E9x vs F8x race yet?

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by Petros

Its definitely made with the purpose of better fuel economy. But that doesn't make it a "little eco engine" like you get in some diesel hatchback for example.

i may have taken it a bit far i agree. but still the S65 was much more of a "radical" engine. if you really look at the S65 with a technical view point, and a S55 from the same view point. the S55 much more "eco".
you can just tell those engines come from different eras.

simple as that. i blame BMW from giving us a race bred engine, then all of a sudden i am stuck with this typical turbo engine that sounds like a honda. and makes fart noises.

[TurboBimmer]

Originally Posted by Petros

A twin turbo 3 litre V6 is hardly a "little eco engine". It will rev to 7500 rpm, which is only 900 rpm less than the S65 that "revs to the sky". Not only that but it will produce more power and torque throughout the entire rev range than any non supercharged S65, even with full bolt on mods and tune. And on top of that it will even return better fuel economy. It's a win on all fronts, except the sound department. That's really the only area where the S65 will easily trump the S55.

Exactly. And a stock M3 exhaust doesn't sound that great neither. I'll wait until I hear the S55 in person before I make my judgment.

[V8FunNaturally]

Originally Posted by Petros

So? An m3 has always been a compromised car.

like it or not the m4/m3 is a compromise due to stricter emission regulations in europe. In fact it is such a big compromise that it has the same engine displacement as the 435i which also runs turbos. That m3/m4 engine is not differentiated enough for an M division and CF mania here and there hardly justifies the price tag for a small eco engine. Not to mention the lack of a proper hydraulic steering.

Now read what BMW had to say about the E92 M3 in its official printed presentation: "the power unit is a fast-revving naturally aspirated engine in an uncompromising sports car". Sure it's partial marketing pitch but they simply cannot talk about no compromise in the 3.0 liter eco engine in the m4/m3 without sounding silly.

Throttle response will always be superior in an NA engine. You can only hope at best to approach it but never match that with a turbo. And that is the M division head's own word when previously interviewed about the F8x M4 throttle response.

The m4 is faster than a stock V8 M3 at least on the first lap. But I think one big unknown is how reliable will that turbo based performance be after hours of driving in a hot day (the m4 is nothing without it's turbo). And also how reliably will that eco turbo engine age after a few years (check previous BMW turbo engines). Let's not forget it's direct injection and carbon deposit on the valves is another problem that can progressively rob the engine's power. None of those concerns exist with a NA engine with throttle bodies port injection.

[ilikebmxbikes]

So much speculation on both sides - be patient people - facts will come

[flea333]

Originally Posted by Petros

That's what you get for trying to buy an all new hot model. Give it a year or two until the hype dies down and then the dealers will be begging you to take it off their hands.

What about the guys on this forum down in So Cal? Don't they always charge $700 over invoice?

[flea333]

Originally Posted by NavidM3E92

If I could drive a 991 911 as a daily, hell I would! But I am just turning 24 and purchased a house last December. All the cars I by are by me. I could for sure as hell go to my dad and say I want a 911(which he suggests before I ever bought a BMW) and would gladly help me, because he knows its a better car. But I dont and I like the satisfaction of knowing it was on my own. So BMW's are more reasonable for me

For now....

lucky dude. I drove a 91' Nissan Maxima til I was 27.

[flea333]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I disagree. I think it is pretty well established that the car is in the neighborhood of 450 hp. The following are the evidence:

There really won't be more proof than this even after the car is released to mags or to the public. Dynos aren't inhernently accurate for absolute power predictions and BMW will never admit what the power is at sea level at standard temperature.

Why are there so many owners of the car already and testers uploading video reviews but none took them to dyno or did a quarter mile? Did BMW make them sign something?

[flea333]

OK here's some of my thoughts on the whole thing:

1) Why are we arguing about turbo reliability? Don't we have plenty of data from E9x 335s? I only know of one person who had terrible luck with his turbo that made him sell the car. But I don't know about the Consumer Reports etc.

2) There is no question the M4 sounds like f*** sh**. Watch the videos out there, there are several and the only person I could see even liking this sound is an Evo or Suburau driver - because it's really just a step up. BMW should be f*ing ashamed of themselves for releasing this ghetto nonsense. Every hear a Nissan Gxx drive by? Yea, almost like that. I guess Rainer Drees is the man to thank.
http://player.vimeo.com/video/93073026
BTW - even in this article hear how the M sound engineer goes on and on about how great NA engine sound is and how difficult it is to make sound from a turbo. I guess it's a challenge all in itself just to FORCE it to sound good.
http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=979417

3) I'm upset that BMW was lazy in the last 5 years and went from such a beautiful improvement of raw power, even from a nicely raw powered 6 cyl, back down to their same old engine and just juiced up the turbo. Couldn't the N55 engine with a tune produce the SAME figures as the new M4? That's BS.

