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....
 
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      02-18-2008, 07:43 AM   #133
gmund1948
Second Lieutenant
Germany
5
Rep
253
Posts

 
Drives: 335 cab,C-6 08, 73 911E 59 D,
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: American in Germany

iTrader: (0)

Thanks for reading

Quote:
Originally Posted by malter2.0 View Post
Drove a '93 Z28. I heard it's a same setup as '08 Z0666.



Actually I addressed it between the lines in my previous post, but I can do it more directly. Porsche handled well back in 13th century, let alone now. In comparison to corvette (or BMW for that matter), it used a superior design since its inception. With generations they optimized, reduced immense, both understeer and oversteer on kill-yourself 930 and just built upon their racing heritage, which is the reason all P-cars nowadays are considered Rolex of track cars.

On the other hand, take American icon like Stingray - it never was a model of great handling car, just powerful straight line muscle car. Much like Porsche continued its path of great handling cars, chevy did also with power, which is why you don't see too many people drag racing their 911 turbos as you do people in supercharged C5 Z06s and C6 and bla bla bla...



Reading is fundamental, so they say. Oh, wait, is that a wrong answer?





Agreed. You are entitled to your opinion 100%, especially since you drove both cars, but on the other hand I would not so easily discredit opinions of those who have read and researched a lot. Collectively, a certain product or "thing" is deemed as good or bad, as the average of all the opinions.
Most of the magazine car reviewers have extensive car design experience or have worked for a long time in automotive industry, not to mention substantial track time. These people are professionals in their field and do this for living. On average their review of the car will be far more accurate than a weekend racer's opinion. I purposely say on average, as reviewers are not all created equal.



I respect a corvette for what it is, just as I respect a crown vic for being a great taxi car. Nothing more, nothing less.
I like BMWs, but I am not a fanboy, as you might classify me.


So you read, thats a good thing,
But no testing of the C-6, or the new M-3 for you ! You mentioned the 930
Porsche, It is too bad you don't get some experience driving them. Deseminate all the information from the journalists you want. Remember
journalists write, then sell themselves to a magazine, the magazine makes money through advertising (BMW, Porsche, Chevy) and sales of the magazines ( to people who cannot drive the car themselves )

You have proven that you can argue with many others until you reach a point of frustration where you're limited experience leaves you dazed and confused. You can only argue so far with information gathered from others
then you get lost

No a 93 Z-28 is not the same as an 08 C6 (or Z-06)

"By far the best proof is experience."
Sir Francis Bacon 1560-1625
__________________
TELL me what real drivers training do you have besides your State Drivers License ?
Appreciate 0
      02-18-2008, 11:25 AM   #134
malter2.0
Banned
United_States
21
Rep
908
Posts

 
Drives: em-funf
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SF Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Great discussion (not), you move from one glaring error to the next then move along to insults followed by apathy. You are really on a roll here. Whether or not you want to admit your errors of fact or errors in perception is irrelevant to the need to put your opinions in "laymans" terms. I was a scientist and engineer for some time and have done real engineering on both brake and suspension systems, so the need for "layman's" terms is again nothing but a poor excuse and another insult.

You don't have time nor patience for a real discussion about susupension systems but you have time to post silly school bus drag races in another post in this very section. Who is worried about their status here?
I have no time nor patience because you are arguing something so absurd, that in order to convince or to at least to bring you closer to understanding would take way too much effort from my side. You did not know that most of the after-market quality suspension manufacturers for your car employ progressive springs, which obviously shows you didn't know how progressive springs even look like, that is, until you dig them out of wikipedia (since all your pictures and paraphrased quotes come from there, including the one with vette leaf springs).

