BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   BMW M3 and BMW M4 Forum > BMW F80 M3 / F82 M4 Technical Topics > Engine / Drivetrain / Exhaust / Bolt-ons

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      06-13-2012, 07:32 AM   #23
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,838
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uli_HH View Post
3.200lbs
I think it is impossible for $70k car built on the F30 chassis.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2012, 07:41 AM   #24
HiMario#30
Registered
HiMario#30's Avatar
Italy
0
Rep
3
Posts

 
Drives: BMW M3 E92 JetBlack DKG
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Italy-Monza

iTrader: (0)

Hi Guys...Nice to meet U!!...I'm new here.
So, I hope in an almost 450Hp,
due the fact M3's competitors like Audi-Mercedes, gets at least 450Hp.
But above all, I hope in lightness, good amount of torque since the beginning and in a mighty and durable breaking system, maybe as powerful as GT-R has it, not like current one...too much weak during a track day.

Anyway, hope even the new line will be aggressive and muscle, like E46 was.

CIAO CIAO
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2012, 10:35 AM   #25
Uli_HH
Lieutenant
Uli_HH's Avatar
Germany
32
Rep
572
Posts

 
Drives: AW M3 E90)/ 523i Touring
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hamburg Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
I think it is impossible for $70k car built on the F30 chassis.
You are totally right ... it is impossible for an car build on the F30 chassis!

But none says that the next M3 would be build on the (steel) F30 chassis ... it would be build on the F80 chassis and its High-Strange-Steel + Carbon-Compount material matrix ... it has little to do with the AG F30 except the overall-look of the car and its dimensions!

And if you think about the carbonparts of the F80, you shouldn´t think at carbonroofs like the old M3 or the new M6 ... I guess little or nothing of this parts would be visible because they consist of parts such as shaft drive / transmission tunnel, lock-makers, engine and luggage compartment rear wall, crash boxes and wheel mounts and axle stools. All parts that must be structurally strong and solid and so are relatively heavy in steel.
If you now imagine that this parts are produced of very light and relatively favorable industry-carbon composite (two layers of carbon with a layer of cardboard / paper in between) , you can easily imagine the weight savings in these dimensions.
The produced in relatively small quantities F80M3/F82M4 will be the first application of this design before getting it in the next 7-way into the AG mass production.

So ~3.200lbs seems not impossible!

Greets Uli_HH

Last edited by Uli_HH; 06-13-2012 at 10:41 AM.
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2012, 10:39 AM   #26
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,838
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uli_HH View Post
But none says that the next M3 would be build on the (steel) F30 chassis ... it would be build on the F80 chassis an its High-Strange-Steel + Carbon-Compount material matrix ... it has little to do with the AG F30 except the overall-look of the car and its dimensions!
And to be clear, for a selling price of $70k, I think it is impossible to offer a 3200lb car based on carbon-intesive version of the F30 chassis.

I would believe it for a $100k car, perhaps.

What I can definitely believe in is a ~3500lb M3 based on a carbon-kissed F30 chassis (called, as we already know, the F80).
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2012, 10:50 AM   #27
Uli_HH
Lieutenant
Uli_HH's Avatar
Germany
32
Rep
572
Posts

 
Drives: AW M3 E90)/ 523i Touring
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hamburg Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
And to be clear, for a selling price of $70k, I think it is impossible to offer a 3200lb car based on carbon-intesive version of the F30 chassis.

I would believe it for a $100k car, perhaps.

What I can definitely believe in is a ~3500lb M3 based on a carbon-kissed F30 chassis (called, as we already know, the F80).

We have to wait and see ... but I think - if not the F80M3 still gets the V6 Biturbo - that the weight of the vehicle will be the revolutionary new and the surprise the officials promised. And there is only less than 3.3oo lbs really interesting. ... 3.500lbs would be nothing special.
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2012, 02:00 PM   #28
mapezzul
Special Agent
mapezzul's Avatar
United_States
26
Rep
1,737
Posts

 
Drives: Depends on the day!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bavaria

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uli_HH View Post
You are totally right ... it is impossible for an car build on the F30 chassis!