I think BMW should have worked up a new engine 3.5L or so 6cyl turbo'd. That would keep me excited about BMW innovation. I really wish BMW would attempt to make the M3 compete with the GTR, but I'm not sure why they don't care about that. I mean the GTR sounds awesome and I never could believe when I learned it was a 6cyl! But at least it's a large ass 6 cyl.

4) I think there might be light at the end of the tunnel in the next gen. Think about it, where else does BMW have to go with the M3 next gen? No way they are gonna just juice up the turbo. They won't go back to NA. So I'm thinkin my point 3 might make an appearance. Maybe they'll try to go after GTR. But really, at some point a Lamborghini is a Lamborghini. What is that point for the M3?
Either way, I'm pretty sure in 5 years I won't be caring about BMW's basic daily racer and I'll be driving Porsche.

5) I'm curious how the turbo's will feel. If my rental vehicles (535i and 328i, X5 M pkg) are any indication the car feels more like a lexus. Everything is all smooth feeling. The turbo's press in carefully and noticeably. The steering is super disconnected and smooth. Everything about the car feels like Lexus and not BMW. Terrible.

[deletedelete]

Originally Posted by flea333

Either way, I'm pretty sure in 5 years I won't be caring about BMW's basic daily racer and I'll be driving Porsche.

Me too. BMW has no answer for the gtr and may never and maybe not even an answer for the Stingray or track versions of the Mustang and Camaro which is sad. Their new designs are ugly and sound like crap and hopefully this generation of M cars that are no longer the benchmark will inspire BMW and M Division to make something great and competitive for the next generation.

[flea333]

Originally Posted by Prowess Symphony

Me too. BMW has no answer for the gtr and may never and maybe not even an answer for the Stingray or track versions of the Mustang and Camaro which is sad. Their new designs are ugly and sound like crap and hopefully this generation of M cars that are no longer the benchmark will inspire BMW and M Division to make something great and competitive for the next generation.

Yes, Camaro Z28, 7L V8. WTF!!

[deletedelete]

Originally Posted by flea333

Yes, Camaro Z28, 7L V8. WTF!!

Maybe the M3/M4 is going to be amazing but I honestly don't believe it will be able to hang with the Z28, Stingray, Cayman or GTR. It's not just about track times so hopefully the driving experience of the new M's is amazing but given how ugly it looks and how awful it sounds I don't have much hope.

[dmk08]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I disagree. I think it is pretty well established that the car is in the neighborhood of 450 hp. The following are the evidence:

1. BMW most often under rates their turbo cars, in part to allow stated power production at widely (wider) varying environmental conditions, i.e. altitude/pressure, temperature.
2. The current M5 is under rated. It is under rated based on dynos, real world performance and physics based performance simulation.
3. BMW claims and identical (or within 0.1 sec) 0-1000m times for the new M5 and new M4. The M4 just couldn't do that given the power and weight of both vehicles.
4. Physics based performance simulations best match this 0-1000m time with 440 hp.

There really won't be more proof than this even after the car is released to mags or to the public. Dynos aren't inhernently accurate for absolute power predictions and BMW will never admit what the power is at sea level at standard temperature.

Its all still speculation until the car actually runs a time close to the M5.

[dmk08]

Originally Posted by NavidM3E92

If I could drive a 991 911 as a daily, hell I would! But I am just turning 24 and purchased a house last December. All the cars I by are by me. I could for sure as hell go to my dad and say I want a 911(which he suggests before I ever bought a BMW) and would gladly help me, because he knows its a better car. But I dont and I like the satisfaction of knowing it was on my own. So BMW's are more reasonable for me

For now....

24, a house in San Diego, a new E92, and no help? What is it you do? I screwed up somewhere lol.

[TurboBimmer]

Originally Posted by Prowess Symphony

Maybe the M3/M4 is going to be amazing but I honestly don't believe it will be able to hang with the Z28, Stingray, Cayman or GTR. It's not just about track times so hopefully the driving experience of the new M's is amazing but given how ugly it looks and how awful it sounds I don't have much hope.

Track times are actually BMWs last hope. Powerwise the M4 is underwhelming and will get destroyed in acceleration by AMGs and Audi RS4s. Not even talking about proper sports cars like a GTR or Stingray.

Whilst previous generation M3 were never the most powerful cars in their class, the gap has now increased considerably.

[deletedelete]

Originally Posted by Autobahn335i

Track times are actually BMWs last hope. Powerwise the M4 is underwhelming and will get destroyed in acceleration by AMGs and Audi RS4s. Not even talking about proper sports cars like a GTR or Stingray.