I refrained from dissecting your overly simplistic and vague explanation why high revving engines have more advantages. There is a competent debater and incompetent. You fall under latter category. Your credentials are meaningless...seriously. Should I remind you of your statement that: "Part throttle, full throttle it does not matter the engine can only produce a certain max torque and it depends on rpm not on throttle position." So if you want to comment further on my posts/threads irrelevant to this discussion, I will be glad to pull more statements from our wonderful search option. You left quite a trail of random BS on entire e90post forum.


gmund1948,

Quote:
You have proven that you can argue with many others until you reach a point of frustration where you're limited experience leaves you dazed and confused. You can only argue so far with information gathered from others then you get lost
When you address my post (not only past, but previous) in its entirety, with something more substantial than I sat in the new M3 for 10 min, maybe we can discuss. I am neither dazed nor confused, simply amazed how a man of your age is so incapable of communicating on adult level. Taking my comical and so obviously sarcastic comment about '93 z28 and twisting it around shows you are really limited.
Appreciate 0
      02-18-2008, 12:26 PM   #135
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
21
Rep
1,908
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
A DOHC design carries some extra weight up top and that is a small draw back of its deisgn. However, the redline of the M3 is quite stupendous. Your post above is a bit dismissive of the value of a high rpm engine. The Vette engine is not absolutely better in all regards, hands down...
Swamp, you didn't bother answering my question in note 95 in this string (and then stated more carefully in note 113 after you shucked and jived). Namely, how is the 8400 rpm redline of the new M3 motor an actual advantage over the 6500 redline of the LS3 engine?

Bruce

Last edited by bruce.augenstein@comcast.; 02-18-2008 at 12:35 PM. Reason: Spelling
Appreciate 0
      02-18-2008, 03:14 PM   #136
Hammer
Lieutenant
Hammer's Avatar
Germany
7
Rep
421
Posts

 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany, Cologne

iTrader: (0)

May we get back to topic?

It´s pretty anoying to read so much offtopic stuff between the pieces of topicrelated stuff...

why are you blaming each other? it´s totally useless! just ignore each other if you can´t handle with the counterpart. or mail/chat etc to solve the problem(if there is any problem).

this forum is great, the members made it great, so keep it great. please.
Appreciate 0
      02-18-2008, 03:15 PM   #137
1.8t
Enlisted Member
0
Rep
31
Posts

 
Drives: 08 C6
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlanta

iTrader: (0)

RPM's kill motors. They are harder on bearings, they are more expensive, they require more up-keep, they consume more oil, and have more oil control issues than an equivalent motor with a lower redline. The do allow more hp given a fixed displacement provided the head/cam selection is up to the task. Most high rev engines are derived from rule requirements and or space requirements. They make it into street cars touting race technology, which helps sell the brand. I also hear that the tq multiplication via gearing is better optimized with a higher redline but I honestly have not looked into that any further that just "hearing" that statement(honestly, based off of some minor brainstorming, I don't see how that comment has any merit).

However, don't fool yourself. If the E92 motor could last 150k miles with a 8400rpm redline, how long do you think it coud last with a 7k rpm redline? Before anyone tries to inform me, yes, I know motors can be built to withstand high rpm use(I had an S2k), but that doesn't take away from the fact that there is less margin for error and assembly process mistakes are more pronounced in the form of blown motors on high rpm engines. Also syncronizers have to be extra snappy since WOT shifts are happening at 8400rpm. There are a whole host of upgrades that have to be accounted for when building a high rpm production car, but it does get the heart churning and the mind racing better than any other form of power production.
__________________
08 C6 Z06 - intake/thermostat - 11.67@125.10
Appreciate 0
      02-18-2008, 03:33 PM   #138
Hammer
Lieutenant
Hammer's Avatar
Germany
7
Rep
421
Posts

 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany, Cologne

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1.8t View Post
RPM's kill motors. They are harder on bearings, they are more expensive, they require more up-keep, they consume more oil, and have more oil control issues than an equivalent motor with a lower redline. The do allow more hp given a fixed displacement provided the head/cam selection is up to the task. Most high rev engines are derived from rule requirements and or space requirements. They make it into street cars touting race technology, which helps sell the brand. I also hear that the tq multiplication via gearing is better optimized with a higher redline but I honestly have not looked into that any further that just "hearing" that statement(honestly, based off of some minor brainstorming, I don't see how that comment has any merit).

