2013 BMW F80 M3 Goes Winter Testing Wearing Less

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Levi

I do not understand. So it is still an I6? How can it have 3.3l if it is based on the N55?

+1 I give it maybe 1% chance of a 3.3L I6. Maybe.

I'd give it 90% chance of being an I6 3.0 to 3.2L, and personally believe the chance of a V6 is < 10%.

[John_01]

It had to be inline 6. If you have driven a car with a 90 degree V6, you would understand how unpleasant they are.

[kueks29]

Yesterday we were at the M-GmbH and it was more than informative!
However, I can not and should not say much here!

It will be a 3.3 liter i6 and I've already said too much.
Also, all rumors to the weight can be nearly as can be!

I'm sorry, but I was a lot of confidence brought against and I keep my word!

[aajami]

The plot thickens.

[mkoesel]

So you are positive it is a 3.3L I6. Okay, I can appreciate that.

Have you played around with a displacement calculator to try and estimate what the bore and stroke of the engine are? If not I highly encourage it. Worthwhile exercise to be sure. I am very curious what your predictions are for those figures.

Just keep in mind the 91mm bore center.

Originally Posted by kueks29

Yesterday we were at the M-GmbH and it was more than informative!
However, I can not and should not say much here!

It will be a 3.3 liter i6 and I've already said too much.
Also, all rumors to the weight can be nearly as can be!

I'm sorry, but I was a lot of confidence brought against and I keep my word!

[Uli_HH]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

So you are positive it is a 3.3L I6. Okay, I can appreciate that.

Have you played around with a displacement calculator to try and estimate what the bore and stroke of the engine are? If not I highly encourage it. Worthwhile exercise to be sure. I am very curious what your predictions are for those figures.

Just keep in mind the 91mm bore center.

I think if they want use the N55 block they only could make an "high-stroke" engine, because the avaliable bore is very restricted ... and also the basic N55 has an higher stroke than bore.
I don´t know if an stroker Turbo works well in an high-performence car like the M3/M4.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Uli_HH

I think if they want use the N55 block they only could make an "high-stroke" engine, because the avaliable bore is very restricted ... and also the basic N55 has an higher stroke than bore.
I don´t know if an stroker Turbo works well in an high-performence car like the M3/M4.

We are definitely on the same page Uli.

I am nevertheless curious to hear what kueks has to say if even bothers to do as I suggested. In my book, if you are going to post up alleged inside information on a forum you should at least take the time to properly vet it.

Bear in mind, I am not saying they couldn't build a 3.3L I6, but as you point out it does not present itself as a good solution to power a 450hp performance car. I am not an engine builder (though I have helped build an engine or two in my time - I6s at that) so perhaps my viewpoint is skewed, but it isn't readily apparent to me why you would go through the pain of increasing the displacement of an engine by just 10% only to be left with the bore profile a Caterpillar diesel. It seems like a lot of time and money spent on the wrong part of the problem. Why not a more advanced turbocharging and induction system instead? Then you are reaping the benefits without ending up with some crazy thin cylinder wall or insane rod ratio or both.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by Uli_HH

I think if they want use the N55 block they only could make an "high-stroke" engine, because the avaliable bore is very restricted ... and also the basic N55 has an higher stroke than bore.
I don´t know if an stroker Turbo works well in an high-performence car like the M3/M4.

Neiter me Uli. If the engine is really as Kueks says, I even wonder how can it rev till 7.000 RPM or be reliable if bore was increased, especially with such high boost. The engine of the McLaren MP4-12C revs till 8.500 RPM, but it also has stroke of 69.9 mm.

[Uli_HH]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

We are definitely on the same page Uli.

I am nevertheless curious to hear what kueks has to say if even bothers to do as I suggested. In my book, if you are going to post up alleged inside information on a forum you should at least take the time to properly vet it.

Bear in mind, I am not saying they couldn't build a 3.3L I6, but as you point out it does not present itself as a good solution to power a 450hp performance car. I am not an engine builder (though I have helped build an engine or two in my time - I6s at that) so perhaps my viewpoint is skewed, but it isn't readily apparent to me why you would go through the pain of increasing the displacement of an engine by just 10% only to be left with the bore profile a Caterpillar diesel. It seems like a lot of time and money spent on the wrong part of the problem. Why not a more advanced turbocharging and induction system instead? Then you are reaping the benefits without ending up with some crazy thin cylinder wall or insane rod ratio or both.

