European Auto Source (EAS)
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 versus...

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      07-06-2013, 08:09 AM   #155
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
5568
Rep
18,503
Posts

Drives: No BMW for now
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

If you want a cross plane S65, look no further than the P65 racing engine. There might be a cross plane modular V8 out there somewhere, but not from the factory that I am aware of.

By the way, I am a huge fan of the modular V8 since my dad was one (of hundreds, sure) of engineers who helped test that engine. I have clear memories of him designing a windage tray for it in his shop (a proof of concept and suggestion he made that didn't end up being used, at least not at the time). I also remember riding in a Lincoln Continental test mule back around 1990 or so and him laying down patches of rubber. Sure it was just the original SOHC engine with about 200hp, but it was a thrilling experience nevertheless. I have high hopes for the next Mustang. If they get the Roadrunner engine up to 8000 RPM and 100hp/L in production form, it will become very hard to resist. And if they can manage to get a DCT on the options sheet, there may very well be one in my driveway.
Appreciate 0
      07-06-2013, 09:45 AM   #156
BMW269
Brigadier General
No_Country
302
Rep
3,897
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330 View Post
Engine block config contributes to exhaust and intake sound how?

Crank design is THE deciding factor on a V8. A 180 deg crank engine has a timing order of two 4 cyl engines and creates a COMPLETELY different exhaust sound. A 180 deg V8 doesn't have that two adjacent cyl firing in a row uneven burble. NO exhaust system, apart from a cross bank/bundle of snakes system, can make a reg crank V8 sound remotely like a flat plane crank engine.

The S65's architecture is, by engineering and design criterias, more similar to a high output V8 with std crank design than it is a Ferrari flat plane V8. Those two V8 designs are two different animals. Comparing a S65 to a Ferrari might make it seem more exotic, but it's basic architecture is miles apart on the most important part that regards sound and ability to make power at high revs. After all there is a reason F1 V8 engines aren't std crank but 180 degree... And why a 430, 458 sounds more like a F1 than a Mustang (or M3)...

Sorry but I don't agree. One of the few details that makes the P65 different compared to the S65 is the crank. How so the the S65 you claim to be very different compared to a Ferrari V8 is all of a sudden the same in P65 form? M3 V8 is more Ferrari like than a Maserati V8 which is a Ferrari engine but with crossplane crank compared to Ferrari's flat one.

What makes the engines similar is their power delivery. No other NA engine delivers its power like an S65.
Appreciate 0
      07-06-2013, 10:35 AM   #157
Boss330
Brigadier General
Boss330's Avatar
Norway
997
Rep
4,832
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Norway, Scandinavia

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Levi View Post
Sorry but I don't agree. One of the few details that makes the P65 different compared to the S65 is the crank. How so the the S65 you claim to be very different compared to a Ferrari V8 is all of a sudden the same in P65 form? M3 V8 is more Ferrari like than a Maserati V8 which is a Ferrari engine but with crossplane crank compared to Ferrari's flat one.

What makes the engines similar is their power delivery. No other NA engine delivers its power like an S65.
The P65 IS comparable to any other flat plane crank engine. Just the same as a Ford Mustang V8 would be if it had a flat plane crank. I think you don't realize how much the different crank design means.

You could take any DOHC V8 engine. Flat plane or not. They all have overhead cams, multi valves, 90 deg V etc. You can get high flowing heads and high performance equipment for all of then.

What sets them apart with regards to sound and characteristics is down to crank design. Just Google it. Don't take my word for it, do your own research. There is even a good thread on this board about the P65 and flat plane crank that offer more technical insight into the significant differences between the two crank designs.

And there are loads of NA V8 engines that deliver power like the S65. It's not like BMW has discovered some magic or secret that no one knows about. The S65 is a great engine. But no matter what it's still a cross plane crank engine. There IS a reason the P65 isn't cross plane but flat plane! Just find the thread here about the P65 and it's crank design.

