BMW M4 - Sport Auto test ride and interview with Albert Biermann

[solstice]

Originally Posted by Boss330

The F10 M5 has a similarly engineered cooling system with dedicated AC for the DME/ECU. Separate water pump system for cooling turbos after shutting off the engine, loads of additional coolers etc.

Ok I was just wondering since there are reports of the M5 suffering heat soak and going into limp mode when doing longer stints on the track. So nothing he say here on cooling is an improvement over the M5? Not that I'm concerned I'm not going to do hard track duty with mine.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by BMW M3 CRT

You forget that the production of the M engines in the "Sondermotorenbau" make much of the M-Spirit ... much like the AMG credo "engine build by one person"

Also cheap watches shows the right time, but most technic inspired people would choose an Rolex, Omega, Breitling ... if they habe the money to buy one. Same issue with the new M3/M4 ... going back from an Breitling like S65 to an cheaper more standard S55 engine is an bad move for many real M fans ... also when the S55 fulfil the needed power demands ... and don't forget great torque was never an part of THW real M spirit !!!

Agreed that a engine made by a bespoke factory has more "romance" to it. But how special can it be if they have made 60000 S65 engines? It's not like a Ferrari F12 engine or a Aston Martin V12 (special versions like one-77 built and assembled by Cosworth).

Many brand names sell exclusivity, but manufacture in China or other cheap places. For instance Breitling, and allmost every Swiss watch, use ETA manufactured moving parts. So, a Rolex, Breitling or Omega can have the exact same moving parts (or engine ), it's only the exterior/case that differs...

ETA is owned by SWATCH, a manufacturer also of cheap watches.

Some info here on ETA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETA_SA

But I think your post is interesting, because it conveys a belief in some brands of watches being exclusively made with bespoke components. Not because we know it is, but because we believe it is. Through marketing etc. Same story with the M models. Maybe 1% of owners know, or care, about where the engine was made. It's enough to know that it is a bespoke engine and what BMW marketing tells us. Same as with the watches. We feel they are exlusive and hand made, when they in fact use off the shelf mass produced movements. The customers still desire them, and they are still as good watches as before you knew they used mass produced components...

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by solstice

Ok I was just wondering since there are reports of the M5 suffering heat soak and going into limp mode when doing longer stints on the track. So nothing he say here on cooling is an improvement over the M5? Not that I'm concerned I'm not going to do hard track duty with mine.

Seems like a similar concept, but if the M5 has issues, let's hope they have upgraded

[Black Gold]

Originally Posted by Boss330

You did read the entire quote from Biermann? He clearly stated that weight was one factor, but that they did not want to spend M budget funds on developing a bespoke hydraulic steering for the M models. They wanted to focus their budget on weight savings.

He states three main reasons for going electric:

-Weight savings
-Cost savings
-Development costs of hydraulic steering

Reasons for going hydraulic:

-Steering feel

Reasons against going hydraulic:

-Weight
-Cost of development

Porsche has done a great job it seems with their electro mechanical steering in the 991, so hopefully BMW will get a similarly good system from ZF as well.

So in that view I don't see his comments on electro mechanic steering as idiotic at all...

well you and I disagree. 3kg of weight savings on a 1500kg car is irrelevant. I think its disingenuous to consider that anything other than a minuscule factor in adding electric steering to the car.

3kg increase in weight is not a legitimate negative to hydraulic over electric.

and yes, I think the below statement is idiotic and disingenuous...

Biermann acknowledges that “to many, electrical steering is a “devils tool” but to us the weight saving of 3kg was a argument

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by KennyPowers

well you and I disagree. 3kg of weight savings on a 1500kg car is irrelevant. I think its disingenuous to consider that anything other than a minuscule factor in adding electric steering to the car.

3kg increase in weight is not a legitimate negative to hydraulic over electric.

and yes, I think the below statement is idiotic and disingenuous...

But your quote is taken out of context! You simply choose to quote less than half of the reasons he gave for their choice... He also states the other reasons in the interview. Weight was but ONE factor.

And they did not ADD electric steering, the F30 is designed with electric steering. They would have had to add hydraulic steering to replace the electric steering (as also was clear from the transcript of the article).

If you are serious about saving weight, 3kg saved is better than 3kg gained. Isolated, 3kg is not much. Agreed. But if they don't see a major downside it's a win-win situation. save weight, save fuel and get a good steering (like Porsche has done as well).

If you want to shed 80kg, then 3kg here and 3kg there makes up for the total weight saved. After all it seems like it's a multiple 3-10kg savings all over the car that is responsible for the total weight loss. Sure, those 3kg wouldn't make a lot of difference. And that is exactly what Biermann says in the interview as well! Weight savings was ONE factor, the budgetary reasons seems to have been the main reasons. Biermann doesn't try to hide that at all. In fact he even goes to the length of explaining that they decided to use budgetary funds on weight losses rather than develop a dedicated hydraulic steering specificially for the F8x models.

[F82_SID]

I do think it is sad that the engines do not have special manufacturing anymore however, I hope that this perceived sacrifice in bragging rights and lower production cost will result in lower MSRPs (relatively speaking); especially considering new expensive CFRP technology. I mean, a CFRP drive shaft cant be cheap! So if BMW is saving money for this kind of thing by putting the engine manufacturing under the same house as the rest of the car then I can forgive them. :-)

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by E92_SID

I do think it is sad that the engines do not have special manufacturing anymore however, I hope that this perceived sacrifice in bragging rights and lower production cost will result in lower MSRPs (relatively speaking); especially considering new expensive CFRP technology. I mean, a CFRP drive shaft cant be cheap! So if BMW is saving money for this kind of thing by putting the engine manufacturing under the same house as the rest of the car then I can forgive them. :-)

Agree with what you said

You win some and you loose some

The engine manufacturing isn't as special as it used to be, but the car has more exotic parts in other areas instead.

