Autotalent
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 Technical Topics > Engine / Drivetrain / Exhaust / Bolt-ons / Tuning

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      11-26-2013, 09:23 AM   #23
JoeFromPA
Colonel
1789
Rep
2,995
Posts

Drives: '15 AW M3 6MT Stripper
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: SE PA

iTrader: (0)

The redline being 7800 rpms and the statements of torque increase over s65 at 2000 and 7500 rpms are new and specific interesting tidbits for me...
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 09:56 AM   #24
basscadet
Lieutenant
basscadet's Avatar
166
Rep
444
Posts

Drives: 991.2 GT3
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Overland Park, KS

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuwen View Post
I thought it has been previously stated the turbos were Mitsubishi?
Indeed - that is what Car & Driver reported.

There's nothing wrong with Mitsubishi turbos but I think it is interesting that these are developed with Honeywell to be more solution-specific.
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 10:02 AM   #25
ixse
Major
238
Rep
1,022
Posts

Drives: 2015 boxster s
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuwen View Post
I thought it has been previously stated the turbos were Mitsubishi?
thats a good thing.. i used to abuse the shit out of my evo.. sold it at 70k miles. never had a single problem. even on summer day at willow springs full day time attacks..
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 10:05 AM   #26
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 jsublime View Post
Whether it's 84 or 89, both of these statements contradict earlier info about the engine being oversquare.
I know

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=893611
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 10:15 AM   #27
Boss330
Major General
Boss330's Avatar
No_Country
1712
Rep
5,108
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

I just did a rough measurement based on the original of the picture attached.

The bore is definitely larger than the stroke if we can go by the picture, but I haven't done a precise enough measurement to get a reliable ratio between bore/stroke.
Attached Images
 
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 10:16 AM   #28
basscadet
Lieutenant
basscadet's Avatar
166
Rep
444
Posts

Drives: 991.2 GT3
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Overland Park, KS

iTrader: (0)

Why do we have all of this detail about the bore and stroke of the engine but we still don't have any performance figures for the car yet.
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 10:53 AM   #29
JoeFromPA
Colonel
1789
Rep
2,995
Posts

Drives: '15 AW M3 6MT Stripper
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: SE PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by basscadet View Post
Why do we have all of this detail about the bore and stroke of the engine but we still don't have any performance figures for the car yet.
You mean the car that won't be reviewed by journalists for another ~6 months?
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 10:59 AM   #30
solstice
Major General
5457
Rep
7,037
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

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.

Last edited by solstice; 11-26-2013 at 11:14 AM..
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 11:24 AM   #31
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
7506
Rep
19,370
Posts

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

iTrader: (1)

@solstice

Good article, hadn't seen that one mentioned before. Unfortunately there is so much conflicting information that we won't be able to call any of it fact until BMW makes it official.
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 11:24 AM   #32
CanAutM3
General
CanAutM3's Avatar
Canada
21103
Rep
20,741
Posts

Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gearhead999s View Post
I read somewhere that they are keeping the throttles open under deceleration to reduce pumping losses to help keep the turbos spooled up but only when its in the sport or sport plus drive modes.I cannot remember where I read this though
The S55 does not have throttles...

...keeping intake valves open?
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 11:30 AM   #33
solstice
Major General
5457
Rep
7,037
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
@solstice

Good article, hadn't seen that one mentioned before. Unfortunately there is so much conflicting information that we won't be able to call any of it fact until BMW makes it official.
I agree that as a community or fact source we need the official fact sheets to call it but two sources stating Biermann with the standard BMW I6 numbers and references to the 1M with that the S55 share only bore x stroke plus a few others is enough for me personally, i.e I believe the S55 has the same bore stroke as the standard I6s of 84 x 89.6
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 11:57 AM   #34
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 CanAutM3 View Post
The S55 does not have throttles...

...keeping intake valves open?
Or rather keeping BOTH intake and exhaust valves open perhaps

I know the valvetronic operates the intake valve instead of a throttle, but obviously you need exhaust valves open as well to get flow
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 01:13 PM   #35
Gearhead999s
Major General
Gearhead999s's Avatar
811
Rep
7,888
Posts

Drives: RR Velar R=Dynamic M2C R1200GS
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanAutM3 View Post
The S55 does not have throttles...

...keeping intake valves open?
I should have said being throttled
Appreciate 0
      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
      11-26-2013, 03:14 PM   #37
Kadema
Private First Class
Kadema's Avatar
Germany
1
Rep
116
Posts

Drives: 123d
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Rothenburg ob der Tauber

iTrader: (0)

40% more torque at 7500rpm would be 530~555hp, at least much more than 430 - I highly doubt that.

Also, at 2000rpm it seems to be much more than 70% more torque. More like 230%.