Someone told me that they maybe use the turbosystem from the N57-S and make the car an real "TriTurbo" and also ad ePower, if this System is avalilable in time ... could be an option !?

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Uli_HH

Someone told me that they maybe use the turbosystem from the N57-S and make the car an real "TriTurbo" and als ad ePower, if this System is avalilable in time ... could be an option !?

The N57S is an incredible engine - 125h/L from a diesel? This state of the art engine is now making over 50hp more than its state of the art gasoline counterpart. And this level of power was previously unheard of in a production automobile (even 100hp is rare - basically limited to just BMW and Audi). If they can get that much power from a diesel then there is no doubt in my mind they can get 150hp/L with a gasoline engine using similar technology.

[Uli_HH]

I think, there are only two options that are really realistic for what kueks quotes ... first they developed an complete new bigger I6 engine block to reach the 3.3ltr. displacement ... or they told kueks not the full truth and the engine has really 3.3ltr. but is indeed the rumored "secret" V6 that they want to hide from early publishing ... but nobody knows!?

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by Uli_HH

I think, there are only two options that are really realistic for what kueks quotes ... first they developed an complete new bigger I6 engine block to reach the 3.3ltr. displacement ... or they told kueks not the full truth and the engine has really 3.3ltr. but is indeed the rumored "secret" V6 that they want to hide from early publishing ... but nobody knows!?

Why tell something not true? Just keep silent, no?

It is so funny, that the closer we come to the lunch of the M3 F80, the less we know.

If 3.3l is true, then it can only be, from my understanding, the V6 or a new I6 block, not based on the N55, but using the S63T parts, such as pistons and other small technical parts.

[aajami]

Originally Posted by Levi

Why tell something not true? Just keep silent, no?

It is so funny, that the closer we come to the lunch of the M3 F80, the less we know.

If 3.3l is true, then it can only be, from my understanding, the V6 or a new I6 block, not based on the N55, but using the S63T parts, such as pistons and other small technical parts.

Yeah, I don't buy the theory that BMW blatantly lied to this group of potential buyers at that event. Kueks has owned nearly a dozen BMWs in the past, half of which are M models. Something is definitely rotten in Denmark, but I doubt it's intentional misinformation on BMW's part.

After all, multinational corporations hold themselves to the highest moral standards

(Edit: Scott, before you jump down my throat again, please know that it was a joke I love you, buddy).

[SCOTT26]

Another USP selling point for the M4 over the M3 Sedan. M4 arrives at the tide of volume CFRP being spread further . M3 is too early besides some markets refuse to give up "Luxury" equipment such as a sunroof. Although M did fight against it and won for the M6 , they are in the midst of doing so for the M4.

[aajami]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

Another USP selling point for the M4 over the M3 Sedan. M4 arrives at the tide of volume CFRP being spread further . M3 is too early besides some markets refuse to give up "Luxury" equipment such as a sunroof. Although M did fight against it and won for the M6 , they are in the midst of doing so for the M4.

I'm holding my breath for an M6-style roof (or something with an equally interesting shape) for the M4.

[as7920]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

.......M3 is too early besides some markets refuse to give up "Luxury" equipment such as a sunroof.....

Sunroof

CF Roof

[kueks29]

Has anyone claimed that the M3 engine is based on the N55?
I think not quite the ...

[aajami]

The pea soup thickens.

So Garching is making a truly bespoke I6 for the F8X. I can get behind that...

[BMW269]

Ok, if this is a bespoke I6 engine, then I am all for it, 335i/M335i will stay inferior. Now I can really see the M2 coming with the M3 F80 engine, two cylinders chopped off, to make it a short I4 2.2l.

[Uli_HH]

Infos and new Vids (incl. AB chase!):
http://www.f30post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=662169

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by aajami

The pea soup thickens.

So Garching is making a truly bespoke I6 for the F8X. I can get behind that...

I am skeptical to say the least. If they build a brand new engine, why limit themselves to only 3.3L? It makes no sense. They've built a 3.2L using the M50 architecure before (granted, that it was an iron block).

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Uli_HH

Infos and new Vids (incl. AB chase!):
http://www.f30post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=662169

I see that they also claim that the F82 comes in 2013 and the F83 comes in 2014, which I will happily say on record right now has an absolutely zero percent chance of happening.