View Single Post
      12-05-2008, 05:41 AM   #238
haen
Enlisted Member
haen's Avatar
1
Rep
38
Posts

Drives: e60 M5
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Los Angeles

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky View Post
It is way too late for me to go way in depth but I'll highlight some key points.
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky View Post
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.
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?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky View Post
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.
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky View Post
The Enzo successor, really is the FXX. No turbos, pure NA power. That car also does not exist on paper.
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky View Post
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.
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky View Post
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.
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky View Post
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 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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky View Post
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?
You can spend your money however you want. Like I said, it's your opinion. It doesn't change the facts though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky View Post
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.
Maybe other manufacturers just choose not to go the high revving NA path. Audi's RS4 seemed to get 100hp/liter without a problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sticky View Post
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.
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.
__________________
"If you feel in control, you're not going fast enough." -Mario Andretti

Appreciate 0