Last edited by Boss330; 07-06-2013 at 10:44 AM..
Appreciate 0
      07-06-2013, 01:30 PM   #158
Voltigeur
MacroRisk
Voltigeur's Avatar
Australia
94
Rep
2,523
Posts

Drives: M3 E92 ED'09 / 335d Sport DD
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: TX

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinlevrone View Post
Sorry, but there is nothing in the S65 V8 engine that impresses me.
Hmm... seems you're in the minority: see the world's automotive press - a run of 5 years' winning in the 3 - 4.0L range - yes even vs vaunted Mezger-engined P-cars - the S65 has won - just recently losing its crown to the McLaren M838T:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...ne_of_the_Year

Agree w/ another poster: it will go down as a classic and be a popular engine at classic car shows 20+ years from now when everything is hybridized or electric.
__________________

Just thinking of something not so witty
///M3 E92 '09 Jerez Black | 6MT | Ext Fox Red | Tech | Prem | 19s |Heated Seats | iPod |Smartphone | Euro Deliv June 09
Sold: 540iT / 530i / 323i
Appreciate 0
      07-06-2013, 05:33 PM   #159
verbs
Captain
52
Rep
664
Posts

Drives: 2015 M235i
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Zona

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAM3S View Post
LOL @ the "M3 needs more power and torque"......

You guys clearly dont know what an M car is all about then.
I get what he's saying at least with down low power; the E39 M5 made a good amount of power more under the curve than the E60 M5. BMW sacrificed a bit of low end to get killer top end on their last E series iterations....
Appreciate 0
      07-06-2013, 11:17 PM   #160
Ezio
Brigadier General
Ezio's Avatar
United_States
246
Rep
3,847
Posts

Drives: Audi
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: MI

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by verbs View Post
I get what he's saying at least with down low power; the E39 M5 made a good amount of power more under the curve than the E60 M5. BMW sacrificed a bit of low end to get killer top end on their last E series iterations....
killer top end and sound, dont forget the screaming V8/V10 sound.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 12:53 AM   #161
verbs
Captain
52
Rep
664
Posts

Drives: 2015 M235i
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Zona

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezio View Post
killer top end and sound, dont forget the screaming V8/V10 sound.
I personally didn't forget the sound. My last car was 2008 E60 M5. Miss that ride.
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 02:08 AM   #162
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
463
Rep
10,408
Posts

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

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330 View Post
Crank design is THE deciding factor on a V8. A 180 deg crank engine has a timing order of two 4 cyl engines and creates a COMPLETELY different exhaust sound. A 180 deg V8 doesn't have that two adjacent cyl firing in a row uneven burble. NO exhaust system, apart from a cross bank/bundle of snakes system, can make a reg crank V8 sound remotely like a flat plane crank engine.
I disagree. With significant changes to redline, intake system, exhaust system and block one can radically alter the sound of any engine. Yes there is still something essential the crank type and firing order contribute, but it is NOT the single factor.

I really expected a better reply. You're obviously astute on engines in general. However, it seems you want to rest your argument solely on crankshaft configuration. I don't disagree that is important but it is only roughly as important as power delivery - i.e. torque/power curve shapes and redline.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330 View Post
Engine block config contributes to exhaust and intake sound how?
A bedplate design is significantly more stiff than a traditional design. Although overall noise is dominated by intake and exhaust noise there is also a significant content to overall sound level and sound quality directly from the engine block and engine itself. The stiffness of the block greatly affects this component of the sound.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330 View Post
The S65's architecture is, by engineering and design criterias, more similar to a high output V8 with std crank design than it is a Ferrari flat plane V8. Those two V8 designs are two different animals. Comparing a S65 to a Ferrari might make it seem more exotic, but it's basic architecture is miles apart on the most important part that regards sound and ability to make power at high revs. After all there is a reason F1 V8 engines aren't std crank but 180 degree... And why a 430, 458 sounds more like a F1 than a Mustang (or M3)...
It's fine for you to state this but you've not provided any evidence. My evidence was (again):
  • Bedplate design (a major design decision by the way)
  • Individual throttle bodies
  • Highly efficient/engineered heads leading to very high flow at high rpm and providing
  • High rpm linear power delivery (shape of torque and power curves)
Furthermore the bold part above about ability to make power at high revs is simply completely false. The S65 and F430 have very similar power curves at the upper rpms (nearly linear). However, I've not been able to locate a proper factory dyno for the F430. From some of the regular old "garage" dynos the S65's ability to maintain flat torque and linear power right up to redline appears to be even superior to the F430!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330 View Post
The P65 IS comparable to any other flat plane crank engine. Just the same as a Ford Mustang V8 would be if it had a flat plane crank. I think you don't realize how much the different crank design means.

