BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > M3 (E90 / E92 / E93) > M3 vs....
 
European Auto Source
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      08-19-2012, 07:08 PM   #45
Longboarder
Brigadier General
65
Rep
3,794
Posts

 
Drives: 2013 e92 M3
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Monarch Beach

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2013 WRX STi  [4.00]
2011 997.2 Turbo S  [4.71]
2013 e92 M3  [4.55]
2013 BMW X5  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by gthal View Post
P.S. If you really wanted a fast car, you could have done better than an M3 with mods. By the time you put the mods on and the supercharger you are close to GT-R territory in price... make a few simple mods to that car and you have a complete monster. You seem to be very preoccupied with power and speed so I would have thought you would have picked a different starting platform (or maybe a 2013 GT500). Just saying.
Actually if all I wanted was a fast car I would have simply changed my firmware to run the 91 octane + e85 blend. Vishnu is now getting 425 to the wheels with just a tune! Imagine with meth and downpipes! Or better yet, gone all out for (only) $6,750 for the Vishnu single turbo kit. Shiv took me for a ride in his and it was almost silly. I see why it pulled on a 880 HP Vette at Trona.

But alas it isn't just power but the complete package that I was after...including a car that was going to allow me to become a better driver (hence the GT-R was out). So the M3 it is. I'm actually excited to see what I can do with this car.
__________________
Daily: 2013 e92 M3 DCT / ESS VT2 650 S/C / Akrapovic Evolution / StopTech BBK
Track/Airstrip: 2011 997.2 Turbo S PDK / 725 HP / BBi suspension build
Beater: 2013 X5 3.5sport
YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCT1...eoFBszPIK0gf9w
Appreciate 0
      08-19-2012, 07:29 PM   #46
IFX
Banned
31
Rep
2,538
Posts

 
Drives: AW e46M/N54
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South Fla.

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Longboarder View Post
I did see a stock M3 6MT run a modded 2012 c63 AMG with a PP and exhaust at shift-s3ctors inaugural roll-on event on 11.11.11. Yes the AMG won but the race was very close. Props to the M.

My M3 won't be stock for very long. Because its painfully slow compared to what I drive now. It will be "broken in" with the tune, meth and complete catless exhaust. And once broken in it will be getting a supercharger.





Dude I wouldn't doubt that you saw that race go down, but EVERYONE here on this board knows a manual MT M3 will get slaughtered by a 63. DCT is close race, I will agree to that. I would honestly want to see this race, but unfortunately there would be no way of knowing if the M was stock.
Appreciate 0
      08-19-2012, 08:12 PM   #47
gblansten
Beandoc
gblansten's Avatar
United_States
29
Rep
2,243
Posts

 
Drives: 2014 BMW M5 SG/SS
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Thick ascending limb

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IFX View Post
Dude I wouldn't doubt that you saw that race go down, but EVERYONE here on this board knows a manual MT M3 will get slaughtered by a 63. DCT is close race, I will agree to that. I would honestly want to see this race, but unfortunately there would be no way of knowing if the M was stock.
A C63 with PP would still probably have a leg up on my M3 with DCT. Both are great cars.
Appreciate 0
      08-19-2012, 11:58 PM   #48
clar
Major
clar's Avatar
Singapore
26
Rep
1,033
Posts

 
Drives: M5
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Singapore

iTrader: (0)

I know what AMG has done with the C63 is nothing short of fireworks stuffs, but whenever i think of the 6.3 litre capacity, the awesomeness dwindles a little. I know some say AMG "chose" a different path. They have always chosen a different path to M and never quite managing to match. They had to go all the way to 6.3 to better the M3 in the straights. I have not driven the AMG and prob will like it if i do, but as an arm chair critic, the S65's sophistication and cutting edge tech takes the cake for me. I don't give a rat's ass whether it's made by hand or machine. I will take a machine made marvel of an engine over a handmade piece of crap any day of the week including weekends and holidays. (not saying the 6.3 is crappy)
__________________

