BMW X3 Forum
BMW X3 Forum
Welcome to the ultimate BMW X3 community.
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      05-24-2011, 02:14 PM   #45
kmarei
Major General
kmarei's Avatar
Egypt
685
Rep
6,844
Posts

Drives: 2018 Audi RS5 coupe
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

iTrader: (34)

Garage List
2018 Audi RS5  [0.00]
interesting
well the only good news it now that they whored out the M brand to cover SUVs
and now that the next X3M will have the M3s powerplant before the M3
and that it might be a V6 as opposed to a straight 6
the only thing left for them to do, is an M diesel
which i would not mind actually
__________________
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 02:42 PM   #46
positiveions
Lieutenant General
positiveions's Avatar
Lebanon
961
Rep
11,722
Posts

Drives: 19 Tacoma, 16 Golf wagon
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Upland, CA

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by sukutash View Post
Duh, remember Kindergarten! 3 is GREATER than 2. Or 2<3!
he is asking the pro and cons and not which is greater. We all know 3 is greater than 2, but in this case, BMW is pursuing something far greater than any manufacturer has achieved.
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 03:00 PM   #47
kmarei
Major General
kmarei's Avatar
Egypt
685
Rep
6,844
Posts

Drives: 2018 Audi RS5 coupe
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

iTrader: (34)

Garage List
2018 Audi RS5  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by eatrach73 View Post
he is asking the pro and cons and not which is greater. We all know 3 is greater than 2, but in this case, BMW is pursuing something far greater than any manufacturer has achieved.
at least until audi/mb produce a quad turbo
__________________
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 03:19 PM   #48
Erhan
Colonel
Erhan's Avatar
United_States
87
Rep
2,464
Posts

Drives: Cooper S
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
at least until audi/mb produce a quad turbo
Bugatti Veyron has 4 turbos, and it is owned by VW who also owns Audi.
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 03:36 PM   #49
SG335Xi
Private
SG335Xi's Avatar
5
Rep
79
Posts

Drives: 2008 SG 335Xi
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (2)

It appears to me that most people are overlooking the fact that it's really twin turbo with an ELECTRIC turbo added in....

Probably will just have some sort of electric compressor at the intake... no big deal.
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 03:51 PM   #50
Slalom
Major
Slalom's Avatar
Canada
507
Rep
1,345
Posts

Drives: 04 Z4, 18 X3 M40i
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ottawa and Collelongo (AQ) Italy

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2004 Z4  [0.00]
2018 BMW X3 M40i  [10.00]
Engine speculation

I am not convinced that BMW will go the V6 route. The X3 and F30 have been designed with long hoods - that is part of the design vocabulary of BMW. There is no reason to put an inherently inferior engineering as a V6 in an X3 or F30. The only rational reasons for a V6 are;

(a) limited hood length
(b) a transversely mounted engine - as in the X1 and Mini
(c) cost savings where shared engines with a non-prestige marque dictate the use of shared engines

The thought of triple turbos or even turbos and a supercharger (with its sonorous whine) is very appealing.
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 04:12 PM   #51
Erhan
Colonel
Erhan's Avatar
United_States
87
Rep
2,464
Posts

Drives: Cooper S
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slalom View Post
I am not convinced that BMW will go the V6 route. The X3 and F30 have been designed with long hoods - that is part of the design vocabulary of BMW. There is no reason to put an inherently inferior engineering as a V6 in an X3 or F30. The only rational reasons for a V6 are;

(a) limited hood length
(b) a transversely mounted engine - as in the X1 and Mini
(c) cost savings where shared engines with a non-prestige marque dictate the use of shared engines

The thought of triple turbos or even turbos and a supercharger (with its sonorous whine) is very appealing.
They are kind of doing (c) allready. And a compact V6 will give more room to fit 3 turbos and their coolers...
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 04:13 PM   #52
kmarei
Major General
kmarei's Avatar
Egypt
685
Rep
6,844
Posts

Drives: 2018 Audi RS5 coupe
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

iTrader: (34)

Garage List
2018 Audi RS5  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by SG335Xi View Post
It appears to me that most people are overlooking the fact that it's really twin turbo with an ELECTRIC turbo added in....
i've found the supplier!!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ELECT...item3cb8235d17

__________________
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 04:22 PM   #53
atopa2002
Lieutenant
atopa2002's Avatar
United_States
203
Rep
538
Posts

Drives: Z3M, 2013 e92 M3, F15 X5
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Richmond,VA

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slalom View Post
I am not convinced that BMW will go the V6 route. The X3 and F30 have been designed with long hoods - that is part of the design vocabulary of BMW. There is no reason to put an inherently inferior engineering as a V6 in an X3 or F30. The only rational reasons for a V6 are;

