New Speculations on the F30 M3 / F32 M3

[frenchM3dreamer]

what i get out of it is that i still have about 2 years to get a E93? mhm, time to get a new job and start saving

[Uli_HH]

Originally Posted by shift@red

A Z4M with the V8 would be sick! I would def pick up one of those so long as its not a hardtop vert.

No 0.01% chance that it comes, if it comes, with the V8 ... uf we see an new Z4M then with the I6 TriTurbo!

Uli_HH

[Doctor J]

ha -- it's all good -- i'm just yanking chains here

i love a good MT just like any other gearhead -- but unfortunately it's all about sales these days and it's the beancounters that are making a lot of the drivetrain decisions in the vehicles we the consumers buy. we vote with our wallets -- and unfortunately the wallets that like DCTs/ATs outnumber the wallets that like MTs by a long shot

[jworms]

to bmw there is no selling point to keeping the manual option available.

DCT:
-performs better (reminder: M = Motorsports = performance oriented)
-gets better gas mileage
-has easier learning curve

other than price, what advantage does the manual have that bmw would realistically (business-wise) care about? they aren't going to care about "feel" ...especially considering that is completely subjective.

though, you are right in that there is a line to be drawn where technology assumes the position of the driver. but where was everyone when ABS came about? drive by wire? active steering? stability control? etc. why were those ok, but this isn't? instead of phrasing the question as "where does automation draw the line?" it should be why do you draw the line with this specific case and not others?

you don't see people "not buying" the GT-R because it doesn't come with a manual. same with ferrari, lambo, and soon enough porsche will be there (yes, they will). it's an industry wide change that will soon trickle down to non-sport cars for its clear-cut advantages.

either way, this thread shouldn't be about DCT vs manual. i'm getting more and more excited for the new M3. though what i'm most interested in hearing about is the weight of the car.

[dizzyj]

people who argue about the dct being faster really dont get it. Yall are going to have a blast at the track when you cars can go around all by themselves. you will be sitting in a sky box drinking a cup of coffee saying, "hmm..did you see how well my car hit all the apexes, what a machine!"

sounds like a blast

[jworms]

Originally Posted by dizzyj

people who argue about the dct being faster really dont get it. Yall are going to have a blast at the track when you cars can go around all by themselves. you will be sitting in a sky box drinking a cup of coffee saying, "hmm..did you see how well my car hit all the apexes, what a machine!"

sounds like a blast

Originally Posted by jworms

though, you are right in that there is a line to be drawn where technology assumes the position of the driver. but where was everyone when ABS came about? drive by wire? active steering? stability control? etc. why were those ok, but this isn't? instead of phrasing the question as "where does automation draw the line?" it should be why do you draw the line with this specific case and not others?

...

[Advskier]

Originally Posted by Ironring Racing

Well... yes.



Really, body panels. And here I thought the spirit of the M3 was how it performs, not it's appearance. But I guess it's a driver vs. poser thing. Looks like the only reason you bought yours is for the slots in the front quarter panel.



Well, Professional Mechanical Engineer, with a minor in Manufacturing Engineering. So, actually, more qualified than a rocket scientist for this discussion.

My point, that you completely missed while struggling to come up with a smart ass reply, is that the M's are increasingly just as you describe, just slightly modded 3's. Obviously according to your defenition of "modded", they always have been, but a few bolt on suspension members, stroked engine, and... (oh yes, body panels )

Let me be clear, I'm NOT hating on the M3. In fact, I think it's generally the best sports sedan out of the box. Stock to stock, it handles better than any other 3. It's a great engine, a true swan song to NA (unfortunately). For me, I race bikes and karts, and need to tow a trailer (yes, crazy, I tow a trailer) so went with the 335, modded the hell out of it, and now it's an even better car than it started out. 530hp/530tq at the crank, 1.2G cornering on our local road course, beat 70% of the exotics at Race the Base 300kph top speed event, with a trailer hitch and baby seat in the back.

So please understand my comments aren't a 335 vs M3 flame war, I'm simply pointing out that when you look at the numbers: light weight, cheap, fast, handling... the 335 embodies the original M spirit pretty well.

This is a thread about the future direction of the M. And like many here, it seems like more and more it's the bean counters taking control at M; which for years they'd successfully prevented from happening. Corvette and Mustang are doing better at staying true to their roots these days.

How can you boast of being a professional mechanical engineer and call the M3 a slightly modded 3 in the same post?
Sorry, but you lost all cred after that statement.

[dizzyj]

Originally Posted by jworms

...

very well said. like most things in life, there is not black or white, but shades of gray. so yes, there is an arbitrary line, to which when you cross over, your not in control of the car anymore. That line is different for a lot of people.

I'd say for a lot of us, that line exists when you take 2 of my limbs out of the equation.

[mPlasticDesign]

Originally Posted by AMPowerJ

So you just called me a poser because I called you out because you said minus the engine you could make a M3 with just a simple suspension change. I was just pointing out that your argument is incorrect.

DO NOT FEED THE ______________!!!!!

[Ironring Racing]

Originally Posted by ///Metak

DO NOT FEED THE ______________!!!!!

I agree.

In stead, let's please continue the discussion of the future of the M brand. I'm simply comparing current 3 series models and making, I think, a strong case that one of the current non-M models may, in fact, embody the ORIGINAL spirit of the M brand moreso than either the current or certainly what is rumored to be the F30 M.

I'll say it again, I think the current M3 is fantastic. Always have, I've recommended it to several friends, and personally I had a really hard time deciding between the two cars. Believe it or not, money wasn't the deciding factor. As anyone can easily see, I've well passed the purchase price of an M3 with the total 335. To me, I valued the lightness, the acceleration, the tunability, of the 335. I knew I'd replace the suspension, wheels, tires, brakes, etc of either car, and that the overall handling would be equal.

One area I haven't been able to improve the 335 to my satisfaction is the heat issue. An M3 will run laps all day just fine. I run into temperature issues in 10 laps or so. Certainly wouldn't be a good canditate for endurance racing, whereas the M3 is a great engine for that.

If they're going with a tri-turbo stroker N55, I'll be really interested to see how they handle the cooling issue.

Anyway, good discussion. All great cars. Hope the F30 M they produce is a fast, light, fun (manual ) car!

[scheherazade]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

...

I have to remain very skeptical on this point. The bore of the 3L N55 (and N54) is 84mm. Stroke is 89.6mm. In order to achieve 3.5L the stroke would need to be increased to a whopping 103.8mm.

(Prove this to yourself here: http://www.bgsoflex.com/displacement.html)

That seems really outrageous to me, especially if they are going to hit 7000 RPM (or more) like other BMW turbocharged motors. Plus that extra 14mm would play havoc on the engine geometry. It would basically mean a new block with a higher deck.

...

You can increase engine capacity, both by increasing stroke, and by decreasing stroke.
(The calculator you showed does not let you adjust the other items, like rod length.)


(stroked)
You can increase volume (L) by using a longer crank and [even more] shorter rods
This :
increases torque
reduces relative horsepower - increase in volume makes up for HP loss
increases sidewall-load, and lowers maximum RPM
Engines on the extreme of this configuration are considered 'long stroke'.



(de-stroked)
You can increase volume (L) by using longer rods and [an even more] shorter crank.
This :
increases horsepower
reduces relative torque - increase in volume makes up for torque loss
reduces sidewall-load, and increases maximum RPM
Engines on the extreme of this configuration are considered 'short stroke'.



If BMW chooses to, they can make a turbo N55 with 3.5L and a very short stroke - without violating the head height constraints.

And they can make it even revvier - fortunately, loss in torque from shorter stroke could be made up for with FI.

Essentially, 3.5L isn't all that unlikely.

-scheherazade

[Ironring Racing]

Originally Posted by scheherazade

You can increase engine capacity, both by increasing stroke, and by decreasing stroke.Essentially, 3.5L isn't all that unlikely.

-scheherazade

Agreed, Mkoesel you're just looking at increasing stroke. Somebody mentioned that they calculated that the increased displacement also couldn't be achieved with only a bore increase due to the cylinder spacing.

But Scheherazade is obviously right (besides the typo, I assume he means you can increase capacity both by increasing stroke and/or increasing bore). There's room in the middle for the engine designers. My concern would be with the open deck block while increasing bore and presumably increasing boost.

[duk]

N54/N55 based engine is boo boo

Tri-turbo is boo boo and rediculous

3.5 liter is good

[scheherazade]

Originally Posted by Ironring Racing

...

But Scheherazade is obviously right (besides the typo, I assume he means you can increase capacity both by increasing stroke and/or increasing bore).

No typo.

Look up "stroked" vs "de-stroked".

The key point is : you can adjust stroke and rod length to get more capacity, without violating head constraints.

Read this PDF : http://www.kidzuku.com/StrokeOrNot.pdf
I know it's long, but it's really worth it. You'll walk away enlightened, seriously.

Note :
The distinction is that there is a small twist...
Instead of only looking at swept volume, you include increase in empty space at the top of the cylinder as increase in capacity.
The engine ultimately has lower compression - which isn't all bad, since it allows you to run more boost.

-scheherazade

[Ironring Racing]

Ah, you mean a shorter rod length, so greater displacement. That works too.

Really, we both agree there's several options for them to reach 3.5l displacement within the N55/N54 block parameters.

Originally Posted by Advskier

Engine, DCT transmission, body panels, EDC suspension, etc.

Yeah, I pretty much covered all of that when I said that net of ENGINE (and BODY PANELS ) it's s simple SUSPENSION swap to basically turn a 335 into an M3.

Engine-Check
DCT-I drive a manual
Body Panels-Check
Suspension-Check

Wow, just let it go!

[southlight]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Any idea of the time frame for when that might happen? I think that an X3/X4 M is a no brainer when you consider how much more potential sales there are. So I do fully expect it to make production. And for that matter, X1 and X2 M some time down the road as well.

My best guess would be 2012/13.

Originally Posted by mkoesel

One last thing: assuming that a Z4 M also gets the green light (it sounds like it will), would that also come after the X3 M, or potentially before it? I have to assume that a Z4 M would use the same motor as the new M3 and X3 M also.

Honestly, no idea.


Best regards,
south

[scheherazade]

Originally Posted by Advskier

Engine, DCT transmission, body panels, EDC suspension, etc.
I may not be a "professional mechanical engineer", but I don't see this as being a simple modded 3 series.
Maybe with your "professional mechanical expertise" you could do all those "mods" in an hour or so.

But since you are offering, please go through the parts list and show us piece by piece how identical the M3 is to a basic 3 series.

Look at it this way :

Consider the serb/bosnian conflict...

As an outsider, both of the peoples seem essentially identical.
If you walked in there, you wouldn't be able to tell one apart from the other.

But if you're a local, you can look down the street, and point out every person from one side or the other.



It's kind of the same way with the 335 and the M3.

Within the 'BMW family', they're so different.
But if you zoom out and take a broader view, they're practically the same thing.


The difference in perspective means that the same/different argument will always be at an impasse.

-scheherazade

[southlight]

Originally Posted by Ironring Racing

Yeah, I pretty much covered all of that when I said that net of ENGINE (and BODY PANELS ) it's s simple SUSPENSION swap to basically turn a 335 into an M3.

Engine-Check
DCT-I drive a manual
Body Panels-Check
Suspension-Check

Wow, just let it go!

FYI, here's a detailed explanation of the differences. Let's get back to topic now, please.


Best regards,
south

[esquire]

south, you should update the first post of this thread to reflect scott's comments regarding the 2011 departure of the e90 and 2012 departure of the e92 and e93.

[southlight]

Done.


Best regards,
south

[fastrack]

I'm glad i ordered mine now

[OC ///M]

south:
We all knew it was coming, like a dark, wet, torrential storm signals the change of seasons- BMW will be homoginizing the M3 and eliminating the last of the high-reving n/a motors.

This is enough in and of itself to give pause to us all, but if BMW decides to cut the MT from the F3x M3, two things are sure to happen;
1) They'll have lost me, my family, and all of my future children as customers.
2) I'll be keeping my '11 forever.

P.S. Hasn't all of the recent scientific studies which de-bunk the man-made climate change theory penetrated the walls of the lawmakers yet?