Quote:
Originally Posted by haen
That's because the inline 6 was cast iron. BMW never mentions that fact when they brag about how light the new V8 is. Do you even know what individual throttle bodies are/do? They do not account for a substation portion of the engine's weight. Yes, it's great that the V8 has ITBs, but the fact remains that BMW's engine pound for pound is seriously underpowered compared with competing engines.
HP/liter does not define an engine's characteristics. It's a unit of measure!!!! Please, understand that concept before you go any further.
I own an e60 M5 and I wouldn't even go so far as to say that only the F430's V8 or GT3's flat 6 beat it. You like those engines because of their high hp/liter output. No offense, but being a stat geek doesn't mean you know what you're talking about. Other engines are built with different philosophies in mind. That shouldn't automatically make them less valuable. You just sound really bias. You said "the M5 does not need 6.2 liters to beat the benz V8". Beat it at what? I bet your answer is along the lines of HP/liter. Get over it. Like I said before, it's a unit of measure and does not dictate an engine's characteristics.
That's your opinion.
I think it's more along the lines of a GT3 turning into a GT2. Remember that car? GT3 with twin turbos. Where do I find the "owned" smilie? 
Why can't turbo engines be special? The Ferrari F40 uses a turbo and I don't think anyone is disappointed in that car.
Sticky, while I had a lot of fun picking apart your comments, you missed the point of my original post. I was not trying to discredit BMW's current philosophy towards performance engines, rather I was stating that this design has passed its prime. Time to move onto the next evolution. Don't tell me you wish automakers had stuck with steam engines because they were so special.
|
Where to begin with this disaster you think is an intelligent post.
I'm quite familliar with the GT2, GT3, and turbo. Does the GT2 have turbos? Does the turbo have turbos (even you should figure that one out.) Yes the GT3 is RWD like the GT2, I was making a point of the way it would deliver power, flew way over your head. Get it now? Ok good.
Yep, the inline 6 was iron. Never, never once, have I heard BMW not mention this fact. Did the thought ever cross your mind as to how strong that block is? Oh wait, no it didn't. How about over 600 wheel horsepower potential? That motor is ridiculously strong, actually handles more power on stock internals than the z06 or the 63 series AMG's. And with half the displacement? Seems to me BMW knows what a solid motor is. Their engineers definitely know better than you.
Yep, my opinion is the M3 is special and so is its motor. The fact that the worlds automotive press agrees just shows they have good taste.
The M5 beating the 6.3 by hp per liter? No, it beats it in performance as well. You must not know your cars that well.
The ferrari F40 came out when? When is the last time Ferrari did a turbo motor? What, the only other remotely recent car would be the 288 GTO, which was before the F40. What did Ferrari decide was best for the F40 successor? Oh, that's right, NA. What about for the successor to that? Hmm, seems we have developed a pattern here. But hey, you tell the Ferrari engineers what is best for their car. What do they know?
A high hp per liter naturally aspirated car is going to need a high redline in correlation. Couldn't figure this out?
You sure you want an owned smiley? Because you would be seeng it used frequently in responses to your posts.
Steam engines and internal combustion... I see your point. So wait, are forced induction motors not internal combustion? Are NA motors not internal combustion? Seems to me they have a bit more in common with each other than steam motors. One technology is not exactly more advanced than the other. Uh, you lost me, that was not a solid analogy.