[GregW / Oregon]

300 kph (186 mph) surprises me -- higher than I would have thought.

[Boss330]

Yes, higher than what was reported initially. We'll see if that's a theoretical top speed and if it's limited to 280km/h or something.

[Ezio]

you can just tell this M4 was made in a different era than the E9x. a lot of talk about trying to get it better fuel economy. at the end of the day they are a business, so not much they can do but cost cut and make better MPG engines.

honestly though putting aside my dislike for the new engine. i really don't like to here the DCT has longer ratios for fuel saving reasons.

[basscadet]

Sometimes I wonder how efficient it is to spend extra 5000 dollars on carbon fiber pieces that provide same weight loss benefit than what it would take to downsize the battery and get rid of the spare wheel and tire? How much of these are really just marketing bullet points?

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by basscadet

Sometimes I wonder how efficient it is to spend extra 5000 dollars on carbon fiber pieces that provide same weight loss benefit than what it would take to downsize the battery and get rid of the spare wheel and tire? How much of these are really just marketing bullet points?

Does cars in the US still come with a spare tire??? Haven't seen that in a BMW or allmost any other car over here for years!

And I'm quite confident that they didn't "forget" the battery either...

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Ezio

you can just tell this M4 was made in a different era than the E9x. a lot of talk about trying to get it better fuel economy. at the end of the day they are a business, so not much they can do but cost cut and make better MPG engines.

honestly though putting aside my dislike for the new engine. i really don't like to here the DCT has longer ratios for fuel saving reasons.

Pretty sure the DCT has longer gear ratios to suit the power characteristics of the new engine, as a side effect it also gives better fuel economy (with a more powerful/torquier engine you can cruise at lower revs and still have better acceleration).

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by Boss330

Pretty sure the DCT has longer gear ratios to suit the power characteristics of the new engine, as a side effect it also gives better fuel economy (with a more powerful/torquier engine you can cruise at lower revs and still have better acceleration).

i was thinking about that. turbo engine don't like short ratios is the theory right ?

[Boss330]

I'm sure others can explain that better than me, but a engine with a broad power band can have a long gear ratio to "work against" as it builds speed. With a very short gear ratio it would use the "wrong end" of the rev range. A Ferrari 458 needs closer and shorter ratios to maximize it's power band, a turbo engine wants longer ratios to take the most advantage of it's torque/power band.

Maybe Swamp2 could explain a bit better, have to get some sleep over here now...

[Black Gold]

Originally Posted by Ezio

i was thinking about that. turbo engine don't like short ratios is the theory right ?

its not that, its that it isn't necessary

a turbo motor (or big v8 like a z06 for example) doesn't need to use short gearing to get torque to the ground. they also have wider powerbands which make more torque and power at lower RPMs than something like the s65. the z06 can hit 60 mph in first gear

it is more the e9x m3 that is the anomaly as its gearing with DCT is very short.

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by basscadet

Sometimes I wonder how efficient it is to spend extra 5000 dollars on carbon fiber pieces that provide same weight loss benefit than what it would take to downsize the battery and get rid of the spare wheel and tire? How much of these are really just marketing bullet points?

E90/92 don't come with a spare; MMobility kit only.

[bimmerjph]

Originally Posted by Boss330

“No M engine should shy away from high RPMs”, Biermann says as the tacho needle has left 7500rpm behind a long time ago.

Its interesting that BMW keeps hinting that it revs over 7500 when everything we have seen thus far indicates a 7500 redline.

[paddy335]

Originally Posted by Boss330

Many brand names sell exclusivity, but manufacture in China or other cheap places. For instance Breitling, and allmost every Swiss watch, use ETA manufactured moving parts. So, a Rolex, Breitling or Omega can have the exact same moving parts (or engine ), it's only the exterior/case that differs...
ETA is owned by SWATCH, a manufacturer also of cheap watches.

It's a little disingenuous to imply that just because ETA is owned by Swatch Group that the components are cheap, or low quality.

It's a bit like suggesting Ferrari is lower quality because it is owned by Fiat.

[AhsanU]

Originally Posted by bimmerjph

Its interesting that BMW keeps hinting that it revs over 7500 when everything we have seen thus far indicates a 7500 redline.

Agreed. The quote clearly states that 7500 RPM was "left behind a while ago", and most pictures we've seen shows that it's a hair above 7500. To me, the deciding factor will be the redline. I'm coming from an E46 M3 that screamed its pants off to 8k, I don't think it's possible to settle for anything less than that (I'm spoiled ) but if BMW can get close to that number while maintaining engine reliability then I'm sold.

And the whole hydraulic vs. electric steering debate will go on forever. We all know the main reason for BMW going for electric is because of petrol consumption, but there's absolutely no way we can knock it until we've driven it for ourselves. Porsche seems to have done it really well with the 991 GT3, whose to say that BMW can't do it with, arguably, one of their most special cars?

[basscadet]

Originally Posted by KennyPowers

its not that, its that it isn't necessary

a turbo motor (or big v8 like a z06 for example) doesn't need to use short gearing to get torque to the ground.

Z06 has nice long gears. I remember cruising at 75mph at about 1800 RPMs, got about 25 miles per gallon. Basically you're just idling. That motor was straight from God.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by bimmerjph

Its interesting that BMW keeps hinting that it revs over 7500 when everything we have seen thus far indicates a 7500 redline.

Everything? We've seen like 2-3 pictures of a car with a variable redline. Who knows if one of those red led's might turn orange .