But none says that the next M3 would be build on the (steel) F30 chassis ... it would be build on the F80 chassis and its High-Strange-Steel + Carbon-Compount material matrix ... it has little to do with the AG F30 except the overall-look of the car and its dimensions!

And if you think about the carbonparts of the F80, you shouldn´t think at carbonroofs like the old M3 or the new M6 ... I guess little or nothing of this parts would be visible because they consist of parts such as shaft drive / transmission tunnel, lock-makers, engine and luggage compartment rear wall, crash boxes and wheel mounts and axle stools. All parts that must be structurally strong and solid and so are relatively heavy in steel.
If you now imagine that this parts are produced of very light and relatively favorable industry-carbon composite (two layers of carbon with a layer of cardboard / paper in between) , you can easily imagine the weight savings in these dimensions.
The produced in relatively small quantities F80M3/F82M4 will be the first application of this design before getting it in the next 7-way into the AG mass production.

So ~3.200lbs seems not impossible!

Greets Uli_HH
You are right in the sense that CF will be used more. Not necessarily solely with the cardboard as you mentioned- high strength areas require an Aramid core if going the dual layer sandwich route. Certain areas of the car can not be changed from the F30 because of homologation. The CF cardboard can be used in areas like the seat backs, center console etc. CF is also not the only solution to weight- there are ways to make stronger lighter plastics for interior uses and E-Glass for parts like the trunk lid and such.

Combining CF and the unibody is more than likely a no go as well, considering the cost of repairs and the needed retooling at the factory, that would be an entire extra step to unite via adhesive the clips and that is not cost effective or practical. When the E60/61/63 were being made they were all made on the same line because of this added step of bonding the then aluminum to the steel. That is why BMW has moved on... not cost effective. BMWi is different as the chassis and passenger cell are separate then joined in a process that was designed to be that way from the get go and will be assembled in its own manner. If M develops its own chassis completely the cost per unit would be in the stratosphere- M numbers are not even remotely practical to do that with unless you are talking halo car. If (and I have no indication they will from my connections) I would be blown away and at the same time sad because each car would either be out of reach for me or being sold at a loss....

Garching is not capable of building M3s in a large volume so that is out of the question, it will be built on the regular line outside of special editions.

The drive shaft and half shafts will be much lighter than now (more on that in the future), as will the rear diff, wheels and suspension components. Decreasing unsprung weight as has been mentioned before will be a huge target and the new designs of the CF roof.

Sure if pricing was no object they could build something unthinkable but they have a hard number to hit and that will be in line with current market expectations and still be revolutionary.

BMW M and parts suppliers have been working closely on some of the developments with this car... some of the tech is not new but the effective use of the tech has been adapted for use in a daily driver. Other components are already in competitors products.

The engine will feature some great additions that people are still debating but just remember that performance and efficiency must improve. There are some sacred parts of this car that must be made more efficient in terms of emissions and fuel economy (not always the same issues).

Appreciate 0
      06-13-2012, 02:01 PM   #29
mapezzul
Special Agent
mapezzul's Avatar
United_States
26
Rep
1,737
Posts

 
Drives: Depends on the day!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bavaria

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
And to be clear, for a selling price of $70k, I think it is impossible to offer a 3200lb car based on carbon-intesive version of the F30 chassis.

I would believe it for a $100k car, perhaps.

What I can definitely believe in is a ~3500lb M3 based on a carbon-kissed F30 chassis (called, as we already know, the F80).
Keeping it real as always...
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2012, 09:26 PM   #30
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

I agree with many of your guesses/statements above but this one below is almost for sure incorrect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapezzul View Post
The drive shaft and half shafts will be much lighter than now (more on that in the future), as will the rear diff, wheels and suspension components. Decreasing unsprung weight as has been mentioned before will be a huge target and the new designs of the CF roof.
The engine will have much more torque and this will require stronger components in much of the driveline. Without very expensive composites stronger generally means heavier.

Wheels: Existing wheels are quite light. New car may get 19" standard and 20" optional. From the base 18" wheels this would also likely be a weight increase.

Suspension: Without advanced and very expensive use of composites it will be challenging to save much weight compared to the existing cars forged aluminum parts.