However, don't fool yourself. If the E92 motor could last 150k miles with a 8400rpm redline, how long do you think it coud last with a 7k rpm redline? Before anyone tries to inform me, yes, I know motors can be built to withstand high rpm use(I had an S2k), but that doesn't take away from the fact that there is less margin for error and assembly process mistakes are more pronounced in the form of blown motors on high rpm engines. Also syncronizers have to be extra snappy since WOT shifts are happening at 8400rpm. There are a whole host of upgrades that have to be accounted for when building a high rpm production car, but it does get the heart churning and the mind racing better than any other form of power production.
Do you thing, the M3 will be used on the track all the day?

I think, there ll be some M3, which will be used on the track most of their lifetime (some people here do this, i live 60miles distanced to the Nürburgring). But most of the M3 engines ( like my prospective m3) will have to handle with a broad range of usements ( 30% city, 50% autobahn, 5% track, 5% abuse on the road ). Therefor i think that my engine ll last for at least 400.000miles ( if the engine is warmed up every time befor any stress).
And if i m wrong...
Appreciate 0
      02-18-2008, 03:43 PM   #139
gmund1948
Second Lieutenant
Germany
5
Rep
253
Posts

 
Drives: 335 cab,C-6 08, 73 911E 59 D,
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: American in Germany

iTrader: (0)

Well

Gmund1948,


When you address my post (not only past, but previous) in its entirety, with something more substantial than I sat in the new M3 for 10 min, maybe we can discuss. I am neither dazed nor confused, simply amazed how a man of your age is so incapable of communicating on adult level. Taking my comical and so obviously sarcastic comment about '93 z28 and twisting it around shows you are really limited.[/quote]


There is a lot to be said for experience, the experience of driving high performance sports on a track or a back road, is fun. We can all debate
who has a better suspension, the best motor or the best handling.

I only have two track days in the new M-3 and a 45 minute test drive
on the autobahn. The Corvette is a wonderful car as well, I just returned from a trip to Munich, and when we pulled into the BMW Welt, people took pictures of the Corvette ( one was a BMW delivery guy ) The Corvette is rare
over here. A German friend was picking up his M-5 and I was invited, If you do delivery in Munich, this is the way to do it.

The ride home was heaven, Fast, cold and dry. Every summer I have a hard time driving in the states because of the speed limits. In the Bay Area and LA its the congestion (like Munich argh!!) that I cannot stand.

As far as age, I might be alot younger than you surmise, The point I have made is experience counts, synthesizing ideas from others opinions are in no way a substitute for driving experience.To be able to rate a car through others opinions is intellectual suicide, Many people here have autocrossed,
been driving instructors or at least had some training. Have you ? If not
start. BMW, Porsche, Audi, Chevrolet, they all make great cars. I was fortunate to be exposed at a young age to sports car driving. I am fortunate
now to be able to own more than one car, and still be a good provider.

If you love sports cars, the more power to you. I would rather drive any capable car on a mountain road or race track than being stuck in traffic.

Your statements have much more value if you have experiences to back them up.even in other cars. The danger is in relying too much on the specs and not on the product itself.

Your posts are so critical of other manufactures, you cant seem to accept that you do not have to put a great car down (if you have experienced it)
to find that BMW has a great design in an M3. If could compare them yourself you might find the world is getting flat again.

__________________
TELL me what real drivers training do you have besides your State Drivers License ?
Appreciate 0
      02-18-2008, 03:58 PM   #140
1.8t
Enlisted Member
0
Rep
31
Posts

 
Drives: 08 C6
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlanta

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer View Post
Do you thing, the M3 will be used on the track all the day?

I think, there ll be some M3, which will be used on the track most of their lifetime (some people here do this, i live 60miles distanced to the Nürburgring). But most of the M3 engines ( like my prospective m3) will have to handle with a broad range of usements ( 30% city, 50% autobahn, 5% track, 5% abuse on the road ). Therefor i think that my engine ll last for at least 400.000miles ( if the engine is warmed up every time befor any stress).
And if i m wrong...
Your motor will be fine and even if it does blow, the BMW warranty will take care of it. I wanna say it was a rod bearing issue on the E46's that was plagueing them for a year or two before BMW ironed it out with updated rod bearings and different viscosity oil. I am not trying to scare you out of the car. As I stated, you can build a motor to handle the rpm, it will just cost more and require more precision, both of which BMW is perfectly capable of executing. My only point with the a high rpm motor was the fact that there is no free lunch.
__________________
08 C6 Z06 - intake/thermostat - 11.67@125.10
Appreciate 0
      02-18-2008, 06:46 PM   #141
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by spearfisher View Post
so your admiting that you'll be dusted by old western stage coach technology. You might get a good view of the leaf spring from behind.


got to go my chariot with leaf spings awaits me.
I saw your Avatar and thought Epacy is really coming around. Look he is now making posts that are objective and unbiased, wow. Then I was saddened to see it wasn't Epacy at all, but you: spearfisher. Nice to see you add something to the forum from outside the usual BMW circle of friends. Refreshing indeed.
Appreciate 0
      02-19-2008, 10:13 AM   #142
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 malter2.0 View Post
I have no time nor patience because you are arguing something so absurd, that in order to convince or to at least to bring you closer to understanding would take way too much effort from my side. You did not know that most of the after-market quality suspension manufacturers for your car employ progressive springs, which obviously shows you didn't know how progressive springs even look like, that is, until you dig them out of wikipedia (since all your pictures and paraphrased quotes come from there, including the one with vette leaf springs).

I refrained from dissecting your overly simplistic and vague explanation why high revving engines have more advantages. There is a competent debater and incompetent. You fall under latter category. Your credentials are meaningless...seriously. Should I remind you of your statement that: "Part throttle, full throttle it does not matter the engine can only produce a certain max torque and it depends on rpm not on throttle position." So if you want to comment further on my posts/threads irrelevant to this discussion, I will be glad to pull more statements from our wonderful search option. You left quite a trail of random BS on entire e90post forum.
You clearly have no time nor patience. Talk about gross contradictions. Keep them coming. You can also say your lines like that so many times until you look simply pathetic. I don't have coilovers, never said I did, was never talking about them in particular and clearly know what a progressive spring looks like. Again, I have actually designed coil springs and had them wound (in both spring steel and titanium, just FYI) custom for suspension applications. I did not do this work as a weekend car warrior or for fun but for an OEM suspension system as the engineer. Where are such random and meaningless accusations coming from? I can see that your insecurity and inability to admit your own error is the reason for all of the constant attempts to refocus the discussion away from yourself and back to me.

Well what absolute falsity/absurdity of yours is next to deal with... I don't paraphrase wikipedia nor to I get pictures from there. Heck I'm the first to admit I grab pictures left and right from google images - who the hell doesn't/shouldn't. Again it begs the serious question, RELEVANCE??? Who the hell cares where a picture comes from if it helps you make a point?

As far as e90post goes I have posted almost nothing there. Unless you call m3post.com part of e90post.com. I think of them really as separate and again have little to no interest in non M BMWs. Tell me more about my "trails of random BS" overe there, please. As far as your little obsession looking for errors I have made - enjoy yourself (your busy and impatient self ). I stand by my posts, and debates, the ones won and the ones lost, the times I am correct and the times incorrect. There are a lots of sharp and experienced folks here and I enjoy learning from them. Seems you definitely don't/won't.

