05-24-2011, 02:14 PM | #45 |
Major General
722
Rep 6,860
Posts
Drives: 2014 BMW 435i X-drive
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA
|
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, 03:00 PM | #47 |
Major General
722
Rep 6,860
Posts
Drives: 2014 BMW 435i X-drive
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA
|
at least until audi/mb produce a quad turbo
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-24-2011, 03:19 PM | #48 |
Colonel
87
Rep 2,464
Posts |
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 |
Private
5
Rep 79
Posts |
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 |
Major
509
Rep 1,345
Posts
Drives: 04 Z4, 18 X3 M40i
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ottawa and Collelongo (AQ) Italy
|
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 | |
Colonel
87
Rep 2,464
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-24-2011, 04:13 PM | #52 | |
Major General
722
Rep 6,860
Posts
Drives: 2014 BMW 435i X-drive
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Reston, VA
|
Quote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ELECT...item3cb8235d17
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-24-2011, 04:22 PM | #53 | |
Lieutenant
224
Rep 560
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-24-2011, 04:30 PM | #54 | |
Major
115
Rep 1,347
Posts
Drives: 2011 335d
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
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. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-24-2011, 04:31 PM | #55 |
(Sold) '00 M Roadster '06 M Coupe '16 M3 '20 X3MC
1633
Rep 2,604
Posts |
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 | |
Major
115
Rep 1,347
Posts
Drives: 2011 335d
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
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? |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-24-2011, 04:40 PM | #57 | |
Major
115
Rep 1,347
Posts
Drives: 2011 335d
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-24-2011, 04:47 PM | #58 | |
(Sold) '00 M Roadster '06 M Coupe '16 M3 '20 X3MC
1633
Rep 2,604
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-24-2011, 04:50 PM | #59 | |
Colonel
87
Rep 2,464
Posts |
Quote:
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, 07:11 PM | #61 | |
Second Lieutenant
5
Rep 269
Posts |
Quote:
I assume the electric turbo would only be used for a short time, and then deactivated once the exhaust-driven turbos spool up.
__________________
Track videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/drivendriver |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-24-2011, 07:22 PM | #62 | |
Moderator
7537
Rep 19,368
Posts |
Quote:
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 | |
Moderator
7537
Rep 19,368
Posts |
Quote:
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 | |
Major
115
Rep 1,347
Posts
Drives: 2011 335d
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-24-2011, 08:19 PM | #65 | |
Moderator
7537
Rep 19,368
Posts |
Quote:
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
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|