|
|
01-21-2013, 12:09 AM | #23 |
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
3387
Rep 7,541
Posts |
Munit, your post is so far off from accurate my head hurts.
__________________
-----| Like us on Facebook | Instagram || Tuning Information | Remote Coding |----- ----Visit us at www.BPMSport.com - Emotion. Driven. | Toll Free: (888) 557-5133---- |
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 07:34 AM | #24 | |
Brigadier General
913
Rep 3,456
Posts
Drives: Harrop E90 M3
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Colorado Springs
|
Quote:
Now my brain hurts... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 09:15 AM | #25 |
First Lieutenant
306
Rep 315
Posts |
[QUOTE=Mr.Metak2you;13341104]What is the weight comparison, S65 vs S62? I'm always amazed how much lighter the S65 is than even the I6 S54.[/QUOTE]
Excuse my ignorance, but I never really understood the engine weight comparison between the S54 and the S65. The S65 is 33lbs lighter (iron vs aluminum), but on the other hand the E90/92 as the whole car is 300lbs heavier than the E46...so what's the big deal that the engine is lighter? |
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 11:07 AM | #26 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
65
Rep 1,705
Posts |
Quote:
First, the car would be 333lbs heavier if the engine wasn't lighter (using your numbers). Lighter is better. Second, Acceleration is a function of power (to the wheels), weight and traction. Although the engine has little effect on traction (smooth power delivery helps, but both engines have that in spades), but all else equal, more power and lighter is better. If you can add power and save weight, that is good, so why wouldn't people be excited about BMW's new (six years ago) engine being significantly more powerful 414 vs 333, and also lighter?
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 11:11 AM | #27 | |
-
11817
Rep 23,187
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
02 Tiag e46 M3|6MT|GC plates|MCS c.o.|GC bars|GC race control arms|GC bushings|BW eng. & tran. mounts|subframe kit|BW race shifter|BW Jaffster|Euro header|BW exhaust|K&N c.a.i.|Epic race tune|Rouge pulleys|Seibon CF hood|CSL bumper|apr gt 250 & splitter|ST-40|XR-2|SS lines|half cage|Recaro profi|Profi 2 harness|BMWpedals|BW studs| |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 11:16 AM | #28 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
65
Rep 1,705
Posts |
Quote:
The reason people are excited is because it is an impressive engineering feet to improve so much on what was already a world class engine, more power, more torque, higher revving, AND lighter. I BELIEVE that most BMW ///M fans have at least a little engineering nerd in them. I probably have a lot
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 11:19 AM | #29 | |
First Lieutenant
306
Rep 315
Posts |
Quote:
Yes, of course S65 is obviously more powerful and better from most aspects than the S54, I was just getting annoyed by the constant comparisons on the weights on those two engines when it doesn't hold any value when the car itself is 10x heavier the weight savings on the engine. If one were to bench press an S65 vs an S54 then I can see how the weight difference would matter, otherwise I don't given the facts above. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 11:23 AM | #30 |
-
11817
Rep 23,187
Posts |
maybe we should try dead lift first. at 445 lbs thats a pretty hefty bench.
__________________
02 Tiag e46 M3|6MT|GC plates|MCS c.o.|GC bars|GC race control arms|GC bushings|BW eng. & tran. mounts|subframe kit|BW race shifter|BW Jaffster|Euro header|BW exhaust|K&N c.a.i.|Epic race tune|Rouge pulleys|Seibon CF hood|CSL bumper|apr gt 250 & splitter|ST-40|XR-2|SS lines|half cage|Recaro profi|Profi 2 harness|BMWpedals|BW studs| |
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 12:26 PM | #32 |
-
11817
Rep 23,187
Posts |
nah i can dead lift more than that. not bench.
__________________
02 Tiag e46 M3|6MT|GC plates|MCS c.o.|GC bars|GC race control arms|GC bushings|BW eng. & tran. mounts|subframe kit|BW race shifter|BW Jaffster|Euro header|BW exhaust|K&N c.a.i.|Epic race tune|Rouge pulleys|Seibon CF hood|CSL bumper|apr gt 250 & splitter|ST-40|XR-2|SS lines|half cage|Recaro profi|Profi 2 harness|BMWpedals|BW studs| |
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 12:28 PM | #33 | |
Major
140
Rep 1,242
Posts
Drives: 2012 E92 M3
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida's Emerald Coast
|
Quote:
Paring down the weight of the S65 to net a -33lbs relative the S54 means the prospects for increasing driving dynamics (provided suspension and other factors are duly engineered for optimal performance) are enhanced as the less weight up high and forward offers physics, kinetic energy specifically, less weight to work with toward sending the car off the road in a turn. Is the -33lbs a gimmick? Not to me.
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 12:32 PM | #34 |
-
11817
Rep 23,187
Posts |
id like to have -400. that would be a non gimmick i could really get excited about.
__________________
02 Tiag e46 M3|6MT|GC plates|MCS c.o.|GC bars|GC race control arms|GC bushings|BW eng. & tran. mounts|subframe kit|BW race shifter|BW Jaffster|Euro header|BW exhaust|K&N c.a.i.|Epic race tune|Rouge pulleys|Seibon CF hood|CSL bumper|apr gt 250 & splitter|ST-40|XR-2|SS lines|half cage|Recaro profi|Profi 2 harness|BMWpedals|BW studs| |
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 01:25 PM | #35 | |||
Major General
684
Rep 5,069
Posts
Drives: BMW 230i Msport w/LSD
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Astral Projecting: ∞ 23.516 -122 02.625 0242.101 ĕv'rē-hwâr'
iTrader: (16)
Garage List 2009 Porsche 911 997.2 [10.00]
2019 Hyundai N (Sold) [10.00] 2013 BMW M3 (Sold) [10.00] 2011 1M Coupe (Sold) [8.78] 2008 E90 M3 (Sold) [8.60] 2007 Z4 Mcpe (Sold) [9.50] 2005 BMW M3 (Sold) [10.00] |
Quote:
Quote:
Ref: http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...-bmw-m3-page-4 Quote:
Now, If I had my choice, I'd probably say stroke the S65.