- Frozen Grey F10 M5 DCT
- Rosso Corsa 458 Speciale
- Frozen Grey E92 M3 Sold
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 06:40 AM   #49
gthal
Brigadier General
gthal's Avatar
Canada
77
Rep
3,471
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 M4
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2011 M3  [3.37]
Quote:
Originally Posted by clar View Post
I know what AMG has done with the C63 is nothing short of fireworks stuffs, but whenever i think of the 6.3 litre capacity, the awesomeness dwindles a little. I know some say AMG "chose" a different path. They have always chosen a different path to M and never quite managing to match. They had to go all the way to 6.3 to better the M3 in the straights. I have not driven the AMG and prob will like it if i do, but as an arm chair critic, the S65's sophistication and cutting edge tech takes the cake for me. I don't give a rat's ass whether it's made by hand or machine. I will take a machine made marvel of an engine over a handmade piece of crap any day of the week including weekends and holidays. (not saying the 6.3 is crappy)
AMG engines are large in displacement as the aim is large torque. That only comes from displacement or FI. The S65 isn't about huge torque at any RPM. I actually do believe it is just a different direction for the engines. No doubt the S65 is a sophisticated engine and is a marvel. So is the AMG. The AMG engine is as bullet proof as the S65. The engine revs as freely. The difference is redline and displacement. The S65 needs a high red line to develop its power due to smaller displacement. The AMG engine doesn't need as high of a redline (although it is still relatively high regardless) due to its displacement. Both are very technical, very capable and very well regarded power plants.

Saying that you take pride in the sophistication of the S65 is no different than someone taking pride in the AMG being built to some extent by hand (or at least moreso than other engines). Bottom line is they BOTH perform exceptionally well and which engine someone likes comes down to a few things... 1) personal preference to approach (redline/displacement), 2) whether you prefer big torque or high rev racing feel, 3) whether you are blinded by either BMW or MB marketing and are a fanboy of one or the other.
__________________
2015 M4 | Austin Yellow | Black Full Merino Leather | DCT
2014 Corvette Stingray | Z51 | Torch Red | 7MT - Sold
2012 MB C63 Coupe | Performance package | Obsidian Black - Sold
2011 E92 M3 | Jerez Black | Fox Red | DCT | Competition Package - Sold
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 11:49 AM   #50
MTV
Banned
Canada
56
Rep
1,906
Posts

 
Drives: E60 M5, Volvo S60R
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Montreal

iTrader: (1)

It's great marketing on MB's part... that is all.

Gives the owner a sense of uniqueness towards the car... because they're all slightly different.
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 12:38 PM   #51
UnaBomber
Second Lieutenant
UnaBomber's Avatar
2
Rep
241
Posts

 
Drives: 2012 X5, 2010 GTR
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Bluffton, SC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Longboarder View Post
I did see a stock M3 6MT run a modded 2012 c63 AMG with a PP and exhaust at shift-s3ctors inaugural roll-on event on 11.11.11. Yes the AMG won but the race was very close. Props to the M.

My M3 won't be stock for very long. Because its painfully slow compared to what I drive now. It will be "broken in" with the tune, meth and complete catless exhaust. And once broken in it will be getting a supercharger.
and you will still be slow
__________________
2010 Nissan GTR,TopSpeed Motorsports 4 Liter Alpha12
Motec, JRZs, HREs, Alcon SuperKit, Carbon Errything,etc
9.01@164 - 1357whp 1040tq Road Race Prepped Monster
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 01:19 PM   #52
Longboarder
Brigadier General
65
Rep
3,794
Posts

 
Drives: 2013 e92 M3
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Monarch Beach

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2013 WRX STi  [4.00]
2011 997.2 Turbo S  [4.71]
2013 e92 M3  [4.55]
2013 BMW X5  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by IFX View Post
Dude I wouldn't doubt that you saw that race go down, but EVERYONE here on this board knows a manual MT M3 will get slaughtered by a 63. DCT is close race, I will agree to that. I would honestly want to see this race, but unfortunately there would be no way of knowing if the M was stock.
I was very surprised at the outcome as well. The M3 was stock - I saw under the hook and spoke with the owner. Maybe the M3 got the jump I dunno Respect for the stock 4.0 litre for keeping it so close.
__________________
Daily: 2013 e92 M3 DCT / ESS VT2 650 S/C / Akrapovic Evolution / StopTech BBK
Track/Airstrip: 2011 997.2 Turbo S PDK / 725 HP / BBi suspension build
Beater: 2013 X5 3.5sport
YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCT1...eoFBszPIK0gf9w
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 01:38 PM   #53
Longboarder
Brigadier General
65
Rep
3,794
Posts