You could take any DOHC V8 engine. Flat plane or not. They all have overhead cams, multi valves, 90 deg V etc. You can get high flowing heads and high performance equipment for all of then
...
And there are loads of NA V8 engines that deliver power like the S65.
Not true. Heads, valve system and the entire intake system are as highly engineered for flow across a extremely wide rpm range as many other parts of an engine. Which leads me to your next statement. Please find a V8 (or any production) car engine with as broad and flat of a torque curve as the S65. it has 90% of peak torque from 2500 rpm to 8200 rpm (98% of redline). The thing is - you can't! Also, you are now even talking aftermarket compared to stock with is really grasping at straws...
Factory BMW S65 M3 Dyno
__________________
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 |

Last edited by swamp2; 07-07-2013 at 02:30 AM..
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 05:47 AM   #163
NISFAN
Major General
NISFAN's Avatar
United Kingdom
2477
Rep
8,878
Posts

Drives: The best kind of F30 :)
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Bedford UK

iTrader: (0)

Lol at the s65 fanboi's.

The s54 is 20% smaller displacement, a generation older design, yet is only 9% down on torque and 18% down on power.

If we look at s54 in CSL format we are only 14% down on power and 7.5% down on torque compared to s65.

Yes the s65 is quite a special engine, but not the marvel of engineering claimed by the fans. Compared to the generation before, it is a bit of a let down in terms of specific output per litre.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 05:56 AM   #164
Tåst
Second Lieutenant
Tåst's Avatar
2
Rep
220
Posts

Drives: BMW, I think.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: FIN

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Not true. Heads, valve system and the entire intake system are as highly engineered for flow across a extremely wide rpm range as many other parts of an engine. Which leads me to your next statement. Please find a V8 (or any production) car engine with as broad and flat of a torque curve as the S65. it has 90% of peak torque from 2500 rpm to 8200 rpm (98% of redline). The thing is - you can't! Also, you are now even talking aftermarket compared to stock with is really grasping at straws...
Audi 4.2L V8 is pretty similar than S65, but its got direct fuel injection(apples vs oranges) make Audi´s V8 just bring more horsepower and little better torque curve. (360Nm 2200rpm-8500rpm and peak 430Nm 4000-6000rpm) But yes how good S65 would be whit direct injection?

S65 is not marvelous or some kind miracle engine compared to other S-engines. They are always been engineered well, remember S54 which has world power fullest six cylinder engine and engine delivers most highest torque per litre ratio, until Ferrari (430?) get title. Of course S14,S52,S70 and many others

Last edited by Tåst; 07-07-2013 at 06:02 AM..
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 06:17 AM   #165
manuelf
Private First Class
53
Rep
134
Posts

Drives: BMW M3 E92 LCI
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
Lol at the s65 fanboi's.

The s54 is 20% smaller displacement,
18,9% exactly

Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
a generation older design, yet is only 9% down on torque and 18% down on power.

If we look at s54 in CSL format we are only 14% down on power and 7.5% down on torque compared to s65...
I think it should also be considered, that the S54 only had to fullfill Euro3 and (later) Euro4 emission norm whereas the S65 fullfills Euro5.
It has often been discussed that already the Euro4 S54 had a slight performance drop compared to the Euro3 version
.... and comparing official spec sheet numbers of power/torque might be questionable maybe? What are the typical dyno results of S54 and S65 cars? Do you see the same claimed differences?
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 08:28 AM   #166
BMW269
Brigadier General
No_Country
302
Rep
3,897
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
Lol at the s65 fanboi's.

The s54 is 20% smaller displacement, a generation older design, yet is only 9% down on torque and 18% down on power.

If we look at s54 in CSL format we are only 14% down on power and 7.5% down on torque compared to s65.

Yes the s65 is quite a special engine, but not the marvel of engineering claimed by the fans. Compared to the generation before, it is a bit of a let down in terms of specific output per litre.

