BMW X3 Forum
BMW X3 Forum
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
XBimmers | BMW X3 Forum > BMW X3 Forums | F25 (2011 - Current) > X3 M Forum » Rumor: BMW X3M Coming Soon with Tri-Turbo Engine!

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      05-24-2011, 02:14 PM   #45
kmarei
Major General
 
kmarei's Avatar
 
Drives: 1988 E30 M3 Evo II
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

Posts: 6,456
iTrader: (32)

Garage List
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
__________________
This user has been banned from the 4 series forum because he doesn't sing its merits like the admins want us all to

kmarei is offline   Egypt
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 02:42 PM   #46
positiveions
Lieutenant General
 
positiveions's Avatar
 
Drives: 09 MKV JETTA 2.5 & E90 M3 :)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: La Verne, CA

Posts: 10,358
iTrader: (1)

Send a message via MSN to positiveions Send a message via Yahoo to positiveions
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.
positiveions is offline   Lebanon
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 03:00 PM   #47
kmarei
Major General
 
kmarei's Avatar
 
Drives: 1988 E30 M3 Evo II
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

Posts: 6,456
iTrader: (32)

Garage List
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
__________________
This user has been banned from the 4 series forum because he doesn't sing its merits like the admins want us all to

kmarei is offline   Egypt
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 03:19 PM   #48
Erhan
Colonel
 
Erhan's Avatar
 
Drives: Cooper S
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle

Posts: 2,466
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
Erhan is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 03:36 PM   #49
SG335Xi
Private
 
SG335Xi's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 SG 335Xi
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Minnesota

Posts: 57
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.
SG335Xi is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 03:51 PM   #50
Slalom
First Lieutenant
 
Slalom's Avatar
 
Drives: 04 Z4, 07 328xiT,12 M3 week 46
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Bern

Posts: 313
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
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.
__________________
Collelongo (AQ) BMW Club
Sometimes I wonder why I drive BMW's then I drive something else and the doubt disappears.
Slalom is offline   Switzerland
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 04:12 PM   #51
Erhan
Colonel
 
Erhan's Avatar
 
Drives: Cooper S
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle

Posts: 2,466
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
Erhan is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 04:13 PM   #52
kmarei
Major General
 
kmarei's Avatar
 
Drives: 1988 E30 M3 Evo II
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA

Posts: 6,456
iTrader: (32)

Garage List
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

__________________
This user has been banned from the 4 series forum because he doesn't sing its merits like the admins want us all to

kmarei is offline   Egypt
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 04:22 PM   #53
atopa2002
Private First Class
 
Drives: Z3, LCI e90 335i, 2013 e92 M3
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Richmond,VA

Posts: 157
iTrader: (1)

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.
atopa2002 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 04:30 PM   #54
JoosyJoos
Major
 
JoosyJoos's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 335i Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Johns Creek, GA

Posts: 1,291
iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2008 BMW 335i  [0.00]
Send a message via AIM to JoosyJoos
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.
__________________

1998 M3 Vert
1995 M3 Track Car
2008 335i - Retired
JoosyJoos is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 04:31 PM   #55
Mako
2000 M Roadster (sold), 2006 M Coupe (sold)
 
Drives: '12 X3 35i M Spt '13 335 M Spt
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chicago

Posts: 1,252
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.
Mako is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 04:35 PM   #56
JoosyJoos
Major
 
JoosyJoos's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 335i Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Johns Creek, GA

Posts: 1,291
iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2008 BMW 335i  [0.00]
Send a message via AIM to JoosyJoos
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?
__________________

1998 M3 Vert
1995 M3 Track Car
2008 335i - Retired
JoosyJoos is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 04:40 PM   #57
JoosyJoos
Major
 
JoosyJoos's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 335i Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Johns Creek, GA

Posts: 1,291
iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2008 BMW 335i  [0.00]
Send a message via AIM to JoosyJoos
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.
__________________

1998 M3 Vert
1995 M3 Track Car
2008 335i - Retired
JoosyJoos is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 04:47 PM   #58
Mako
2000 M Roadster (sold), 2006 M Coupe (sold)
 
Drives: '12 X3 35i M Spt '13 335 M Spt
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chicago

Posts: 1,252
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.
Mako is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 04:50 PM   #59
Erhan
Colonel
 
Erhan's Avatar
 
Drives: Cooper S
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seattle

Posts: 2,466
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
Erhan is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 04:58 PM   #60
positiveions
Lieutenant General
 
positiveions's Avatar
 
Drives: 09 MKV JETTA 2.5 & E90 M3 :)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: La Verne, CA

Posts: 10,358
iTrader: (1)

Send a message via MSN to positiveions Send a message via Yahoo to positiveions
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarei View Post
that is the one.
positiveions is offline   Lebanon
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 07:11 PM   #61
drivendriver
Second Lieutenant
 
drivendriver's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 E83 X3
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Alexandria, VA

Posts: 269
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.
__________________
drivendriver is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 07:22 PM   #62
mkoesel
Moderator
 
Drives: IB/PS M-DCT E93 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

Posts: 13,013
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.
__________________
2008 Interlagos Blue E93 M3 - M-DCT
2011 Salsa Red Jetta TDI Sportwagen - DSG
mkoesel is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 07:59 PM   #63
mkoesel
Moderator
 
Drives: IB/PS M-DCT E93 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

Posts: 13,013
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.
__________________
2008 Interlagos Blue E93 M3 - M-DCT
2011 Salsa Red Jetta TDI Sportwagen - DSG
mkoesel is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 08:07 PM   #64
JoosyJoos
Major
 
JoosyJoos's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 335i Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Johns Creek, GA

Posts: 1,291
iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2008 BMW 335i  [0.00]
Send a message via AIM to JoosyJoos
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.
__________________

1998 M3 Vert
1995 M3 Track Car
2008 335i - Retired
JoosyJoos is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 08:19 PM   #65
mkoesel
Moderator
 
Drives: IB/PS M-DCT E93 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

Posts: 13,013
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?
mkoesel is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-24-2011, 08:31 PM   #66
Dackelone
Moderator
 
Dackelone's Avatar
 
Drives: 135i Silber mit/Rot 6MT N54
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Bayern, Germany

Posts: 15,128
iTrader: (1)

Some food for thought...

332Kw engine from BMW...

Dackelone is offline   Germany
0
Reply With Quote
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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:23 AM.




xbimmers
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
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