 
Drives: 2013 e92 M3
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Monarch Beach

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2013 WRX STi  [4.00]
2011 997.2 Turbo S  [4.71]
2013 e92 M3  [4.55]
2013 BMW X5  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnaBomber View Post
and you will still be slow
You are correct. When complete, it will likely be on par with an Alpha 6 GT-R in a roll-on (I will be doing either a VF 620 or ESS 600 - but in either case will be running meth + full catless exhaust which should get me ~ 550-575 wheel). But not even close off the line to the GT-R. And I probably won't be as fast around a track either.

A better platform to compete with the GT-R is the 911T. I like being an underdog...and you aren't the underdog with those cars.
__________________
Daily: 2013 e92 M3 DCT / ESS VT2 650 S/C / Akrapovic Evolution / StopTech BBK
Track/Airstrip: 2011 997.2 Turbo S PDK / 725 HP / BBi suspension build
Beater: 2013 X5 3.5sport
YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCT1...eoFBszPIK0gf9w
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 03:30 PM   #54
Hoosiers
Private
United_States
0
Rep
97
Posts

 
Drives: 2008 M3 Coupe White
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Longboarder View Post
Did you ask him how come it takes 6.2 litres to do what BMW can do in 4.0?
Yeah but then he would say "because it actually produces torque".
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 03:37 PM   #55
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
21
Rep
1,907
Posts

 
Drives: Legacy GT - 13.704@99.39
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Manheim, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by adc View Post
Thanks for elaborating on the many possibilities why a hand built engine *can* perform better, or where a more automated process *can* prove inferior. But that doesn't mean it's the case at AMG.

So to get to the point, do you really think all AMGs engines have no variation, or less variation than M engines? If you know that to be a fact, then it's not marketing. If you don't, then I guess it's marketing after all.
If all AMG engines are had built, then I'd bet that they have less variation than M engines, assuming M engines are not hand built. Of course, I personally have no idea how far AMG goes with the hand build process, nor how far the M guys may go with their engines.

I responded with a note about how hand built engines differ from machine built engines. I don't really give a damn either way, however, since today's automated build processes are so good. For me, it's how the car I am about to buy runs and drives, regardless of how it's built.

Bruce
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 03:49 PM   #56
konaforever
Second Lieutenant
United_States
2
Rep
234
Posts

 
Drives: 2009 Red GTR
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Boston, MA

iTrader: (0)

My engine was built was 100 naked virgins (all hotties).
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 03:53 PM   #57
Longboarder
Brigadier General
65
Rep
3,794
Posts

 
Drives: 2013 e92 M3
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Monarch Beach

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2013 WRX STi  [4.00]
2011 997.2 Turbo S  [4.71]
2013 e92 M3  [4.55]
2013 BMW X5  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoosiers View Post
Yeah but then he would say "because it actually produces torque".
lol I do agree with you. The only way the S65 motor can compete is to stay between 7,000 and 8,400 RPM. But the fact that it can compete at all is very impressive.
__________________
Daily: 2013 e92 M3 DCT / ESS VT2 650 S/C / Akrapovic Evolution / StopTech BBK
Track/Airstrip: 2011 997.2 Turbo S PDK / 725 HP / BBi suspension build
Beater: 2013 X5 3.5sport
YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCT1...eoFBszPIK0gf9w
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 04:00 PM   #58
alms211
Banned
9
Rep
746
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 E92 M3
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: MD

iTrader: (1)

For godsake
Please understand what torque to the wheels and gearing actually means before making assinine comments.
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 04:05 PM   #59
BMoney
Second Lieutenant
BMoney's Avatar
4
Rep
255
Posts

