GetBMWParts
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 Forum > M3 / M4 Photos and Videos

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      07-21-2014, 11:04 PM   #67
NeedleBanger
Private
Canada
3
Rep
52
Posts

Drives: '07 335i
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Alberta

iTrader: (0)

Oh ya I forgot, internet folk consider criticizing something as "trolling". All I know is I'll be looking to a different manufacturer on my next V8 coupe purchase.
Appreciate 0
      07-21-2014, 11:16 PM   #68
SakhirM4
Major General
SakhirM4's Avatar
United_States
10783
Rep
8,852
Posts

Drives: '15 SO M4/'20 Z4 M40i
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin, TX

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2020 BMW Z4 M40i  [10.00]
2015 BMW M4  [8.76]
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedleBanger View Post
Oh ya I forgot, internet folk consider criticizing something as "trolling". All I know is I'll be looking to a different manufacturer on my next V8 coupe purchase.
Criticizing is not trolling. Jumping into a thread to purposely make remarks to generate negative reaction is trolling!!
__________________
Tejas Chapter, BMW CCA, mem #23915, President 27 years, www.tejaschapter.org
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 12:02 AM   #69
Black Gold
Major General
590
Rep
5,396
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas

iTrader: (15)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedleBanger View Post
I dunno it kinda seems like it. This new M3 is just like all the other new stock turbo 6 cylinder cars - relies solely on the turbos & gotta make the car as light as humanly possible (money that used to be spent on bigger engine is now spent on weight reduction strategies) cause at the end of the day the 6 cylinder engine really ain't all that powerful. Been there done that before, V8 is better. It's a 4.0L V8 vs. twin turbo 3.0L i6, the two engines aren't even in the same category. Drop the turbos from the inline 6, you got nothing. Add the turbos to the V8, you got a freakshow.
You have a very simplistic and limited understanding of both the s65 and s55. You also seem to be unaware that the s55 is far more powerful at every rpm than the s65.

Probably would be well advised to read the sticky in this forum that describes both.

Also, the s65 in it's current form does not make sense to turbo for many reasons.

Finally, I think you're the first person to criticize BMW for making the car lighter...curious thought process there
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 12:22 AM   #70
gthal
Major General
gthal's Avatar
Canada
1901
Rep
5,678
Posts

Drives: 2018 340i xDrive
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by KennyPowers View Post
You have a very simplistic and limited understanding of both the s65 and s55. You also seem to be unaware that the s55 is far more powerful at every rpm than the s65.

Probably would be well advised to read the sticky in this forum that describes both.

Also, the s65 in it's current form does not make sense to turbo for many reasons.

Finally, I think you're the first person to criticize BMW for making the car lighter...curious thought process there
The only person in the history of the world to not be happy a car is lighter I suspect he hasn't seen the power curves of the two cars... almost not comparable, really. But yeah, the S55 sucks
__________________
2020 X3 M40i | Black | Current DD
2020 C8 Corvette | Z51 | Torch Red ... built and waiting for delivery
2016 M2 | Long Beach Blue | 6MT
2015 M4 | Austin Yellow | DCT
2012 MB C63AMG | 2011 E92 M3 | 2010 E92 M3
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 01:26 AM   #71
SakhirM4
Major General
SakhirM4's Avatar
United_States
10783
Rep
8,852
Posts

Drives: '15 SO M4/'20 Z4 M40i
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin, TX

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2020 BMW Z4 M40i  [10.00]
2015 BMW M4  [8.76]
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedleBanger View Post
I dunno it kinda seems like it. This new M3 is just like all the other new stock turbo 6 cylinder cars - relies solely on the turbos & gotta make the car as light as humanly possible (money that used to be spent on bigger engine is now spent on weight reduction strategies) cause at the end of the day the 6 cylinder engine really ain't all that powerful. Been there done that before, V8 is better. It's a 4.0L V8 vs. twin turbo 3.0L i6, the two engines aren't even in the same category. Drop the turbos from the inline 6, you got nothing. Add the turbos to the V8, you got a freakshow.
Drop the turbos from the inline 6 and you would probably have a 333hp NA engine instead of a 425hp engine. Sound familiar? Sound like an E46 M3 that everyone is praising? In it's day, it was thought to be a pretty good engine. My '71 Corvette had a 5.7 liter V8 with 300hp. Sooo what. Your right - that isn't even the same category.
__________________
Tejas Chapter, BMW CCA, mem #23915, President 27 years, www.tejaschapter.org
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 08:29 AM   #72
bradleyland
TIM YOYO
United_States
1504
Rep
3,282
Posts

Drives: 2013 M3
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Vero Beach, FL

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedleBanger View Post
I dunno it kinda seems like it. This new M3 is just like all the other new stock turbo 6 cylinder cars - relies solely on the turbos & gotta make the car as light as humanly possible (money that used to be spent on bigger engine is now spent on weight reduction strategies) cause at the end of the day the 6 cylinder engine really ain't all that powerful. Been there done that before, V8 is better. It's a 4.0L V8 vs. twin turbo 3.0L i6, the two engines aren't even in the same category. Drop the turbos from the inline 6, you got nothing. Add the turbos to the V8, you got a freakshow.
I love the S65 in my M3, but dude, seriously, get some perspective. I cannot think of a more lame method of comparison than saying "drop the turbos from this, add some turbos to that, and BINGO BANGO, we have a winner!" That makes no sense at all.