The existing CF roof itself is very light and not even a structural component (which contributes to its already low weight).

I agree BMW is going to press very hard to control, manage and likely to reduce the weight of the new M3. It just is most likely not going to come from the areas you have mentioned.
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2012, 11:14 PM   #31
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uli_HH View Post
And if you think about the carbonparts of the F80, you shouldn´t think at carbonroofs like the old M3 or the new M6 ... I guess little or nothing of this parts would be visible because they consist of parts such as shaft drive / transmission tunnel, lock-makers, engine and luggage compartment rear wall, crash boxes and wheel mounts and axle stools. All parts that must be structurally strong and solid and so are relatively heavy in steel.
If you now imagine that this parts are produced of very light and relatively favorable industry-carbon composite (two layers of carbon with a layer of cardboard / paper in between) , you can easily imagine the weight savings in these dimensions.
The produced in relatively small quantities F80M3/F82M4 will be the first application of this design before getting it in the next 7-way into the AG mass production.

So ~3.200lbs seems not impossible!
I'd bet against 3200 lb, again strongly bet against it.

Cheap core materials like cardboard can provide stiffness improvements in large sheet like structures but would not be used for more complex mechanical/structural type shapes. Due to language difficulties (wheel mounts, axle stools ?) I am not positive, but many of the items you list do not seem like good candidates for replacement by CF, certainly not a CF/cardboard sandwich.

We keep hearing about the capabilities BMW gained when they purchased a large stake in SGL Group. However, they are touting much of the CF production from their new Moses Lake, WA facility to be slated for the i3 and i8 vehicles. They are also claiming that their new industrial (as opposed to aero******* grade CF will be about 50% the cost of traditional aerospace CF, thus about $10/lb, still over 10 times more expensive than steel.

For the sake of argument if they want to save 300 lb with CF that will take about 100 lbs of CF replacing 400 lb steel (super coarse "back of the envelope" estimate here). That will then cost just in materials at least $1000, not to mention higher tooling (fixed) and much higher labor costs (variable). I'd estimate the total cost (not price, cost) to save 300lb at about $1200. That must be increased further by their desired profit margin. It may not sound like a lot in a $60k car, but you would be amazed at what large automotive OEMs will do to save a few pennies on simple things like fasteners. $1200 is a HUGE expense.

Again there will be innovation, there will be weight savings, there will be increased use of composites, CF and lightweight metals. The car most likely will weigh less than the outgoing model. However, 3200 lb is just not going to happen.
Appreciate 0
      06-15-2012, 02:31 AM   #32
Uli_HH
Lieutenant
Uli_HH's Avatar
Germany
32
Rep
572
Posts

 
Drives: AW M3 E90)/ 523i Touring
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hamburg Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
I'd bet against 3200 lb, again strongly bet against it.

Cheap core materials like cardboard can provide stiffness improvements in large sheet like structures but would not be used for more complex mechanical/structural type shapes. Due to language difficulties (wheel mounts, axle stools ?) I am not positive, but many of the items you list do not seem like good candidates for replacement by CF, certainly not a CF/cardboard sandwich.

We keep hearing about the capabilities BMW gained when they purchased a large stake in SGL Group. However, they are touting much of the CF production from their new Moses Lake, WA facility to be slated for the i3 and i8 vehicles. They are also claiming that their new industrial (as opposed to aero******* grade CF will be about 50% the cost of traditional aerospace CF, thus about $10/lb, still over 10 times more expensive than steel.

For the sake of argument if they want to save 300 lb with CF that will take about 100 lbs of CF replacing 400 lb steel (super coarse "back of the envelope" estimate here). That will then cost just in materials at least $1000, not to mention higher tooling (fixed) and much higher labor costs (variable). I'd estimate the total cost (not price, cost) to save 300lb at about $1200. That must be increased further by their desired profit margin. It may not sound like a lot in a $60k car, but you would be amazed at what large automotive OEMs will do to save a few pennies on simple things like fasteners. $1200 is a HUGE expense.

Again there will be innovation, there will be weight savings, there will be increased use of composites, CF and lightweight metals. The car most likely will weigh less than the outgoing model. However, 3200 lb is just not going to happen.
Okay, sorry for my bad english ... some german technical words are not easy to translate.