LOL at the N54 fans. The engine is not a marvel of engineering calimed by fans. Toyota had such an engine even more advanced two decades ago. Nissan had turbocharged I6 engines long before BMW making alot more power from even smaller displacement with even higher redline.


An the N54 was never really that new, just a turbocharged M54.


By the way, contrary to what most think, S65 is more old, it is based on S60 that powered the M3 GTR. S65 is a pure Motorport engine, an engine that was developed by BMW Motorsport for racing only. Based on it was built the S65 for road. And based on S65 was derived, contrary to what most think eventhough it came before, the S85, an S65 with two more cylinders.
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 10:11 AM   #167
NISFAN
Major General
NISFAN's Avatar
United Kingdom
2477
Rep
8,878
Posts

Drives: The best kind of F30 :)
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Bedford UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by manuelf View Post
18,9% exactly



I think it should also be considered, that the S54 only had to fullfill Euro3 and (later) Euro4 emission norm whereas the S65 fullfills Euro5.
It has often been discussed that already the Euro4 S54 had a slight performance drop compared to the Euro3 version
.... and comparing official spec sheet numbers of power/torque might be questionable maybe? What are the typical dyno results of S54 and S65 cars? Do you see the same claimed differences?
True regarding Emission controls being stricter, but still every manufacturer has been able to increase power whilst maintaining better emissions.

The s65 is also a bigger engine, and everyone knows it is easier to get higher specific power/litre from a bigger engine. Put two Honda K20 engines together in a 4litre V8 and it would wave bye-bye to an s65. K20 is even older engine technology, designed late 90's.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 10:12 AM   #168
NISFAN
Major General
NISFAN's Avatar
United Kingdom
2477
Rep
8,878
Posts

Drives: The best kind of F30 :)
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Bedford UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Levi View Post
LOL at the N54 fans. The engine is not a marvel of engineering calimed by fans. Toyota had such an engine even more advanced two decades ago. Nissan had turbocharged I6 engines long before BMW making alot more power from even smaller displacement with even higher redline.


An the N54 was never really that new, just a turbocharged M54.


By the way, contrary to what most think, S65 is more old, it is based on S60 that powered the M3 GTR. S65 is a pure Motorport engine, an engine that was developed by BMW Motorsport for racing only. Based on it was built the S65 for road. And based on S65 was derived, contrary to what most think eventhough it came before, the S85, an S65 with two more cylinders.
Can I ask why you quoted me and then went on to talk about N54?
__________________
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 10:25 AM   #169
BMW269
Brigadier General
No_Country
302
Rep
3,897
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
Can I ask why you quoted me and then went on to talk about N54?
Not obvious? You a turbo fan, this is M3 thread, M3 E90 has NA S65 which you hate, you love new M3 F80 which in worst senario will have a pimped N54, and you like it.
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 10:41 AM   #170
NISFAN
Major General
NISFAN's Avatar
United Kingdom
2477
Rep
8,878
Posts

Drives: The best kind of F30 :)
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Bedford UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Levi View Post
Not obvious? You a turbo fan, this is M3 thread, M3 E90 has NA S65 which you hate, you love new M3 F80 which in worst senario will have a pimped N54, and you like it.
Ah I see

Just to put you straight, IMO BMW has made at best mediocre Turbo engines. Back in the 2002 turbo or 80's F1 days different story maybe, but I don't rate any modern BMW Turbo engine, so can in no way be considered an n54 FAN.

s63tu is OK, but not that special for a performance engine, and N54/N55 with a turbo not capable of flowing enough in the upper rev range is a disaster. Who needs full boost by 1,200rpm?

The light at the end of the tunnel for the new M3/4, is if you rip the BMW turbo system off it, and turbo charge it properly it will be an amazing package. ...it all depends on whether the ECU can be cracked. BMW are making this more difficult.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 10:48 AM   #171
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
5568
Rep
18,503
Posts

Drives: No BMW for now
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
The s65 is also a bigger engine, and everyone knows it is easier to get higher specific power/litre from a bigger engine.
So this suggests that in the real world, the engines with the highest specific output are also those with greatest displacement. Does it hold true? Big stonking V10 and V12s of the world are typically making more HP/L or torque/L than Ferrari V8s or Porsche H6s, or super bike engines?

