415hp S55 Powered F80 M3 / F82 M4 Revealed via BMW VIN?!

[Jason]

Originally Posted by Transfer

Last weekend a group of us hit the dyno and someone brought a 1M. With full exhaust and no tune it put down 330s HP and 370 TQ on a low reading dyno, matching all 3 M3s in HP and destroying them in TQ. I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same engine in the new M3 which would be disappointing in that we wouldn't see a new engine, but the 1M engine is nothing to cry about.

Originally Posted by CSanto

If its the 1M engine, I will try another brand. This comes from a lot of seat time in a 1M.
Just Sayin...

Folks, the article clearly states that the M3/M4 engine is the S55, not the N54 from the 1M / 335i.

[bimmerjph]

I am not necessarily disappointed in the lack of an increase of power. I am concerned about the massive increase in torque with no increase in power. I am afraid this might have a weird torque curve, or that it will have a super low redline (I was hoping for at least 7.5k). But who knows. There is a reason the engineers work for bmw and I don't....yet.

[jaehshim]

Originally Posted by M3Denver

I'd rather have both 450 and 300 lb lighter.... Aaand throw in 8300 rpm
Now that sounds more fun.

well, then you better keep your E9X M3 and start saving for the next M

[FogCityM3]

At around 3,400 lbs and 420 hp, that's a weight to power of 8.1 (just based on base car pre options). Pretty high weight to power and higher than M3 GTS...if those are the stats, it's not going to be a huge improvement in straight line, but the light weight will be nice for handling/dynamics. There's also modding potential, but isn't any increase in boost an auto void on warranty (unlike N/A tunes??). Nice work..

Originally Posted by Jason

Added this info about weight:

The same source also told us that engineers were targeting E46 M3 weight. The E46 M3's curb weight is 3,415 lb, while the current E90 M3 and E92 M3 weigh 3,726 and 3,704 pounds, respectively. This would represent an approximate 300 pound weight reduction; great news for BMW enthusiasts who bemoan the increasing weight of cars in general. The caveat to keep in mind however, is that curb weight is calculated based on the total weight of a vehicle with standard equipment, and with the ever growing list of standard equipment and technology in late model cars, don't be surprised or disappointed if you don't see exactly 300 pounds shaved. What's important is that the E46 M3 weight is being used as a target, which in any scenario, should result in significant weight reduction for the new M3 and M4.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by 09BlkSapphire

Was wondering when the first e90/e92 M3 owner would chime in with disappointment and start yelling AMG this, Porsche that.

That extra 100 pounds of torque will leave your car behind. Have fun in your AMG

Huh, No.

Max torque by itself is a meaningless number. Max HP is more representative of the accelerative capabilities of the engine. In general, same HP = same acceleration for a given weight.

However I do suspect that BMW will underrate this engine as it seems they have been doing so a lot recently.

[jaehshim]

Originally Posted by bimmerjph

I am not necessarily disappointed in the lack of an increase of power. I am concerned about the massive increase in torque with no increase in power. I am afraid this might have a weird torque curve, or that it will have a super low redline (I was hoping for at least 7.5k). But who knows. There is a reason the engineers work for bmw and I don't....yet.

Well, that really doesn't make sense. You have to look at where it's all coming from.

E46 to E9X (333-414) was a drastic change, because it went from 6-8cylinder, as well as .8L increase in displacement. Redline went up as well

E9X to F80 (414-415) is a downgrade from 8-6 cylinder, but with forced induction. This is NOT "massive increase in torque with no incrase in power". It's a completely new engine, new forced induction on a inline-6. From a basline non-turbo inline 6 perspective, it is massiv increase in torque AND power.

There will be about 6.8 million threads about E9X's NA vs F80 Turbo once F80 comes out, but these two engines' characteristics will be completely different. High Rev NA vs Twin turbo toque. We all know it's coming...

[Karazy]

Originally Posted by DASHOCKER

we all know it wont be 415hp. keep the competion guessing bmw.

Sure hope your right. I've got my little 335 over 400 torque with a simple Dinan stage 2 tune. Weight reduction is #1 in my book, but even a Bimmer / Beemer lover like myself can't help but look at cars like the base level C7 Stingray and hope for better HP to weight numbers.
We shall see...

[OverDriven]

Originally Posted by mrkhanna16

Im disappointed in the power....AMG here I come

That makes no sense. People who know about cars know that weight matters as much as power. Consider that if they're targeting E46 weight, this car at 415HP will have a power to weight ratio of 1HP per 8.2 pounds. The C63 AMG at a bloated 3924 pounds and 451HP will have 1HP to every 8.7 pounds. The BMW will be significantly faster, and will corner better as well.

[BMW269]

Sounds fake to me.

[FogCityM3]

Deja Vu - from 10 months ago

http://www.f30post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=698816

[MI6]

So what the heck is 4LZ- Blue Shadow trim???????????




-Bond

[Transfer]

Originally Posted by 09BlkSapphire

Don't people read??

It says right there in the article that the M3/M4 engine is called the S55 and produces 415hp. The 1M has the N54 engine and 340hp.

Yeah ok fine so N54 vs S55 (N55). My point is that what they did with the 1M is possibly what we'll see with the next M3. Apparently the 1M can put down the same HP as the current M3 despite it's 340 HP rating, that is unless we were sandbagged, but the owner was a stand up guy and denied a tune. The 1M dyno numbers match up to this VIN's HP number and the expected torque output. Just speculatin'.

[tuna_hp]

Originally Posted by mrkhanna16

Im disappointed in the power....AMG here I come

Really? The upcoming C63 AMG is rumored to use the same twin turbo 5.5L V8 as their larger cars. Which means that it will be stupidly front-heavy.

As far as this news, I'm surprised that BMW kept the displacement at 3.0L. I remember an interview with the US M brand managers posted on bimmerpost a while back where they regretted building the current M5/M6 with the same 4.4L displacement as the 50i engine, claiming that it misled people into believing that they were identical or very similar engines. I think most people expected BMW to bore out the I6 to ~3.2L if only to better differentiate from the standard I6 engine while conveniently hinting at the old E46 M3 I6.

Another weird issue is that the new modular I3/4/6 engine platform that BMW has started building (including the N20 and all the 1.5L I3 engines that have been in the news) is designed for up to 75hp/cylinder. They have already proven that out with the 220hp 3 cylinder that is going i8 car. This would mean that using standard components from this new modular platform, BMW should easily be able to build a ~450hp 3.0L I6 engine. Why heavily modify the outgoing version when a newer, more efficient, more powerful, and presumably cheaper alternative is readily apparent?

Still, 415hp/395tq is plenty of power for a RWD, front engine car of this weight class. At a certain point, more power mostly just means more wheel spin. At that point you either need to put more weight over the rear wheels or switch to AWD to be able to do anything useful with the extra power.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by tuna_hp

The upcoming C63 AMG is rumored to use the same twin turbo 5.5L V8 as their larger cars. Which means that it will be stupidly front-heavy.

No. C AMG is getting a new TC 4.0l V8, two TC 2.0l I4 from the A AMG put together.

[Mr. ///M3 RD]

Originally Posted by mrkhanna16

Im disappointed in the power....AMG here I come

Originally Posted by 09BlkSapphire

Was wondering when the first e90/e92 M3 owner would chime in with disappointment and start yelling AMG this, Porsche that.

That extra 100 pounds of torque will leave your car behind. Have fun in your AMG

I think it is a bit premature to think like this ... why not wait for the final facts the engine I'm sure has NOT yet received the final green light.

Jason clearly stated

"(although keep in mind that everything is subject to change by the time the model hits production)".

Originally Posted by tuna_hp

Really? The upcoming C63 AMG is rumored to use the same twin turbo 5.5L V8 as their larger cars. Which means that it will be stupidly front-heavy.

As far as this news, I'm surprised that BMW kept the displacement at 3.0L. I remember an interview with the US M brand managers posted on bimmerpost a while back where they regretted building the current M5/M6 with the same 4.4L displacement as the 50i engine, claiming that it misled people into believing that they were identical or very similar engines. I think most people expected BMW to bore out the I6 to ~3.2L if only to better differentiate from the standard I6 engine while conveniently hinting at the old E46 M3 I6.

Another weird issue is that the new modular I3/4/6 engine platform that BMW has started building (including the N20 and all the 1.5L I3 engines that have been in the news) is designed for up to 75hp/cylinder. They have already proven that out with the 220hp 3 cylinder that is going i8 car. This would mean that using standard components from this new modular platform, BMW should easily be able to build a ~450hp 3.0L I6 engine. Why heavily modify the outgoing version when a newer, more efficient, more powerful, and presumably cheaper alternative is readily apparent?

Still, 415hp/395tq is plenty of power for a RWD, front engine car of this weight class. At a certain point, more power mostly just means more wheel spin. At that point you either need to put more weight over the rear wheels or switch to AWD to be able to do anything useful with the extra power.

I have a feeling it will be close to the e46 weight ratio and that be super. As for engine size and rated HP let's just all wait I say

[signes]

Interesting find, apart from the engine reference it sounds like an F10 M5. HUD would be nice to have.

[Jblack4083]

A 3 Liter I6... I'm not impressed so far but hopefully this car delivers.

I still have faith. I was hoping for a slight displacement bump but I bet its going to be underrated. Rated at 415HP but really putting out 440 or so.

Weight reduction could be a huge game changer here. Do i smell CFRP Hood, roof, and decklid?

[OfficialBOLO]

COBB, take note. Us future boosted M3/4 drivers will be needing your services lol

[rpagianotto]

One thing that people need to consider while looking at those specs is that BMW has consistently downrated the numbers on their turbo engines, to a degree that BMW's nominal power is actually closer to what you get at the wheel, and not at the crank/flywheel.

Take a look at the m5/m6, for example - they're both rated at 560 hp and people have been coming up with dyno readings north of 540 whp.

With that in mind, a car that weighs around 3500 lbs with about 400~410 whp sounds like a real monster to me! And that's before even considering what extra power a simple tune could unleash. Yup, this thing's gonna be fast.

What also caught my eye is the transmission - it says mech right there in the VIN sheet! So thankfully bmw isn't ditching the clutch pedal altogether just yet! Great news all around, if you ask me!

I just wish they'd pay a little more care into developing the acoustics, so that this engine sounds good enough without resorting to a synthetic generator...

[v3.2mc]

interesting it's loaded with style 220 wheels. i wonder if sizes/offsets will be similar to the e9x ///m's...

[burrito007]

Originally Posted by Jblack4083

A 3 Liter I6... I'm not impressed so far but hopefully this car delivers.

I still have faith. I was hoping for a slight displacement bump but I bet its going to be underrated. Rated at 415HP but really putting out 440 or so.

Weight reduction could be a huge game changer here. Do i smell CFRP Hood, roof, and decklid?

oh wow i didn't see that..


why can't they give us the S54 with HPF turbo kit??? I was hoping for at least 3.2l maybe 3.3 and a 7500rpm redline.

[richb811]

I wouldn't be too disappointed in the power output being near identical to the S65 folks. The usable torque band on this car is going to make it a monster at highway acceleration without downshifting. Not to mention a right hoot to kick the tail out in.

My estimation : This engine feels like a Corvette LS3, and I'm okay with that!