Whilst previous generation M3 were never the most powerful cars in their class, the gap has now increased considerably.

Hence my worry about this generation of M's compared to the competition.

[ss134]

Same debates every time a new M3 comes out...........most of you here will end up buying an F8x sooner or later!!

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by ss134

Same debates every time a new M3 comes out...........most of you here will end up buying an F8x sooner or later!!

i wont. going back to corvettes and muslce cars. they seem to understand me better. i like more "manly" engines. E92 was a great car for me. i loved the German muslce a lot. but they all are losing there "muslce" with these pea shooter engines.

i am not a BMW guy, i am E92 M3 guy.

[ss134]

Originally Posted by Ezio

i wont. going back to corvettes and muslce cars. they seem to understand me better. i like more "manly" engines. E92 was a great car for me. i loved the German muslce a lot. but they all are losing there "muslce" with these pea shooter engines.

i am not a BMW guy, i am E92 M3 guy.

I loved the E9x m3 as well, I had two of them but I believe the new M3 will be better in almost every respect. Really looking forward to driving it. In a few years time I might pick up an E92 M3 though if I can find a clean example, as it stands it's still my all time favourite car....hopefully only until I drive the F80!

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I disagree. I think it is pretty well established that the car is in the neighborhood of 450 hp. The following are the evidence:

1. BMW most often under rates their turbo cars, in part to allow stated power production at widely (wider) varying environmental conditions, i.e. altitude/pressure, temperature.
2. The current M5 is under rated. It is under rated based on dynos, real world performance and physics based performance simulation.
3. BMW claims and identical (or within 0.1 sec) 0-1000m times for the new M5 and new M4. The M4 just couldn't do that given the power and weight of both vehicles.
4. Physics based performance simulations best match this 0-1000m time with 440 hp.

There really won't be more proof than this even after the car is released to mags or to the public. Dynos aren't inhernently accurate for absolute power predictions and BMW will never admit what the power is at sea level at standard temperature.

Swamp, would you agree with me that, assuming identical power-to-weight, the new M4 will put the F10 M5 on the trailer in a drag race? I say that due to the shape of the power curves on each vehicle. The M4 will be at max power shortly after the shift to third, and will be there until VMAX, including short-shifting to reduce rotating inertias. The M5 will drop power after each shift and will apply less power (as a percent of full power) over that 1000m distance than the M4.

Therefore, the shape of the M4's power curve will mean that it can do better against the M5 than a simple power-to-weight analysis would tend to indicate - over 1000 meters or to VMAX. Would that be enough to narrow the 1000m time difference to essentially nothing? Dunno, but it's clearly a factor between the two machines.

Bruce

[LarThaL]

Originally Posted by Ezio

i wont. going back to corvettes and muslce cars. they seem to understand me better. i like more "manly" engines. E92 was a great car for me. i loved the German muslce a lot. but they all are losing there "muslce" with these pea shooter engines.

i am not a BMW guy, i am E92 M3 guy.

Similar appeal to me for the e92. When I was a kid, it was all about muscle cars....V8 2+2 coupes with a manual gear box and RWD. The appeal of the M3 to me was it took that basic concept and blended it with sophisticated engineering, precision, refinement and killer styling. My next car.....most likely a Vantage GT.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by dmk08

Its all still speculation until the car actually runs a time close to the M5.

Well, not if you consider the word of BMW speculation. They have made this claim officially.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Swamp, would you agree with me that, assuming identical power-to-weight, the new M4 will put the F10 M5 on the trailer in a drag race? I say that due to the shape of the power curves on each vehicle. The M4 will be at max power shortly after the shift to third, and will be there until VMAX, including short-shifting to reduce rotating inertias. The M5 will drop power after each shift and will apply less power (as a percent of full power) over that 1000m distance than the M4.

Therefore, the shape of the M4's power curve will mean that it can do better against the M5 than a simple power-to-weight analysis would tend to indicate - over 1000 meters or to VMAX. Would that be enough to narrow the 1000m time difference to essentially nothing? Dunno, but it's clearly a factor between the two machines.

Bruce

The M4 will certainly best the F10 M5 assuming both under rated and at factory specified weight in the 1/4 mi. However, to be the same power to weight ratio as the F10 M5 the M4 would have to be around 3200 lb flat (not counting driver). Here the whooping will get even stronger. Without going through the details (and you reasoning sounds perfectly valid) the basic reason the M5 will get bested is due to the M4 producing more average power.

Counting for wheelspin the S55 should be above 5500 rpm all through 2nd gear. Most shifts after that get down to around 5250, just a hair before peak torque.