(a) limited hood length
(b) a transversely mounted engine - as in the X1 and Mini
(c) cost savings where shared engines with a non-prestige marque dictate the use of shared engines

The thought of triple turbos or even turbos and a supercharger (with its sonorous whine) is very appealing.
Why is v6 inferior? V6 is more compact and displacement can easily be increased to achieve more power,cooling is better and it can also be made smooth by using electromechanical mounts.I don't thing they can go more that 3.2 in an I6 it will be too big like a V8.
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 04:30 PM   #54
JoosyJoos
Major
JoosyJoos's Avatar
United_States
113
Rep
1,347
Posts

Drives: 2011 335d
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2008 BMW 335i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by SG335Xi View Post
It appears to me that most people are overlooking the fact that it's really twin turbo with an ELECTRIC turbo added in....

Probably will just have some sort of electric compressor at the intake... no big deal.
That thought also occurred to me actually... there was talk of KERS technology from the F1 team spilling over... maybe this could be used to some extent on an electric turbo type set-up the likes of which we have never seen on a production vehicle. That would be very very interesting... but I think unlikely.

And I'm still betting on the V6 even after some good arguments by others... from a business perspective it just makes sense to chop down the S63 v8. Think about all the economies of scale that could be had if this engine is used in the Z4/X3/M3. The rods, pistons, etc all shared across Z4-M/X3-M/M3/M5/M6/X5-M/X6-M. BMW doesn't have the business partnerships to afford development of several engine solutions. The more they can save via economies of scale and margin improvement goes a long way to get them even with the competition. It's simply too good to pass up from a business and manufacturing viewpoint.
__________________

1997 M3 Coupe - BMWCCA I-Prepared #22
2006 M Roadster - 23,000 miles and slowly counting
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 04:31 PM   #55
Mako
(Sold) '00 M Roadster '06 M Coupe '16 M3 '20 X3MC
1545
Rep
2,585
Posts

Drives: '23 M3 comp
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chicago suburbs

iTrader: (0)

so has it been confirmed if they stick with a i6 that it will be the N54 or N55 3.0 liter? how do we know they aren't bringing back a 3.2L i6? I would think a 3.2L with twin turbo plus an electric turbo could easily push out 400+HP and torque, plus would be a new engine for M's only and be used in the X3M, Z4M, next gen M3, M4, X4M...

I am all for a tri turbo 3.2L i6 which could get over 20 mpg combined in all cars. It would devistate the new twin turbo V8 the next gen C63 would get, performance would be similar but MPG would be a joke compared to a tri turbo i6.
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 04:35 PM   #56
JoosyJoos
Major
JoosyJoos's Avatar
United_States
113
Rep
1,347
Posts

Drives: 2011 335d
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2008 BMW 335i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by atopa2002 View Post
Why is v6 inferior? V6 is more compact and displacement can easily be increased to achieve more power,cooling is better and it can also be made smooth by using electromechanical mounts.I don't thing they can go more that 3.2 in an I6 it will be too big like a V8.
Most peoples problem is simply with BMW's long standing heritage and what a V6 would spell---- the end of the inline 6 altogether.

The electromechanical mounts would be an interesting touch especially since this would be a performance application. I know Porsche uses something similar in the GT3 but it would be a first for BMW.

What about the use of mechanical balance shafts? Could those be retro-fitted?
__________________

1997 M3 Coupe - BMWCCA I-Prepared #22
2006 M Roadster - 23,000 miles and slowly counting
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 04:40 PM   #57
JoosyJoos
Major
JoosyJoos's Avatar
United_States
113
Rep
1,347
Posts

Drives: 2011 335d
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2008 BMW 335i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mako View Post
so has it been confirmed if they stick with a i6 that it will be the N54 or N55 3.0 liter? how do we know they aren't bringing back a 3.2L i6? I would think a 3.2L with twin turbo plus an electric turbo could easily push out 400+HP and torque, plus would be a new engine for M's only and be used in the X3M, Z4M, next gen M3, M4, X4M...

