View Single Post
      03-24-2007, 12:46 AM   #26
T Bone
Brigadier General
 
T Bone's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 335xi Coupe
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The land where we kill baby seals

Posts: 4,021
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e36jakeo View Post
This whole engine comparison winds up confusing me. If the above figures are correct for MUCH larger and torquier engines that are also just as fuel efficient (or more so) as the M3's V8, what is the TRUE point of a high-revving design? Less torque does allow for a lighter weight drivetrain, but then the M3 will still weigh a lot more than a GT3, Z06, etc.

I'd love to see a breakdown of how much lighter the engine, transmission, axles, gears, clutch, etc. etc of BMW's high-revving M3 vs. the Z06's "old school" pushrod 7 liter V8. The immediate 470 lbs ft of torque in a Z06 makes it really fun to drive with friends -- just to whip their head back!

If you compare an F430's 483 HP V8 to a Z06's 505 HP V8, the Z06's V8 makes more torque, more HP, weighs almost the same (based on above numbers), yet gets dramatically better fuel economy (16/26 vs 11/16 for the Ferrari).

If revs cost in gas and in torque and (it seems) don't benefit much in weight., what is the point?

2 things:
  1. BMW designed the engine to meet displacement requirements
  2. The kick ass drivetrain is connected to a non-sports car chassis, the E92
I realize #2 may be heresy but the 911, Vette, F430 are real sports cars.
__________________
"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari
T Bone is offline  
0
Reply With Quote