On the engine points again nice way to continue to argue. Say you don't have time but keep bringing up an issue. But of course never really making a serious attempt to clearly state your contention or disagreement. You simply have to be one of the worst/most frustating people to (attempt to) engage with. Try making a point and saying something critical/novel if you can (seems clearly not). Lastly, on my clear mistake about part throttle torque - again have fun digging around as much as possible to find my mistakes. Aren't you clever. Did you notice how I handled that one? I thought about it for a bit longer, realized I was wrong, admitted my clear mistake, offered a good thought experiment to help others who may have been confused about the same point (as others were indeed), thanked those who got me thinking right and simply moved right along. Of course we all make mistakes, but again I'll stand by the dozens or hundreds of times I have been correct, predictive, helpful or insightful for this board. What exacly are you credentials IRL or on this forum (perhaps other than a glorified mechanic who wrenches on their own car)?

This is a strongly adviseable way for you to behave (as per my personal example just above) on the leaf spring issue if you want to maintain any shred of credibility yourself.

I am anxiously awaiting your next note which will be clearly devoid of any real criticism or argument since you just don't have the time/patience for me. Get real.
Appreciate 0
      02-19-2008, 10:22 AM   #143
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
Swamp, you didn't bother answering my question in note 95 in this string (and then stated more carefully in note 113 after you shucked and jived). Namely, how is the 8400 rpm redline of the new M3 motor an actual advantage over the 6500 redline of the LS3 engine?

Bruce
Did not seem like a fierce nor heated debate between us. Sorry if I left you hanging. Not sure what sucking/jiving you are talking about either. We both acknowledge that each engine design philosophy has merits and I was quite clear to point out that many of my points in favor of a high rpm design were not applicable specifically in the M3 vs. Vette engine case. I'd clearly have to dive in to the LS3 in much greater detail to make any useful and valid comparisons directly vs. the M3 V8. Why don't you tell us your thoughts on why one is superior to the other (was it "in all regards" or "almost all regards")?
Appreciate 0
      02-19-2008, 01:15 PM   #144
Hammer
Lieutenant
Hammer's Avatar
Germany
7
Rep
421
Posts

 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany, Cologne

iTrader: (0)

But, Porsche are especially build for the ring( Nordschleife is the favorite track of porsche).
Appreciate 0
      02-19-2008, 02:43 PM   #145
spearfisher
Lieutenant
spearfisher's Avatar
6
Rep
409
Posts

 
Drives: C6 ZO6
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: FL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by malter2.0 View Post
Touche. Source is there.

However, I still stand behind my words that given the same condition (weather and driver), M3 is faster on n-ring than, both C5 and C5 Z06. Without a doubt in my mind. I will also note that this is the first semi-official time for M3, which is still very much a new car and naturally that time will be reduced as people get accommodated with the car.

Different drivers, different skills. Also, it would be interesting to see whether the track was empty when M3 was tested. Often times, they will test time with other drivers on the track.

You'll dust me in a Subaru? Trying hard not to give you my honest answer as it would put me on, apparently your 13-year old level. Do you also have a bigger brother that will beat me up?



Swamp2,

I cannot communicate with you. You are balls deep in something that you obviously don't understand, or at least from your verbiage that's what it seems. You might know it in your head, but thats not what I am reading. Some of things you are counter-arguing are basic, and I don't have time or patience to address it or to put in layman's terms. Good luck and keep up the good status. I'm not here to impress anyone.

I'll meet you at the playground at 12 noon.

you belive the BMW will prevail, but I belive power to weight ratio will prevail.

we will see with time, or when I encounter one on the 1/4 or track, or clear cut data from a reliable source.

But I know Bimmers are notorious for beating book times, I know when the E46 M3 came out tests conducted had it doing the 1/4 in 13.3. to 13.4, but I was able to coax 13.1 to 13.2 in the 1/4 in the past, and seen others cut 13.0 in the qtr, so I'm sure the new M3 will do better at the track.