I am all for a tri turbo 3.2L i6 which could get over 20 mpg combined in all cars. It would devistate the new twin turbo V8 the next gen C63 would get, performance would be similar but MPG would be a joke compared to a tri turbo i6.
Correct me if I'm wrong (anyone) but I don't believe the N54/N55 can be bored out that much... and lets keep in mind the block is an aluminum open deck block. Not sure how thrilled BMW would be to make a production car with the (assumed) high levels of torque, boost,and heat from 3 turbos with an aluminum block (even with cast iron sleeves). And then there's the weight issue---the N54/N55 block is heavy especially when compared to the N52.
__________________

1997 M3 Coupe - BMWCCA I-Prepared #22
2006 M Roadster - 23,000 miles and slowly counting
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 04:47 PM   #58
Mako
(Sold) '00 M Roadster '06 M Coupe '16 M3 '20 X3MC
1545
Rep
2,585
Posts

Drives: '23 M3 comp
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chicago suburbs

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoosyJoos View Post
Correct me if I'm wrong (anyone) but I don't believe the N54/N55 can be bored out that much... and lets keep in mind the block is an aluminum open deck block. Not sure how thrilled BMW would be to make a production car with the (assumed) high levels of torque, boost,and heat from 3 turbos with an aluminum block (even with cast iron sleeves). And then there's the weight issue---the N54/N55 block is heavy especially when compared to the N52.
sorry, I wasn't saying turn the N54 or N55 into a 3.2L, really meant build a new one (old M3 used to be 3.2L, I remember the 3.2L in my M coupe as well). take a newer version of that engine and add turbos.
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 04:50 PM   #59
Erhan
Colonel
Erhan's Avatar
United_States
87
Rep
2,464
Posts

Drives: Cooper S
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoosyJoos View Post
Most peoples problem is simply with BMW's long standing heritage and what a V6 would spell---- the end of the inline 6 altogether.
Well, after seeing how much heritage matters to BMW, I wouldn't be surprised if they ditch I6. That is why I would not be surprised to see a TT (twin turbo) or TT (triple turbo ) V6 in the next M3.

V6 will also give more interior room without changing the exterior size since it is more compact... And BMW is trying to save weight, so I don't think they want to increase the exterior size but they must increase the interior size to be competitive.
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 04:58 PM   #60
positiveions
Lieutenant General
positiveions's Avatar
Lebanon
961
Rep
11,722
Posts

Drives: 19 Tacoma, 16 Golf wagon
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Upland, CA

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
that is the one.
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 07:11 PM   #61
drivendriver
Second Lieutenant
drivendriver's Avatar
5
Rep
269
Posts

Drives: 2010 E83 X3
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Alexandria, VA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by erhanh View Post
I'd like to now this too.. What sets the redline in a turbo engine?

Also, 3rd turbo might be used to reduce lag.. I'm thinking of a very tiny turbo just to reduce lag..
Yes, a small turbo driven by an electric motor would start generating boost quicker than exhaust-driven turbos, and therefore would pretty much eliminate turbo lag.

I assume the electric turbo would only be used for a short time, and then deactivated once the exhaust-driven turbos spool up.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 07:22 PM   #62
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
7506
Rep
19,370
Posts

Drives: No BMW for now
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoosyJoos View Post
from a business perspective it just makes sense to chop down the S63 v8. Think about all the economies of scale that could be had if this engine is used in the Z4/X3/M3. The rods, pistons, etc all shared across Z4-M/X3-M/M3/M5/M6/X5-M/X6-M. BMW doesn't have the business partnerships to afford development of several engine solutions. The more they can save via economies of scale and margin improvement goes a long way to get them even with the competition. It's simply too good to pass up from a business and manufacturing viewpoint.
But wait a minute.

Speaking purely from an economies of scale perspective - BMW sells many, many times as many I6 engines as they do V8 engines. The I6 is used in every single model BMW sells currently, and is produced in greater numbers than the V8 sibling in every model where both are available, except maybe the F0x (and even there, I would still guess the I6 sells more). So, with that in mind, it would actually make much more sense for the M engine to share the already engineered, already tested, already completely done I6 short-block than it would to borrow parts from the V8. Sure, in either case, you can use some existing parts. But think about it - no matter how you slice it, if you go creating a new V6 engine, you are going to need a ton of new V6-specific parts such as the crank-shaft, cam shafts, block, etc.

If BMW wants to drive cost down for the V8 and create economies of scale for the part content used in that engine, then the better way to handle that would be to share pistons, rods, valves, injection system, other valvetrain components, etc. with the I6, and for that matter with the I4 as well (some rumors suggest that they intend to do exactly this starting with the next generation of engines). I can't fathom why you would instead pick a low volume model like an M3 to build a parts-sharing business case with, especially when, as I say above, you end up wiping out a portion of the money you just saved by now requiring a bunch of V6-specific parts for this M engine.

