4 Series (F32) [Official] BMW 4-Series Coupe

[EnI]

Until BMW released the official spec of the 4 series everything about it's weight was conjecture

The numbers are everywhere.

428i (I4; 245HP): 1525kg (EU; manual) ... 1545kg (EU; automatic; with xDrive: 1615kg)
435i (I6; 306HP): 1585kg (EU; manual) ... 1600kg (EU; automatic; with xDrive: 1665kg)
420d (I4; 184HP): 1525kg (EU; manual) ... 1540kg (EU; automatic)


MB E-class Coupe (with 7G-tronic plus only; EU):
E300 (V6; 252HP) ... 1685kg
E350 (V6; 306HP) ... 1685kg
E200 CDI (I4; 170HP) ... 1735kg
E220 CDI (I4; 204HP) ... 1735kg

Audi A5
A5 2.0 TFSI (R4; 225HP): 1505kg (EU; manual) ... 1550kg (EU; multitronic)
A5 2.0 TFSI Q (R4; 225HP): 1585kg (EU; manual) ... 1615kg (EU; multitronic)
S5 Quattro (V6; 333HP): 1750kg (EU; S-tronic)
A5 2.0 TDI (R4; 177HP): 1545kg (EU; manual) ... 1570kg (EU; multitronic)

 

[SCOTT27]

I always see we want lightweight but we also want this and this and this.
Forums are full of people wanting no Luxuries but they are a minority. The majority cannot live without features that enhance luxury , status and of course personal discussion.
I would say that BMW have done a lot more in introducing lightweight technology , just as they lead the way in efficiency. In 2003 BMW broke the boundaries and introduced a CFRP roof with the BMW M3CSL and then the E63 M6 and the E92 Coupe. Its dedication to this material technology brought down costs. As somebody in M. Reflected , Audi and Mercedes cannot do the same without adding to the price which alone would be far more expensive than the M3 Coupe.

The true test to BMWs lightweight philosophy for its core portfolio begins entirely from the 7er , they have shown internally diagrams to the key points of utilising materials to signify weight loss with the current car.
The BMW i3 starts the revolution.


The benefits for BMWs volume production of CFRP goes way beyond just cars. Currently there are a few companies queuing up to buy for use in their respective industries which means BMW can recoup its initial investment , which is why Klatten got rid of the VAG influence threatening SGL . This is practically a gold mine.

 

[mini_cooper4]

The numbers are everywhere.

............................. DIN / EU ......... (8-speed automatic gearbox; DIN / EU)

428i (I4; 245HP): 1450kg / 1525kg .... (1470kg / 1545kg) (with xDrive: 1540kg / 1615kg)

435i (I6; 306HP): 1510kg / 1585kg .... (1525kg / 1600kg) (with xDrive: 1590kg / 1665kg)

420d (I4; 184HP): 1450kg / 1525kg ... (1465kg / 1540kg)

Eg.
E-class Coupe (with 7G-tronic plus only; EU):
E300 (V6; 252HP) ... 1685kg
E350 (V6; 306HP) ... 1685kg
E200 CDI (I4; 170HP) ... 1735kg
E220 CDI (I4; 204HP) ... 1735kg

Hmmm as far as I remember the E92 weights more...
Can someone do a comparo? It seems like the 4-Series is pretty light.

 

[Deckhook]

Balderdash. It's about what's right and what's wrong. I could give a rat's arse as to whether EnI was happy to answer your question or not. (No beef with him of course).
My issue is with you and your sweeping statements as always.

Your words. Your statement says that BMW's competitors are dramatically reducing weight. Operative word: ARE. Appropriate word: SUPPOSEDLY.

So let me get this right, VAG according to the magazines stated they would be dramatically dropping the weight of their cars and low and behold their MQB platform did dramatically reduce its weight over the previous model, in anyone else's opinion that means they have already fulfilled their claims so maybe the 'are' was correct after all.

Furthermore - in the context of the 4er discussion what relevance does your assertion hold? I'd accept it if we were talking MQB vs F20.

I will repeat myself by saying would you prefer it if we bring this up when their models are released as I haven't a problem with that.

 

[klier]

Hmmm as far as I remember the E92 weights more...
Can someone do a comparo? It seems like the 4-Series is pretty light.

435i (I6; 306 HP): EU 1585 kg (1600 kg) (with xDrive: 1665 kg)
335i (I6; 306 HP): EU 1600 kg (1615 kg) (with xDrive 1680 kg)

420d (I4; 184 HP): EU 1525 kg (1540 kg)
320d (I4; 184 HP): EU 1495 kg (1505 kg)

 

[Deckhook]

435i (I6; 306HP): EU 1585 kg (1600 kg) (with xDrive: 1665 kg)

335i (I6; 306HP): EU 1600 kg (1615 kg) (with xDrive 1680 kg)

Well there is a improvement admittedly small but like Enl says with the extra standard kit which the 4 series has this might be much more than it first appears.

 

[martinbo]

Ja, ja - just duck and dive with evasive comebacks. Same story, different day.

Useless BMW: doing nothing about addressing the weight of their cars when other manufacturers are making dramatic weight savings.

The 4er is a fat heavy pig of a premium & (now) mid-sized coupe. Perfect evidence that BMW are nowhere against the backdrop of drastic moves by the others.

 

[klier]

435i (I6; 306 HP): EU 1585 kg (1600 kg automatic)
S5 coupe (V6; 333 HP): EU 1750 kg (7 speed automatic only)
E350 coupe (V6; 306 HP): EU 1685 kg (auto only)

 

[Deckhook]

Ja, ja - just duck and dive with evasive comebacks. Same story, different day.