 
Drives: 2014 Mercedes CLA45 AMG
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoosiers View Post
Yeah but then he would say "because it actually produces torque".
The 6.2 also has to haul a car that weighs 400 lbs more than the M3.
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 04:12 PM   #60
gthal
Brigadier General
gthal's Avatar
Canada
77
Rep
3,471
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 M4
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2011 M3  [3.37]
Quote:
Originally Posted by alms211 View Post
For godsake
Please understand what torque to the wheels and gearing actually means before making assinine comments.
We all know how this works (well, many of us). To be even close to the C63 with torque to the wheels, the M3 needs to be very high in the rev range and even then it is less. We are talking about torque produced by the engine (engines being the theme of the thread) which is much more readily available. Bottom line though is you are correct and when driven properly (especially the DCT) torque at the wheels is good in the M3. At a track, the M3 has lots of usable torque when revs are maintained at a high level.
__________________
2015 M4 | Austin Yellow | Black Full Merino Leather | DCT
2014 Corvette Stingray | Z51 | Torch Red | 7MT - Sold
2012 MB C63 Coupe | Performance package | Obsidian Black - Sold
2011 E92 M3 | Jerez Black | Fox Red | DCT | Competition Package - Sold
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 04:37 PM   #61
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
21
Rep
1,907
Posts

 
Drives: Legacy GT - 13.704@99.39
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Manheim, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
...Things built by machine are in general more accurate, more consistent and these issues contribute greatly to overall quality. One also should not confuse the machining and grinding accuracies and tolerances of individual components with the assembly of parts manufactured using these processes.

In modern automotive engine machining and grinding tolerances can be measures in microns or even smaller. Higher quality engines will have improved tolerances. Modern statistical process control and 6 sigma manufacturing techniques along with 100% in process part inspection compensate very well for items like tool wear, heat, etc. These are nearly non-issues. Of course higher accuracy and smaller tolerances still cost more money to manufacture and higher end engine components will have better controls in place for this compared to those going into cheap engines. But then again the cheap engines of today have components more consistent and accurate than higher end engines of just a decade or two ago.
Agree with most of this, assuming when you say "microns", you mean a whole bunch of them. Tolerances smaller than a micron in the automotive world? Forget it. You're dreaming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Now again we must not confuse component accuracy with assembly quality. They are not all that related. Volume of production is the almost the sole factor that will determine how much of an engine is hand built (hand assembled to be clear since ALL parts are CNC machined). For low volumes the investment in very expensive and accurate robotics for assembly simply does not provide a return on investment. Just hire the skilled labor and even in small numbers they can meet the production requirements.
My point exactly about not confusing component accuracy with assembly quality. In fact, that's THE point.

Here's a list of tolerances I found on the 'net for an S52 engine:

S52 3.2L Piston Rings: (all in millimeters mm.)
1st groove - plain compression ring
end clearance 0.25 - 0.40
end float 0.03 - 0.065
2nd groove - tapper face ring
end clearance 0.2 - 0.4
end float 0.02 - 0.055
3rd groove - oil ring (scraper w/hose-spring)
end clearance 0.25 - 0.50
end float 0.020 - 0.055

Piston:
diameter
Std. 86.365 (+/-) 0.009 mm
1st oversize 86.565 (+/-) 0.009 mm
Piston running clearance 0.026 - 0.058 mm
Max wear clearance piston/cylinder (engine operated) 0.113 mm

Rods:
Diameter big end 48.000 - 48.016 mm
Pin bushing inside dia. 22 (+0.010/+0.005) mm
Max deviation weight (per engine) without bearing (+/-) 4g

Cylinder Bore: (in millimeters mm.)
Bore 86.400 (+0.014)
Intermediate bore dimensions a)
a) new or recon work 86.450 (+0.014)
Grinding dimension 86.600 (+0.14)
Permitted roundness deviation of cylinder bore a) 0.005
Permitted conicity of cylinder bore a) 0.01
Permitted total wear clearance between piston and cylinder engine run in 0.113


Apparently BMW is being coy about publishing current M3 numbers, but these'll do.

Just casually perusing these items (and forgetting my snickering in regard to your sub-micron statement), can you see how cylinder to cylinder variation is way more than an antiquated notion? Can you also see how hand fitting pistons at the top end of the tolerance to cylinders at the top end of the tolerance can make sense, and make a difference?

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Just about everything a human can do with his/her hands a robot and computer can do better. Now that being said it also requires a very ingenious machine designer and engineers to design the assembly machines In this endeavor as in any the consistency, speed and flexibility of these machines can vary widely. You pretty much will get what you pay for. The thing is that this field of manufacturing engineering is extremely mature.