But someone, from which I know that he sometimes could see secret M-GmbH prototyps, told me that he has seen an unpainted F80 chassis and that this parts I posted would be made from black composite material.

Also many officials from the M-GmbH quotes on M events that the new F80M3 would an great surprice (3.500lbs would be no surprice, because also the CRT reach this weight! for all M drivers and has radical changes in the materials, which would be used. And that the F8x could be seen as the material testcar for the coming 7er successor and the BMW lightweight strategy for the future.

Last edited by Uli_HH; 06-15-2012 at 06:17 AM.
Appreciate 0
      06-15-2012, 04:50 AM   #33
Levi
Brigadier General
Levi's Avatar
Czech_Republic
124
Rep
3,450
Posts

 
Drives: Alfa Romeo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Prague

iTrader: (0)

3 years ago, I was told that the target weigth of the M3 E9X successor to bring it below the weigth of the M3 E46. For me it was hard to believe. But in the past years, more info was coming that it will 110 % be lighter than the M3 E9X. Now the rumors make seem that the target is achieved. This could explain "low" 420 PS power. More would make the M3 E80 faster on straight line than the M6 F13.
Appreciate 0
      06-15-2012, 06:36 AM   #34
mapezzul
Special Agent
mapezzul's Avatar
United_States
26
Rep
1,737
Posts

 
Drives: Depends on the day!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bavaria

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
I agree with many of your guesses/statements above but this one below is almost for sure incorrect.



The engine will have much more torque and this will require stronger components in much of the driveline. Without very expensive composites stronger generally means heavier.

Wheels: Existing wheels are quite light. New car may get 19" standard and 20" optional. From the base 18" wheels this would also likely be a weight increase.

Suspension: Without advanced and very expensive use of composites it will be challenging to save much weight compared to the existing cars forged aluminum parts.

The existing CF roof itself is very light and not even a structural component (which contributes to its already low weight).

I agree BMW is going to press very hard to control, manage and likely to reduce the weight of the new M3. It just is most likely not going to come from the areas you have mentioned.
Those changes will be coming and are being tested. The 18 wheels are not even forged now so how can you say that they are light as they can be? Brakes will be larger and lighter and have a CF option.

The driveshaft/ prop shaft can lose weight and get stronger as can the half shafts. They are in the prototypes and other brands are already using this technology in less than super car price points (Even the M5/M6 are lighter than the one's they replaced)- the Rear diff was originally designed to be used with these components.

They are making suspension bits out of CF and testing it now, and using more aluminum in areas that were once steel. The aramid/CF sandwich is lighter and stronger than steel and will be used in non-visible areas where necessary to lose weight and add rigidity.

They are doing this and a lot more. I heard this from a top executive on more than one occasion. The price BMW is getting CF for is cheap compared to others- they are running the show now thanks in small part to the BMWi ramp up.

What will make it to the street- no one knows as they are still testing durability and wear on these components. Biggest concern with the CF is not it breaking but it forcing added stresses to other areas, computer modeling can only do so much.
Appreciate 0
      06-15-2012, 07:04 AM   #35
mapezzul
Special Agent
mapezzul's Avatar
United_States
26
Rep
1,737
Posts

 
Drives: Depends on the day!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Bavaria

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
I'd bet against 3200 lb, again strongly bet against it.

Cheap core materials like cardboard can provide stiffness improvements in large sheet like structures but would not be used for more complex mechanical/structural type shapes. Due to language difficulties (wheel mounts, axle stools ?) I am not positive, but many of the items you list do not seem like good candidates for replacement by CF, certainly not a CF/cardboard sandwich.

We keep hearing about the capabilities BMW gained when they purchased a large stake in SGL Group. However, they are touting much of the CF production from their new Moses Lake, WA facility to be slated for the i3 and i8 vehicles. They are also claiming that their new industrial (as opposed to aero******* grade CF will be about 50% the cost of traditional aerospace CF, thus about $10/lb, still over 10 times more expensive than steel.

