Latest BMW M4 Coupe F82 Spy Pics and Updated Info (Nearly 8000 RPM)

[hwelvaar]

Originally Posted by Gjm127

Sucks that all the other competitive models such as the C63 and RS5 are keeping theirs... Ppl here like the downgrade to 6-cyl but absolutely NO ONE would have said no to a F82 M3/M4 V8!

I would have said no. Simple: the V8 puts out about 280 gr/KM of Co2.
Not sure what the new M3 will do, but it could possibly be below 200 gr/KM, and as a result the road tax here, that exponentially raises with the CO2 emission, would make a huge difference in V8 NA vs I6 turbo.
(as in 250$ per month, as in 15.000$ on a 5 year lease)

This is one of the reasons for the downsizing in the car industry.

[Gjm127]

Originally Posted by hwelvaar

I would have said no. Simple: the V8 puts out about 280 gr/KM of Co2.
Not sure what the new M3 will do, but it could possibly be below 200 gr/KM, and as a result the road tax here, that exponentially raises with the CO2 emission, would make a huge difference in V8 NA vs I6 turbo.
(as in 250$ per month, as in 15.000$ on a 5 year lease)

This is one of the reasons for the downsizing in the car industry.

I agree with this, but that's why there's the I6 turbo (twin-power or whatever you wanna call it) 335i that boasts approximately the same numbers with a good tune for ppl in Europe that don't want to waste their money on this God forsaken tax. Anyway, I don't wanna be that guy that restarts this debate, I'm over the downgrade issue lol

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by Blindside_137

But couldn't a more efficient V8 have been produced as well while remaining NA?

Not a chance in hell.

[AlpWhite11]

Originally Posted by evolution80

lets not forget the additional fact (quite possibly)

+25% higher base price than current m3


...i hate not being rich

Absolutely zero chance it will be priced that much higher.

[bimmerjph]

Originally Posted by hwelvaar

Beware people...
It's not a 8K redline, but a near-8K RPM redline! In marketing terminology, 7700 RPM is also near-8K redline...

Even if it would have 'only' 7700 RPM, that would still be an achievement, compared to the 7000 RPM redline of the current 3L turbo petrol BMW engine (N55), which the new M3 engine will be based upon.

Very true. But at this point I will be happy with anything over 7.5k.

[eMvy]

Originally Posted by formula M

And the exact reason I didn't buy one.. it wasn't needed.

Also, r u aware the current M3 weighs 3,700lbs? (So who cares regardless, right?)

It was needed. Improved competition and a weight increase from e46 > e92 was inevitable, so additional power was needed. A NA I6 simply wasn't going to cut it and FI likely would have been too early (lots learned from N54/N55). So naturally they decided to increase displacement and build one of the best production V8's on the planet.

S65

[Tåst]

S65, great engine, but turbocharged Inline-six nearly 8000rpm redline is something what we not ever seen.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

The only reason to do it is if the car is faster by letting the engine rev to ~8k. This would mean one of two things:

- The engine is still capable of making more power at that RPM.

- The engine's power peak comes before 8k RPM, but the decrease in power above that point is offset by targeting a higher RPM for the next gear change.

One thing we can be sure of is that BMW will not produce an engine that revs to nearly 8K RPM at the expense of performance.

I dont understand the comment... this is not engine dependent but turbo sizing dependent. If the turbo can't hold boost past a certain rpm, it's useless to wind it out that far as you are actually losing performance. There is no way that they can size a turbo (whether 1,2 or 3) to be high revving, torquey and very responsive. Then comed the problem of gearing it right to take advantage of the spool... this would feel very weird if this thing really revved to 8k.

[eMvy]

We haven't heard anything in a while, but one of the more curious aspects of the S55, is whether or not M will introduce a third electric turbo. That should ensure the engine has NA like responsiveness.

BMW has tri-turbo cars in their fleet today, so they've certainly had some time to figure out and optimize the plumbing.

[See5]

Originally Posted by 3s-a-charm

Other than the C63... how can anyone compete with this? ...based on performance + appearance.

I think Lexus and Cadillac will probably get pretty close in performance, we'll see about the appearance.

[Transfer]

I had been hoping for 7500-8000 RPM redline and I'm glad to hear that will actually happen. I do wonder though where the power falls off. In the M5, HP is virtually flat past 5500 rpms while torque falls off as expected. There isn't really an advantage going beyond 6k rpms based solely on a dyno plot. So I'm hoping that if the M3 has say a 7900 rpm redline, will it actually be useable? Will the driver want to take it to 7900?

So lets say that yes, it's useable and power peaks at like 7800. This would be best accomplished with a BIG turbo. I've said it before but I could totally see a so called "tri" turbo system that incorporates a twinscroll for decreased lag and mid range power and a larger turbo to carry the big HP numbers to redline. I would be very surprised if there is an electric turbo but that would be pretty fantastic.

Also, the S55 absolutely has to have fully forged internals. If they're pushing 8k rpms and hopefully they care about carrying boost to near redline, this better be one stout engine, and cooling better be something very special. For all those hoping to tune this one to 600HP, I say good luck it's going to be at near max capacity as it is when it comes down to cooling and what a 3.0L can handle.

[pseto]

Originally Posted by eMvy

We haven't heard anything in a while, but one of the more curious aspects of the S55, is whether or not M will introduce a third electric turbo. That should ensure the engine has NA like responsiveness.

BMW has tri-turbo cars in their fleet today, so they've certainly had some time to figure out and optimize the plumbing.

+1 electric tri-turbo M3/M4 with near 8k RPM. BMW filed for the patent a while ago

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=597327

[solstice]

If you listen to the latest footage from the ring where you have an E90 M3 leading the way of a train of turbo cars, the F10 M5, Panny S V6 TT and an F80 you can hear how crappy the FIs sound in comparison and you can also hear how the F80 is short shifted which would indicate that it makes optimal power like most FIs in the midrange.

I'm convinced that the F80 will not sound as good and not pull so hard towards the redline. It will be different but still very good. I hope for a nice muted growl, minimum lag and an ability to hold power towards the redline + the fat FI midrange. If that's what we will get I'm fine with that. Not as awesome as the S65 in many ways but good enough and frankly all what we can expect from FI.

[car7]

Originally Posted by eMvy

Not seeing the correlation between those two sentences.

It was 3 sentences. Americans shouldn't complain about the move from a 8-cyl to a 6, because bmw never was about v8s. The s65 is a very nice sounding engine. But it is way to slow and way to inefficient. You could always buy a camaro, because there is no point in whining about something that's gonna happen regardless if you like the s65. The next m4 is gonna make the m3 look outdated in every way.

[Judah]

Originally Posted by eMvy

We haven't heard anything in a while, but one of the more curious aspects of the S55, is whether or not M will introduce a third electric turbo. That should ensure the engine has NA like responsiveness.

BMW has tri-turbo cars in their fleet today, so they've certainly had some time to figure out and optimize the plumbing.

+1

In addition, BMWs are historically known to breathe well on the top end,(rpm). I think this "electric assist" setup will allow this to be the case in the new M3/4 turbo motor.
I think we're getting ready to see something very different in turbo charging.....

[fuddman]

Originally Posted by car7

... bmw never was about v8s.

Got anything to back this up?

[Mak135i]

Originally Posted by hwelvaar

Beware people...
It's not a 8K redline, but a near-8K RPM redline! In marketing terminology, 7700 RPM is also near-8K redline...

Even if it would have 'only' 7700 RPM, that would still be an achievement, compared to the 7000 RPM redline of the current 3L turbo petrol BMW engine (N55), which the new M3 engine will be based upon.

Without getting in to the engineering and science behind the engine, can somebody explain why a 7700 RPM redline or a 6000 RPM redline matter if the car is making the same power at the lower point and indeed making more torque? I know the beauty of a NA engine is that the power keeps rising all the way (or very very close) to the limiter but in FI that's not the case and we know the new M3/M4 will be FI.

Thanks

[eMvy]

Originally Posted by car7

It was 3 sentences. Americans shouldn't complain about the move from a 8-cyl to a 6, because bmw never was about v8s. The s65 is a very nice sounding engine. But it is way to slow and way to inefficient. You could always buy a camaro, because there is no point in whining about something that's gonna happen regardless if you like the s65. The next m4 is gonna make the m3 look outdated in every way.

• We aren't concerned about the move from a V8 to an I6. We are concerned about retaining the characteristics that make an M special.
• Yes, the S65 is a "nice" sounding engine, but if you think we're in love with it simply for that reason
• "it [S65] is way to slow" - I'm not even sure what to say
• "The next m4 is gonna make the m3 look outdated in every way" - I absolutely agree from a statistical standpoint, but we all know it's not the singular recipe that makes an M really special. Just look at the M5 feedback.

Lastly, "bmw never was about v8s". Not sure where to go here, but keep in mind the first M3 had an I4. If you think BMW isn't capable of deviating from an I6, take a look at the M70

[FogCityM3]

Makes you wonder why BMW keeps bringing that E90 M3/CRT on the 'Ring....difficulties in getting the new car to out-perform the old??

Originally Posted by solstice

If you listen to the latest footage from the ring where you have an E90 M3 leading the way of a train of turbo cars, the F10 M5, Panny S V6 TT and an F80 you can hear how crappy the FIs sound in comparison and you can also hear how the F80 is short shifted which would indicate that it makes optimal power like most FIs in the midrange.

I'm convinced that the F80 will not sound as good and not pull so hard towards the redline. It will be different but still very good. I hope for a nice muted growl, minimum lag and an ability to hold power towards the redline + the fat FI midrange. If that's what we will get I'm fine with that. Not as awesome as the S65 in many ways but good enough and frankly all what we can expect from FI.

[solstice]

Originally Posted by mhabs

Makes you wonder why BMW keeps bringing that E90 M3/CRT on the 'Ring....difficulties in getting the new car to out-perform the old??

It's what I would do. Drive them back to back between a couple of drivers and compare notes. Any perceived weakness in the new car should be reported and worked on. And yes, to put one of best drivers in the old M3 and have a lesser driver chase him down in the new one is a cool test

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by car7

...because bmw never was about v8s.

Not sure where you are getting this from

BMW has been making great V8s throughout its history.

[auaq]

If the S55 is basically the same as the N55 engine, then is the bore x stroke the same as well? If so, mind if I ask about the rod:stroke ratio of the N55 engine?