Question though I know you try to discredit what one member says due to his seat time or experience.
I think experience and seat time counts for a lot, when I've attended driving schools, I respect the instructors for their experience and seat time.

Besides theory cannot can't be validated without actual experience.
Appreciate 0
      02-19-2008, 07:34 PM   #146
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
21
Rep
1,908
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Did not seem like a fierce nor heated debate between us. Sorry if I left you hanging. Not sure what sucking/jiving you are talking about either. We both acknowledge that each engine design philosophy has merits and I was quite clear to point out that many of my points in favor of a high rpm design were not applicable specifically in the M3 vs. Vette engine case. I'd clearly have to dive in to the LS3 in much greater detail to make any useful and valid comparisons directly vs. the M3 V8. Why don't you tell us your thoughts on why one is superior to the other (was it "in all regards" or "almost all regards")?
1) LS3 is slightly lighter in weight
2) LS3 is similar in overall size but not as tall, lending itself to a lower center of gravity in pretty much any car
3) LS3 makes about five percent more power (22 HP)
4) LS3 makes about 45% more torque (124 pound feet)
5) LS3 appears to have better bsfc numbers

1) M3 V8 has a 1900 rpm higher red line, which you have claimed in your fantasy world as an advantage

So I guess in your world it's in "almost all regards" that the LS3 is superior.

Oh, I forgot. Folks without actual knowledge would claim that since the M3 makes more power per liter, that's an advantage in this comparision.

Would you claim that?

Bruce
Appreciate 0
      02-19-2008, 08:35 PM   #147
spearfisher
Lieutenant
spearfisher's Avatar
6
Rep
409
Posts

 
Drives: C6 ZO6
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: FL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
I saw your Avatar and thought Epacy is really coming around. Look he is now making posts that are objective and unbiased, wow. Then I was saddened to see it wasn't Epacy at all, but you: spearfisher. Nice to see you add something to the forum from outside the usual BMW circle of friends. Refreshing indeed.

thanks ruff
Appreciate 0
      02-20-2008, 06:18 AM   #148
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
1) M3 V8 has a 1900 rpm higher red line, which you have claimed in your fantasy world as an advantage
No need to get so testy Bruce. You did agree with me on multiple points I gave on my list about the advantages, in general of a high rpm design. Was that pandering or are you changing your mind?
Appreciate 0
      02-20-2008, 01:23 PM   #149
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
21
Rep
1,908
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
No need to get so testy Bruce. You did agree with me on multiple points I gave on my list about the advantages, in general of a high rpm design. Was that pandering or are you changing your mind?
Sorry. The discussion was around the relative merits of the M3 vs Vette engines, and you said that the M3 engine had an rpm advantage. In my opinion, that isn't an advantage in any way that I can see, and apparently you now agree.

We're good.

Bruce
Appreciate 0
      02-20-2008, 03:04 PM   #150
lucid
Major General
lucid's Avatar
United_States
116
Rep
8,034
Posts

 
Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

While we are on the M3 vs LS3 engine topic, I've been thinking about the following lately:

If both engines (engines only) were run at the same power output, say at 100 hp, 200 hp, and then 300 hp, which engine would consume less fuel and how would consumption differences between the two engines be affected at different power outputs?

In other words, which one has the higher thermal efficiency, and how does thermal efficiency change over the rpm range? I am assuming variables like compression ratio, volumetric efficiency, friction, mass of reciprocating parts, combustion characteristics are all influential.
Appreciate 0
      02-21-2008, 12:15 AM   #151
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
21
Rep
1,908
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
While we are on the M3 vs LS3 engine topic, I've been thinking about the following lately:

If both engines (engines only) were run at the same power output, say at 100 hp, 200 hp, and then 300 hp, which engine would consume less fuel and how would consumption differences between the two engines be affected at different power outputs?

In other words, which one has the higher thermal efficiency, and how does thermal efficiency change over the rpm range? I am assuming variables like compression ratio, volumetric efficiency, friction, mass of reciprocating parts, combustion characteristics are all influential.
There may or may not be SAE papers which could shed *some* light on the subject (available for some $$), but I'm wearing a big "EMPTY" sign on my forehead at the moment.

