People who seem to be happy with the new F80 M3 / F82 M4 engine direction

[catherineanh]

i'm ok with the new force induced engine. it will have more low end torque than the e9x m3, but definitely won't sound as nice as a naturally aspirated engine s65 v8.

[richardg]

I have owned all M3 but an E30M and have an e92 now. I love the motor but I am looking forward to the new turboI6. Unlike most here I am not too concerned with it not being a completely new motor. I have no complaints with the 1M or 335i motor though I have never owned a car with either the N54 or N55. The mpg will be a small bonus but with the way I drive the car I doubt I will average much more than the low 17 I do now. Power delivery will be great and the torque will be a new experience for me. And if they break 7500rpm I have no complaints. Overall I am sure the motor will be fine and I will like it.

What is drawing me towards the new M4 is the technology. I have always driven manual so it will likely be my first DCT too. I look forward to the weight loss the most. I am hopeful for a full 150-100lbs though I doubt we will get that. Also I suppose that new trick M differential from the f10/12M will get carried over into this and it seems like a pretty cool thing to have. Also finally having proper brakes is a nice touch.

I want the new M4 because of the sum of it's parts and what it is. I could just buy a 997 GT3 if I wanted to go fast with a manual and high revving motor. And admittingly I will miss this. But I would like to try something new. Besides I will still have my E92M anyawy lol (unless R8 V10 depreciate enough in the next 3 years lol)

[ixse]

there are always people whining about new engine. when bmw ditched straight six for v8 for e9x i remember people whining. boost is good.. boost makes happiness.. fat mid range torque is what makes things easy anywhere..

[Eau Rouge]

^ instant throttle response, high revving is what does it for me. Torque? Pfftt as if I care.
I'd might as well get this over with. The I6 engines and now the S65 have been treats. With the advent of the turdbros, it is going to be a long time before BMW has anything that interests me. And for those that are hoping for zero turbo lag...take a spin in an M5. It's still there.

[ixse]

^ obvoius answer coming from current e92 m3 owner. wonder how effective that "instant" response is.. as far as i remember, torque wins races.
and mpg pwns you =)

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by ixse

^ obvoius answer coming from current e92 m3 owner. wonder how effective that "instant" response is.. as far as i remember, torque wins races.
and mpg pwns you =)

Toqure doesn't always means win. BMW made the e92 m3 with gear ratios and launch control to keep revs high when racing at the drag. and at the track you are keeping the car in the power zone. Its not a hugh problem. But for the most part torque is more important for drag racing, and Horse power is more important for the race track. Ask any F1 driver....

The only thing i can see someone like you complaining is when daily driving, where you are keeping revs low. not in the power zone, where the next M3 will shine.

With that said. I love the sound of a V8, and the high revs. I could carless about MPG also. i am a rare breed, or maybe just have a lot of cash... either way.

I think this is something you might not understand. honestly i do see where people like you are coming from. a engine thats makes more power, better on gas, more torque. i get it.

but to me. i have never really liked practical cars. but this new one is better for BMW, and for many people

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by Eau Rouge

^ instant throttle response, high revving is what does it for me. Torque? Pfftt as if I care.
I'd might as well get this over with. The I6 engines and now the S65 have been treats. With the advent of the turdbros, it is going to be a long time before BMW has anything that interests me. And for those that are hoping for zero turbo lag...take a spin in an M5. It's still there.

You prefer NA? An engine that suffers from lag from idle to the redline.................hmmm I see where you are coming from

[pkimM3r]

Originally Posted by YUN

All I care about is if new M cars will lose some weight and have little more torque down low. I'm over this NA thing as I'm getting older and dont want to get attention on the road while reving the crap out of the engine to get it going

You need to go to hpde with it.

[pkimM3r]

Originally Posted by ixse

^ obvoius answer coming from current e92 m3 owner. wonder how effective that "instant" response is.. as far as i remember, torque wins races.
and mpg pwns you =)

Mustangs dont win races LOL.

Ferrari 458 has a pretty damn close hp to tq ratio as the e9x m3. No one is complaining there.

But yes you obviously need instant torque to make lane changes in a 35mph zone.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by ixse

... as far as i remember, torque wins races.

Drivers win races. And power-to-weight determines a car's ability to accelerate. Torque wins on the spec sheet.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by Eau Rouge

^ instant throttle response, high revving is what does it for me. Torque? Pfftt as if I care.
I'd might as well get this over with. The I6 engines and now the S65 have been treats. With the advent of the turdbros, it is going to be a long time before BMW has anything that interests me. And for those that are hoping for zero turbo lag...take a spin in an M5. It's still there.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

You prefer NA? An engine that suffers from lag from idle to the redline.................hmmm I see where you are coming from

Nonsense.

With any common understanding of what turbo lag is, this is incorrect. I know what you are trying to say, take a turbo engine and basically disable or remove the turbo and you have an engine with less performance. That's not the point at all, lag is not about the peak or even overall power it is about the dynamics of the power increasing and decreasing.

And yes me too, like many M enthusiasts prefer NA power.

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Nonsense.

With any common understanding of what turbo lag is, this is incorrect. I know what you are trying to say, take a turbo engine and basically disable or remove the turbo and you have an engine with less performance. That's not the point at all, lag is not about the peak or even overall power it is about the dynamics of the power increasing and decreasing.

And yes me too, like many M enthusiasts prefer NA power.

You might rely on 'common understanding'. I don't as the majority confuse the term. I prefer to use the 'experts understanding'.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

You might rely on 'common understanding'. I don't as the majority confuse the term. I prefer to use the 'experts understanding'.

No, absolutely wrong again. You can choose to have you own special little definition of a term but when that is at odds with everyone else (everyone in a very real and practical sense) then you end up living in your own isolated world where no one can communicate intelligently with you. Don't let your personal preferences and biases turn you into an isolationist. It's really quite a silly little game and definition you have here and I think you actually know that.

[Dave2011M3]

Originally Posted by kevinlevrone

Give me more power and torque and I don't care what engine it is.

The e92 M3 is just underpowered in daily driving (and on tight tracks) due to the lower torque. I drove an e92 M3 and while everything was perfect in terms of suspension and steering, the engine was a letdown for me (I have a tuned 335i). Also, the V8 M3 engine doesn't sound especially good, it is rather dull, faint and uncharacteristic to a V8 sound. Listen to an AMG or Porsche engine, even a V6 or an inline 6, and they sound awesome. Why can't BMW do this ?

The new M3 engine will fix this, and I think that it may even sound better, from the spy videos. It will even have a "close to 8000RPM redline" as I read lately. I will speculate a 7800RPM redline.

Sorry, but there is nothing in the S65 V8 engine that impresses me.

You need to put down the crack pipe...

Everything you said is utter hog wash. Also, when you take into account the E9Xs torque multiplication due to its gearing it is inline with its torque output with a lot of its lower revving brethren. There isn't one lazy gear in a E9X M3...I have driven plenty of 335s and yes the low end torque is nice but not near in terms of visceral feel, sound and performance. As far as Porsche, I owned a 997S and it sounded like ass until I added AWE 200 cpi cats and Borla cans along with the X51 exhaust manifolds. A E9X M3 sounds light years ahead better than the H6 in the base and S anyday of the week, now a GT3 is a different story...love the GT3, a $130K car.

I for one realize the direction of the new S55 powerplant but I have to say I am dismayed quite a bit. The S65 is the last real BMW M powerplant, end of story. The engine blocks were one offs for the M division while the new S55 powerplant is derived from the N55, basically its a souped up 335i motor.

I really hope I am wrong, I want the new powerplant to wow me...

Dave

[mxa121]

Originally Posted by Ezio

I have noticed something while on this forum. while this is not the case for every person. It seems like a lot of people who are happy with the new I6 M3/M4 engine are non e9x M3 owners.

I feel the S65 engine is great in terms of having special characteristics. The S65 shares more characteristics with a engine found under the hood of a car with a "Dancing horse" badge on it, than it does to BMW engines in general.

While i know the new M3/M4 engine will most likely be better on Gas, and more powerful. Its going to be rather dull when coming from a S65. Of course i am making assumptions based off a car that i have never driven. but they are assumptions that only people driving e9x m3s are making.

