale:

On the other hand, the use of rollout with 0-60 times is inappropriate in our view. For one, 0-60-mph acceleration is not a drag-racing convention. More importantly, it's called ZERO to 60 mph, not 3 or 4 mph to 60 mph, which is what you get when you apply rollout. While it is tempting to use rollout in order to make 0-60 acceleration look more impressive by 0.3 second, thereby hyping both the car's performance and the apparent skill of the test driver, we think it's cheating.

https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/...nd-trucks.html

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by Eddien123

Can't really wrap my head around why you'd ever get the i4 if you were vaguely interested in the M3. It's clear that even the full blown M version of this will be well over 5,000lbs. Why would you want 1,000 more lbs of car in something that's supposed to be nimble and agile. It does good with what it has but we're not talking about buying a 320 vs an i4 here. We're talking about a person deciding to go EV or M3 and if these two were my options the i4 isn't even close. Tech has a bit more to go before I think it'll genuinely replace the M3.

Consider also how poor that range is when you rip it on a track. Probably sub 50 miles

I've had 3 M3's over the years (E46 manual, E93, F80 manual) and 1 model 3 perf.

Track mode in the tesla is pretty amazing, especially the 100% regen braking and insane instantaneous torque. One of the only cars that has made me nauseous driving. Crazy.

Yes, the E93 was heavy, too. But the difference in weight is noticeable. The model 3 at 4250 lbs must be lighter than the i4M50.

The weight being very low in the car and the weight results in dramatic understeer at times and some lack of excitement in the curves.

The lack of sound and engagement with the machine via shifting etc is odd.

Overall driving the tesla fast for me was really amazing for a while, but not nearly as satisfying and fun like an M3. Obviously much, much cheaper on gas. But I wore the tires out in 12k miles. I drove that car hard. Of course, I did the same with my M cars.

[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by Eddien123

Can't really wrap my head around why you'd ever get the i4 if you were vaguely interested in the M3. It's clear that even the full blown M version of this will be well over 5,000lbs. Why would you want 1,000 more lbs of car in something that's supposed to be nimble and agile. It does good with what it has but we're not talking about buying a 320 vs an i4 here. We're talking about a person deciding to go EV or M3 and if these two were my options the i4 isn't even close. Tech has a bit more to go before I think it'll genuinely replace the M3.

Consider also how poor that range is when you rip it on a track. Probably sub 50 miles

Its easy: you want to be green for a change

[sor]

Originally Posted by Eddien123

Can't really wrap my head around why you'd ever get the i4 if you were vaguely interested in the M3.

Easy, it's just more fun where it counts for most of us.

I've driven multiple M cars on tracks, if I wanted a fun track car it would be an M2. Maybe an M3 if it were stripped down, but the M3 is already sort of a compromise between fun and practical. For spirited driving on public roads you really can't beat the feel of an electric powertrain. It's an opinion and as such it can be debated all day but there are plenty of people who feel this way, might as well acknowledge it even if you disagree.

The i4 M50 feels a lot like an M3, in that you can feel the weight a bit but you're not going to be doing any extreme tire squealing maneuvers in day to day driving, you're just looking for that "punch" and responsive handling.

[Kriz2fer]

Originally Posted by antzcrashing

Its easy: you want to be green for a change

You are not slowing climate change buying that car. It’s for ego and self worth.

[cruzer666]

Originally Posted by Kriz2fer

You are not slowing climate change buying that car. It’s for ego and self worth.

It's a move in the right direction, EV's today have a lower carbon footprint than ICE vehicles, even taking into account manufacturing. This is especially true if you take into account people that generate their own electricity through solar panels. So yes, EV's are green. In addition BMW doesn't use rare materials in their electric motors and also they make sure the lithium that goes into their factories is ethically and sustainably mined.

For this and other electric vehicle myths you can start here: https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/el...-vehicle-myths

I don't think this is a discussion about facts though, this is more of a discussion of present vs future, old vs new, ICE vs BEV. People had similar conversations and debates going from horse powered carriages to motor transport over 100 years ago. In another 100 years or so, the only place we'll see ICE vehicles will be in automotive history museums. Most people will always be resistant to change.

[Nahlem]

Originally Posted by Eddien123

Can't really wrap my head around why you'd ever get the i4 if you were vaguely interested in the M3. It's clear that even the full blown M version of this will be well over 5,000lbs. Why would you want 1,000 more lbs of car in something that's supposed to be nimble and agile. It does good with what it has but we're not talking about buying a 320 vs an i4 here. We're talking about a person deciding to go EV or M3 and if these two were my options the i4 isn't even close. Tech has a bit more to go before I think it'll genuinely replace the M3.

Consider also how poor that range is when you rip it on a track. Probably sub 50 miles

You maybe wouldn't not at least from the start, but if you wanted to go EV for whatever reason you have and are looking for what is the closest as of today to get that resembles the feel of what i had in M then this would be the obvious choice and not a Tesla especially if want quality. Cant though speak for the tesla's being made in Germany though. So yeah i understand why.

Originally Posted by M2Cmtl

It’s not even close to being twice the TCO. In Canada anyways the cars are 10-15% apart in MSRP. Then most of the fuel costs are offset by the much higher resale value of the M3…sure it’s more expensive over 5 years or so but not by that much.

And we can debate about the environmental impacts of EVs all day…

Yes the fuel costs, running costs, just about any cost associated with owning a car EVs out perform its ICE counterparts, cant speak so much for resale value but i am most certain that no matter the car you buy it will tank in terms of 2nd ownership and you come out loosing at the end it is the curse of being in the front lines of buying cars.

Originally Posted by Maverik259

LMAO. Relax homie. You're not saving anyone driving an electric car.

True one EV wont save the world two wont but it is a rather good place to start on that front. Part is not financing the Saudis but that is also a half truth considering how much oil products are used in the build of a car so yeah. But at least its nice knowing that you won't be needing it to propel the car forward witch is nice. Its rather unmodern needing petrol/diesel to propel the car forward burning fossils fuels for it feels rather say like a dinosaur thing

Originally Posted by Ilyam5

right on.. it is not even close... maybe it competes with M340 but weight of i4 is going to kill the handling.

Yeah except throttle house tested it on winter setup witch is rather stupid if you want to get a feel for the car and also they didn't even know certain things about the car when testing it that they brought forward later on. Then again i don't take to much from reviews like Throttle house, Thomas i think he's been so pissed of at BMW ever sense they changed the cars from what he wants them to be to what they are today both in performance and design aesthetics. So he keeps bashing BMW constantly for it, so i would take his review with a pinch of salt. And i am full aware of him owning a M2 and the E46 witch is what makes him to bias towards what BMW "used" to be and not accepting the changes.

Originally Posted by Kriz2fer

You are not slowing climate change buying that car. It’s for ego and self worth.

Not entirely true but yeah there is much to be done about climate change not the one that is happening naturally of course but parts where we are responsible for it. But saying "Well look at them they are worse then us!" that isn't a good reasons not to try to help out. Just saying.

[hotrod182]

Originally Posted by Ilyam5

right on.. it is not even close... maybe it competes with M340 but weight of i4 is going to kill the handling.

That was one of the worst reviews. And they were so focused on it not being an M rather than a great everyday street car. If they were so into handling, Full Throttle should have tested one with the 20" wheel pkg. For every bad review, there are more positive ones.

[sor]

Originally Posted by Kriz2fer

You are not slowing climate change buying that car. It's for ego and self worth.

But I'm avoiding gas stations and my EV is 100% solar powered at home, so at least there's a feeling of being self sufficient. Honestly the main thing I was looking forward to in getting an EV was avoiding standing in the blowing snow for five minutes in winter once a week.

I'd say to some degree any BMW is for ego and self worth, certainly M cars. I don't know why EVs make it more so.

[Saphirschwarz]

Originally Posted by Eddien123

Can't really wrap my head around why you'd ever get the i4 if you were vaguely interested in the M3. It's clear that even the full blown M version of this will be well over 5,000lbs. Why would you want 1,000 more lbs of car in something that's supposed to be nimble and agile. It does good with what it has but we're not talking about buying a 320 vs an i4 here. We're talking about a person deciding to go EV or M3 and if these two were my options the i4 isn't even close. Tech has a bit more to go before I think it'll genuinely replace the M3.

Consider also how poor that range is when you rip it on a track. Probably sub 50 miles

You're certainly right (and lucky) in the US but over here in Europe the taxes are getting crazy, and totally absurd if it's a company car. Otherwise of course everyone would buy a lighter, cooler, good sounding M3 or 911... But governments push I4 and Taycans like crazy.

[hotrod182]

I would really like to know what the Edmunds reviewer was alluding to about a more aggressive M type electric car coming out soon? I4 M60 please!

[Nahlem]

Originally Posted by hotrod182

I would really like to know what the Edmunds reviewer was alluding to about a more aggressive M type electric car coming out soon? I4 M60 please!

Well there has been some rumour i would say more then talks about an possible i4M in the works but hard to verify other then that BMW said them self they would want a full blown M at some point in EV form. But if the i4 is the platform for it i don't know maybe when the new dedicated EV platform comes in the future they will go and make a full blown M.

If you look at the i4 m50 in general it has a lot of treats that an full blown m would get so it feels to me when driving my i4 that at some point they said okay lets not go full blown M with the i4 and wait for the neue class later on to go full M.

Might be some of the reasons other then chip shortages and materials shortages why the i4 has taken so long to get here. Due to a change in later prototype production state where they decided that and might have needed to town down the m50 then, witch caused delays.