I'm not trying to be difficult, but honestly I just don't follow your line of reasoning at all. To me, assuming that either a V6 or an I6 can both equally be designed and engineered to meet the performance, reliability, service life, etc, requirements, there is no scenario where it makes sense monetarily to up and switch to a V6. It is primarily for this very reason that I have been extremely skeptical of the V6 from the very outset when these discussions started up two years ago. And I've yet to hear anyone come up with a truly convincing argument that justifies why BMW has such a dire need for a V6 now.
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 07:59 PM   #63
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
7506
Rep
19,370
Posts

Drives: No BMW for now
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by erhanh View Post
V6 will also give more interior room without changing the exterior size since it is more compact... And BMW is trying to save weight, so I don't think they want to increase the exterior size but they must increase the interior size to be competitive.
But they aren't going to do that in an M3 specific scenario. That would have to be an engineering tenet that starts with the 3 series and then filters down to the M3 - just like other packaging and platform related decisions.

In other words, they are not going to go reshaping the engine compartment, moving the firewall, redoing the passenger compartment, or any other major unibody alterations for the M3. It uses the exact same body shell as the 3 series - always has and, if they intend to keep it reasonably priced, always will.
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 08:07 PM   #64
JoosyJoos
Major
JoosyJoos's Avatar
United_States
113
Rep
1,347
Posts

Drives: 2011 335d
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2008 BMW 335i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
But wait a minute.

Speaking purely from an economies of scale perspective - BMW sells many, many times as many I6 engines as they do V8 engines. The I6 is used in every single model BMW sells currently, and is produced in greater numbers than the V8 sibling in every model where both are available, except maybe the F0x (and even there, I would still guess the I6 sells more). So, with that in mind, it would actually make much more sense for the M engine to share the already engineered, already tested, already completely done I6 short-block than it would to borrow parts from the V8. Sure, in either case, you can use some existing parts. But think about it - no matter how you slice it, if you go creating a new V6 engine, you are going to need a ton of new V6-specific parts such as the crank-shaft, cam shafts, block, etc.

If BMW wants to drive cost down for the V8 and create economies of scale for the part content used in that engine, then the better way to handle that would be to share pistons, rods, valves, injection system, other valvetrain components, etc. with the I6, and for that matter with the I4 as well (some rumors suggest that they intend to do exactly this starting with the next generation of engines). I can't fathom why you would instead pick a low volume model like an M3 to build a parts-sharing business case with, especially when, as I say above, you end up wiping out a portion of the money you just saved by now requiring a bunch of V6-specific parts for this M engine.

I'm not trying to be difficult, but honestly I just don't follow your line of reasoning at all. To me, assuming that either a V6 or an I6 can both equally be designed and engineered to meet the performance, reliability, service life, etc, requirements, there is no scenario where it makes sense monetarily to up and switch to a V6. It is primarily for this very reason that I have been extremely skeptical of the V6 from the very outset when these discussions started up two years ago. And I've yet to hear anyone come up with a truly convincing argument that justifies why BMW has such a dire need for a V6 now.
Good points. I think the need for the V6 would be because the I6 can't be bored out enough to create the power the way they want. The N55 and N54 blocks are both different but as far as I'm aware they can't be bored out safely. So then you're looking at a whole new short block and the development costs associated with that. Then there's the fact that you're going to have an even longer (marginally) engine.
__________________

1997 M3 Coupe - BMWCCA I-Prepared #22
2006 M Roadster - 23,000 miles and slowly counting
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 08:19 PM   #65
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
7506
Rep
19,370
Posts

Drives: No BMW for now
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoosyJoos View Post
Good points. I think the need for the V6 would be because the I6 can't be bored out enough to create the power the way they want. The N55 and N54 blocks are both different but as far as I'm aware they can't be bored out safely. So then you're looking at a whole new short block and the development costs associated with that. Then there's the fact that you're going to have an even longer (marginally) engine.
I an understand and appreciate this line of reasoning - that the I6 just can't provide any additional displacement while a V6 of course, could. I do agree that the 91mm bore center of the modern BMW M50-based I6 architecture won't likely yield an aluminum engine above 3L. However, as I have said in the past, I don't think more displacement is needed. I believe that 150hp/L is not only achievable by M Division, but in fact they will be blowing well past that figure in the coming generations of their engines. Current rumor suggests that the next generation of non-M BMW engines will be designed for up to about 136hp/L. To me it would be foolish to bet against 150hp+ from the M Division. In fact, I would not be surprised to see a them hit 170hp/L from their imminent turbo I4 engine.

When you think about it, Mitsubishi had a 150hp/L I4 some fifiteen years ago, right? Probably more, even. How is logical to believe M cannot match that today?
Appreciate 0
      05-24-2011, 08:31 PM   #66
Dackelone
European Editor
Dackelone's Avatar
Germany
10505
Rep
22,992
Posts

Drives: N54 e82
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Bayern, Germany

iTrader: (1)

Some food for thought...

332Kw engine from BMW...

Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:28 AM.




xbimmers
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST