2009 BMW M3: Is Bigger Really Better?

I agree completely. would have really prefered if you guys bought it in Jerez Black Metallic w/ Silver Novillo Extended Leather, and the 19" Rims.

I'll defend Scott for the color scheme, I think it looks great with white on red. Wheels though I have to agree with you Josh, 19s fill the wheel well better, look better, and handle better. Cost should not be an excuse since almost every other option was checked for this car. For some reason though I do like the darker color of the 18s though. Are you guys thinking of swapping them for 19s?

I prefer the vehicle in the charcoal/grey color and I like these rims - gotta hide that brake dust!

There are some cars that just look so good in white. NSX, Murcielago, and I'd include BMW sedans in that.

dougtheeng -- the wheels already look like they're coated with brake dust! I'm just not a fan of dark wheels. Not saying they have to be chrome, but a nice silver or diamond-cut polish with a good clearcoat would be the business. These wheels look dirty all the time.

White is widely accepted to be the best match for E90. I personally love white but that's just me.

Yeah, get the 19" wheels. And then complain about replacement tire cost and buy crappy tires because you can't afford premium ones. You know, like you did with the E46 M3...

19s should be standard on a $55k car. Thats what I say. I could go down a list of cheaper cars with standard 19" or 20" rims but I wont. I do not like the 18s on this car. Then again, I never liked the rims on the old M3.

Those rims sucks, plain and simple. With all the nice wheels BMW makes, they've assigned some of their worse for the standard M3. The 335 has much nicer looking 18" rims. Does BMW still charge extra for regular metallic paint? It could excuse the white choice if it was a pearl effect or tri-coat but this color is non metallic Maytag washing machine white... boring.

"But according to the hairsplitting M3 nerds on M3 post.com the 19s (with tires) actually weigh less."

I'm glad someone finally debunked this often overused myth that all larger rims are heavier than smaller ones.

I'm not a fan of the white and as chavis10 said it's a non-metallic white to boot. And yes, BMW still charges for metallic paint.

The red interior I like and would not hesitate to purchase a red interior on a car. It's nice that BMW still offers interior colors other than black, gray, and beige.

I think these 18" wheels look fine but would be a pain to clean with all those spokes and the little space between them.

You're complaining about a free car?

Also, I don't understand the obsession with huge rims. 18" is the perfect size for a small car like this.

I like the white exterior, would prefer a more mainstream interior color(black, gray or tan), and I think that the 18" size is a good choice although I am not a huge fan of the color or styling. BMW does make some really nice looking wheels, but these are not among my favorites. I think that by going to 19" wheels, even on a performance vehicle, you give up too much livability from a ride quality perspective, the tires are ridiculously expensive and it looks like a rubber band stretched over a too large wheel IMO.

"I'm glad someone finally debunked this often overused myth that all larger rims are heavier than smaller ones. "

those who want us to ride around on 80s era 15" wheels in the name of performance are going to have a fit when they read that.

carguy:

You are right about cleaning those wheels. Lots of spokes are a PAIN. I know firsthand.

I'm not a fan of white cars, and wouldn't own one unless somebody GAVE me a white M3. However, I do have several friends that feel white is the end-all, be-all car color. I don't get it. I wouldn't pick the red interior personally, but I do think it goes better with say a dark gray color. 19s would definitely be my choice.

White is a great color on some cars but BMW white looks great on everything they make. Really, they're the only manufacturer who gets it. White on a BMW makes me want one, and I'm not really a fan because soooo many people drive them for the wrong reason ('status" as opposed to driving experience). Even a white 135 might get me past the looks and make me plunk down the cash. A white M3 would be my dream car.

Sorry, but I think Oldham got it white...er, right!

"dougtheeng -- the wheels already look like they're coated with brake dust! I'm just not a fan of dark wheels. Not saying they have to be chrome, but a nice silver or diamond-cut polish with a good clearcoat would be the business. These wheels look dirty all the time."

True, but at least they look evenly coated. I'd rather have this dark rim look then the awful dirty/patchy/greasy look that comes from brake dust on a silver rim. I know how bad that can look, as my MINI has this problem and my rims are a pain to clean. I also just like the look of darker rims in general.

I don't have a problem with the color of the rims, more the size and the way they fill the wheel well.

The white isn't a bad color, but like Josh said, it hides the unique character lines in the car more than a different color might.

The compact segment cars look great in white - for example, I love the 1 series in white. But the 3 is a bit larger - and I would choose another color. But white is OK. As opposed to say a 7 series in white - just looks bloody imposing, and looks like a Taxi.

As far as the wheels are concerned I would stick with the 18s personally. I would look at these as the 80% solution - 80% of the time (or maybe, even 100% of the time for lots of folks), you will not be tracking the car. The minuscule loss in performance is compensated many times over by the improve in ride quality. And if you worry so much about performance, there are faster (or more tactile) cars out there for a similar amount of money. To me - the M3 is not a track car - it is too heavy. Personally, I would look for something lighter... like a Lotus. An M3 too me would be an everyday performance car that I could live with - and 18s are much easier to live with.

And I am not sure about the logic extended above -

@1487 - "19s should be standard on a $55k car. Thats what I say. I could go down a list of cheaper cars with standard 19" or 20" rims but I wont."

By that logic - what should be standard on a 911 GT3 - $112K, or the GT2 - $194K, coz both seem undersized at 19. Maybe 22's and 24's respectively.

On a similar note, I have been looking for a used 328 with the smaller rim sizes - 16s and 17s are fine for me, up here in potholed Chicago. But the problem is that BMW marketing wants you to upgrade and pay them more. So they make the base model rims real ugly... Sucks!

Would the 19's really fill the wheel well gap any better than the 18's, or are they just a plus-1 with the same overall diameter?

Agree on the white. Too blah for such an exciting car. Every M looks best in blue, IMHO. I appreciate the many colorful interior options, probably would go with a nice baseball glove/saddle brown color myself. As for wheels, I'd want to test drive both to see if ride comfort suffers with the bigger hoops. These particular wheels with the gray finish don't do it for me, they look dirty. Not that I'm into chrome either.

The 18's are ugly in both design and color. The first new M3 that I saw in person had the 18's and they just don't look sporty. But they do provide better ride compliance and possibly rotational inertia than the 19's (even if they are lighter). It's not just about weight.

By "dish", I'm assuming he's referring to the swooping concavity of the rear wheels, but that is not truly "dish".

txmatt1, 19's will have very similar overall diameter.

i love white colors! i do however agree on the red leather interior opinion of yours though :)

"By that logic - what should be standard on a 911 GT3 - $112K, or the GT2 - $194K, coz both seem undersized at 19. Maybe 22's and 24's respectively."

Don't be ridiculous. We know wheels top out at 19" or 20" for performance cars. You should not have to pay more to get the largest wheels and tires offered on a 3 series on a $55k M3. Period. When you can get 18" rims on a Malibu for $25k I would expect 19s on an M3. I don't think its too much to ask considering this is a performance sedan.

I think all the factory wheel choices for the current M3 are unattractive.

But I think the red leather is stunning.

"The minuscule loss in performance is compensated many times over by the improve in ride quality."

A plus one tire swap on a 3800 lbs car should NOT degrade the ride quality from acceptable to poor. Let's be realistic hear, it's not that big of a change. If the ride is harsh with 19"s then it's on the brink with 18"s too. Get some nice lightweight forged rims and you won't even know the difference (assuming similar quality tires).

Red leather is nice and distinctive and fitting for a performance car. A white exterior however ruins the lines and makes the car look like a Corolla. I would have gone for a dark metallic gray or plain black. As for the wheels; the only way to know which one you prefer is to drive a car that has 18s and drive car with 19s, if they feel the same, the car is tuned for them, you like the look, and you can afford it, get the 19s.

404 Dish Not Found. I've never been a fan of deep dish wheels anyway. I don't want something I can bake pizzas in.

Function > Bling

The 80's Testarossa looked awesome in white (Miami Vice). Same with the old BMW M1. And back then every respectable drug dealer's Countach was white.

The M3 in white is at least different from the all the silver and carbon black ones on LA's West side.

Have to get the 19's for both looks and performance. I would choose the metallic black with red interior or one of the two darker blues with black or silver interior.

I have an alpine white e90 M3. The car looks much better with the 19's and tinted windows. Defiantely more aggressive. European blackline taillights really clean up the rear as well. I have black interior with black leather carbon fiber trim. I think the fox red they use is really washed out looking, As for interior, colors are limited for m3. Black, red, silver and beige are the only choices offered. There is no brown.

Color choices always inspire love it/hate it debates. I, for one, love the white, hate the red, love the wheels, and feel ambivalent toward the optional 19" rims. To say all cars in this price range should come standard with at least 19" wheels is foolish at best. I think the M3 looks better with 18s, and I'm betting it feels slightly better in daily driving.

@1487 - I am just examining the logic that you extended in making the statement - and I have seen 22's & 24's being fitted to some cars and trucks out there. I wanted to check if your logic extended in that direction :-)

@chavis10 - the reason we moved to pneumatic tires - sometimes very early in this century - is because the air acts as a natural suspension and provides some comfort - i.e. ride quality. With larger rims - you get shorter stiffer sidewalls - and less of this cushioning. Unless you are recommending that the entire external diameter of the car tire be expanded too?? Perhaps? I believe there is a direct correlation between rim size and comfort, holding the external diameter of the tire constant - every other review talks about this trade-off when evaluating ride vs. handling. Are you suggesting that there is no such link.

As far as looks go - the bigger rims do look better - which is my pet peeve against BMW. They don't make nice looking rims in smaller sizes - and would like our more of our money. It is a marketing trick - designed to make suckers out of us.

There is a limit to how large FACTORY rims are going to be on a car. That said, 18s are no longer exclusive or "big" in today's world. The Cobalt comes with 18s. If BMW has 19s available for the M3 they should be standard. I was not suggesting that a GT3 should have rims twice as large as the M3 simply because it costs more. In this day and age few performance cars with high price tags should come with anything less than 19s.

"@chavis10 - the reason we moved to pneumatic tires - sometimes very early in this century - is because the air acts as a natural suspension and provides some comfort - i.e. ride quality. With larger rims - you get shorter stiffer sidewalls - and less of this cushioning. Unless you are recommending that the entire external diameter of the car tire be expanded too?? Perhaps? I believe there is a direct correlation between rim size and comfort, holding the external diameter of the tire constant - every other review talks about this trade-off when evaluating ride vs. handling. Are you suggesting that there is no such link. "

Umm.. thanks for the history lesson but you are completely missing the point. Going from a 245/40 to a 245/35 is not that big of a deal. If you do the calculations, difference in the sidewall dimension between the 19" wheel/tire versus the standard 18"s is .52". Considering the overall diameter of the tire is ~ 22", a .5" difference will barely be noticeable IF the tires are not to blame and IF the larger wheel is not substantially heavier than the smaller wheel. Most people who hate large wheels will attribute any unfavorable ride characteristic to larger wheels but none take the time to understand how tiny the difference really is. The culprit is usually larger unsprung weight as opposed to less impact absorbtion in the tire. Ultra low profile tires will usually recommend relatively high tire pressure causing less deflection in the tire regardless of sidewall height. This in turn transfers more of the force into the suspension. If the unsprung mass is high, then the suspension is slower to react and won't affectively absorb the impact passing instead it into the body (ie rough ride). So I stand by my statement that implying a performance car rides good with 18" wheels and rides bad with 19" plus one is false.

In these days of rubber band tires on gigantic shiny rims, I usually select the smaller rim choice, so I'd definitely have the 18s...though I am disappointed that they're heavier than the 19s. Also, I like white on most cars and that includes the M3.

"To say all cars in this price range should come standard with at least 19" wheels is foolish at best"

What is foolish is that BMW charges $1200 for the 19" upgrade. If this is the ultimate driving machine, why are max performance tires optional? The difference in performance between the 19" M3 that IL tested earlier and this LT car should really make it clear that the standard wheel/tire package yields meager results. If I get a CTS-V, I get the best wheels/tires for the job standard (oh yeah, they're 19"s). Nissan 370Z gets 19" rims in the sport package for less than $40k and they want $68k for this car with this rubber?

There is a practical aspect to this beyond the "cool" factor.

The smaller wheels have taller sidewalls (or they would have to change the rear end gearing) which means they are smoother riding and can take curbs and road debris to a greater extent without tire damage.

I purposely ordered my M3 (2008 coupe) with the 18s, although got almost all other options, just for this reason.

The car has no spare and a little more resistance to tire damage and smoother ride (for the wife) made the choice for me.

Being a belt and suspenders kind of guy, I also got a spare and jack kit... LOL

I have the 18s and I chose that solely because the 19s look too similar to the 19s that were available on the E46 M3. Never liked that design. However, seeing some folks that powder coat their 19s to the same gun metal color, I am sort of regretting that decision.

@chavis10 Either rims get the same Max performance tires, which is the PS2. Both rims have the exact same widths and will accommodate wider tires for better grip if necessary. For track junkies, I think this is more important.

Alpine White just so happens to be the M3's launch feature color... so somebody in BMW Design must like it! I was in Munich right after the launch, and the plaza in front of the BMW headquarters was lined up with white M3's. The Munich aiport also had a couple white M3's on display.

Regarding the wheels, I definitely like the 19's a lot better, but can understand why the 18's are standard. The BMW forums are filled with stories of potholes and bent rims. I suppose to quiet the haters on here it'd be better if the 19's were standard and the 18's were a no-cost downgrade.

"What is foolish is that BMW charges $1200 for the 19" upgrade. If this is the ultimate driving machine, why are max performance tires optional? The difference in performance between the 19" M3 that IL tested earlier and this LT car should really make it clear that the standard wheel/tire package yields meager results. If I get a CTS-V, I get the best wheels/tires for the job standard (oh yeah, they're 19"s). Nissan 370Z gets 19" rims in the sport package for less than $40k and they want $68k for this car with this rubber?"

Max performance tires are standard on the M3, regardless of wheel choice.

I would like to know why GM charges $3400 for a sport seat upgrade on the CTS-V. The standard seats are mushy blobs with not enough lateral support, on a $58K 556-hp performance car. I love the Recaros and would no doubt get them, but $3400? The M3 gives you awesome seats standard, no need to shell out $3400 to de-blob. There. Tit for tat.

Bimmerjay- I would agree that $3400 is ridiculous for the seats but GM doesn't really feature sport seats in any of their cars (except the Cobalt/HHR SS) so there's no way to spread that cost. Since we are going tit for tat, the V offers a no cost automatic transmission while the dual clutcher in the M3 cost $2900. The V also has adjustable damping, iPod hookup, premium sound and keyless access standard while those features are optional on the M3.

Bimmer:

Its a little rich for a BMW fan to be criticizing Cadillac for option prices. $3400 is expensive but they are Recaro seats. Let me know what comparable cars offer Recaros STANDARD or as a CHEAP option. Let me know how that research goes. Offering sport seats doesn't mean the regular seats are bad, it means that if you plan to put the CTS-V on a track you probably need the aggressive seats. Numerous BMW models dont come with sport seats standard. Also, do we want to get into the other features that are standard on the V but optional on the M3? The two cars have the same loaded price even though the M3 has a base MSRP that is about $5k less. Why? Lack of standard kit on the M3.

@chavis10 -

Thanks for the lesson in automotive engineering - but it still would not explain bent rims? Or does it? (Shrugg...)

Anyway, I'd like some air-sprung tire wall between the rim and the road. One reason why I would not buy super large rims for road going cars - 18s are larger than necessary, and 19s are an overkill on a 4 door car. Now I have 19s on my RR - and that's fine. And this is the same reason why I would replace my run-flats immediately with tires that have less rigid tire walls.

Do agree with you on the tragedy that it is - where 18s weigh more than the 19s. Here are the statistics...

19 tire plus wheel
Front: 47.0
Rear: 51.5

18 tire plus wheel
49.05 Front
52.10 Rear

But, for a 3800 lb car, the weight difference is something like 2 lbs on the front axle (where the heavier engine sits) - and 0.6 lbs on the rear. That's what - 0.07% - in total. WOW! Its huge. Would change my life!

Thanks, but no thanks. I'll keep the 18s, and the $1200.

"Thanks for the lesson in automotive engineering - but it still would not explain bent rims? Or does it? (Shrugg...)"

Bent rims can be the result from the wheel protruding farther than tire on a lot of cars. In performance cars, you will notice extra wide wheels relative to tire section width compared to say an SUV. For example, an SUV might run 265mm tires on an 8" wheel. However, a performance car might run a 225mm tire on an 8" wheel, see my point? Bent rims could also result from a fragile wheel design. Sometimes, forged rims can experience greater malleabilaty because they may be less dense(so an impact may cause more damage). Given that forging yields a stronger part, less metal can actually be used for the same strength spec relative to casting. While this may result in lower mass, those lightweight wheels may be more susceptible to road damage. And again, higher pressure of low-pro tires transfers more force into the wheel, suspension and eventually the body. Don't take my word for it though, go read a textbook.

"But, for a 3800 lb car, the weight difference is something like 2 lbs on the front axle (where the heavier engine sits) - and 0.6 lbs on the rear. That's what - 0.07% - in total. WOW! Its huge. Would change my life! "

Doesn't seem like you understand the difference between sprung and unsprung mass. When you do, we can continue this discussion.

The fact remains that the 19" wheel/tire option weighs LESS than the 18" standard offering. That extra unsprung would have a more direct affect on the ride/handling as opposed to the .52" loss in sidewall height of the 19" package- PERIOD.

While I appreciate your zeal, your rationale is flawed.

@chavis10 -

couldn't have a meeting of the minds here my friend. I am truly sorry...

But tell you what - Lotus just announced a new base version of the Elise - a purist edition is what they have termed it. It comes shod with 16s up front and 17s at the back... and for a day on the track, I'd take that over this M3 ANY day... note the special emphasis on 'ANY'!

And if you look at the pictures in high res - here - http://www.autoblog.com/2009/05/01/lotus-releasing-elise-purist-edition-for-43-995/
- you will notice a nice supple tire wall.

So my rims should be OK - and given that these are 16s & 17s, they should hopefully keep you happy with the lower unsprung mass (which I do understand - and on that metric, the BMW 19s are indeed lighter than the 18s - 4% up front, and a full 1.1% at the back - so Victory is yours - But, I will keep my $1200, thank you).