I believe our misbeliefs about this human vs. machine thing come from some expired and romantic view of human superiority over machines. 40 or so years ago this may have still had some validity but today it just doesn't. Surely there still are (not much in the automotive world though) bad/crude assembly machinery and robots that can be outperformed by a carefully trained, managed and monitored group of humans. This just is not the norm at all...
I am not aware of BMW (or anyone else) using an automated process to custom fit individual pistons to individual cylinders. Are you? Seriously, if you know of such an automated process, I'd like to know about it too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
I completely agree that MB's claims about this engine are a huge stretch of any reasonable definition of "hand built" and in doing so they are simply continuing to promote a curmudgeonly/antiquated view of the superiority of robots and computers for the vast majority of high volume manufacturing.
Do you actually know how far either AMG or the M group go in the hand-building process? If so, tell us. If not, then I hope you now know how hand building can make a difference even in these modern times.

Now for my final point, in spite of some of the information I've provided, I am assuming that you will cling to your belief that today's automated tolerances have made any advantage of hand-building moot.

If that's the case, then why would anybody do that unless volumes were very low.

Don't say marketing please. You think marketing dictates build techniques at MB? Don't be silly.

If not marketing or finance, then why?

Bruce

Last edited by bruce.augenstein@comcast.; 08-20-2012 at 05:30 PM.
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 04:43 PM   #62
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gthal View Post
There is much more to acceleration than just the engine. There is weight and gearing... both are hugely important.
Power and weight, specifically their ratio is the single most important factor is a vehicles straight line performance. I used to think gearing mattered more than it does. Gearing certainly must be matched the the cars torque and redline, but once that is done the vehicles performance is not too dependent on individual ratios and spacing, etc.

The M3 appears to be a bit of an overachiever given its power and weight. I think part of that comes from its chassis, suspension and tires. All critical in terms of hook up and getting more acceleration and less wheel spin, wheel hop, etc. The car also appears to have a very efficient drive train (low parasitic losses). However, putting to bed the issue of a small underrating vs. a highly efficient drive train is extremely challenging and that absolutely won't be solved with any normal dyno testing.
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 04:50 PM   #63
alms211
Banned
9
Rep
746
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 E92 M3
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: MD

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gthal View Post
We all know how this works (well, many of us). To be even close to the C63 with torque to the wheels, the M3 needs to be very high in the rev range and even then it is less. We are talking about torque produced by the engine (engines being the theme of the thread) which is much more readily available. Bottom line though is you are correct and when driven properly (especially the DCT) torque at the wheels is good in the M3. At a track, the M3 has lots of usable torque when revs are maintained at a high level.
Of course we are talking about the engine......if you don't have an engine you don't have "at the wheels" numbers to use. At the end of the day, the M3 has 295 ft lbs of torque and the C63 has 443....a difference of nearly 150 ft lbs. The fact that the M3 is a few tenths off in the 1/4 mile and bests the C63 on most tracks says wonders about the M3 and it's "lack" of torque. Most people see torque of a C6 LS3 Vette at 430 and 3,100 lbs and don't realize that the M3 torque to the wheels is very comparable to that car.

You are correct about usable torque. I went on many runs with my former M3 and found that for spirited driving, the DCT M3 always seemed to be in the correct gear coming out of turns and puts the power to the wheels in remarkable fashion. I think the car's gearing combined with the DCT is something special. Same held true when I took the car to VIR

Last edited by alms211; 08-21-2012 at 06:33 AM.
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 09:12 PM   #64
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast. View Post
Agree with most of this, assuming when you say "microns", you mean a whole bunch of them. Tolerances smaller than a micron in the automotive world? Forget it. You're dreaming.
Sorry, wrong.

Here is a quote from Addison D. Cole, CEO of Adcole Corporation an inspection machine company, about how improved engine tolerances are greening engines,

Quote:
"In the last 25 years, crankshaft roundness tolerances have been reduced from eight microns to three microns. The green cars of the future will have high performance, small engines with very low emissions. Consequently, the production tolerances will continue to tighten..."
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast. View Post
Here's a list of tolerances I found on the 'net for an S52 engine:
.00x mm is in fact x microns...