This is a honest question, for the people who are sold on the new M direction. Have you ever driven a e9x M3 before and really got a feel for the car?

You are correct in my case. I have never driven an e92 m3 but that was my dream car. I salivate over the sound of it with an exhaust system! Problem was, couldnt afford it. So I bought a well equipped 335i and have found to really enjoy most of the characteristics of the engine. I love the torque and power, the smoothness, the sound (Performance Exhaust), the ease of tuning, and the gas mileage is nice (20-25 mpg). The bad characteristics are slight lag and sometimes not smooth delivery at low rpms.

So, before buying a 335i: turbos are the devil, its e92 m3 w/ s65 or nothing!
After buying a 335i: turbos are sweet, i could live with a turbo m3, the s65 is still awesome but I may not swing it due to mpg and age by the time I buy.

I do not think the s55 will be dull by any stretch. It will be a monster that will spank an e92. However, the s65 will always be special and have that uniqueness to it, being a high revving v8 and probably the only v8 to ever grace an m3.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Dave2011M3

You need to put down the crack pipe...

Everything you said is utter hog wash. ...

Absolutely. The S65 V8 in the M3 is the closest thing you can get to the Ferrari F430 engine (outside of Maranello) but for probably 1/3rd of the price. No it's not a cross plane V8 and no it doesn't quite rev to 8500 rpm, yes, its specific torque and hp are a tad bit less but in most of those respects and others it is damn close. And if the F430 engine is not special to you then we can't even really continue any rational discussion.

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by swamp2

No, absolutely wrong again. You can choose to have you own special little definition of a term but when that is at odds with everyone else (everyone in a very real and practical sense) then you end up living in your own isolated world where no one can communicate intelligently with you. Don't let your personal preferences and biases turn you into an isolationist. It's really quite a silly little game and definition you have here and I think you actually know that.

Ha ha, you do crack me up, you chop and change to look good in any discussion....a classic argumentative.

Maybe you don't take automotive engineering as any kind of science, but I certainly do, so will not rename something that is known in engineering circles because the masses know it as something else. Next we will be making up words like Nukular or engine dampener

Afterall it was you who previously stated - The language describing science must be very precise to be correct!

And as for biases turning one into an isolationist, your overwhelming bias of the s65 and NA comes across very clear. If you were a neutral engineer, you would have shot down the 'instant throttle response' description of an NA. As we engineers all know ALL engines suffer from 'Lag' whether they have a turbo or not. You need to be precise describing science.

[Dave2011M3]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Absolutely. The S65 V8 in the M3 is the closest thing you can get to the Ferrari F430 engine (outside of Maranello) but for probably 1/3rd of the price. No it's not a cross plane V8 and no it doesn't quite rev to 8500 rpm, yes, its specific torque and hp are a tad bit less but in most of those respects and others it is damn close. And if the F430 engine is not special to you then we can't even really continue any rational discussion.

Do you also play COD under this sig name? If so, this is /Kos/SgtT11B

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

Ha ha, you do crack me up, you chop and change to look good in any discussion....a classic argumentative.

Yes, when people spew crap, I'll take the bait and debate.

Originally Posted by NISFAN

Maybe you don't take automotive engineering as any kind of science, but I certainly do, so will not rename something that is known in engineering circles because the masses know it as something else. Next we will be making up words like Nukular or engine dampener

Yeah, right, give me a break. I am both trained and have practiced in math, physics and mechanical engineering. But ultimately that is not all that relevant. Everyone who has driven one knows what turbo lag is and you want to use an alternate entirely non-standard definition. You can't come across any more tech/science savv by doing so, its just utter nonsense.

Originally Posted by NISFAN

Afterall it was you who previously stated - The language describing science must be very precise to be correct!

Yes and we all know turbo lag is the operating range of an engine before the large dynamic increase in power as a turbo system gains rpm and is finally able to build boost pressure, pump effectively and thus increase power. In this operating range such an engine will feel decidedly powerless and unresponsive to throttle inputs. Exactly what EVERYONE knows and calls turbo lag (apparently except you). We also know that a hypotentical 3 liter M4 with no boost will be lucky to make 300 hp. A lack of power, compared with perhaps 450 peak hp when the turbos are not at appropriately high rpm will be obvious. Now that being said we also know BMW is going to try all sort of trickery (trickery not in a bad way but in a good one) to try to reduce or possibly even eliminate turbo lag. Perhaps using triple turbos or even an electric turbo or both.

Originally Posted by NISFAN

And as for biases turning one into an isolationist, your overwhelming bias of the s65 and NA comes across very clear. If you were a neutral engineer, you would have shot down the 'instant throttle response' description of an NA. As we engineers all know ALL engines suffer from 'Lag' whether they have a turbo or not. You need to be precise describing science.

Bias is not the correct word. I enjoy the S65, independent of whether I own one or not. It is an absolute gem of an engine and the international motoring press have heaped praise on it as well. It also won International Engine of the Year in its class in case you forgot that important detail. Much of the praise for the engine includes is razor sharp throttle response. It is just about as lag free as possible as an engine can get.

Really, get with the program here. This is not even much of a debate or even discussion with you.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Dave2011M3

Do you also play COD under this sig name? If so, this is /Kos/SgtT11B

Sorry not me.

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by swamp2

........Yes and we all know turbo lag is the operating range of an engine before the large dynamic increase in power as a turbo system gains rpm and is finally able to build boost pressure, pump effectively and thus increase power.

Layman's term maybe, but wrong to a drive train engineer.

Originally Posted by swamp2

In this operating range such an engine will feel decidedly powerless and unresponsive to throttle inputs. Exactly what EVERYONE knows and calls turbo lag (apparently except you).

No, I unapologetically use the engineering definition. If I were to go by 'EVERYONE's beliefs then I would also have to close mindedly accept that 'Torque wins races' or other nonsensical definitions. Just to recap, a turbo engine responds to throttle input EXACTLY the same as an NA engine, afterall it actually is an internal combustion 4 stroke engine.

Originally Posted by swamp2

We also know that a hypotentical 3 liter M4 with no boost will be lucky to make 300 hp. A lack of power, compared with perhaps 450 peak hp when the turbos are not at appropriately high rpm will be obvious. Now that being said we also know BMW is going to try all sort of trickery (trickery not in a bad way but in a good one) to try to reduce or possibly even eliminate turbo lag. Perhaps using triple turbos or even an electric turbo or both.

If you had used torque in your argument you would have been onto something, but totally failed with the horsepower reference. Lag on a modern turbo system at peak horsepower revs would be negligible. I know you probably used it for a more forum friendly reference, but down the wrong track. The higher the revs = the higher the exhaust gas energy = lower compressor spool time.

At least you agree that, say, the S63Tu at 4.4 litres even when in 'lag' state will be at least if not better than an s65. Kind of poo poo's the people who believe the F10 M5 F12/13 M6 suffers from lag. I'm pretty sure I feel strong acceleration when driving the M6

Originally Posted by swamp2

Bias is not the correct word. I enjoy the S65, independent of whether I own one or not. It is an absolute gem of an engine and the international motoring press have heaped praise on it as well. It also won International Engine of the Year in its class in case you forgot that important detail. Much of the praise for the engine includes is razor sharp throttle response. It is just about as lag free as possible as an engine can get.

Yep, you are definitely biased towards the s65.....comes across really clearly. It is a great engine by the way, and deserves the credit it has received. Sadly it doesn't fit in with the modern way of doing things. You have to move with the times in this industry.

Originally Posted by swamp2

Really, get with the program here. This is not even much of a debate or even discussion with you.

This new engine direction has stumbled on a V8/I6 thing, but probably a bigger factor is the NA / FI thing.

Obviously current M3 owners would like the engine they know and love to move into the next car in some form or another.....but simple facts are, to extract the increase of power required, BMW would have to go against the global trends for economy and emissions, on an already thirsty engine.

On the plus side, there was equally as much debate about the F10 M5 / M6 dropping the s85 engine. Seems like s63tu has gone down well with new owners, with only 'the sound' being a negative.

As for turbo lag, check out race two in this e60 M5 vs. F10 M5 (race two singled out as it was closest start point for the both in terms of reaction time). Not bad for a over 100kg heavier car with 12% less displacement.