Quote:
Originally Posted by haen
Why don't you start by showing me where BMW mentions that the reason the inline 6 in the e46 M3 was heavier than the e92 M3's V8 was because it was cast iron. I'm not going to reply to another one of your posts until you provide this info. I'm getting tired of your baseless claims.
You're not going to find any. No manufacturers make 4.0 V8 but we can compare its weight with larger displacement V8s which will highlight the fact that the M3's V8 is heavy for its displacement. I don't know of a single manufacturer that makes 4.0 liter V8s. Do you?
All those BMW inline 6's that are getting 600hp are turbo charged, so I don't see what you're getting at. What is the point of this aftermarket reference? Bang for your buck? What the hell are you talking about? You need to drop this because you're not making any sense.
The FXX is not the Enzo successor. It's a platform Ferrari uses to test new parts. Regardless, the next car Ferrari produces will use turbos.
I'm starting to think that you're not comprehending anything I say. We are talking about just the engines, not the entire car. Which engine makes more HP? Which engine makes more torque? End of discussion.
NA is old tech because it isn't as efficient as FI. The automotive industry is moving toward more efficient cars. BMW's favorite new term is Efficient Dynamics. Direct Injection makes a far larger impact in a FI engine vs an NA engine and the rest of the tech you listed for NA also works for FI.
I understand. Will you please listen to what I write? FI will replace NA because it is more efficient in terms of power, fuel consumption and size.
You can spend your money however you want. Like I said, it's your opinion. It doesn't change the facts though.
Maybe other manufacturers just choose not to go the high revving NA path. Audi's RS4 seemed to get 100hp/liter without a problem.
Most people take the easy way out? No, most people are rational and understand that their viewpoint is not always the right one. I understand that it takes a lot of engineering brainpower to make an M3 or M5, but do you think that AMG/Quattro just whip up their cars in a single afternoon? Stop being so BMW bias.
|
Huh? BMW assumes people have common sense and can figure out iron is heavier than aluminum. You need BMW to hold your hand before you figure this out?
Lexus had a 4.0 liter V8 and Land Rover. Jaguar went from a 4.0 to a 4.2 and their motor is heavier, and makes less power AND torque from larger displacement. In the super v8 for the new XJ they get 310 pound feet from 4.2 liters NA. Same torque per liter, actually more for the M3 if you go by torque to the wheels... seems BMW is right where they should be for their displacement and weight.
What do you mean you don't see what I am getting at? The BMW iron block is strong as hell. You can make more power and torque with it with forced induction than these big v8's you are talking about. People talk about forced induction and aftermarket gains. Well, BMW's naturally aspirated motors when combined with forced induction give out of this world performance. I like a car with headroom for tuning.
The FXX is the platform they tested the Enzo "successor" parts on. The FXX was supposed to turn into a road going vehicle but instead they made it a racer. It is the spiritual successor as they pushed the Enzo envelope to the limit and beyond. There is no announced successor yet so this is the closest thing, period.
I'm starting to think you are not comprehending anything I say.
NA can't make as much power per liter as forced induction. I thought you said hp per liter doesn't matter? Well, BMW's NA motors as efficient as physically possibly. That does not mean they are old tech, ridiculous. If anything they have to push the envelope further technologically to stay competitive.
I will not listen to what you write. I will read it though.
What facts is my opinion seeking to change? My opinion is the M3 is better with a gem of an NA motor than it would be with a tuned N54. You want that, get a 335. It will NEVER be or feel like an M3.
Audi tried to go the high revving NA path, and they couldn't match BMW. Audi's RS4 makes 100 hp per liter on paper, that power does not get to the ground. Blame it on Quattro or whatever you want, BMW's setup is more efficient with their "old tech" NA.
Most people are rational? Buddy, the rational thing is to buy a Prius and use a car as transportation. However, I enjoy driving and a BMW M car with its high revving motor gives me the greatest driving pleasure of its competition. That is not BMW bias, it is the truth.
The C63 was not whipped up in one afternoon. It probably took them the whole weekend to decide to stuff the 63 AMG V8 into the C class, give it the same transmission they use in everything, and call it a day.