__________________
Last edited by mPlasticDesign; 01-21-2013 at 02:43 PM.. |
|||
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 01:37 PM | #36 | |
Veni Vidi Vici
89
Rep 2,750
Posts
Drives: '11 JB/BBe-6sp-e90
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Macungie PA
iTrader: (0)
Garage List 2011 e90 M3-Sold [8.50]
2003 RS6 - Sold [0.00] 2009 e90 M3 - Gone [0.00] 2003 M3 SOLD [0.00] old 2002 [10.00] |
Quote:
Sorry, I don't remember if I generated these from chassis dyno numbers or from some other source. Can't say if it is true wheel thrust or not.
__________________
Dinan compliment of stuff plus PF rotors and RG63s. Enough for now. Why, yes. I am an abrasive bastard. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 02:53 PM | #37 |
Major General
684
Rep 5,069
Posts
Drives: BMW 230i Msport w/LSD
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Astral Projecting: ∞ 23.516 -122 02.625 0242.101 ĕv'rē-hwâr'
iTrader: (16)
Garage List 2009 Porsche 911 997.2 [10.00]
2019 Hyundai N (Sold) [10.00] 2013 BMW M3 (Sold) [10.00] 2011 1M Coupe (Sold) [8.78] 2008 E90 M3 (Sold) [8.60] 2007 Z4 Mcpe (Sold) [9.50] 2005 BMW M3 (Sold) [10.00] |
I did some searches and found this:
S62= 158kg or 348lbs E30/S62 Swap: http://www.***********.com/content.p...-into-E30-Swap note: ****= Bimmerpost S65= 202 kg or 445lbs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_S65 Seems that doing this swap would actually make sense from a weight advantage. -97lbs
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 02:56 PM | #38 |
-
11817
Rep 23,187
Posts |
__________________
02 Tiag e46 M3|6MT|GC plates|MCS c.o.|GC bars|GC race control arms|GC bushings|BW eng. & tran. mounts|subframe kit|BW race shifter|BW Jaffster|Euro header|BW exhaust|K&N c.a.i.|Epic race tune|Rouge pulleys|Seibon CF hood|CSL bumper|apr gt 250 & splitter|ST-40|XR-2|SS lines|half cage|Recaro profi|Profi 2 harness|BMWpedals|BW studs| |
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 03:01 PM | #39 |
Second Lieutenant
12
Rep 253
Posts |
Well that kills the "M3 was made for DCT" argument.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 03:09 PM | #40 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
65
Rep 1,705
Posts |
Quote:
Compare the weight to the C63, also a nice car, or the CTS-V or the Audi RS4, etc. I think the M3 probably averages over 300lbs lighter than those cars.
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 03:11 PM | #41 | |
-
11817
Rep 23,187
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
02 Tiag e46 M3|6MT|GC plates|MCS c.o.|GC bars|GC race control arms|GC bushings|BW eng. & tran. mounts|subframe kit|BW race shifter|BW Jaffster|Euro header|BW exhaust|K&N c.a.i.|Epic race tune|Rouge pulleys|Seibon CF hood|CSL bumper|apr gt 250 & splitter|ST-40|XR-2|SS lines|half cage|Recaro profi|Profi 2 harness|BMWpedals|BW studs| |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 03:28 PM | #42 | |
Colonel
497
Rep 2,400
Posts |
The E9x platform switch involved significant safety upgrades (particularly on side door collisions, frontal and offset collusions) vs the E46 chassis, and you saw that in the crash test results in Europe and the US. There's no such thing as a free lunch.
Also vs other sedan-based vehicles (Yes, the M3, whether 2 or 4 door, is a sedan, not a true sports car) ie C63 and RS4, it is quite lighter. Remember this is from 6 yrs ago, a time when carbon fiber was much much more expensive to produce. Given all the safety upgrades and luxury items packed into M3s, think they did an amazing job with both the engine and chassis under the circumstances at the time. Moreover, vs today's competition, the M3 is still lighter. Hope the next generation will be taken one step further in terms of weight reduction. [QUOTE=Yugo;13344938] Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 05:10 PM | #43 |
Banned
33
Rep 220
Posts |
What is off about the simplified version I explained.
You take the amount of torque an engine can put out. You then factor in RPMS for that engine torque value and in combination the higher the revs, the more of that available torque is applied every "time" (second, ms etc). That amount of torque applied is the engine output which than is put through gear ratios to multiply its force to the wheels. What don't you get or what is "wrong" That is why an 8400 rpm car can use the same 280 foot pounds or whatever is available up there, and put out a thrust which kills a 450 foot pound car revving to 5500. The 280 output can be applied 3000 plus times more per quantity of measurement which means total output of force per time yields what we call engine power. So not sure at all what you are saying is so bogus |
Appreciate
0
|
01-21-2013, 07:09 PM | #44 |
Lieutenant Colonel
65
Rep 1,705
Posts |
Not a lot of low weight builds out there, it will be great to see what you can do. I can't imagine this car at 3200 lbs! It would be INSANE
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|