Last edited by Kadema; 11-26-2013 at 03:31 PM..
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 03:19 PM   #38
solstice
Major General
5457
Rep
7,037
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330 View Post
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.
Good point about the possible reversal of bore and stroke in this article. It seems a bit strange though that Biermann doesn't use this to argue the difference to the 1M engine. It would put an end to any speculation of reuse and similarities. It could of course be that Autoweek is the only source here and that they have manufactured facts and quotes or just gotten them wrong which would surprise no one.
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 03:37 PM   #39
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
Good point about the possible reversal of bore and stroke in this article. It seems a bit strange though that Biermann doesn't use this to argue the difference to the 1M engine. It would put an end to any speculation of reuse and similarities. It could of course be that Autoweek is the only source here and that they have manufactured facts and quotes or just gotten them wrong which would surprise no one.
Yeah, we'll just have to wait for official specs.
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 03:39 PM   #40
BMW M3 CRT
Lieutenant
BMW M3 CRT's Avatar
177
Rep
464
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Exclamation

For me its clear, that one statement in this forums engine spec must be wrong, if the S55 is based in the N55 than an bore of 89,6mm is impossible !!!
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 04:07 PM   #41
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 BMW M3 CRT View Post
For me its clear, that one statement in this forums engine spec must be wrong, if the S55 is based in the N55 than an bore of 89,6mm is impossible !!!
If it shared the block, yes it would be impossible with the bore spacing of the N55.

It is a all new block and that is also visible from the photos. However if that means a new bore spacing and 89,6mm bore is a different matter. But according to Biermann the engine shares nothing apart from some ancilliaries with the N55, so who knows?

BTW did you find the info on 80% unique components on the E9x M3 that we discussed on the other thread?
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 04:12 PM   #42
solstice
Major General
5457
Rep
7,037
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Edmunds has the same numbers and possible mistake. From reading a few of the articles from different sources I wonder if there are only two conflicting sources that has been copied by the others. Here's Edmunds piece that matches this post:

"Weighing 452 pounds fully dressed, the engine is 22 pounds lighter than the V8 it replaces, even with its pair of Honeywell turbochargers and indirect intercooling system attached. The two turbos generate around 18 pounds of boost pressure, which is then fed through the intercooler into chambers with an 80mm bore and an 89.6mm stroke."

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/2014...-revealed.html
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 04:17 PM   #43
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 BMW M3 CRT View Post
Really interesting fact ... seem like the inside source from the german m-forum was right as he tells me, that the new S55 (205kg!) would be a little bit heavier than the ongoing S65 (202kg!).

Seem logical ... if you compare the engine netto weights, an 3.0ltr.I6 is probably lighter than an 4.0ltr.V8, but in gross weight an BiTurbo with racetrack proof cooling need many heavy cooling parts ánd its never less an great weight saving effort to make him in nearly the same weight class als an proven lightweight V8.

Greetings BMW M3 CRT
This article also mentions the 10kg weight save and quotes a weight of 195kg (which actually adds up with the claim of 10kg lighter than the S65)

Here Biermann is quoted as saying that the S55 shares bore and stroke with the 1M engine... Meaning a 84mm bore and 89,6mm stroke... We will have to wait and see...

http://skiddmark.com/2013/09/bmw-rev...-m3-m4-wvideo/
Appreciate 0
      11-26-2013, 04:30 PM   #44
catpat8000
Lieutenant
United_States
34
Rep
421
Posts

Drives: 2019 M5
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: California

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice View Post
Edmunds has the same numbers and possible mistake. From reading a few of the articles from different sources I wonder if there are only two conflicting sources that has been copied by the others. Here's Edmunds piece that matches this post:

"Weighing 452 pounds fully dressed, the engine is 22 pounds lighter than the V8 it replaces, even with its pair of Honeywell turbochargers and indirect intercooling system attached. The two turbos generate around 18 pounds of boost pressure, which is then fed through the intercooler into chambers with an 80mm bore and an 89.6mm stroke."

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/2014...-revealed.html
Remember the internet is a giant echo-chamber so all these numbers (and mistakes) probably originate from the same place - BMW.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
2014 bmw m3, 2014 bmw m3 horsepower, 2014 bmw m3 specs, 2014 bmw m4 horsepower, 2014 bmw m4 specs, 2014 m3, 2014 m3 engine, 2014 m3 forum, 2014 m3 horsepower, 2014 m3 hp, 2014 m3 specs, 2014 m3 weight, 2014 m4 engine, 2014 m4 horsepower, 2014 m4 hp, 2014 m4 specs, 2014 m4 weight, 2015 bmw m3, 2015 bmw m4, 2015 m3, 2015 m3 engine, 2015 m3 specs, 2015 m4, 2015 m4 engine, 2015 m4 hp, 2015 m4 weight, bmw f80, bmw f80 forum, bmw f80 forums, bmw f80 m3, bmw f80 m3 s55, 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 f82 m4 s55, bmw f82 m4 video, bmw f83, bmw f83 m3, bmw f83 m4, bmw m forum, bmw m forums, bmw m3 carbon fiber roof, bmw m3 forum, bmw m3 forums, bmw m3 s55, bmw m3 s55 engine, bmw m3 yas marina blue, bmw m4, bmw m4 concept, bmw m4 concept coupe, bmw m4 coupe, bmw m4 coupe concept, bmw m4 curb weight, bmw m4 weight, f80 m3 specs, f80 m3 weight, f82 m4 specs, f82 m4 weight, m4 weight

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 06:00 AM.




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