Bruce
Appreciate 0
      02-21-2008, 01:21 PM   #152
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
Sorry. The discussion was around the relative merits of the M3 vs Vette engines, and you said that the M3 engine had an rpm advantage. In my opinion, that isn't an advantage in any way that I can see, and apparently you now agree.

We're good.

Bruce
Bruce what the heck am I missing when you agreed with some (and disagreed with other) points on my list which provided advantages (in general) of high rpm engines? My review of our discussion reveals we were talking both about the specific comparison of the Vette vs. M3 engine as well as the generalities of a "high rpm design" vs. "lower rpm design". I certainly do not agree (concede) with you that there is no advantage whatsoever for the M3 design in comparing the Vette and M3 engines. Of course you must compare engines and redlines and tranmissions as matched sets which surely complicates matters. Drop the Vette engine in the M3 without changing the transmission and you have a car with a top speed less than 130 mph. How about this basic observation of the performance obtained by the systems, rather than the engines purely in isolation:

Performance tests show very closely matched acceleration figures for the cars. The M3 accomplishes this with more weight, less power, less torque and a substantially worse power to weight ratio. Could there be some advantage of the high rpm design linked to an appropriately matched transmission that contributes to making the car a much closer competitor that one might guess.

Is there some reason that F1 cars do not use relatively low rpm designs? If such designs were better in all regards as it seems to be your contention then surely such "technology" would be used in such cars. Sure neither a Vette nor M3 is as purpose built as an F1 car but all purport to offer one of the same clear and ultimate goals - very fast around a track.

P.S. My take on the hp per liter thing is clear (or I'll make it clear now). High hp/l is a technical achievement and engineering advantage that may or may not always translate to a concrete/real world advantage in comparison with a lower hp/l design implemented in a properly designed and matched system.
Appreciate 0
      02-21-2008, 02:08 PM   #153
spearfisher
Lieutenant
spearfisher's Avatar
6
Rep
409
Posts

 
Drives: C6 ZO6
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: FL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
While we are on the M3 vs LS3 engine topic, I've been thinking about the following lately:

If both engines (engines only) were run at the same power output, say at 100 hp, 200 hp, and then 300 hp, which engine would consume less fuel and how would consumption differences between the two engines be affected at different power outputs?

In other words, which one has the higher thermal efficiency, and how does thermal efficiency change over the rpm range? I am assuming variables like compression ratio, volumetric efficiency, friction, mass of reciprocating parts, combustion characteristics are all influential.
that would be a very interesting article, I'd like to see that comparo.


Overall though, even though the LS3 is lighter and has a lower center of gravity.

the M3 engine is technologically more advanced than the LS3, a more complicated engine to work on also, but has more technology, not that the LS3 is a slouch, very durable, flat torque band, good HP, but most engines now a days have a lot of engineering behind them anyway just some more than others.

but the quad cam 4 valves per cylinder allows for more HP per liter and higher peak RPM. If the vette had similar technology or the M3 was 6.2 liters wow the amount of HP developed would be nice.

the way I see it, two different ways of making HP
displacment and making it effecient
quad cams, 4 vavles per cylinder, and making it effecient

Last edited by spearfisher; 02-21-2008 at 03:06 PM.
Appreciate 0
      02-21-2008, 02:29 PM   #154
spearfisher
Lieutenant
spearfisher's Avatar
6
Rep
409
Posts

 
Drives: C6 ZO6
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: FL

iTrader: (0)

stumbled on this site, don't know how reliable a source this is

comments
http://www.fastestlaps.com/index.php...=458eebee78a2f

http://www.fastestlaps.com/index.php...=458be6dc37c65

http://www.fastestlaps.com/index.php...=45896d4b380a0
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 07:47 AM.




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