For the sake of argument if they want to save 300 lb with CF that will take about 100 lbs of CF replacing 400 lb steel (super coarse "back of the envelope" estimate here). That will then cost just in materials at least $1000, not to mention higher tooling (fixed) and much higher labor costs (variable). I'd estimate the total cost (not price, cost) to save 300lb at about $1200. That must be increased further by their desired profit margin. It may not sound like a lot in a $60k car, but you would be amazed at what large automotive OEMs will do to save a few pennies on simple things like fasteners. $1200 is a HUGE expense.

Again there will be innovation, there will be weight savings, there will be increased use of composites, CF and lightweight metals. The car most likely will weigh less than the outgoing model. However, 3200 lb is just not going to happen.
So your saying that $1200 is too much for weight savings? What if they were saving about $10k per engine? (just throwing that out there).

If interested, you might want to look into how BMW is using the CF a bit more there is a lot out there on it. They are ramping up the launch of an entire brand based on CF so yes they are pushing that but the CF will be used across the board. But have said publicly many times that thanks to BMWi the BMW Group will have CF advantages- Board members have announced the next 7 using CF from the BMWi/SGL establishment as well as M saying it.

Costs are less than what you are estimating. They are not autoclaving and using a system that is not more labor intensive or energy intensive from a cost perspective. That is how they can do any of this at all. They built in Moses Lake for the cheap renewable energy (make the fiber usually high cost) then it is woven in Wackersdorf and molded at the foundry in Landshut. By not autoclaving they save a boat load of money.

Is the weave as nice as the weave on the visible components like the roof? No, but it is nearly as strong. Having seen this stuff in action it is impressive (see crappy iPhone image). The target of the i3 is 30k units per year (some mainstream media recently published 100k but that is BS I have the BMW info with 30k).

While they have optimized the cuts for the BMWi models there is still "scrap" and that scrap can be then recycled into smaller items rather than be thrown away or reprocessed. So they look at multiple platforms per cut and use every last ounce they can. Stuff that would have not been used now has a purpose and is relatively cheap- (they do this with leather as well). F80 will be considered in these cuts and moldings- if the i3 doesn't sell then BMW will have a boat load of CF they already invested in so no harm in using it at that point.

The CF aramid sandwich on the CRT is an example of what they can do and what they will do- they had bigger plans than just the CRT but the board shot it down.
Attached Images
 
Appreciate 0
      06-15-2012, 08:19 AM   #36
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,838
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Levi View Post
But in the past years, more info was coming that it will 110 % be lighter than the M3 E9X.
So it will have negative mass? Doesn't this also mean it will be invisible and travel faster than the speed of light?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Uli_HH View Post
...but I think - if not the F80M3 still gets the V6 Biturbo - that the weight of the vehicle will be the revolutionary new and the surprise the officials promised.
I am having a difficult time understanding why there is still discussion of a V6.

One revolutionary aspect of the car will be the high volumetric efficiency of the engine. Another will be the use of carbon fiber to improve weight by ~200 lbs. vs. the current car. It is all but entirely inconceivable that they will drop weight by ~500 lbs. as compared to the E90 M3. It just doesn't stand up to sound reason.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
      06-15-2012, 08:39 AM   #37
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,838
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
For the sake of argument if they want to save 300 lb with CF that will take about 100 lbs of CF replacing 400 lb steel (super coarse "back of the envelope" estimate here). That will then cost just in materials at least $1000, not to mention higher tooling (fixed) and much higher labor costs (variable). I'd estimate the total cost (not price, cost) to save 300lb at about $1200. That must be increased further by their desired profit margin. It may not sound like a lot in a $60k car, but you would be amazed at what large automotive OEMs will do to save a few pennies on simple things like fasteners. $1200 is a HUGE expense.
With no particular fact-based argument to offer up to counter this point, swamp, my gut feeling is that your figure is off by a wide margin on the low side.

Also, regarding estimates, I saw your disclaimer and realize you were just throwing out numbers. That being said, if we wanted to get closer to real figures I would think that it would be pretty safe to start with the premise that there will be a higher cost per pound saved as weight tends toward zero. We can even put an asymptote at around 2000 lbs or so. I.e. it would cost an infinite amount of money to build a 2000 lb M3 (read: impossible).