The S55 was designed from the outset to be a turbocharged engine. Turbocharging is a very advanced method of delivering more power from smaller displacement. People who think that it's just a matter of slapping a turbo on to any old motor have never attempted such a feat. In my younger, more naive days, I tried my hand at turbocharging a friend's Honda Civic. Yeah, laugh it up, but until you've tried the same, you can give it a rest. I've rebuilt more than one engine by hand. I've tuned tons of carbureted engines. I've even rebuilt my own transmission (something I never recommend, btw), and turbocharging that little B16 put me over the edge. We simply didn't have the equipment and the know-how to get the job done. Building a responsive turbocharged engine takes a lot of engineering.

Do me a favor and name three reputable turbo kits for the S65. We'll all wait.

Turbocharging isn't "easy horsepower" like everyone makes it out to be. The S55 is an engineering feat in its own right. No, it doesn't sound like the S65, and you're right that the engines aren't in the same league. The S55 is more powerful at every RPM than the S65, often by a very wide margin.
__________________
His: 2019 R1250GS - Black
Hers: 2013 X3 28i - N20 Mineral Silver / Sand Beige / Premium, Tech
Past: 2013 ///M3 - Interlagos Blue Black M-DCT
Past: 2010 135i - TiAg Coral Red 6MT ///M-Sport
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 09:46 AM   #73
GBPackerfan1963
Banned
United_States
39
Rep
996
Posts

Drives: 2002 BMW M5 2007 E60 550i
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elk Grove, CA

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2002 BMW M5  [0.00]
Needless to say @NeedleBanger has been P-Owned.
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 02:49 PM   #74
NeedleBanger
Private
Canada
3
Rep
52
Posts

Drives: '07 335i
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Alberta

iTrader: (0)

Well that's what happens when you twin-turbo a V8 engine - it hauls ass. The V10 was NA. Not really getting owned here, I have some pretty good experience with BMW's turbo inline 6s. Wait a year and we'll let the sales & customers do the talking. I'm just speculating. I don't remember saying weight saving was a bad thing. It's that they shrunk the engine size, slapped some tiny cheap turbos on there (probably the weakest link & the first thing to blow), and spent the extra saved money on more weight saving measures, because tiny little 3.0L turbo charged engines depend heavily on lightness to seem quick. I've already been down this road with BMW's turbo i6 cars. When the guy in the video says the engine is "a little boring", I already know exactly what he means. The 450HP inline 6 I'm driving right now is also a little boring, it doesn't have that balls-to-the-wall throw-you-back-in-your-seat V8 power that I'm looking for in my next vehicle purchase. This new M3 surely won't have it (stock anyway). I'll say this though: the 2015 m3/m4 is gonna come down to tuning capability, which in my mind is always a good thing as long as nothing rattles/explodes. I think BMW already realized this after they saw what people were doing with their N54 engine. That $500 JB4 chip adds like 100HP and makes the whole car run better. My stock 335i went into "limp mode" religiously before adding a JB4 chip, now I haven't seen it once in 2 years. The mods for the old e92 V8 engine were through the roof (ie. $6,500 for exhaust), and I'm hoping that this new M3 has some more reasonable tuning options. I was also hoping that this new M3 was going to be the next level for me, but it just seems like more of the same...
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 02:58 PM   #75
NeedleBanger
Private
Canada
3
Rep
52
Posts

Drives: '07 335i
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Alberta

iTrader: (0)

Hoi crap I thought u were talking about M5, my bad sorry.
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 03:42 PM   #76
Black Gold
Major General
590
Rep
5,396
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas

iTrader: (15)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedleBanger View Post
Well that's what happens when you twin-turbo a V8 engine - it hauls ass. The V10 was NA. Not really getting owned here, I have some pretty good experience with BMW's turbo inline 6s. Wait a year and we'll let the sales & customers do the talking. I'm just speculating. I don't remember saying weight saving was a bad thing. It's that they shrunk the engine size, slapped some tiny cheap turbos on there (probably the weakest link & the first thing to blow), and spent the extra saved money on more weight saving measures, because tiny little 3.0L turbo charged engines depend heavily on lightness to seem quick. I've already been down this road with BMW's turbo i6 cars. When the guy in the video says the engine is "a little boring", I already know exactly what he means. The 450HP inline 6 I'm driving right now is also a little boring, it doesn't have that balls-to-the-wall throw-you-back-in-your-seat V8 power that I'm looking for in my next vehicle purchase. This new M3 surely won't have it (stock anyway). I'll say this though: the 2015 m3/m4 is gonna come down to tuning capability, which in my mind is always a good thing as long as nothing rattles/explodes. I think BMW already realized this after they saw what people were doing with their N54 engine. That $500 JB4 chip adds like 100HP and makes the whole car run better. My stock 335i went into "limp mode" religiously before adding a JB4 chip, now I haven't seen it once in 2 years. The mods for the old e92 V8 engine were through the roof (ie. $6,500 for exhaust), and I'm hoping that this new M3 has some more reasonable tuning options. I was also hoping that this new M3 was going to be the next level for me, but it just seems like more of the same...
im going to be nice here and say this in the most gentle way possible