Useless BMW: doing nothing about addressing the weight of their cars when other manufacturers are making dramatic weight savings.

Where did I say that?

I think you'll find that these were your words not mine or are you trying to put words into my mouth?

The 4er is a fat heavy pig of a premium & (now) mid-sized coupe. Perfect evidence that BMW are nowhere against the backdrop of drastic moves by the others.

I like this car quite a bit and if my son's chair would fit I'd probably get one... could you say the same?

P.S.
BTW its you turning this into an argument not I.

 

[bimmerjph]

I always see we want lightweight but we also want this and this and this.
Forums are full of people wanting no Luxuries but they are a minority. The majority cannot live without features that enhance luxury , status and of course personal discussion.
I would say that BMW have done a lot more in introducing lightweight technology , just as they lead the way in efficiency. In 2003 BMW broke the boundaries and introduced a CFRP roof with the BMW M3CSL and then the E63 M6 and the E92 Coupe. Its dedication to this material technology brought down costs. As somebody in M. Reflected , Audi and Mercedes cannot do the same without adding to the price which alone would be far more expensive than the M3 Coupe.

The true test to BMWs lightweight philosophy for its core portfolio begins entirely from the 7er , they have shown internally diagrams to the key points of utilising materials to signify weight loss with the current car.
The BMW i3 starts the revolution.


The benefits for BMWs volume production of CFRP goes way beyond just cars. Currently there are a few companies queuing up to buy for use in their respective industries which means BMW can recoup its initial investment , which is why Klatten got rid of the VAG influence threatening SGL . This is practically a gold mine.

What has BMW done though to enhance lightweight electronics? BMW has done a lot to lighten the chassis and engine, but I haven't heard much about the electronics.

 

[martinbo]

Where did I say that?

I think you'll find that these were your words not mine or are you trying to put words into my mouth?

Duh!? Are you flipping thick? Did I quote you here? Of course these are my words. Yes, they're meant to be close in meaning to your words - words that you wrote yet can't seem to understand what they mean.

I like this car quite a bit and if my son's chair would fit I'd probably get one... could you say the same?

Because you have such a poor command of the written word, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not insinuating that I do not have the means to afford this car. But just in case you're being a stupendously ignorant idiot: you know nothing about me, what I earn, where I live and how I choose to manage my financial affairs.

BTW its you turning this into an argument not I.

Yes, because from time to time your utter lack of comprehension of your own words deserves a good old fashioned anti-BS argument.

Pursue this discussion at your peril.

 

[mini_cooper4]

@EnI

Can we expect to see the 1M's/si engine in the upcoming M440i ?
Also can we expect any weight savings on the M440i ?
In general anything you are able to share with us about this car

Thanks in advance!

 

[Deckhook]

^Why will it be called M440i?

 

[mini_cooper4]

^Why will it be called M440i?

As the engine will be in a different stage of tune I guess.

 

[Deckhook]

435i (I6; 306HP): 1585kg (EU; manual) ... 1600kg (EU; automatic; with xDrive: 1665kg)

S5 Quattro (V6; 333HP): 1750kg (EU; S-tronic)

The weight of the S5 has always puzzled me when compared to the regular A5 2.0TFSI quattro, a 135Kgs increase is enormous especially against the 435xi which is only 50Kgs more than the 428xi Auto.

 

[Deckhook]

As the engine will be in a different stage of tune I guess.

I'll never understand the logic of giving an engine the number based on its state of tune, especially for us that are old enough to remember that previously these numbers use to mean capacity. Why not call the 3.0L engine 430i and if you increase its tune then add an S at the end.

 

[bmwownage]

I'll never understand the logic of giving an engine the number based on its state of tune, especially for us that are old enough to remember that previously these numbers use to mean capacity. Why not call the 3.0L engine 430i and if you increase its tune then add an S at the end.

Then 428i should be called 420is? doesn't matter man, numbers didn't really mean the capacity since a long time ago. E46 323i had a 2.5L engine, E90 328i had a 3.0L engine? numbers mean level of output nowadays.

 

[Monster]

I'll never understand the logic of giving an engine the number based on its state of tune, especially for us that are old enough to remember that previously these numbers use to mean capacity. Why not call the 3.0L engine 430i and if you increase its tune then add an S at the end.

Marketing, like how BMW uses the term "twin power turbo" and how Audi uses the letter "T" for their supercharged engines.

 

[mini_cooper4]

I'll never understand the logic of giving an engine the number based on its state of tune, especially for us that are old enough to remember that previously these numbers use to mean capacity. Why not call the 3.0L engine 430i and if you increase its tune then add an S at the end.

It's easier to differentiate the engines with simple numbers.
The new turbo engines are matching or exceeding the performance and in some cases the output of the bigger displacement NA engines from the past.
For example:
28i TsT vs. the 28i NA.
35i TT vs. the 3.2 NA... it goes on and on

X20 to X30 are TsT/TT I4s matching the NA I6s performance/output
X30 to X40 are TsT/TT I6s matching the NA V8s performance/output

 

[Deckhook]

^I do get why they've chosen this method and anyway it's no biggie.

Here's an example the other day when one of my teens asked what engine is in the 316d in front of us, you can imagine his screwed up face trying to figure out why they were doing it like that. Now imagine the laugh I'd have had if a C250cdi had pulled in between us. LOL