InsideLine confirms the next gen M3 will be getting N55 engine?

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Take your argument one step further to the real detail that matters - piston speed . Actually I thing that spec has been posted for most of these engines.

With a little metallurgy, there's no particular reason why the N55 couldn't rev as high as the S54 did.

But as we've discussed before, why bother? With the turbo (or two, or three), you can tailor a power and torque curve to get pretty much whatever you want. 450 HP (or whatever) would work just fine with a 7000 rpm limit.

Yeah, I know that some of the faithful swear they'll never buy a turbo M3 that only goes to 7K, but hey, BMW folks know what they're doing. Once the torque curve in the new one shortens up their eyeballs by a couple of diopters, the current religious faithful will see the (new) light.

Bruce

[-=Hot|Ice=-]

Originally Posted by jml

Decisions Decision - get in on the last couple months of E90 action and add the dinan 4.6, or wait for the 991.

991.

[-=Hot|Ice=-]

2 sources claiming the next gen M3 is going to have some version of the N55. Scott, can you shed some light on this please?

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

With a little metallurgy, there's no particular reason why the N55 couldn't rev as high as the S54 did.

But as we've discussed before, why bother? With the turbo (or two, or three), you can tailor a power and torque curve to get pretty much whatever you want. 450 HP (or whatever) would work just fine with a 7000 rpm limit.

Yeah, I know that some of the faithful swear they'll never buy a turbo M3 that only goes to 7K, but hey, BMW folks know what they're doing. Once the torque curve in the new one shortens up their eyeballs by a couple of diopters, the current religious faithful will see the (new) light.

Bruce

Piston speed could be one limiting factor and although not my own belief as to the most important limiting factor in future designs, it seemed to be the essence of the post I replied to.

The rumors I have heard that sound the most likely are that BMWs Valvetronic system can not keep pace past 7000 rpm (or perhaps 7000 + some safety factor). Of course Valvetronic is likely in the the next M3 but its successor could very well yield a faster responding system.

I'm guessing the new M3 will have a "compromise" redline of about 7,500. A compromise between the F10 M5 in the low 7k range and the existing S65 screamer at 8400.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I'm guessing the new M3 will have a "compromise" redline of about 7,500. A compromise between the F10 M5 in the low 7k range and the existing S65 screamer at 8400.

You guess the M3 F32 will have a "compromise" redline of about 7.500 RPM. I hope it will get a COMPROMISE redline at 8.000 RPM. The M3 F32 is said to be lighter than the M3 E46, so let it rev at least as high as it: 8.000 RPM!

[Franken///M]

Originally Posted by Levi

You guess the M3 F32 will have a "compromise" redline of about 7.500 RPM. I hope it will get a COMPROMISE redline at 8.000 RPM. The M3 F32 is said to be lighter than the M3 E46, so let it rev at least as high as it: 8.000 RPM!

Who said it is going to be lighter than then E46? Everyone is throwing around weight and how much lighter the next M3 is going to be, yet no one seems to take notice BMW's cars are still getting bigger. If the next M3 weighs the same as the current M3 it will be a surprise.

Secondly, the often quoted weight of 3700lbs for the current M3 is not entirely fair. Going off of inside line and their "curb weight, as tested" puts the 2002 M3 at 3472lb vs the 2010 M3 at 3556lb. Not much of a difference as a lot of people would believe.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Piston speed could be one limiting factor and although not my own belief as to the most important limiting factor in future designs, it seemed to be the essence of the post I replied to.

Yeah, I think what Levi was trying to demonstrate is that stroke and max RPM don't necessarily correlate. I.e. the S54 had a longer stroke than current BMW turbocharged motors, yet revv'd higher than they do.

The rumors I have heard that sound the most likely are that BMWs Valvetronic system can not keep pace past 7000 rpm (or perhaps 7000 + some safety factor). Of course Valvetronic is likely in the the next M3 but its successor could very well yield a faster responding system.

Valvetronic might be the most interesting unknown left at this point (assuming one is now convinced that the I6 will indeed be the engine layout - and I know that not everyone is yet). Remember, the S63 does not have Valvetronic, and while that clearly is a product of the fact that the engine it is based upon - the N63 - does not have Valvetronic, this does not mean that Valvetronic will necessarily be present on an threoretical "S55" just because the N55 uses it. After all, since M will likely use an entirely different turbo and induction strategy than the N55 for their engine, they could theoretically nix the Valvetronic system as well.

I'm guessing the new M3 will have a "compromise" redline of about 7,500. A compromise between the F10 M5 in the low 7k range and the existing S65 screamer at 8400.

That could be. Anyone's guess at this point. I don't really care too much one way or the other since this engine is not going to be all about high RPM power like the S65 and S54 are.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Piston speed could be one limiting factor and although not my own belief as to the most important limiting factor in future designs, it seemed to be the essence of the post I replied to.

The rumors I have heard that sound the most likely are that BMWs Valvetronic system can not keep pace past 7000 rpm (or perhaps 7000 + some safety factor). Of course Valvetronic is likely in the the next M3 but its successor could very well yield a faster responding system.

I'm guessing the new M3 will have a "compromise" redline of about 7,500. A compromise between the F10 M5 in the low 7k range and the existing S65 screamer at 8400.

I should've been more clear on the piston speed issue.

My point was that since the S54 went to 8000 rpm, the M version of the N55 would also be OK at that rpm, since it has a slightly shorter stroke.

In regard to Valvetronic, I assume that the M folks will want to use it, since it in theory improves fuel economy by reducing pumping losses. However, I admit that I have no clue in regard to this technology.

From my perspective, having a restriction at the valve is essentially no different than having a restriction at the throttle body, so obviously I'm missing something.

[-=Hot|Ice=-]

Originally Posted by AutoBlog Via BMW Blog

Production of the current E90 and E92 BMW 3 Series will come to an end for good in October, in preparation for next spring's launch of the all-new F30 3 Series. Before the gas models bow out, the oil-burning 335d will cease production in August.

The death of the current 3er makes room for a sleeker, less cluttered version of the car which clings closely to the more aggressive new BMW design language. Among the changes will be flatter kidney grilles as well as shorter overhangs, as well as a more muscular stance.

The new 3s will also get a bump in efficiency, with a range of turbocharged four- and six-cylinder mills, with the outside chance of a three-banger joining the lineup later on. The next M3 will ditch V8 power in favor of a twin-turbo inline-six sporting about 450 horsepower.

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/05/31/b...-model-coming/

3rd source.