Edit: You know what, I guess I didn't appreciate the fact that you were talking about material costs only. So disregard my statements as a counterpoint. However, they do make for a reasonable secondary supporting argument. Furthermore, I will suggest that material costs are among the least significant considerations. Though to be perfectly honest, I really have no idea what drives costs of carbon fiber. I suppose I should hit the search engines and see if I can find some information on it because you have piqued my interest.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
      06-16-2012, 07:17 PM   #38
Bbenavitz
New Member
Bbenavitz's Avatar
0
Rep
25
Posts

 
Drives: BMW m3
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Naples

iTrader: (0)

The F30 328i is 88 lbs less than the previous generation and since BMW and all other mass auto producers rely upon economies of scale it would not make practical sense to make the F80's chassis components out of different materials. With this logic and the use of CF for the roof, hood, deck lid, drive shaft, and maybe doors along with more use of aluminum and magnesium components and carbon ceramic brake rotors (60 to 80 lbs savings alone) it would be reasonable to get the F80 to 250 lbs under the current M3. BMW could throw us a big curve ball and make the entire chassis out of aluminum which could result in the same overall weight reduction which as we all know many of mass producers are doing now (Audi and Jag). I'm betting on a new 3.5 Liter in line 6 all aluminum twin turbo with 450 HP and 450 ft lbs of torque.
__________________
2011 M3 Sedan
ZCP, DCT
Dinan tune, intake, pulley
265-35-19 Hoosier R6's
for the track with Carbotech pads
Appreciate 0
      06-17-2012, 06:15 AM   #39
Levi
Brigadier General
Levi's Avatar
Czech_Republic
124
Rep
3,450
Posts

 
Drives: Alfa Romeo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Prague

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bbenavitz View Post
The F30 328i is 88 lbs less than the previous generation and since BMW and all other mass auto producers rely upon economies of scale it would not make practical sense to make the F80's chassis components out of different materials. With this logic and the use of CF for the roof, hood, deck lid, drive shaft, and maybe doors along with more use of aluminum and magnesium components and carbon ceramic brake rotors (60 to 80 lbs savings alone) it would be reasonable to get the F80 to 250 lbs under the current M3. BMW could throw us a big curve ball and make the entire chassis out of aluminum which could result in the same overall weight reduction which as we all know many of mass producers are doing now (Audi and Jag). I'm betting on a new 3.5 Liter in line 6 all aluminum twin turbo with 450 HP and 450 ft lbs of torque.
I think an all aluminium chassis would be less profitable than a composite CF chassis, because in any case the chassis will have to be redesign, and right now BMW is skipping the aluminium construction and going over to CF with the i3, i8 and next 7 Series which is always the first car of the next BMW generation. Just now the 7 Series got facelift, so BMW is already working on the next one, the M3 F8X is the beginning of the tendency, so it can very well get a CF chassis components that would save quite alot. Of course we mustn't forget that CF is not everything, the MP4-12C with CF chassis is quite lighter than the 458 Italia, but the Aventador with CF chassis is not any lighter than the aluminium chassis of the F12 Berlinetta.
Appreciate 0
      06-17-2012, 02:47 PM   #40
Bbenavitz
New Member
Bbenavitz's Avatar
0
Rep
25
Posts

 
Drives: BMW m3
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Naples

iTrader: (0)

Yes, Levi, the next gen 7 will likely contain CFRP, but according to the press it will be the roof, hood, and deck lid just as I suggested the new M3 may use. The i3 will be much lower production numbers which is doable with this material just like the MP4-12C, and Lamborghini and the previous F1 and CarreraGT were. If you look closely at the i3 press photos of the chassis notice the crash structures and lower frame rails are aluminum.

Your right in predicting future mass produced cars will begin using CRFP for stress bearing components, I just don't think it will happen until 2020 or later. Just my opinion, not meant to be argumentative.
__________________
2011 M3 Sedan
ZCP, DCT
Dinan tune, intake, pulley
265-35-19 Hoosier R6's
for the track with Carbotech pads
Appreciate 0
      06-17-2012, 09:18 PM   #41
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uli_HH View Post
Okay, sorry for my bad english ... some german technical words are not easy to translate.

But someone, from which I know that he sometimes could see secret M-GmbH prototyps, told me that he has seen an unpainted F80 chassis and that this parts I posted would be made from black composite material.
Absolutely no need to apologize. I wish my German was 5% as good as your English. Perhaps you could translate some of those terms better, that would be quite useful for your points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapezzul View Post
Those changes will be coming and are being tested.

They are making suspension bits out of CF and testing it now, and using more aluminum in areas that were once steel. The aramid/CF sandwich is lighter and stronger than steel and will be used in non-visible areas where necessary to lose weight and add rigidity.
Want to place any wagers? There is no way there will be composite suspension pieces in the next M3. It is already mostly forged aluminum. Not much weight left to be saved without composites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapezzul View Post
The 18 wheels are not even forged now so how can you say that they are light as they can be? Brakes will be larger and lighter and have a CF option.
Wheel design is more important than cast vs. forged. My only point was that larger wheels are generally heavier and the car is likely to have larger wheels. The brakes also, will not be CF. They may offer carbon ceramic which is not carbon fiber at all, but it would almost for sure be an option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapezzul View Post
The driveshaft/ prop shaft can lose weight and get stronger as can the half shafts. They are in the prototypes and other brands are already using this technology in less than super car price points (Even the M5/M6 are lighter than the one's they replaced)- the Rear diff was originally designed to be used with these components.
Rotating shafts are an ideal place to use composites. You save on weight and inertia. I would not be surprised to find this in the next car. However, I have no idea what you mean that the M5/M6 are lighter than the one they replaced? Do you have weight data on E60 M5 vs. F10 M5 drive shaft or axles? I also have no idea what you are trying to say about the diff.



Quote:
Originally Posted by mapezzul View Post
They are doing this and a lot more. I heard this from a top executive on more than one occasion. The price BMW is getting CF for is cheap compared to others- they are running the show now thanks in small part to the BMWi ramp up.

What will make it to the street- no one knows as they are still testing durability and wear on these components. Biggest concern with the CF is not it breaking but it forcing added stresses to other areas, computer modeling can only do so much.
OK, what did you hear. You directly contradict yourself here. You heard they ARE doing these things but then who knows what will actually make it. I am not debating BMW M R&D here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapezzul View Post
So your saying that $1200 is too much for weight savings? What if they were saving about $10k per engine? (just throwing that out there).
BMW is not about to throw away all of the engine cost savings by throwing it all at weight reduction. The next car must OVERALL be less COST than the existing one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapezzul View Post
If interested, you might want to look into how BMW is using the CF a bit more there is a lot out there on it. They are ramping up the launch of an entire brand based on CF so yes they are pushing that but the CF will be used across the board. But have said publicly many times that thanks to BMWi the BMW Group will have CF advantages- Board members have announced the next 7 using CF from the BMWi/SGL establishment as well as M saying it.
I am pretty familiar. Thanks though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapezzul View Post
Costs are less than what you are estimating. They are not autoclaving and using a system that is not more labor intensive or energy intensive from a cost perspective. That is how they can do any of this at all. They built in Moses Lake for the cheap renewable energy (make the fiber usually high cost) then it is woven in Wackersdorf and molded at the foundry in Landshut. By not autoclaving they save a boat load of money.
I can provide references for their strive to get to $10/lb. Do you want to see that article?

Is the weave as nice as the weave on the visible components like the roof? No, but it is nearly as strong. Having seen this stuff in action it is impressive (see crappy iPhone image). The target of the i3 is 30k units per year (some mainstream media recently published 100k but that is BS I have the BMW info with 30k).

