|
|
01-07-2012, 11:09 AM | #67 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
Bruce |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-07-2012, 01:07 PM | #68 | |
Banned
15
Rep 122
Posts |
Quote:
With future development in tri-turbos and valvetronic it likely is more possible but for now it is not really the case. Ferrari does not tend to pick rather small displacements for their v8s for nothing and same goes with traditional M cars. They allow them to build the car for high rev horsepower. Anyway I am just saying I agree that IF we had 400 foot pounds AND redline of 8400 with peak power at redline than sure it would be bliss but its really not possible. I think this problem will be addressed with the new m3 and we will see how buyers react. I think it will not effect sales and if anything will improve them because more people do enjoy low end grunt. I think I am in the minority because a ton of the enjoyment in daily driving the m3 is downshifting and upshifting to hear the lovely engine/intake and exhaust blipping and making noise. If we had a ton of torque than downshifting would be putting you outside the torque curve and you really would not get to enjoy the race-car like sounds of shifting in this car. Both sound like great cars and both are great drivers but people just have to decide which characteristics they prefer. They are just different. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-07-2012, 11:28 PM | #69 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
Think GTS. More torque, same terrific top end rush. No reason this engine couldn't have shown up right from the get-go in the current M3. Bruce |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-07-2012, 11:32 PM | #70 |
Banned
15
Rep 122
Posts |
GTS is a bigger engine as I said this is what it would take. However it still does not have much more torque down low and still makes its power up top. Gthal was talking about an extra 250-350 foot pounds. I understand it is possible to increase torque and keep a high revving engine but if you want 300 more foot pounds you would need to really increase the displacement of the engine (unless you use FI) and if you do want the torque available really low and in the middle than you need to tune the engine delivery for that and that would make it impossible to make peak power at such a high rpm.
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-08-2012, 10:23 AM | #71 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
The GTS makes about ten percent more torque than the standard M3, peaking at a slightly lower rpm. In my opinion, if this engine were in the M3 there would be no more talk about a soft low end. Given the car's other attributes, the 4.4 liter power plant would address one of the car's (very minor, IMO) weaknesses. It would liven up the lower end considerably. It might even address the car's only other (more major) weakness, which is fuel economy. With more torque available, you could go for a more aggressive overdrive in top gear, as Porsche has recently done, and thus improve highway mileage thru reduced pumping losses and friction. It's terrific now, but with the 4.4 and gearing changes it could in fact be the almost perfect car - closer than anyone has gotten before. Bruce |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-08-2012, 08:47 PM | #72 | |
Banned
15
Rep 122
Posts |
Quote:
Really bugs me since they have the gts engine made. Shoot even if they did not make a single change and just offer the gts engine in the f30 m3 as an optional engine. Would make so many people happy and still allow those who would prefer TT and efficiency happy. You think we could all put a crapload of small letters together and send them to bmw M? Seriously...giving them more of an idea that the following is here and to make the gts engine available for the f30 as a different option, even though its more work for them to get it approved and modified to meet carb standards, would really please a very important enthusiast group! We should do it! |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 09:44 AM | #73 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
The new one will make more power, more torque, be cleaner emissions-wise, and get much better fuel mileage. And, with the probability that the new model will also weigh less than the current car, everybody's gonna be grinnin'. Even me, who's bitched forever about how each new M is bigger and heavier and less fun to drive. Bruce |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 09:50 AM | #74 | |
Major
144
Rep 1,440
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
- Frozen Grey F10 M5 DCT
- Rosso Corsa 458 Speciale Sold - Frozen Grey E92 M3 Sold |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 10:21 AM | #75 | |
Major General
592
Rep 5,396
Posts |
Quote:
id estimate 450 hp / 450tq and about 19 city and 25 hwy mpg. add a tune on to that and you will have an incredible performer. i probably will get a new m3 once they have been out for a year or two. a good FI engine in this car would be incredible imo.
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 11:52 AM | #76 |
Second Lieutenant
5
Rep 273
Posts |
Love the C63 defensiveness that comes out. Owners know what the car is, yet feel the need to defend it's weaknesses.
I'll bite, I've driven both. - M3 has better steering feel. - M3 has a better balance of chassis, steering feel in sport, throttle response, torque curve (yes, it is optimal for the track, IMO) and handling. - The M3's motor sounds more exotic, a high revving 4.0ltr V8. - Those who keep harping on the "lack of" torque really have no idea what they are talking about, I've driven some very torquey cars and I drove the M3 right after the C63 and the extra mountains of torque in the C63 --with it's monster torque that could stop the earth's rotation, hand-crafted by the Führer himself in hell-- didn't really stand out to me. - The C63 has a nicer interior IMO. - The C63 needs more rubber. - I don't think it feels as heavy as some say, but it does feel heavier than the M3 with EDC on sport and sport mode on - at the expense of a ghey comment - it doesn't dance at your fingertips like a M3 does. - It does sound insane, but a different type of sound. I describe it as "God's hammer". - It is quite torquey. - I would love to get one in addition to my M3.
