01-30-2013, 01:51 PM | #23 | |
Administrator
![]() 42506
Rep 21,300
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
Check on the Latest BMW News
Become a fan of Bimmerpost Facebook Follow us on Bimmerpost Twitter Subscribe to Bimmerpost Youtube Channel |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 01:57 PM | #24 |
Colonel
![]() ![]() 123
Rep 2,024
Posts |
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.
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 01:58 PM | #25 | |
Major
![]() ![]() 497
Rep 1,375
Posts |
Quote:
![]()
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:00 PM | #26 | |
Colonel
![]() 502
Rep 2,397
Posts |
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..
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:03 PM | #27 | |
General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 21156
Rep 20,745
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
![]() 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. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:05 PM | #28 | |
Major
![]() ![]() 497
Rep 1,375
Posts |
Quote:
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...
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:07 PM | #29 | |
Go Fast And Take Chances
![]() 50
Rep 261
Posts |
Quote:
We shall see... ![]()
__________________
2014 Corvette Z51 Stingray 3LT, 7 M/T
2015 KTM 1290 SA Retired- 11 BMW 335, 07 BMW R1200GSA, 04 BMW Z4, 01 BMW K1200RS, 00 BMW R1150GS ![]() |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:08 PM | #30 |
Second Lieutenant
![]() 7
Rep 296
Posts |
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.
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:20 PM | #32 |
Colonel
![]() 502
Rep 2,397
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:24 PM | #34 |
Major General
![]() ![]() 5282
Rep 5,875
Posts |
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'.
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:26 PM | #35 |
Enlisted Member
![]() 2
Rep 38
Posts |
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. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:36 PM | #36 |
Brigadier General
![]() ![]() 441
Rep 3,888
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:43 PM | #37 | ||
Happy Camper
![]() 626
Rep 7,869
Posts
Drives: C63 AMG & 280 SL on Weekends :
Join Date: May 2010
Location: GTA, Ontario - Canada
iTrader: (0)
Garage List 1969 Restored Merce ... [7.50]
2011 M3 Coupe TRADED [7.34] 1987 BMW 535is [1.00] Cars from the Past [6.50] The ///M3 Engine S65 [9.59] |
Quote:
Jason clearly stated "(although keep in mind that everything is subject to change by the time the model hits production)". Quote:
![]()
__________________
Cheers, Rolf-Dieter
![]() Life will take us to some interesting places, fortunately The ///M3 will too with a ![]() ---> Click here for some good stuff I found |
||
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:43 PM | #38 |
Brigadier General
![]() ![]() 209
Rep 4,319
Posts |
Interesting find, apart from the engine reference it sounds like an F10 M5. HUD would be nice to have.
__________________
GT3 RS | Desperately seeking the next great M car...
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 02:49 PM | #39 |
Captain
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 118
Rep 888
Posts |
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? |
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 03:06 PM | #40 |
Captain
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 37
Rep 735
Posts
Drives: 2013 F30 335i X-Drive MSport
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Brooklyn
|
COBB, take note. Us future boosted M3/4 drivers will be needing your services lol
__________________
2013 F30 335i X-Drive / AW / CR / MSPORT / PREMIUM / TECH / HK / Heated Seats / Sport Auto / PDC / M Performance Grills and Spoiler / 20% tint (sold)
1995 Toyota Supra Single Turbo (for sale) |
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 03:08 PM | #41 |
Private First Class
![]() 99
Rep 135
Posts |
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... |
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 03:22 PM | #42 |
Not a New Member
![]() 94
Rep 925
Posts
Drives: with both hands and both feet
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: midwest
|
interesting it's loaded with style 220 wheels. i wonder if sizes/offsets will be similar to the e9x ///m's...
![]()
__________________
#1498E86 | Sepang Bronze | Dark Sepang Leather | Carbon Leather Trim
![]() |
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 03:24 PM | #43 | |
Second Lieutenant
![]() 93
Rep 236
Posts |
Quote:
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. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2013, 03:25 PM | #44 |
474
Rep 4,591
Posts |
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! |
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|