|
|
01-02-2011, 09:17 AM | #287 | |
Brigadier General
242
Rep 3,306
Posts |
Quote:
Also, note the date of that video.......it was created sometime since the e92 ///M was released, so its not like this is some old philosophy from 20 years ago. I love how they focus on how the ///M Division is separate from the rest of BMW....BS!!! If it was truly independent it wouldn't be turning out the engines they have (current SAV ///Ms and upcoming ///M5) been.... Cheers, e46e92
__________________
"...it's not about the money and not about the brand of the car, it's about handling,performance and passion......And that, no other car has all together like an M3........when you talk about the most complete car the M is invincible." --Tony Kanaan. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-02-2011, 09:30 PM | #288 | |
Captain
120
Rep 898
Posts
Drives: '69 GT3, GT4, 1M, 912
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, Shenzhen, Oman
|
Quote:
The S2000 motor revs to 9000 RPM, is that better? Or buy a Yamaha that revs to 16,000+... It's painfully easy to make numbers on a dial- give it a big bore to stroke ratio and voila, you're there. That 9000 rpm V8 you want (100 hp per liter)- they could have done that 15 years ago with one eye closed (95mm bore, 80 mm stroke, done). Designing a motor that's compact, powerful, responsive and efficient? That's a worthy challenge. These are the boys that built the motor you love half a decade back, and one assumes they might have learned a little something since then. Maybe give them a little credit. The mark of true genius is doing things other think are impossible... Let's see what they come up with.
__________________
1M, GT4, 1969 Porsche 911 w/ 997 GT3 Cup Motor (435hp & 2,100 lbs)
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-02-2011, 10:20 PM | #289 |
Banned
61
Rep 908
Posts
Drives: em-funf
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SF Bay Area
iTrader: (0)
Garage List 2000 E39 M5 - current [0.00]
2007 E92 335i - SOLD [0.00] 1996 E36 M3-SOLD [0.00] 2000 E39 M5-SOLD [0.00] 2001 E46 M3-SOLD [0.00] 1995 E36 M3-SOLD [0.00] |
SAY NO TO FI!
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-02-2011, 10:50 PM | #290 | |
Colonel
87
Rep 2,464
Posts |
Quote:
btw, I agree with you. I'm all in for NA motors.
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-02-2011, 10:54 PM | #291 | |
Colonel
87
Rep 2,464
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-02-2011, 10:58 PM | #292 | ||
Lieutenant General
634
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
However, I do agree that although not an explicit philosophy, the advertisement that Levi posted (I hadn't actually seen that one before and I do like it!) drives it home that high reving is a key part of what the division has done and done progressively through its evolution. On your specs though Levi, you are simply dreaming. You're fully aware of that right? Ruff: You should have described that post. I almost did not click on it. Very interesting. Makes an empirical point that engine downsizing is not actually delivering real world fuel efficiency gains. It is worth noting though that in some cases the EPA figures are definitely improved. As much as it is unfortunate, the EPA ratings are what matter for meeting US regulations. This leads to the question... We've all said it, and everyone seems to know it, but is it true? "M is going FI due to government regulation". Is the volume of M vehicles high enough (or perhaps it is soon going to be high enough) that BMW would be substantially hurt purely from tariffs/penalties/etc. associated with continuing to produce high EPA/EU fuel efficiency vehicles (specifically slight improvements of existing NA M engines perhaps by adding DI)? Companies like Porsche, Ferrari and Lamborghini continue to produce all or some models that have low efficiency. Of course I am not saying you can make many direct comparisons there in terms of price, volumes nor the cars themselves but those companies are certainly mostly ignoring the need for big changes in emissions or efficiency. That being said even these folks are working on efficiency. Despite more power and more weight the new 458 Italia is more fuel efficient than the F430. I'm keenly interested to know if BMW really "has" to go FI or perhaps the changes have as much to do with saving money on engines as they do on "big bad governments" with too much regulation. This might take some really detailed knowledge about US and EU legislation on fuel efficiency and carbon emissions specifically targeted at the automobile industry.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
||
Appreciate
0
|
01-02-2011, 11:21 PM | #293 | |
Colonel
87
Rep 2,464
Posts |
Quote:
And with all due respect, BMW is the biggest hypocrite here. They talk about efficieny, and only bring 335d here. Really? Wtf happened to 316d, 318d, 320d, and 325d?
__________________
2011 MINI Cooper S
previous cars: E92 M3, Z4MC, Z4 Roadster, E36 328 Sedan |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-03-2011, 12:40 AM | #294 | |
Captain
120
Rep 898
Posts
Drives: '69 GT3, GT4, 1M, 912
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, Shenzhen, Oman
|
Quote:
What's tricky, and what's out of the experience base of most here, is an appreciation of efficiency and brake specific fuel consumption. I've attached a map of a turbo diesel motor; this is basically a map of how much power a motor produces for a given amount of fuel, with lower numbers (grey) being better. Normally aspirated motors can have reasonably high BSFC in one area of the chart, but fuel consumption increases dramatically to either side. As a motor rarely runs in the "sweet spot" (wide open throttle @1800 RPM in the chart below) they rarely if ever achieve the efficiency they are capable of. Much of the fuel is wasted simply overcoming the friction of the spinning motor. Turbos tend to have much wider peaks in maps like the below, allowing them to average much more energy per unit fuel. For those that understand engine technology the choice is clear- for a given amount of CO2/ fuel you can choose NA, or you can choose FI and make around 25% more power. Regulations have forced BMW to be concerned with fuel economy (if rising fuel prices hadn't already already), and hence they have no choice but to move towards FI, Luddites be damned. For a given amount of emissions/ fuel it simply allows them to deliver much more power. I'm sure they would prefer not to; it will result in more complex motors, where it sounds like simply raising the redline is enough to keep the "fans" happy. However they will also be more modern, advanced and to my eyes better motors. If they do it right, which is what the real question is in my mind. If they skimp and figure they can make their power targets without putting their best foot forwards I think they will get the message loud and clear, and M3 sales have already been slipping. Another point- many here think "race" motors should be normally aspirated, but that's a view highly skewed by marketing. F1 will soon return to FI, following drag cars, WRC, the turbo cars of Group C (also concerned with fuel economy; the C stands for consumption) and indeed most race cars this side of carburetted nascar. A good FI motor can be very, very good; much higher power to weight ratio vs NA, more torque, better economy, etc. BMW has some of the best engine designers in the world- again I look forward to seeing what they come up with it the engineers are given free reign.
__________________
1M, GT4, 1969 Porsche 911 w/ 997 GT3 Cup Motor (435hp & 2,100 lbs)
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-03-2011, 02:40 AM | #295 | |
Major
32
Rep 999
Posts |
Quote:
other than that, i completely agree with everything you said. if rumors are true, they will start a new "legend" that might end shortly because customers might be jumping ship. i guess we'll see what happens. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-03-2011, 08:21 AM | #296 | |
Major
72
Rep 1,171
Posts |
Quote:
I only hope the end result will be better in all respects, without compromising throtle response, overheating and/or component reliability (as a result of a more complex system). The high reving feeling & what comes with it such as the sound of a screaming NA engine will most definitely be gone - hopefully these will be the only casualties. I don't know, maybe who cares.... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-03-2011, 02:21 PM | #298 | |
Brigadier General
242
Rep 3,306
Posts |
Quote:
Unfortunately, the idiots rule out over the enthusiasts. Cheers, e46e92
__________________
"...it's not about the money and not about the brand of the car, it's about handling,performance and passion......And that, no other car has all together like an M3........when you talk about the most complete car the M is invincible." --Tony Kanaan. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-03-2011, 02:55 PM | #299 | |
Major
32
Rep 999
Posts |
Quote:
oh well, what can you do? too many of those kind of people around. Last edited by crackberry; 01-03-2011 at 04:20 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-03-2011, 03:17 PM | #300 | |
Brigadier General
443
Rep 3,888
Posts |
Quote:
Why a would pay such price it because I want something good, and it seems BMW can't anymore do anything slightly better without asking alot more: ex: -BMW Z4 sDrive35is -BMW M3 GTS I would pay more for a worthy M3 than less for an M3 built as a 1M. Back to efficiency: I do understand the regulations and M needs to lower emissions, but is it really necessary to go FI for M, if there is the new sub-brand BMW i coming, that is just done for this? Then remember the 1 Series Tii Concept? Why can't BMW use Tii badge for sporty/tuned cars with FI, and for M badge continue using NA engines? Swamp yes I am dreaming, but if BMW M wanted, they could do it, also for the 911 (not 911 S or 911 Turbo) price. It is not impossible for them. I all this includes better millage. I mean Ferrari could do it with the 458 Italia, and Prosche is going to do it with the new 911 (991). And BMW is known for building the "best" engines. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-03-2011, 03:43 PM | #303 | ||
Colonel
87
Rep 2,464
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
One for people who want it just because it is an M and with all the bells and whistles. This car can be as a heavy as it wants, it can even be turbo. This is more like a C63 AMG competitor. The other should be for enthusiast who wants light cars with high revving NA engines with some of the tech goodies. This car won't be as comfy and luxorious as the first model. It won't have massaging seats or even power seats. It'll come with BMW performance seats, performance exhaust etc. It can have nav, ac etc. It won't be as stripped as GTS, since that's kinda against what an M car is (ie, it should be daily driveable). Both these cars will share as many components as possible (obviously including the chasis, frame, body, major exterior and interior bits and pieces). Not sure how much it will effect the R&D and testing. But hey, at the end of the day, they may sell more cars this way. I seriously believe they can steal 911 drivers if they offer a enthusiast version of the M3. Last edited by Erhan; 01-03-2011 at 03:46 PM.. Reason: spelling... |
||
Appreciate
0
|
01-03-2011, 03:53 PM | #304 | |
Private
10
Rep 94
Posts |
You are funny.
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-03-2011, 03:59 PM | #305 |
Brigadier General
443
Rep 3,888
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-03-2011, 04:18 PM | #307 | |
Brigadier General
242
Rep 3,306
Posts |
Quote:
Cheers, e46e92
__________________
"...it's not about the money and not about the brand of the car, it's about handling,performance and passion......And that, no other car has all together like an M3........when you talk about the most complete car the M is invincible." --Tony Kanaan. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-03-2011, 04:57 PM | #308 | |
Major
32
Rep 999
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|