__________________
2015 Porsche 911 C2S | 2019 BMW X5 50i | 2020 Land Rover Discovery
2007 Ducati Monster S4RS | 2016 BMW RNineT | 2018 Aprilia RSV4 | 2019 Speed Triple RS |
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 12:24 PM | #77 | |
Brigadier General
2354
Rep 4,254
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
///M Power
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 02:44 PM | #78 |
Banned
74
Rep 449
Posts
Drives: 2013 BMW M3
Join Date: May 2010
Location: I'm not telling some creeper where I live!
|
That's just a silly thing to say. Some people want the responsiveness of a NA engine and the M156 delivers just that. Gobs of power...now and in a balanced manner.
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 02:55 PM | #79 |
Brigadier General
2354
Rep 4,254
Posts |
I respect your throttle response argument, but silly? Really? If people are going over to vehicle for reasons of torque as fun-factor, don't you think a small turbo will do the trick? If it's all about in-gear acceleration and the "fun" of being pushed into your seat.. turbo. I for one am not a fan, but hey.
__________________
///M Power
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 03:28 PM | #80 | |
Major General
592
Rep 5,396
Posts |
Quote:
No one complains about the turbo v6 in the gtr, the 911 turbo, new m5 etc. This board for some reason hates an engine which hasn't even come out yet. I am a believer and think it will be a great balance. Each m3 engine has been better than the kne before, no reason to think that trend will change
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 04:32 PM | #81 | |
Banned
15
Rep 122
Posts |
Quote:
However the new engine will be an apples to oranges comparison given what standard do you use to compare to totally different engines? If its simply more power and more torque than of course FI will always win. If its hp/litre than FI will always destroy a NA engine. If its tunability than Fi again will destroy. Unfortunately there is no objective measure of an engine's "feel" , sound or character in regards to the delivery of power. So I am not sure what better means when comparing two different animals alltogether. One delivers power in a vastly different way than the other and if you prefer the delivery of top end high hp/low displacement engines than the new FI engine will not be "better" even though it may have all the objective measures of being better. All I am saying is this will create a situation where comparing the new engines with m-engines past will make it impossible to really directly compare them. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 05:18 PM | #82 | |
Banned
74
Rep 449
Posts
Drives: 2013 BMW M3
Join Date: May 2010
Location: I'm not telling some creeper where I live!
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 05:27 PM | #83 | |
Major General
1889
Rep 5,506
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-09-2012, 11:08 PM | #84 | |
Second Lieutenant
5
Rep 273
Posts |
Quote:
I am sure the new M3 will be faster around a track. Will I get one, let's see. Will I keep my high-revving V8 M3, probably. It's like having an air-cooled Porsche for purity, yet no denying the 991 3.8ltr motor with 400hp is the shiznit.
__________________
2015 Porsche 911 C2S | 2019 BMW X5 50i | 2020 Land Rover Discovery
2007 Ducati Monster S4RS | 2016 BMW RNineT | 2018 Aprilia RSV4 | 2019 Speed Triple RS |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-10-2012, 12:39 AM | #85 | |
Banned
74
Rep 449
Posts
Drives: 2013 BMW M3
Join Date: May 2010
Location: I'm not telling some creeper where I live!
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-10-2012, 11:31 AM | #86 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
- more power at a given engine weight (including intercooler paraphernalia) - an infinitely tunable torque curve (great for coming off corners) - better mileage Bruce PS - Anecdotally, my old SRT4 (bone stock except for track sneakers and pads) would give E46 M3s all they could handle around a given track, except on a long straight. It was well down on power to weight (230 HP, 2920 pounds full of gas), but it would come out of corners like a striped ape while riding the boost. E36s were for breakfast. I'm really looking forward to the new M3. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-10-2012, 07:49 PM | #87 | |
Lieutenant
26
Rep 504
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-10-2012, 10:54 PM | #88 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
Turner Motorsports cars. I think you're sort of, kind of, almost correct about E46s vs E36s. In my experience, very close except for almost any straight that wasn't a mere short chute. Our E46 saw just one track day. Although it was a bit quicker than our E36 had been, I pretty much hated it because of more understeer - plus the stupid rasp of the exhaust which didn't sound anything like a proper BMW from my point of view. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|