Skip to main content

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review

Photos by: Graham MacNeil & Kevin Doubleday

Imagine a world where only two cars exist and have ever existed; the BMW M4 and the Toyota Corolla. Assuming cost isn't a factor, just about every car buyer who has even a remote interest in high performance driving would take the M4. There would be no complaints about how it well goes, stops, or turns, how it handles, or even how it sounds. All those aspects are better in the M4; miles better, in fact. Next to a Corolla, an M4 is a super car, and a darn good one. But replace the Corolla with another car in this imaginary world, say a Lamborghini Huracan for an instance, and all of a sudden, an M4 becomes pedestrian. Perspective could make or break a car, even a good one. And that, perhaps, is the biggest contributing factor in the impression that the M4 left on me.

I haven't driven any Huracans, unfortunately. But on the same day I drove this BMW M4, I drove an E46 Dinan S1 M3 and a Cayman GT4. Comparisons to the GT4 in my mind were inevitable, but a bit unfair so I will leave those locked up there for now. But Comparisons to the E46 M3? They aren't only fair, they are necessary. After all, what is the point of redesigning and upgrading cars if the replacements are no better? Now, rest assured, the M4 beats that E46 M3 in every measurable way and it does so with ease, probably even the highest Dinan versions of the same vintage. I couldn't find a test of a Dinan S1 M3 but I found a Car & Driver test of an E46 Dinan S2 M3. Here's how it stacks up to an M4, both as tested by Car and Driver. I also included a test of a DCT M4 since the one I drove wasn't a manual.

M4 Manual M4 DCT E46 Dinan S2 M3
425 hp
425 hp
361 hp
406 lb-ft
406 lb-ft
282 lb-ft
3,556 lb.
3,480 lb.
0-60 mph
4.1 s
3.9 s
4.6 s
0-100 mph
9.0 s
8.6 s
11.6 s
0-130 mph
15.1 s
14.6 s
21.1 s
5-60 mph
4.6 s
4.2 s
5.4 s
1/4 mile
  12.4 s @ 117 mph  
  12.1 s @ 119 mph  
  13.2 s @ 107 mph  
300 ft lat-g
0.98 g
0.98 g
0.96 g
braking 70-0 mph  
151 ft
151 ft
163 ft

Both M4's tested had the competition package and the carbon brakes. The M4 I drove had neither, so I expect it to give up some ground in handling and braking compared to test numbers. But the E46 M3 I drove was on Hankook Ventus Evo V12 vs the OEM Michelins, and it was an S1, not an S2 like the one tested, so it would likely give up some braking and grip compared to the E46 test numbers too. From behind the wheel, the M4’s felt like it was a lot more capable - more solid/rigid, higher grip limits, stronger brakes, stiffer. And, of course, it felt faster. A LOT faster.

Although there's a big gap, the numbers alone don't even tell the complete story. The S55 engine is a monster. The Cayman GT4 I drove that same day also had a trap speed of 117 mph in C/D tests, same as the M4 manual. Considering that the GT4 is also manual, that should mean it's basically just as fast between gear shifts as the M4 I drove, with the only advantage in the DCT test numbers attributable to gear shifts. But from behind the wheel, the M4 feels a lot stronger. 425 hp and 406 lb-ft? I don't believe it. No way. Maybe I was intoxicated by the boost and torque hitting early, but it feels so much stronger than those numbers. Saying you need to be careful with the throttle is a massive understatement. I suspect this car has close to 500 crank hp. Full throttle out of turns right at the apex? No, not gonna happen. Forget full throttle out of turns, going WOT in 3rd gear in the back straight, I had traction control light flashing almost the entire way until 4th gear. Nothing in this car, not one thing, leaves as strong an impression as the engine. And this is where things start to disappoint..

An M4 where the most memorable aspect is overwhelming power? "M4" doesn't have quite the same ring to it.. but that's an M3 as far the last four BMW 3-series generations are concerned. It's just not right. A friend of mine had a C7 Corvette with the Z51 package. He sold it and got an M4 because he often needed to take his other car (which had back seats) instead of the Corvette so that he can take his kids to school in the morning and rarely drove the Corvette as a result. On track, he found the Corvette to be more manageable and it was easier to modulate (and use more of) the throttle in it. We are talking about a Corvette here having a better power/chassis balance than an M3/M4.. it's sacrilege. The way the car feels is also all wrong.

Compared to the E46, there's such a big disconnect between what you feel and what is going on outside. It's an odd feeling, because the suspension feels stiffer, which is typically associated with more body movement and NVH, but the driving feels numb. Climb out of an E46 M3 after a track session and jump into an M4, you'll be blown away by the progress in performance but you'll wonder if you've just got into a simulator.. the last little bit may be an exaggeration, I admit, but it's necessary to make the point. I think I read that the F80/F82 M3/M4 have solid rear subframe mounts. That should transmit a whole lot of NVH and feedback to your seat of the pants, but it doesn't seem to. The rear axle should feel like it's glued to your butt. It doesn't.

The steering weight and feedback also feel 100% artificial compared to the E46. Steering feel has been a sore point for BMW's for a generation or two now across the range - 3-series and 5-series, for both M and non-M cars. Here's what I think is happening: BMW takes all the forces coming back from the front wheels through the steering and filters out what you don't want. Things like vibrations, kick-back, responses to bumps and dips, etc. Then, it adds weight based on what the computer thinks the front tires are doing. In theory, it's great. You get rid of the stuff you don't want and get the information you do, but the end result is a very synthetic feel. It's almost like playing a video game with a really (really) good steering wheel controller.

I can't quite put my finger on why it feels wrong overall. I test drove a 335i xDrive M-sport a while back and found the same issues with steering and feel compared to the E46. I did a little bit of digging into some chassis specs/dimensions in that article to try and figure out why it doesn't feel like the E46, but I'm not sure if those differences alone explain all that is lacking. They do shed some light on the issues, though. As far as steering goes at least, I read multiple articles/interviews with BMW engineers who said the way the steering is now is what their customers want. Pity.

Fortunately, if you can get past some of the missing intangible essence that used to make an M3 what it is - the power/chassis balance and excellent feel - there is a really good car underneath. It is a lot of fun to drive. Responses are sharp. It's very predictable and never feels like it's going to bite, the latter a magnificent feat given the overwhelming power. Braking is very good and easy to modulate. There is power everywhere in the rev range. Comments about the noise are generally left unsaid.. but there is a narrow slice high in the rpm range that, at WOT, reminds you that there is an excellent BMW M straight six behind the turbos and the noise through the speakers. And the traction control system is very good. It doesn't feel reactive as it does in a lot of cars (including the E46 M3). You don't get the sense that you've overdone it and it is reining you back, it's just seamlessly working in the background to limit spinning.

But at the end of the day, it was very difficult for me to love it. I was very impressed by the capability and I definitely enjoyed driving it. I would never dream of turning down another opportunity to drive one, especially on track. But would I buy one, with my own money? The M3 would be extremely tempting if I were shopping in that price range. Not many sedans in that range that offer what it does and BMW seems to still do some things really well - combine practicality, usability, and performance in a really fun package. But if I were shopping for a coupe, there are many better options IMO than an M4, including its ancestor; the E46 M3.

Follow Ram's Eye The Track Guy on Facebook and Instagram!


  1. This is nice content man, you deserve the top spot in google search if im totally honest with you. Why the fuck doesn't google rank this higher?

    Such piece of gold can't be found everywhere I tell you that, I got chills just from reading the second paragraph and by the fourth one I was almost in tears. My only recommendation, though, this site right here expands a lil bit more on the N55 engine used in the M4, it also has a nice setup for those interested. You might want to check it out, but all in all, incredible man, hats off to you, have a good day.


Post a Comment

Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.

Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.

🔥 Most Visited This Week

2004 Audi TT 3.2 Quattro DSG Track Review

Before getting into this, I have to confess something... I had never driven an Audi TT before. Not until this one, anyway. But that hasn't stopped me from forming an opinion about it from the comforts of my own couch while reading and watching reviews online. After all, if you've never done that, do you even know what the point of the internet is? Now, we all interpret reviews differently. Call it confirmation bias if you will, but if you like a car, you'll read a review and look at the positives as what makes the car great and the negatives are but a few quibbles you have to live with. If you don't like a car, the positives are a few things the manufacturer got right while screwing up everything else. It's a bit harsh to put the TT in the latter category, but that's where it ended up for me... I never took the TT seriously. The problem with the TT for me isn't that it's a Golf underneath, per se. There is nothing wrong with a performance car sharing a

Falken Azenis RT615k+ Street and Track Review

Last year, I picked up a 2009 Lancer Ralliart to do a long term test with it as a dual duty track/daily. One of the first things I knew I was going to do was put a decent set of tires on it. The car came without OEM wheels which was actually good because I didn't have to hesitate about getting a good set of aftermarket wheels to support going wider. Thankfully, my friends at YST Auto Halifax  set me up with a great set of Superspeed RF03RR wheels. The Wheels I had never even heard of Superspeed but I trusted the good folk at YST Auto who mentioned some customer cars running on track with them. These wheels are rotary forged which is basically a prerequisite to be taken seriously in this market populated by companies like TSW and Fast Wheels. The wheels looked like a high quality, well finished wheel and each had a "QC" check sticker on. Just for appearances? Maybe, but I found no defects. The wheels seemed easy to balance (didn't need many weights) and at 18.1 lb. f

GTR vs Evo X vs STI: which has the best AWD system?

A few weeks ago, I made a post explaining  mainstream AWD system types and how they compare , pros and cons, etc. including some simple diagrams to show where the power goes and how much. As promised, this post will focus on specific cars and what AWD systems they use, especially ones that that have more or less been defined by their AWD systems, and the best place to start may be with a bombshell; the Nissan GT-R. Nissan GT-R (R35) The GT-R has built a reputation around having monster traction and very approachable performance, thanks to its AWD system - Advanced Total Traction Engineering System for All-Terrain (ATTESA) - and what it can do for you. But the GT-R doesn't actually use the most mechanically sophisticated type of AWD systems discussed in the previous article, namely a "true" AWD with a centre differential. Instead, it uses a clutch pack to transfer power. RWD-based clutch-type AWD schematic - Rams Eye The Track Guy © The R32, R33, and R34 Sky

Limited Slip Differential Types Compared

BMW M2 equipped with an eLSD - BMW © A few weeks ago, I posted about traditional clutch-type limited slip diffs (LSD's) and how they work. You can read about those in the previous post: How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track . But as you might know or have learned from reading the article, they aren't without their faults, which means engineers are always working to get around those limitations. You may not be surprised to learn that something like the Ferrari 488 GTB doesn't use a traditional limited slip diff, but it's not limited to super cars, far from it. Cars like the Golf GTI, the Civic Type R, various Mustangs, Corvettes, and BMW M cars, and even the Lexus RC F and GS F, all avoid a traditional limited slip diff in favour of one of these technologies. To keep things simple, I'll focus on two wheel drive vehicles. The vast (vast) majority of principles apply to all and 4 wheel drive vehicles, but there are some subtle differences that I'll