Also the S52 was now developed what, well over a decade ago? That's a long time from the perspective of precision, tolerances and robotics! The S65 surely has a variety of single digit micron tolerances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast. View Post
I am not aware of BMW (or anyone else) using an automated process to custom fit individual pistons to individual cylinders. Are you? Seriously, if you know of such an automated process, I'd like to know about it too.
No factual/first hand knowledge of this but given the level of inspection this would not be too difficult at all. Watch the video posted below. The piston for each cylinder is placed in a specific holding fixture and robotic mover.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast. View Post
I am assuming that you will cling to your belief that today's automated tolerances have made any advantage of hand-building moot.
I would not go so far as to say there is no advantage for any part of the process. Specifically there likely is some actually implemented hand process that is better than some (albeit poorly implemented) machine process. I will say again that whatever is done by hand can be done better by machine (engine assembly or the like). Certainly anything where the human is in the loop will require machines in the loop to contribute to the process (specifically inspection machines). You just don't throw a nice Mitutoyo micrometer on any modern crankshaft to measure its roundness (let alone its diameter...).

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast. View Post
If that's the case, then why would anybody do that unless volumes were very low.

Don't say marketing please. You think marketing dictates build techniques at MB? Don't be silly.

If not marketing or finance, then why?
You know the answer, it is ALL driven by volume and cost and their relation. Its very simple.
Appreciate 0
      08-20-2012, 09:17 PM   #65
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Here is a decent video showing some modern automobile engine machining and assembly. The equipment invovled here is obviously very high tech, precise and most importantly for this discussion EXPENSIVE. Look at the last segment where the timing chain is done. That is one heck of a robot!

Appreciate 0
      08-21-2012, 12:09 PM   #66
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
21
Rep
1,907
Posts

 
Drives: Legacy GT - 13.704@99.39
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Manheim, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Sorry, wrong.

Here is a quote from Addison D. Cole, CEO of Adcole Corporation an inspection machine company, about how improved engine tolerances are greening engines,

"In the last 25 years, crankshaft roundness tolerances have been reduced from eight microns to three microns. The green cars of the future will have high performance, small engines with very low emissions. Consequently, the production tolerances will continue to tighten..."
On the one hand, I genuinely appreciate this informational nugget, as my dated knowledge would've said five or six microns. On the other hand, sub-micron tolerances in this area may well take another 25 years...

Be that as it may, however, even three microns is a far cry from your sub-micron comment, and my original note was about cylinder to cylinder and piston to piston variation - not crankshafts.

In the example I provided, we're looking at 23 microns in terms of combined piston and cylinder variation in the S52, which is enough to drive a couple of trucks from the Submicron Shipping Company through there, side by side.

Here is where hand assembly can make a difference. A clear difference.


Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
.00x mm is in fact x microns...

Also the S52 was now developed what, well over a decade ago? That's a long time from the perspective of precision, tolerances and robotics! The S65 surely has a variety of single digit micron tolerances.
It's possible (in the sense that almost anything is possible), but going from a combined 23 microns to under a micron would be an extraordinary stretch, wouldn't you say?

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
No factual/first hand knowledge of this but given the level of inspection this would not be too difficult at all. Watch the video posted below. The piston for each cylinder is placed in a specific holding fixture and robotic mover...
On the contrary. It would in fact be difficult (read: expensive). You would have to measure each piston to essentially exactitude, then store it in one of hundreds of buckets, then measure each cylinder to exactitude, then go and retrieve an appropriate piston...

Expensive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
You know the answer, it is ALL driven by volume and cost and their relation. Its very simple.
I am going to take this as just another of your thoughtless comments, as opposed to a deliberate insult.

In point of fact our disagreement is based on the fact that I know it's NOT all about the money.

Mercedes has built those 6.2 liter engines by the thousands, since they've put that engine into just about everything except the Smart Car. There was clearly enough volume there to justify the automated tooling (a good deal more volume than exists with the S65), yet they went with hand assembly - at least as far as fitting pistons goes.

I believe they did this to get better piston to cylinder wall tolerances, with whatever benefit that provides them.

Bruce

PS - By the way, your childlike faith in the M Group's ability to provide sub-micron tolerances in the S65 is touching - but I'll need some proof, please.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:00 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST