View Single Post
      11-26-2013, 02:54 PM   #36
Boss330
Major General
Boss330's Avatar
No_Country
1712
Rep
5,108
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice View Post
Autoweek states the exact same bore x stroke as the 1M and the piece in this post. The 80 mm bore above is obviously a typo and should be 84.

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2013...NEWS/130929883

That article also talks about a more than 200 lbs lighter CSL being considered with lightweight seats etc. I think Scott26 has hinted at this as well.
Yes, there is a lot of confusion so far, but the quoted 80mm and 89,6mm measurements have been reported by Auto Motor und Sport as well as CAR, along with a description of the engine being oversquare, so they have obviously not just made a simple typo.

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=893611

The Engine Tech International article also mentions 80/89,6mm but has got it backwards and has the 80mm stated as the bore. That equates to a volume of 2,7l, so definitely not correct.

It either has a 80mm stroke and 89,6mm bore or a 89,6mm stroke and 84mm bore. From the photo I posted the bore is definitely larger than the stroke, but hard to verify as being correct due to angle of the engine on the photo etc.
Appreciate 0