Quote:
Put two Honda K20 engines together in a 4litre V8 and it would wave bye-bye to an s65. K20 is even older engine technology, designed late 90's.
Or put two BMW S1000RR engines together and make S65-sized power with 2L, right? Or lots of other similar things that don't usually happen in the real world because simply scaling up a complex mechanical system like this is far from trivial. It can be done and sometimes is, but even so, it hardly validates your point above.

I get it - BTW. In a forum like this it can be a challenge to read through and see an over abundance of largely one-sided discussions. Sometimes we can feel an obligation to look out for the other side of the argument. But if you are hasty you can let emotions get the best if you and it ends up undermining what would otherwise be a fairly clean track record as a voice of reason. Because like most of the regular commenters on bimmerpost, you have a relatively good sense of reason, an apparently solid body of knowledge to draw from, and are a passionate enthusiast who wants to get his message across. A message that, in the end, I know you'd like to be credible so that it is taken seriously, rather than opinionated and error-laiden.
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 11:04 AM   #172
NISFAN
Major General
NISFAN's Avatar
United Kingdom
2477
Rep
8,878
Posts

Drives: The best kind of F30 :)
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Bedford UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
So this suggests that in the real world, the engines with the highest specific output are also those with greatest displacement. Does it hold true? Big stonking V10 and V12s of the world are typically making more HP/L or torque/L than Ferrari V8s or Porsche H6s, or super bike engines?
No, but the point is this....any car needs a minimum amount of torque to make it driveable. The bigger the engine, the easier it is to achieve the minimum torque, and therefore more attention can be directed at getting maximum torque higher up in the rev range. If that makes sense.

Your superbike engine is a valid example. Good enough torque for a motorbike, but nowhere near enough for a car. You quite rightly point out good examples to disprove my theory, however, just because an engine is big in displacement, it doesn't mean it has been squeezed for maximum performance. To many, more displacement is enough.

Mercedes have countered BMW's M3 offering by using a large displacement, but relatively lazy engine. Clearly this example does not support my argument.



Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
Or put two BMW S1000RR engines together and make S65-sized power with 2L, right? Or lots of other similar things that don't usually happen in the real world because simply scaling up a complex mechanical system like this is far from trivial. It can be done and sometimes is, but even so, it hardly validates your point above.
True, it has to be done with the whole picture in mind, otherwise we would have 100 cylinder radio controlled aircraft engines powering our cars.

Two BMW S1000RR engines would be great for a single seater racing car, but still not enough torque for a road going car, and why it helps to have bigger displacement in order to really focus on the high end torque.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
I get it - BTW. In a forum like this it can be a challenge to read through and see an over abundance of largely one-sided discussions. Sometimes we can feel an obligation to look out for the other side of the argument. But if you are hasty you can let emotions get the best if you and it ends up undermining what would otherwise be a fairly clean track record as a voice of reason. Because like most of the regular commenters on bimmerpost, you have a relatively good sense of reason, an apparently solid body of knowledge to draw from, and are a passionate enthusiast who wants to get his message across. A message that, in the end, I know you'd like to be credible so that it is taken seriously, rather than opinionated and error-laiden.
I would like it to be taken seriously
__________________
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 11:54 AM   #173
BMW269
Brigadier General
No_Country
302
Rep
3,897
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
Ah I see

Just to put you straight, IMO BMW has made at best mediocre Turbo engines. Back in the 2002 turbo or 80's F1 days different story maybe, but I don't rate any modern BMW Turbo engine, so can in no way be considered an n54 FAN.

s63tu is OK, but not that special for a performance engine, and N54/N55 with a turbo not capable of flowing enough in the upper rev range is a disaster. Who needs full boost by 1,200rpm?

The light at the end of the tunnel for the new M3/4, is if you rip the BMW turbo system off it, and turbo charge it properly it will be an amazing package. ...it all depends on whether the ECU can be cracked. BMW are making this more difficult.