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapezzul View Post
While they have optimized the cuts for the BMWi models there is still "scrap" and that scrap can be then recycled into smaller items rather than be thrown away or reprocessed. So they look at multiple platforms per cut and use every last ounce they can. Stuff that would have not been used now has a purpose and is relatively cheap- (they do this with leather as well). F80 will be considered in these cuts and moldings- if the i3 doesn't sell then BMW will have a boat load of CF they already invested in so no harm in using it at that point.
You can not achieve a part as strong as an existing steel part in CF by using recycled non-oriented fiber technology. Chop fiber, random finer or recycled materials are WAY less strong and rigid than true woven multi-layer materials.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapezzul View Post
The CF aramid sandwich on the CRT is an example of what they can do and what they will do- they had bigger plans than just the CRT but the board shot it down.
Probably due to cost

In short, I have no doubt whatsoever that the use of composites in general and CF and CSiC will be in the next car. We simply disagree on how much will be present and which parts will be so.
Appreciate 0
      06-17-2012, 09:21 PM   #42
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
With no particular fact-based argument to offer up to counter this point, swamp, my gut feeling is that your figure is off by a wide margin on the low side.

Also, regarding estimates, I saw your disclaimer and realize you were just throwing out numbers. That being said, if we wanted to get closer to real figures I would think that it would be pretty safe to start with the premise that there will be a higher cost per pound saved as weight tends toward zero. We can even put an asymptote at around 2000 lbs or so. I.e. it would cost an infinite amount of money to build a 2000 lb M3 (read: impossible).

Edit: You know what, I guess I didn't appreciate the fact that you were talking about material costs only. So disregard my statements as a counterpoint. However, they do make for a reasonable secondary supporting argument. Furthermore, I will suggest that material costs are among the least significant considerations. Though to be perfectly honest, I really have no idea what drives costs of carbon fiber. I suppose I should hit the search engines and see if I can find some information on it because you have piqued my interest.
Ball is in your court here. Traditional layered, oriented woven or long fiber materials are very expensive. Both components are expensive, the CF itself as well as the labor. BMW is obviously attacking both fronts but the savings will occur incrementally. Reducing the existing cost of material by half is a huge deal.
Appreciate 0
      06-17-2012, 09:25 PM   #43
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bbenavitz View Post
The F30 328i is 88 lbs less than the previous generation
But what about the new 335i. It is a much better comparison. I've seen a lot of ambiguous figures on both even in the BMW press release that issue was noted and discussed here on the forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bbenavitz View Post
With this logic and the use of CF for the roof, hood, deck lid, drive shaft, and maybe doors along with more use of aluminum and magnesium components and carbon ceramic brake rotors (60 to 80 lbs savings alone) it would be reasonable to get the F80 to 250 lbs under the current M3.
Pretty much agree here both on method and results

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bbenavitz View Post
BMW could throw us a big curve ball and make the entire chassis out of aluminum which could result in the same overall weight reduction which as we all know many of mass producers are doing now (Audi and Jag).
I'd pretty well guarantee that won't happen. The primary chassis of the base car is already set in stone. It is steel and thus the M3 will be the same using the same basic chassis.
Appreciate 0
      06-18-2012, 09:15 AM   #44
Uli_HH
Lieutenant
Uli_HH's Avatar
Germany
32
Rep
572
Posts

 
Drives: AW M3 E90)/ 523i Touring
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hamburg Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
I'd pretty well guarantee that won't happen. The primary chassis of the base car is already set in stone. It is steel and thus the M3 will be the same using the same basic chassis.
+1 ... an complete aluminum chassis won´t happen.

But why you are so sure that the primary chassis is already set in stone. I think the new F3x chassis was developed from the beginning to allow parts either to be made of steel or of carbon composite ... this is the real and only reason for the split into F3x and F8x.

Two reason for made me think so:
  • The M3/M4 is an relative limited production and high-priced car, and therefor the ideal testbed to introduce new revolutionary materials into mass production.
  • In nearly every interview BMW / M-GmbH officials stated that its no matter how much hp the new M3/M4 would be achieve ... the numbers goes from ~420 to ~ 450hp - no more or only a little bit more than the E9xM3, but also stated that it would outperform all earlier M3s in such an manner, that it would be an great surprice for the M community. To reach this target nearly only by weight reduction and without hp-increase there is the ultimate need for an greater weight loss than ~150lbs.

I also think that the ~3.200lbs could only be achieved if the car would be ordered with optional lightweight sport seats ala CRT.

Greets Uli_HH

Last edited by Uli_HH; 06-18-2012 at 09:21 AM.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
f80 m3, f80 m3 forum, rumors

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:33 AM.




f80post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST