05-21-2011, 03:42 PM | #177 | |
Brigadier General
1904
Rep 3,213
Posts
Drives: 2018 BMW 440i GC
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Eastern MA
|
Quote:
Even if it is from a reputable BMW source, there are only suggestions of possibility, words like "may be considering", "may look into".... There is no "Confirmation" |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2011, 03:54 PM | #178 |
Brigadier General
433
Rep 3,888
Posts |
BMW M3 F32 coming with a Turbo 3.3l V6
I do not say this as a fact, but I am very sure of this.
Before starting, leave the 1M aside. It came very late, that is why it can be said to be better than an M3, but remember two other M3 are coming: the M3 EVO E90 and the M3 CSL E92. These will be alot faster and lighter also. We can talk about this again when and if there comes a 1M CSL. To finish about this 1M vs. M3, they are very close because one has a NA 4.0l V8 and the other has a FI 3.0l I6, this is called downsizing. The next M2 F22 vs. M3 F32 fight will be very different, one will have two cylinders less and will be lighter and thus more fun, but the other will be faster in all cases: just look at 911 vs Cayman: The Cayman is fun, but the 911 is just unbeatable. And to put a 911 engine into a Cayman, or an M3 engine into an M2 will just never be done. By the way the next Cayman get a FI Flat4 just as the M2 F22 get a FI Inline4. And yes the M2 F22 will be very light. All this to say that the M3 was the benchmark, and maybe still is, of the most affordable true sportscar, or least the closest thing to a sportscar yet being practical and drivable on daily use. However the demand for more comfort increased its wieght, even the M3 E46 was not that light (1570 kg [DIN]), and thus worsend its performance. But remember on thing: the M3 has alot of rivals now, as all other brands try to dethrone it, and maybe without your know the M3 is dethroned by the GT-R. Probably it is less fun to drive, but wheather you want is or not, is is alot faster, even a supercharged M3 E9X does not reach it. That is why BMW M will focus on the thing with two different cars: the M2 F22 for "fun", and the M3 F32 for high performance. And this is why the M3 F32 will get a 90° 3.3l Twin- or Tripple Turbo V6. Just remember the last Nissan Skyline R34 had an I6, and now it went over to V6. Remember the M3 E46 was a car of a perfect middle, not to small, not to big, no I4, but also no V8, not to heavy (compared to RS4 and C AMG), but enough comfortable. With the groth of cars in general, this is now divided into to extremeties and will continue so with the 2 Series/M2 F22 and 3 Series/M3 F32. Now the question is how to make the M3 F32 better than ever? And there is only one onswer: LIGHTER. The M3 has everything: power, balance, comfort, beauty, style, identity and also wieght, that would be nice to get reed off. That is why a V6 is the best solution. Do you remember the first rumours of M3 V6 one year ago or more? This was for nothing, it was to prepare you, because BMW knew, they would not have any choice, and this is what they when build the N63: the knew it would take place in a 5 Series and they knew the would come an M5, and they also knew after that would come an M3. An I6 is better than a V6, but not in the case of the M3 F32. The V6 will be the lightest engine choice and also the most compact. This will allow to move the engine even more back and have an even better balance. The V6 base is a better engine than the I6 base to keep the high revs, and due to shorter stroke. BMW M does have alot of experience in building turbo engines here one example: Exhibit: BMW Formula 1 racing engine M12/13 Production dates: 1981 - 1985 Engine: inline, turbocharged Cylinders: 4 Displacement: 1,499 cc Bore x stroke: 89.2 x 60 mm Torque: 450 Nm at 8,500 rpm Power output: 463 - 581 kW at 11,000 rpm (depending on boost pressure) I believe and have confidence they will put all this into practise. The M3's enemy number one is the GT-R. These are the approximate (very positive) figures: M2 F22 2.0l Twin-Turbo I4 340 PS 450 Nm 7.600 RPM Redline 1300 kg [DIN] M3 F32 3.3l Tripple-Turbo V6 90° 480 PS 550 Nm 8.000 RPM Redline 1500 kg [DIN] Now wait and see! |
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2011, 04:17 PM | #179 | |
First Lieutenant
16
Rep 329
Posts |
Quote:
I would agree that BMW would love to out perform the GTR with the M3 and the V6 is a way to do that if coupled with a lightweight body, but GTR and M3 are in totally different buyers leagues. I would add that I think a V6 TT is highly likely the next M3 engine, but the next 1M (or M2) will not be just a for fun car...
__________________
JOY is being offered in manual transmission and RWD. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2011, 04:42 PM | #180 | |
New Member
0
Rep 13
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2011, 05:14 PM | #181 | |
A70
8
Rep 258
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2011, 05:22 PM | #182 | |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Also: Levi: Good post ^ but I think you, just like the rest of us have nothing but speculation to support your guess. As far as performance goes there is nothing inherently better about a V6. Again the new 3er which will be the basis for the M3, has plenty of room for any engine BMW will use, turbo I4 in the regular 3er, I6 or V6. I don't see the relevance of all of the discussion about Skylines, E46 M3 and M2... I strongly believe that the factors BMW are trying to balance are simply cost vs. perceived innovation. Ultimately the cheaper engine will most likely be the one that goes in. I know this does not sit well with us M enthusiasts, but I'm pretty sure this will be the most important factor. Also do you have any empirical evidence that for a given displacement a V6 is lighter than an I6? I have some evidence. The BMW 3.0l N54 I6 TT (aluminum block of course) weighs in at 429 lb. The 3.5l V6 Ford Ecoboost (also aluminum block/heads, TT) weighs in at 417 lb. I know not entirely apples to apples but the Ecoboost is a pretty nice engine, DI, TT, etc. Maybe if it was only a 3.0l it would weigh in the 400lb range. Do you think BMW will choose a V configuration over an I configuration just to save 10-30 lb? Maybe they will, maybe they can make a sub 400 lb 3.3l V6. Either way the weight of the new M3, will be more dependent on base 3er weight than whatever engine they choose and we already know the new car is about the same size as the existing car but wider and with a longer wheelbase. This is why I am watching the rumor mill on the new 3er so heavily!
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2011, 05:28 PM | #183 |
Brigadier General
1967
Rep 4,213
Posts |
I think Levi will turn out to be right along with the others who have suggested the V6. I'm okay with that solution if it turns out to be fun to drive and if the redline is 8000+.
Let's face it. If this car get previewed by the car mags to wide acclaim we are all going to want to test drive it. And all of us will give it strong consideration in the end. Ultimately it is all about the pleasure of driving. If BMW delivers then I'm good. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2011, 05:46 PM | #184 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
What you lose is even firing intervals. Instead of a "standard" 120 degree firing interval, you get 90 - 150, 90 -150, 90 - 150. This makes for a buzzy and somewhat rough-running engine, which BMW simply wouldn't put up with. The solution is to split the crank throws, which is what GM pioneered in 1977 (I think), resulting in an even-firing design of their 3.8 liter 90 degree V6. They sold this even-fire engine in various states of tune for at least a couple of decades, including those legendary Buick Grand National engines which ruled drag strips from the mid eighties through (roughly) the mid nineties. One implication of splitting the crank throws was that the throws themselves would lose some strength because you'd end up with an effectively reduced diameter "at the split". A friend of mine ran his GN for years at the drag strip however, eventually running low 11s, with a best of 11.17 at around 120 mph. One thing he liked to brag about was that he had never even removed the valve covers to get those kinds of times and speeds. He finally gave in and had the heads done, resulting in an instant 10.56 @ 124 mph, with the engine shutting down just before the traps. Turned out his chip tuner had forgotten to remove the from-the-factory 124 mph speed limiter. With that taken care of, the car would trap in the 125-126 mph range. He sold the car with over 100K on the clock and hundreds and hundreds of drag strip passes, and never had a problem with that engine. His experience was more or less duplicated by hundreds of other GN owners, demonstrating just how bulletproof that engine was, in spite of the split crank throws. So BMW could easily build a reliable split-crank 90 degree V6. Would they, though? Don't think so. I'd be betting on a straight six with something innovative in turbocharging. Bruce |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2011, 10:02 PM | #185 |
Lieutenant Colonel
81
Rep 1,656
Posts |
I am liking the S65 more fuel efficient twin turbo option.
__________________
nickname"BAD 3",MHD E85 tune,RennArt catback non-resonated exhaust,VRSF Downpipes, VRSF 7"FMIC,VRSF stock side inlets,SSQV BOV,ECS CP,M-performance alcantara steering,retrofit M3 paddle shifters,Alpina B3 tranny flash,AFE power seal CAI,LED angels,ST Coilovers,M3 upper/lower control arms,E93 M3 Front Swaybar ,235/35/19x9 ,275/30/19x9.5. M sport bumpers, CF diffuser. When in doubt..flat out.
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-21-2011, 10:20 PM | #186 | |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Either way I am leaning in the I6 direction for the new M3 as well. Definitely with DI and some innovation in the turbo charging. Would be great to see a new from the ground up engine but doubt that as well.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2011, 04:48 AM | #187 |
New Member
0
Rep 13
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2011, 02:13 PM | #188 |
Colonel
87
Rep 2,464
Posts |
I kinda agree with @wallstreet... We know BMW is pushing for lowering costs, and I'd assume chopping the V8 to V6 is very tempting (for them). S65 is made to be high revving engine, so I don't think it will be all that great for turbo application. Also, M5 has TT V8, M3 cannot have V8. Either I6, or V6. If they choose to go I6, then I'd assume they'll use their standard 3 liter I6, and go from there.
Same for weight. F3x will no be light. It will be lighter than competition. Just like E9x.
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan |
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2011, 02:24 PM | #189 | |
Brigadier General
1904
Rep 3,213
Posts
Drives: 2018 BMW 440i GC
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Eastern MA
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2011, 02:36 PM | #190 |
Brigadier General
433
Rep 3,888
Posts |
About the GT-R, you must know it is the fastest 4-seater car. It means it does beat the M3. Look to M3 vs. forum and what you see is always M3 vs. C AMG, RS4, RS5, R8 V8, IS-F, CTS-V, 911, GT-R.
