Anyone else worried about the torque????

[ChinoOrtega]

I dont know much about cars but Ive had the past two m3's right know I have a e46 m3 and have had it for 6 years no problem, and I also went to M driving school in Spartanburg and placed a deposit on the new one, but I have to say torque is a big deal in sports cars but I saw the specs and the torque seems a bit low for a V8, can someone clarify if this is good or bad and how will it affect the performance, I am new posting but been reading them for a long time, I live in Guatemala and my dealer says I'll get the m3 around december, thanks everyone

[Hans Delbruck]

Whether you'll feel satisfied (or not) depends on what you're driving now IMO. I think the torque of the new V8 will be a nice improvement over the E36 & E46's 3.2l's.... The new V8 has more torque across the rev range.... there are people here that will get much more technical than I can, but it's a difference you should easily be able to feel! 2 more cylinders!

[The CSL]

I wouldn't worry about the torque when the engine is capable of revving as high as it does.

[paulyd]

this was discussed extensively at m3forum awhile back by many who have alot of technical expertise...

http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=155476

[2m3]

Originally Posted by ChinoOrtega

I dont know much about cars but Ive had the past two m3's right know I have a e46 m3 and have had it for 6 years no problem, and I also went to M driving school in Spartanburg and placed a deposit on the new one, but I have to say torque is a big deal in sports cars but I saw the specs and the torque seems a bit low for a V8, can someone clarify if this is good or bad and how will it affect the performance, I am new posting but been reading them for a long time, I live in Guatemala and my dealer says I'll get the m3 around december, thanks everyone

In short answer: The new engine has very wide power band, and its multiplied by short gearing. Peak number not impressive, but average torque is high

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by chitown08

this was discussed extensively at m3forum awhile back by many who have alot of technical expertise...

http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=155476

Indeed lots of good discussion and debate already on this point, here and in the post above. Just a couple of others: Torque comes from displacement not the cylinder count, period. High rpms come from extremely good engineering and design. One is easy to do the other is not. One is used to make ships and tanks, the other is for race cars. Again not saying at all that the new M3 is a race car ,but that is clearly the design direction and overall intent.

[13eastie]

I don't know enough about the competition to help with a comparison, but (casting my mind back to my university days) it's important to remember that ultimately the absolute acceleration is governed by the torque at the rear wheel, which is influenced by the transmission as well as the torque at the motor (and don't forget grip and the car's weight!).

Also I understand from the brochure that 80% of peak torque is delivered throughout the entire RPM range: this flat(ish) torque curve combined with high max. RPM and perhaps lower gear ratios theoretically allows more acceleration to be delivered from a lower torque at the motor.

In a nutshell, the torque at the motor is one of several factors to consider.

The number of factors makes it harder to compare cars, but if someone who knows a little about the competition could help with the mathematics, it would be very interesting to see some sort of comparison of torques at the wheels.

Meanwhile, I'm not going to worry too much about the torque stats just yet.

[cncmastr]

Originally Posted by 13eastie

I don't know enough about the competition to help with a comparison, but (casting my mind back to my university days) it's important to remember that ultimately the absolute acceleration is governed by the torque at the rear wheel, which is influenced by the transmission as well as the torque at the motor (and don't forget grip).

Also I understand from the brochure that 80% of peak torque is delivered throughout the entire RPM range: this flat(ish) torque curve combined with high max. RPM and perhaps lower gear ratios theoretically allows more acceleration to be delivered from a lower torque at the motor.

In a nutshell, the torque at the motor is one of several factors to consider.

The number of factors makes it harder to compare cars, but if someone who knows a little about the competition could help with the mathematics, it would be very interesting to see some sort of comparison of torques at the wheels.

Meanwhile, I'm not going to worry too much about the torque stats just yet.

Like Swamp said, there is a really good discussion on the "other" forum. It's defintely worth checking out.

[M3_2010]

Torque is always good.... However, to keep the weight down M3 is using high rev engine with relatively low torque (295 pretty good)....... The new M3 will be very very fast no matter how you look at it....... A big improvement over our current M3.

[2m3]

Originally Posted by M3_2010

Torque is always good.... However, to keep the weight down M3 is using high rev engine with relatively low torque (295 pretty good)....... The new M3 will be very very fast no matter how you look at it....... A big improvement over our current M3.

Actually, the new engine is using light weight components (less stress) to allow it rev very high.

[M3_2010]

Originally Posted by 2m3

Actually, the new engine is using light weight components (less stress) to allow it rev very high.

Correct. I meant that by using low torque engine the rest of the driveline can be engineered with lighter components as well...

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by 2m3

Actually, the new engine is using light weight components (less stress) to allow it rev very high.

In general lightweight components will have a higher level of stress and a lower factor of safety. However, low torque as posted above does allow some dirvetrain and other components to be lighter as they do not have to be as strong. Maybe that is what you meant but it did not come out that way...

[GregW / Oregon]

What has been touched on in several posts is that the S65 does not have a really high peak torque number (though ~300 lb ft is not bad), but it has 85% of that from 2,100 to 8,400 rpm--that's pretty amazing! The bottom line is that it's no S200 or RX8; you'll have torque everywhere in the power band. That will make it fast and enjoyable in daily use.

[JEllis]

Im not worried

Jason

[e36jakeo]

It will have plenty of usable torque for the 2K - 5K daily driving to feel quick and sporty, but not brutish (like a Z06 Corvette or AMG Merc). BMW traditionally gears 1st gear quite short, so it should be an excellent stop light racer as well. Should make plenty of grunt for doing tail out u-turns, too.

And then when you let it sing, it will make your jaw drop!

Can't wait!

[e36jakeo]

Originally Posted by GregW / Oregon

What has been touched on in several posts is that the S65 does not have a really high peak torque number (though ~300 lb ft is not bad), but it has 85% of that from 2,100 to 8,400 rpm--that's pretty amazing! The bottom line is that it's no S200 or RX8; you'll have torque everywhere in the power band. That will make it fast and enjoyable in daily use.

I have an S2000, and not only does it not make low end (2K-4K) torque, it also does not make any midrange torque, either (even with a supercharger).

So in 1st gear you need to be going 30 MPH before Vtec kicks in and it starts to really boogy. This hurts its DD fun factor. I can't even break the rear tires out at a right turn like I can on my less powerful E36 M3.

Torque rules in the world of daily driving.

But don't worry: 295 lb ft is PLENTY to have fun as a DD.

[2m3]

Originally Posted by swamp2

In general lightweight components will have a higher level of stress and a lower factor of safety. However, low torque as posted above does allow some dirvetrain and other components to be lighter as they do not have to be as strong. Maybe that is what you meant but it did not come out that way...

M3_2010 is not wrong..I know what he wants to say. Anyway, with oversquare design, short stroke will reduce stress, but torque will be lower.

This is my favorite subject to talk about and to learn. I can read, ask, and discuss on this subject over and over again

[2m3]

Any other naturally aspirated engine in the market that has wide torque band like this new M3 engine? I know this is M3 only discussion, but maybe it will be fun to compare.

maybe AMG 6.2 liter, but it is 2.2 liter more

[E90330iS]

I get your points in the flat torque distribution. However, the RS4 torque curve shares the same quality in the flat torque curve and was said to deliver rich overall torque but the test driver disagree...