Sounds fair to me. You are then clearly not the turbo-"mass-guy" like most other 335i owner on here, you know what you are looking for. I prefer NA engines, but have nothing against FI engines, especially from Japan. I have nothing against FI engines, other then sound, but they have to be special and not like N54, thus my hope for M3 V6.

You define H/R NA engines lazy, I define Euro-Turbo drivers lazy. Wanting to have max torque and smash the pedal from almost idle instead of shifting, and then run out of torque in the upper range, I call that laziness.
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 12:14 PM   #174
NISFAN
Major General
NISFAN's Avatar
United Kingdom
2477
Rep
8,878
Posts

Drives: The best kind of F30 :)
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Bedford UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Levi View Post
Sounds fair to me. You are then clearly not the turbo-"mass-guy" like most other 335i owner on here, you know what you are looking for. I prefer NA engines, but have nothing against FI engines, especially from Japan. I have nothing against FI engines, other then sound, but they have to be special and not like N54, thus my hope for M3 V6.

You define H/R NA engines lazy, I define Euro-Turbo drivers lazy. Wanting to have max torque and smash the pedal from almost idle instead of shifting, and then run out of torque in the upper range, I call that laziness.
Absolutely agree, turbo + lazy driver is not a good mix.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2013, 12:24 PM   #175
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
463
Rep
10,408
Posts

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

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
Lol at the s65 fanboi's.

The s54 is 20% smaller displacement, a generation older design, yet is only 9% down on torque and 18% down on power.
Fans, quite obviously, not fanboys. The S54 is a fine engine but has a sustantially less desireable (i.e. peaky) torque curve. I guess great for folks like yourself who like small engines, big turbos and lots of turbo lag...

Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
If we look at s54 in CSL format we are only 14% down on power and 7.5% down on torque compared to s65.
Terrible, apples to oranges comparison. How about M3 GTS vs. CSL. Not much of an engine competition at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
Yes the s65 is quite a special engine, but not the marvel of engineering claimed by the fans. Compared to the generation before, it is a bit of a let down in terms of specific output per litre.
Well it's a heck of a lot more unique, special and with enormously better power delivery. As you know specific output is great on paper and from an engineering/technical perspective but doesn't matter a bit in the real world (unless in racing or for countries with taxes on displacement.
__________________
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
      07-07-2013, 12:47 PM   #176
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
463
Rep
10,408
Posts

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

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holander View Post
Audi 4.2L V8 is pretty similar than S65, but its got direct fuel injection(apples vs oranges) make Audi´s V8 just bring more horsepower and little better torque curve. (360Nm 2200rpm-8500rpm and peak 430Nm 4000-6000rpm) But yes how good S65 would be whit direct injection?
The Audi 4.2L V8 is a great comparison and a great engine. However, it is not able to breathe as well as the M3 it only produces 90% of peak torque from 2300 to 7500 rpm thus only does so only to 91% of redline. It's torque curve is also a bit more "lumpy". For both of those reasons I would say it is slightly inferior with regards to its torque curve. From a technology standpoint its direct injection is a clear advantage over the M3. The M3 should have had DI!
__________________
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
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
2014 bmw m3, 2014 m3, 2014 m3 forum, 2015 bmw m3, 2015 bmw m4, 2015 m3, 2015 m4, bmw f80, bmw f80 forum, bmw f80 forums, bmw f80 m3, bmw f80 m3 sedan, bmw f82, bmw f82 forum, bmw f82 forums, bmw f82 m3, bmw f82 m3 coupe, bmw f82 m3 forum, bmw f82 m4, bmw f82 m4 coupe, bmw f83, bmw f83 m3, bmw f83 m4, bmw m forum, bmw m forums, bmw m4, bmw m4 coupe, bmw m4 coupe forum, bmw m4 forum, bmw m4 forums, f80, f80 forum, f80 forums, f80 m3, f80 m3 forum, f80 m3 forums, f80 m3 sedan, f82, f82 coupe, f82 forum, f82 forums, f82 m3, f82 m3 coupe, f82 m3 forum, f82 m4, f82 m4 coupe, f82 m4 forum, f82 m4 forums, f83 m3, f83 m4, m forum, m forums, m3 f80, m3 f80 forum, m3 f80 forums, m4 forum, m4 forums

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 01:58 PM.




f80post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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