Quote:
Originally Posted by haen
........
You're correct. I read your comment about the GT3 becoming the Turbo and assumed you meant it was stepping away from the performance oriented GT2 & GT3 models. Please be more specific next time.
An iron block is stronger than an aluminum block. I'm not doubting that. I fail to see what aftermarket tuning has to do with our discussion so I'm not getting into it. We can have a separate discussion about that later if you want. And I just reread the press release BMW put out for its V8 and they never mentions the fact that the inline 6 was cast iron. Please show me where they mention this fact.
Quote from press release:
"this is why BMW's new V8, weighing a mere 202 kg or 445 lb, is a genuine lightweight, saving some 15 kg or 33 lb versus the six-cylinder power unit in the previous model. In other words, the new engine easily sets off the weight of two extra cylinders."
my source:
http://www.worldcarfans.com/2070322....gine-in-detail
I'm not debating the engine's accolades. It's a good engine but it's underpowered for its weight.
Performance in what regard? Are you talking about an M5 vs a E63 in a straight line? From a stop or a rolling starting? These things are dependent on the car as a whole, not just the engine. We are talking strictly about the engine. Stay on topic or be more specific.
Article talking about next Enzo using turbos.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/next-fer...orsepower.html
Nope. I'm an idiot. Engines just rev straight up with no powerbands or torque curves.
I'm pretty confident that if you were to take this discussion outside of a strictly BMW forum, most people would agree with me.
Sorry, I realize that was a poor analogy, especially if you don't know the history of the automobile. The analogy I was trying to make was that there are always people who hold onto old tech because it's comforting and familiar, not because it's better. Steam had its day just as high revving NA engines have had theirs. Turbo engines are simply better from a performance standpoint. BMW is a company that sells cars and is market driven. When the price of oil shoots through the roof, they look to build cars which use less gasoline.
This discussion has lost its core message. Forced induction allows for more performance, less fuel consumption and lighter/smaller engines compared with a NA engine of the same HP. There is no debating these facts. Sticky, you are entitled to your opinion about which is better but they are opinions and nothing more. |
It is way too late for me to go way in depth but I'll highlight some key points.
I want to you post for me lighter V8's equal to or less than the M3's displacement that have the same if not more power or torque naturally aspirated. They don't exist.
The aftermarket tuning example was to show you the strength of the block. You agree it is strong, right? So tell me, do you get more bang for your buck with the BMW 6 cylinder? Is it a motor that gives far more in return than it should? Did the Supra not makes it reputation on the strength of its motor in aftermarket tuning? Did people not say that it was unheard of for a motor of that size to make 600+ wheel on stock internals? How about BMW doing the same, if not better, at 8k rpm with 11.5:1 compression? That is over-engineering if I have ever seen it.
The Enzo successor, really is the FXX. No turbos, pure NA power. That car also does not exist on paper.
Performance of the M5 vs. the 63 AMG's. It does not matter if from a stop or from a roll, the AMG is losing. The 55's made a stronger showing vs. the M5 from a stop, fatter curve. From a roll, the M5 beats either. Whatever way you want to look at it, the M5 rules the autobahn.
Why is NA tech old tech? Direct injection, vanos, sodium filled valves, silicon-aluminum blocks, magnesium-steel rods, etc. Forced induction motors march on as well, VTG or whatever.
You don't seem to understand that people buy high revving motors not because they are efficient, light, or smaller. It is how the motor makes the driver feel. This is why a Ferrari always has that special aura vs. a 911 turbo.
I did not get an M3 because it is the fastest or most efficient. I got it because of the way it makes me feel behind the wheel. That is something others can't match. If the motor did not do something special matched up to the chassis, why wouldn't I be in something easier to modify, lighter, and more fuel efficient?
Frankly, making smaller motors that are naturally aspirated that can compete with the worlds best using forced induction and or lighter motors is incredible. Talk about the weight or whatever else all you want, BMW gets it done. That makes them special. They can do what others can't. I think BMW is losing something very special by going to forced induction. Does that mean they won't do well? No, of course not, BMW will continue to astound. However, there was something awe inspiring by doing it in a way few others could.
You are definitely right if you take this discussion outside of a BMW forum most will agree with you. Most people take the easy way out these days. Most people don't have appreciation for the level of talent it takes to produce cars on the M3 or M5's level. Most people are not connoisseur's.