I like I6 over V6, but in the case of the next M3 for me it doesn't look right. I think a higher redline is an imprtant thing in an M3, more than in an M5 or X6 M for instance. BMW M can not spend everything on building a new engine from scratch, so it will have to be based on something existant. Either N55 or S63. IMO the S63 is a better base if to consider a higher reving engine as it has shorter stroke than the N55. As about weight we shall see, and I am very eager: -the X3 F25 is 30kg than the X3 E83 -the M3 EVO Limited Edition E90 is said to weigh 1550 kg (DIN) -the M3 CSL Concept E92 is said to be a preview of the next M3 F32 -the M5 F10 is said to be 60 kg lighter than the 550i F10!!!!!! The answers will come very soon, also when the new 1 Series F20 will be revealed. Last edited by BMW269; 05-22-2011 at 02:45 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2011, 04:04 PM | #191 | |
Brigadier General
1904
Rep 3,213
Posts
Drives: 2018 BMW 440i GC
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Eastern MA
|
Quote:
Of course the GTR beats the 4D M3, because it is in a totally different league and price bracket. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2011, 04:50 PM | #192 | |||||
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Good post. Some comments
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
1. Manufacturing costs. BMW is pushing hard to bring them down. Common engines and other component is a very good way to do this. 2. Promotion of their green image and working toward the day when fines will be much more significant. In short there is no intrinsic reason BMW can't build an NA high revving engine just as good as the F430 and stuff it in the next M3. But as we all know they won't. Quote:
Quote:
Cheers again, good post.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
|||||
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2011, 04:59 PM | #193 | |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Just like a 911 it does not have real useable back seats in any defintion of the word "seat". It is a 2+2. Both the GT-R and 911 rears are good for a trip to the grocery store for a 10 year old kid, nothing more.
Quote:
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2011, 05:55 PM | #194 | |
New Member
0
Rep 13
Posts |
Quote:
First Drive: 2012 Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG Coupe Timing is key. Mercedes-Benz's new C-Class Coupe will arrive in the U.S. this fall, half a year before archrival BMW replaces its 3 Series, including the coupe, the most consistently successful such two-door in this class. While BMW typically needs a full year between a new 3 Series introduction and a new M3 hot rod, AMG already has the proper engine, the 6.2-liter "63," plus all the other mods, including chassis and bodywork, from the well-established C63 sedan and not-for-U.S. wagon, so its hot rod will launch concurrently with the new C-Coupe bodystyle. Both the new C-Class Coupe and its AMG variant fill many gaps beyond the one BMW is about to create. They take the place of the moderately successful CLK-Class, which Mercedes replaced with the larger, costlier E-Class coupe. The C-Coupe fills in the size category between the 1 Series/1M and the 3 Series/M3, the latter of which was stretched to a larger size than the 3 sedan because BMW nearly called it the 4 Series. Mercedes still has the Audi A5/S5 to contend with, though they aren't nearly as iconic or powerful as the Bavarian brand's coupe. With BMW prepared to downsize the M3's engine back to six cylinders, this time with twin turbos, and enthusiasts worried the 3's chassis and steering will get the same treatment as Series 5 and 7, the timing couldn't be better for a 451-horsepower V-8 under the hood of a tight new C-Class coupe. Those of you yearning for even more power can choose a version of the C63 coupe with what AMG calls a "development package" that adds the SLS AMG's lighter pistons, rod, and crankshaft, subtracting weight and adding engine speed and 30 more peak horsepower for a higher top speed. AMG estimates a 0-62 mph acceleration time of 4.4 seconds for the 451-horse version and 4.3 seconds for the 481-horsepower version. Top speed is electronically limited to 155 mph, though if you add the optional Driver's Package, the limiter cuts off at 174 mph and the giddy new owner gets free driver training thrown in to keep him or her off the curbs |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-22-2011, 08:33 PM | #195 |
Major General
258
Rep 5,012
Posts |
It might be for the next generation just around the corner (like the M5), due to the fact their 'donor' models are bigger and heavier, but as swamp said, that trend has to stop at some time. And with the tough new CAFE standards, I bet it starts with the next iteration. And you already saw the beginning of that, with smaller/lighter engines. I predict the weight increase will be minimum, then reversed on the next model.
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-23-2011, 03:16 AM | #196 |
Lieutenant
105
Rep 585
Posts |
Okay ... to see in what direction BMW M goes in weight issues, we have to wait only one month till June, 23th, when BMW M presents on the M Night the lightweight M3 EVO und give us all informations about the car ... if not something leakes earlier.
Greets Uli_HH |
Appreciate
0
|
05-23-2011, 04:29 AM | #197 | |
A70
8
Rep 258
Posts |
Quote:
I don't think we will see any considerable drop in weight until the base models start losing weight. So far we only have the F10 to go off of, but it’s not looking very good. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-23-2011, 07:22 AM | #198 | ||
Moderator
7509
Rep 19,370
Posts |
I did, because that is exactly how he stated it, and exactly how he meant it.
Quote:
Quote:
I'd actually love to get back to doing that, so, cheers. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
Bookmarks |
|
|