Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN
Layman's term maybe, but wrong to a drive train engineer.
|
Neither of us is a drivetrain nor automotive engineer and again our education nor titles don't really matter either. Everyone on the planet including automotive engineers agree on what turbo lag is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN
No, I unapologetically use the engineering definition. If I were to go by 'EVERYONE's beliefs then I would also have to close mindedly accept that 'Torque wins races' or other nonsensical definitions. Just to recap, a turbo engine responds to throttle input EXACTLY the same as an NA engine, afterall it actually is an internal combustion 4 stroke engine.
|
Well you couldn't be more wrong about that. If your definition of turbo lag is what you provided earlier - that all NA engines are on "lag" across their entire rpm range. Again, nonsense.
Of course I agree about the importance of hp over torque.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN
If you had used torque in your argument you would have been onto something, but totally failed with the horsepower reference. Lag on a modern turbo system at peak horsepower revs would be negligible. I know you probably used it for a more forum friendly reference, but down the wrong track. The higher the revs = the higher the exhaust gas energy = lower compressor spool time.
|
I said there are operating regimes and the lag regime is as previously noted always greater at lower rpm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN
At least you agree that, say, the S63Tu at 4.4 litres even when in 'lag' state will be at least if not better than an s65. Kind of poo poo's the people who believe the F10 M5 F12/13 M6 suffers from lag. I'm pretty sure I feel strong acceleration when driving the M6  |
Sure, but that isn't an apples to apples comparison. The new M3 will be getting 3.0-3.3 liters and will not produce anywhere near the power the current S65 does when under miniumum boost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN
Yep, you are definitely biased towards the s65.....comes across really clearly. It is a great engine by the way, and deserves the credit it has received. Sadly it doesn't fit in with the modern way of doing things. You have to move with the times in this industry.
|
Modern or cost savings? Turbos are not modern, I think you know better. Yes they are getting more popular and are being modernized but are not modern per se.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN
Obviously current M3 owners would like the engine they know and love to move into the next car in some form or another.....but simple facts are, to extract the increase of power required, BMW would have to go against the global trends for economy and emissions, on an already thirsty engine.
|
Yes, again it is about cost and fuel efficiency which BMW M have put aside in the past. Did you happen to note that the Ferrari 458 get bets fuel economy and revs higher than the prior 430 model. It is possible, just not cheap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN
On the plus side, there was equally as much debate about the F10 M5 / M6 dropping the s85 engine. Seems like s63tu has gone down well with new owners, with only 'the sound' being a negative.
|
Just like all of the 335i fanboys saying that car has "no" lag. No lag my ass. The new F10 has been equally or more so complained about. Let's use this quote from Automobile magazine,
Quote:
|
The biggest disappointment with the M5 is turbo lag. Yeah, yeah, how typical that I'm complaining about a turbocharged M5. Actually, I'm not complaining about the fact that the M5 wears turbos: I'm complaining that the S63TU engine has so much more lag than the non-Valvetronic S63 did. In that silly X6M (and the slightly less silly X5M), the turbos were among the most responsive I've ever experienced. Not so in the M5 - the lag is significant enough that you have to drive around it.
|
Uhhhh, yeah, no lag
Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN
As for turbo lag, check out race two in this e60 M5 vs. F10 M5 (race two singled out as it was closest start point for the both in terms of reaction time). Not bad for a over 100kg heavier car with 12% less displacement.  |
Hmmm, peak hp wins races, what a huge surprise. Let me also "surprise" everyone here with some other items from my crystal ball
-The new M3/4 will be lighter than the existing model.
-The new M3/4 will have more power than the existing model.
-The new M3/4 will be faster than the existing model.
Well now that the sarcasm is done here is the last point
-The new engine in the M3/4 will be substantially less appealing in character and also likely in throttle response (as compared to the S65).
Wasting a lot of breath here...