Originally Posted by tuna_hp
Oh I'm not saying that FI engines aren't a desirable compromise, I'm just saying that BMW PR is full of shit. They're purely corporate-minded. They are just going to say whatever makes them look best.
BMW PR was very negative on forced induction when some competitors were beginning to utilize it, especially on smaller engines. MB with their "Kompressor" engines in some of their smaller cars, Audi with its 2.0T and 2.7T engines, and of course porsche had been selling their Turbo for a long time. BMW wanted to be seen as spiritually closer to Ferrari with their high revving engines.
Back then they were only selling NA engines so they claimed that FI engines inevitably lead to unacceptably compromised handling. Now they only have FI engines so they claim that NA is an unacceptable compromise on fuel economy.
Don't get me wrong I love a high revving NA engine. The M3 V8 was almost perfect, but maybe in the wrong(too heavy) body. That's all. A 458 anytime over a MP 4-12C, the Porsche engines NA are great etc.
My current FI engine does higher mpg than my former M3 NA V8.
You can use the higher torque to stay in a higher gear than the NA M V8, press the throttle less and still accellerate in the same or faster way than that NA engine. Which makes it in THAT particular comparison the higher mpg engine. Pedal to the metal the differences get smaller or dissapear of course
But I 'm not 24/7 on a track/WOT. Don't know about you
The F10 M5 irl is getting higher MPG than its predecessor E60 M5....
The RWD vs AWD debate: Make it an option to choose AWD... RWD also in the snow (with the M Diff and PROPER wintertyres on ) much more fun and more than enough traction but better playable as well. On a track we already know the answer.(ie 1M vs RS3)