Can't wait to put M badges on my 4.6is...

[powers1]

A friend of mine also got the same letter
Officially ,it has been said that the 4.6is was going to be tagged as an "M" car but BMW run into legal issues as they wanted to name the 4.6is a MX5 ,and that model name already owned by Mazda!!!
Like the OP ,I would never stick an "M" badge on my X5 but I dont agree that you need to do a 12sec quarter to be an "M"!Loads of "M" cars that dont manage that!My E30 M3 didnt!
Thats my contribution to the thread

[Turbo_Bimmer]

Originally Posted by powers1

A friend of mine also got the same letter
Officially ,it has been said that the 4.6is was going to be tagged as an "M" car but BMW run into legal issues as they wanted to name the 4.6is a MX5 ,and that model name already owned by Mazda!!!
Like the OP ,I would never stick an "M" badge on my X5 but I dont agree that you need to do a 12sec quarter to be an "M"!Loads of "M" cars that dont manage that!My E30 M3 didnt!
Thats my contribution to the thread

I would like to see that letter. If someone could scan that letter (with personal stuff removed).

[mobilejo]

Originally Posted by Turbo_Bimmer

I would like to see that letter. If someone could scan that letter (with personal stuff removed).

Which letter? The OP posted a scan of the letter reffering to the 4.6 as an X5 M in his first post. I presume you are talking about a letter regarding the whole 'MX5' naming issue?

I personally don't believe that. Do you really think if BMW wanted to give a car M status it would be prevented from doing so PURELY on the basis of that naming issue? I doubt it - they would have just called it an XM5 or an X5 M (which they of course did recently). So why would that have been a problem back then? BMW would have known about the existence of the MX5 as they've been out for ever, and would never have even thought twice about naming their own car after a Mazda even at the initial brains storming stage, let alone let it get to the level of legal troubles.

Also, don't M cars actually get breathed on by the M division? Meaning that if the 4.6 was ever produced with the intention of it being an M they would have been built with M specific parts. And so it wouldn't have been possible to drop the M in a last minute re-brand? Just thinking out loud

[Turbo_Bimmer]

Originally Posted by mobilejo

Which letter? The OP posted a scan of the letter reffering to the 4.6 as an X5 M in his first post.

OK, I'll check tonight, since at work many sites (pics hosting) are blocked.
Thanks.

[Quicksilver]

Originally Posted by cmyX6go

You communicated just fine. Reading is fundamental and some don't bother to read.

100%

[powers1]

Originally Posted by mobilejo

Which letter? The OP posted a scan of the letter reffering to the 4.6 as an X5 M in his first post. I presume you are talking about a letter regarding the whole 'MX5' naming issue?

I personally don't believe that. Do you really think if BMW wanted to give a car M status it would be prevented from doing so PURELY on the basis of that naming issue? I doubt it - they would have just called it an XM5 or an X5 M (which they of course did recently). So why would that have been a problem back then? BMW would have known about the existence of the MX5 as they've been out for ever, and would never have even thought twice about naming their own car after a Mazda even at the initial brains storming stage, let alone let it get to the level of legal troubles.

Also, don't M cars actually get breathed on by the M division? Meaning that if the 4.6 was ever produced with the intention of it being an M they would have been built with M specific parts. And so it wouldn't have been possible to drop the M in a last minute re-brand? Just thinking out loud

You missed the point ,mate!I never said there was letter,just said that it was ".officially said" that Bmw would have wanted to name it MX5 but legally couldnt as that name already been taken.MX5 would be the logicall name to call it,since Bmw already had M1,M3,M5 and M6...... ..so "IS" ,it was.

[mobilejo]

Originally Posted by powers1

You missed the point ,mate!I never said there was letter

My comment about the letter was directed at a different poster who had simply said "I would like to see that letter". I never said there was a letter and there was no suggestion of one existing, I was merely asking him what letter he wanted to see. Did he want to see a letter about the whole 'MX5' naming thing? I was just asking him what he was referring to, not implying that you said there was one.

Originally Posted by powers1

,just said that it was ".officially said" that Bmw would have wanted to name it MX5 but legally couldnt as that name already been taken.MX5 would be the logicall name to call it,since Bmw already had M1,M3,M5 and M6...... ..so "IS" ,it was.

Now I can believe that BMW might have wanted to name it MX5 if they ever decided to make an M version of an X5 - it would make sense. But what you said before was

Originally Posted by powers1

Officially ,it has been said that the 4.6is was going to be tagged as an "M" car but BMW run into legal issues as they wanted to name the 4.6is a MX5 ,and that model name already owned by Mazda

And I'm just saying its hard to believe that if was ever intended to really be an M (which would mean M specific parts and everything) that they would actually have totally dropped those plans just because they would have had to call it XM5 instead of MX5.

HOWEVER, thats not to say it never happened and I'm certainly not saying you're lying, it would have just been a crazy move by BMW IMHO if that was the case - to be thrown off because of the placement of an X and an M

[powers1]

Wow....you going way off topic mate !
Let me make a simpler statement for your better understanding and to also get back on topic.
All I am trying to simplY say is that Bmw would probably have called it an MX5if Mazda hadnt already had the rights to the name.Thats it!!!!
Not just my opinion,but generally believed by those in the trade.The 4.6is was more than the deserving the true "M" badge because of its performance and handling!
The 4.6is came out to compete with the AMG ML E55,now we all know that its always "M" cars that compete with AMG!

Going back to the OP topic,is it right to out an "M" badge on a 4.6is..Of course not!The 4.6is has its own unique "is" character,which "lesser" X5s try to emmulate,so its a bit like people with "lesser" bmw cars trying to emmulate "M" versions....

[mobilejo]

Originally Posted by powers1

All I am trying to simplY say is that Bmw would probably have called it an MX5if Mazda hadnt already had the rights to the name.Thats it!!!!

And all i'm saying is - that's wrong. I don't see where I went off topic, if you could comprehend that the topic is whether the 4.6 was ever going to be an M car, then you would understand that what I am saying is bang on the point - Every M car comes through the M division. The 4.6 did not, hence it was not an M. If they were ever planning to make it an M car, then that idea was dropped long BEFORE production. Because had it been an M car you would have seen some different parts on it that were produced for an M car.

BMW don't just decide to stick an M on a car and then thats it - its an M car. There's a whole lot more to it than that and you seem to totally misunderstand that

e.g. new X5 M - no problems with the name there. Totally different car, proper M car with proper M parts. Compare that to the 4.6 which although is a great car, could not have wore the M name as it simply not an M. And i'm not talking about any ridiculous fluffy ideas of 'worthyness' from 'industry experts' based on power/handling or whatever. I'm talking about the fact that it didn't come through the M division!

[powers1]

I understand you,what you say makes sense!
If the "M" division had nothing at all to do with the 4.6is,then yes ,I agree it was never intended to be an ""M" car..but boy does it go and handle like one