you have no idea what you are talking about and are completely out of your element. you also have rampant speculation for which there is zero basis (see your cheap turbos comment and jb4 power gain statement, both of which have zero merit)

see attached for the power curve of s65 vs s55. one thing to keep in mind is the negative effect of using 91 octane on a turbo car vs an N/A car.
Attached Images
 

Last edited by Black Gold; 07-22-2014 at 04:26 PM..
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 04:41 PM   #77
GrussGott
Lieutenant General
GrussGott's Avatar
United_States
18113
Rep
11,746
Posts

Drives: 2018 M4 Comp Indv
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Newport Beach

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by KennyPowers View Post
see attached for the power curve of s65 vs s55. one thing to keep in mind is the negative effect of using 91 octane on a turbo car vs an N/A car.
i'm coming late to the thread, but reading through it does bring up a question to me ... it's been my assumption that the SOLE reason BMW is making an I6 M3/4 vs a V8 (or larger) is efficiency ... It's in their marketing "efficient dynamics"

They have to cope with compliance (CAFE and such) as well as making a fast car that people want to drive.

If they didn't have to worry about CAFE (and the US *is* the M market) they'd probably have built a V8 or something.

So why all the arguing over V8 vs I6? Answer: CAFE.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by TurtleBoy View Post
He tries to draw people into inane arguments, some weird pastime of his.
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 04:55 PM   #78
Black Gold
Major General
590
Rep
5,396
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas

iTrader: (15)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GrussGott View Post
i'm coming late to the thread, but reading through it does bring up a question to me ... it's been my assumption that the SOLE reason BMW is making an I6 M3/4 vs a V8 (or larger) is efficiency ... It's in their marketing "efficient dynamics"

They have to cope with compliance (CAFE and such) as well as making a fast car that people want to drive.

If they didn't have to worry about CAFE (and the US *is* the M market) they'd probably have built a V8 or something.

So why all the arguing over V8 vs I6? Answer: CAFE.
do not agree.

current FI technology is allowing cars to make a ton of power and keep the weight / size of the engine down. a benefit to this is better fuel economy.

the s65 would never be able to put down that amount of average power, and would need to be completely redesigned in order to do so. it would also have to have a much larger displacement.

FI has certain drawbacks, as in less character in the sound, and often times not able to rev as high. its also difficult to get the same sharpness in the throttle, but the throttle response in modern well tuned cars (in manual transmission cars, not autos) is very good.

depends what you want out of the car. personally, I like the sound of the s55 and n54 in the 1m, and prefer the performance of the s55 over the v8 sound. ive never had an issue on track with my 997tt's throttle response, and thought that engine was way more fun on track than my s65, but didn't sound as good.
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 06:56 PM   #79
GrussGott
Lieutenant General
GrussGott's Avatar
United_States
18113
Rep
11,746
Posts

Drives: 2018 M4 Comp Indv
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Newport Beach

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by KennyPowers View Post
do not agree.

current FI technology is allowing cars to make a ton of power and keep the weight / size of the engine down. a benefit to this is better fuel economy.
Ok, but I'm not totally following that ... the M4 engine is "totally redesigned" anyway so, yes, they would've redesigned it but it would've been an NA v8 I'm thinking were it not for needing to hit CAFE.

All guesses, but I have hard time believing the I6 was designed solely around power-to-weight.

I'm also thinking of MB - does anyone really want them to quit making kickass V8s?

Hell, if I could get an equal performance MB v8 I would buy that all day over a FI I6 and I'm guessing I'm not alone.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by TurtleBoy View Post
He tries to draw people into inane arguments, some weird pastime of his.
Appreciate 0
      07-22-2014, 08:39 PM   #80
Black Gold
Major General
590
Rep
5,396
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas

iTrader: (15)

From the dyno you can see that the s65 is down between 60-100 whp throughout the entire rev range.

The gts motor still does not come close to making the amount of power as this motor. There would be no realistic way to make the s65 approach the s55 powerband without a complete redesign and a much larger engine which adds weihjt and probably wouldn't fit in the car.

FI 6 cylinder engines are very powerful and are light weight. Less weihjt in the front of the far is critical to balance and handling.

The s55 m3 traps roughly 120 mph compared to low 112-13 of the s65. It also goes to 100 mph more than a second faster.

It's an entirely different level of performance
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:25 PM.




f80post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
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