BMW M Division CEO confirms next M3 will get turbo 6-cylinder engine

[SlammedR8]

Originally Posted by mapezzul

Good guess but not true based on everything I have ever been told.

The V8 was designed after the V10; the M5 was always to be a V10. The DME in the current M3 was also designed after the one in the V10 (hence the improvements); naming has nothing to do with when something was built/designed. Look at the new Z4- it is an E89, the F01 7 launched well before it; naming is not everything. The naming codes are established prior to productions or design.

The reason there is no DI in any of the ///M cars is simple: they can't get the DI motor to meet greenhouse gas emissions in the US, and there are secondary effects on the emissions systems (unless they FI it). The US is the largest market for ///M cars and that is the reason. The DME in the S65 is the most advanced (at launch) in any street driven vehicle. BMW ///M acknowledges the benefits to DI but the downfalls are greater in many cases (especially longevity). This was reconfirmed to me by those in the know last week- citing the the CTS-V, BMW says there will be more long term issues with that DI on those cars than not having the DI...

I love how people just make assumptions based on naming- the S65 also uses the spark plugs for engine computations (something they just transferred from Motorsport with the S65).

So no the S65 was not a shelved motor and was never intended for the ///M5, they share blood lines and design but it was not put to the side.

BMW does not care all that much about Audi, they care about BMW. Audi does not sell nearly as many performance models in terms of volume, and the Audis have always been nose heavy. BMW sets out to be more efficient and more powerful with each generation. The big plus with this motor was the weight savings. The concept of the cars are begun 5 years prior to the launch, with drivetrains going separate paths as well. And the RS4 is NOT even and ///M5 competitor; sounds like one of those urban legends to me.

They have made some serious breakthroughs over the past 2 years so when the next generation of motors is released it is going to be eye opening

AGREED with EVERYTHING you mentioned above

[footie]

Originally Posted by mapezzul

BMW does not care all that much about Audi, they care about BMW. Audi does not sell nearly as many performance models in terms of volume, and the Audis have always been nose heavy. BMW sets out to be more efficient and more powerful with each generation. The big plus with this motor was the weight savings. The concept of the cars are begun 5 years prior to the launch, with drivetrains going separate paths as well. And the RS4 is NOT even and ///M5 competitor; sounds like one of those urban legends to me.

They have made some serious breakthroughs over the past 2 years so when the next generation of motors is released it is going to be eye opening

I think is a little bit big headed (no offense) to believe that BMW don't care much about what Audi are doing. They very much care about what competitor brands are doing, if you wanted proof positive then look at not only the power output (both HP and torque) and price of the M3 compared to the RS4 and C63. They always have to look and gauge what their competition will be producing in another 3~5years minimum, but at the same time never loss focus on what makes an M car different to the others.

One thing I do agree with is that BMW outsell Audi in hi-performance models by many factors to one, especially the M3 which also outsells every other M cars by a similar amount. I can't say whether BMW's budget is bigger for the M3 than other M cars but it should be because it's the sole model where BMW really to excel over the competition is terms of sales. No M cars has to be more right and close to perfect than the M3, it's probably why it's development is so long from start to production line. And the next M3 will need to be even better in every way than this present one, the intro of not only a smaller engine but the inclusion of turbos will be a bitter pill for some to swallow and it will need to be as close to perfection as any turbo engine has ever been.

I also don't think that Audi have quite got the handling right for their previous RS models (saloons & estates), though they are still nose heavy the effect is nothing like as bad as the normal Audi models including the S versions but the new diff should help with this to a greater extent and I imagine that Quattro (Audi's M-Division) should be able to reign in the excesses of understeer through clever suspension tweaks, anyhow the R8 has shown that the skills are there to produce truly exciting drivers cars. I want to see how good the TT-RS is, this may be a fwd bias awd chassis but I think it will be better than most people believe could be possible from this kind of setup.

If the TT-RS does prove to be quicker than the M3 on the track, what would that mean to BMW M lovers, does it mean that Audi can produce a decent handling car without the constant remarks that the R8 is only a Gallardo with an Audi badge. What about the RS5, do we expect much of the same as before (i.e. understeer) or did the new chassis (MLP) all but squash it's effects but marketing requested a handling that was familiar to existing customers (something I hear mentioned by Audi PR on numerous occasions). Point being I don't think one can look at normal Audi products, even ones using the new platform and using this experience to build a picture of what future RS models will be like. The same thing could be applied to Mercedes and AMG products but here too we are seeing a shift from simply producing a high powered version of an ordinary car to now producing something that does compete with the equivalent M model.

P.S.

The RS4 was never nor never will be an M5 rival, like wise the RS5 will not be a rival to the M6. RS model have only one real advantage over an M model, that is exclusivity, you are less likely to see another in your time of ownership.

[mapezzul]

Originally Posted by footie

I think is a little bit big headed (no offense) to believe that BMW don't care much about what Audi are doing. They very much care about what competitor brands are doing, if you wanted proof positive then look at not only the power output (both HP and torque) and price of the M3 compared to the RS4 and C63. They always have to look and gauge what their competition will be producing in another 3~5years minimum, but at the same time never loss focus on what makes an M car different to the others.

I do not disagree with that except that the competition shoots to beat out the last generation of a BMW product (and they usually do) and BMW also shoots to beat out the last generation product as well, so in reality they are competing with their own product. Unless Audi or MB comes up with some huge break through BMW has no need (and from what I am told) does not care about what they are doing since they are playing catch up. BMW begins designing/developing the next platform a year or two after the previous is released, so they usually design things well before the next MB or Audi has been even spied or speculated about. There is also a huge BMW push to develop more of the items in house rather than 3rd party because of "leaks" (more "M" developed items in regualr production models); many of the latest Audi projects are compliments of Bertrandt if my memory serves me correctly.


And while the R8 is a huge step for Audi, it overcomes many of the short coming of the Audi FWD architecture by placing the engine mid and also biasing the AWD mostly rear. They can't do this with a regular sedan. I will say that the new Quattro and weight balancing they are doing is helping a great deal and the performance of a the latest models vs. even a 2-3 year old model is immensely improved.

Having had my fair share of Audis I can say that what will always keep Audi down is the fact drive trains will always be shared across model line platforms (VW/Skoda/Seat/etc.)and this prevents true drivers cars. When they build a Quattro gmbh platform from the start and use that as a standard model, then we will have some honest competition, until then BMW and MB will have the advantage, but will also suffer from the lack of economies of scale...

[footie]

Originally Posted by mapezzul

I do not disagree with that except that the competition shoots to beat out the last generation of a BMW product (and they usually do) and BMW also shoots to beat out the last generation product as well, so in reality they are competing with their own product. Unless Audi or MB comes up with some huge break through BMW has no need (and from what I am told) does not care about what they are doing since they are playing catch up. BMW begins designing/developing the next platform a year or two after the previous is released, so they usually design things well before the next MB or Audi has been even spied or speculated about. There is also a huge BMW push to develop more of the items in house rather than 3rd party because of "leaks" (more "M" developed items in regualr production models); many of the latest Audi projects are compliments of Bertrandt if my memory serves me correctly.

There is no doubt that both Mercedes and Audi have been playing catch up on previous M3s, less so on the rest of the M cars but definitely witht the M3 which makes me think that the M3 gets to bigest share of the budget and rightly so. I don't happen to agree that the present M3 has moved the goal posts as far as it previously did, especially against the RS4 which was an older design and actually developed around the same time as the E46 (chassis wise).

Most of the benefits that BMW enjoy over Audi is driver feel and involvement, the benefits in outright track time is smaller and the margin of dry weather advantage is not as great for BMW as is wet weather advantage for Quattro cars. So while the M3 does have an advantage in lap times over the RS4 and C63, this dramatically reverses when the weather worsens. I don't see a likelihood of Audi developing a chassis solely for RS models any more than I see BMW doing something similar. I have heard rumours that the MLP platform isn't finished yet and the engine will be moved even further back which would improve the balance and feel even more but this is still probably 5~6 years away.

A bit OT, the next A6 I believe has a development of the TT's alloy/steel platform which will not only reduce the weight below the competition but should allow Audi's engineers to shift the overall weight to be equal between the two axles and this is to be the norm for all future Audi's based on the MLP platform. If true then it will be BMW and Mercedes playing catch up and not Audi.

Originally Posted by mapezzul

And while the R8 is a huge step for Audi, it overcomes many of the short coming of the Audi FWD architecture by placing the engine mid and also biasing the AWD mostly rear. They can't do this with a regular sedan. I will say that the new Quattro and weight balancing they are doing is helping a great deal and the performance of a the latest models vs. even a 2-3 year old model is immensely improved.

The R8 isn't a re-badged Gallardo, in many ways it's superior, not only through it's handling but also refinement and quality. The Gallardo offers a very extreme driving experience that while still very accomplished compared to the F430 over difficult road conditions it's not as good as the R8 which can cope better with bumps, fills you with even more confidence to push harder and yet being down on power and weighing more still is capable of lapping the quicker.

Originally Posted by mapezzul

Having had my fair share of Audis I can say that what will always keep Audi down is the fact drive trains will always be shared across model line platforms (VW/Skoda/Seat/etc.)and this prevents true drivers cars. When they build a Quattro gmbh platform from the start and use that as a standard model, then we will have some honest competition, until then BMW and MB will have the advantage, but will also suffer from the lack of economies of scale...

Blame Piech for the platform and drivetrain sharing, though this will become less and less now that Porsche is under the wing. I imagine Audi and Porsche will be sharing more and more helping both brands to distance themselves from VW and the others. Though in fairness the engine sharing will probably increase due to the 4cyl engine applications increasing throughout brands, BMW and Mercedes will and are coping this policy. I see 4cyl engines doing most of the future work in cars with possibly 5 or 6 cyl engines doing most of the hi-performance work. I can't imagine the TT-RS engine only seeing service in one model, this engine will probably be seen in future A,S and RS models because it's output scope ranging from a modest 150hp in non turbo form all the way up to 400hp.

[swamp2]

Does every thread you're in foot, have to deteriorate into a X vs. Audi debate? I do like a lot of brands myself but this is an M forum after all...

[footie]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Does every thread you're in foot, have to deteriorate into a X vs. Audi debate? I do like a lot of brands myself but this is an M forum after all...

No swamp,

It was mapezzul who first brought up the subject of Audi in this latest twist to the thread and I was only addressing his comments on a subject I know a bit more about.

Sorry if my comments looked to be Audi fanboy stuff because that wasn't me intention. I was only highlighting that no company has that big of an advantage to totally disregard what their rivals are doing.

[Xelloss]

Originally Posted by BMWPower06

E46 M3 GTR came in V8 but it was a very limited production run. IMO the E46 M3 will be more of a keeper than the E92 V8. The E46 M3 straight six is without a doubt the best 6 cylinder to ever grace this earth and it was the last NA 6 M3 (probably)

That's why I still keep mine. If BMW goes the V6 route, they are dead to me. Naturally balanced and smooth engines are a fundamental value of BMW and would go against their philosophy of automotive engineering by switching to a V6 power plant; No matter how good it is designed, an inline 6 afforded the same resources would always be better. Even if a BMW M V6 car is superb, they should go that little extra step to uphold their design criteria they currently uphold since designing and manufacturing cars. I know in the end BMW's main objective is to make money, but there should be heart and integrity in what one does. There seems to be less "soul" and "passion" in each new iteration and that cold and mechanical feeling ever increasing. Going such a way is akin to a volume automobile manufacturer and last I remember, BMW was in the luxury segment. I never liked Porsche but it seems they may be the last manufacturer to produce an automobile for purist that people can affordably attain should BMW sell out. At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if they go V6 since M division has backed out on their statement in an interview I read from a year or two ago regarding no current or future plans for an M SUV as conflict of M's design philosophy. On a side note, I find the design for the new M SUV to be mediocre at best and indeed failing to capture that aggressiveness matched with subtlety that M cars, with the E39 M5 being the quintessential example of this and also being one of my favorite M cars if not the most favorite. The normal X vehicles in my opinion look better than their M counterparts. As it goes, and for those for those who desire it, we'll probably see the fabled and unwarranted M7 and an M derivative for the entire BMW line like Mercedes has done with AMG. It pretty much has already happened and my adoration and fanboism since I was a child for BMW continues to precipitously diminish with each "new direction" BMW takes. I could not part with my E46 M3 due to the emotional attachment I have developed for it, the experiences we have endured and will probably not part with it for years to come. I have supported, in my mind, many controversial decisions and was even a fan of some of them such as the new BMW design language pioneered by Chris Bangle, which has infected into the design of its competitors, the X3, the 1 coupe which was initially faced by a good many of the auto industry with hostility, and the depressing cancellation of the E92 M3 CSL. I'm sure with time, the new E92 M3 community and especially those that were newly christened to BMW via the E92 M3 will share the same sentiment I do now if or when a V6 M3 beast is born. I guess my zealous nature can be attributed to my experiences as a former engineer and a man who enjoys the arts and applies their principles from such disciplines to what should be the "Ultimate Driving Machine."


To each their own.

[mapezzul]

Originally Posted by footie

No swamp,

It was mapezzul who first brought up the subject of Audi in this latest twist to the thread and I was only addressing his comments on a subject I know a bit more about.

Sorry if my comments looked to be Audi fanboy stuff because that wasn't me intention. I was only highlighting that no company has that big of an advantage to totally disregard what their rivals are doing.

HA, it was not me! Someone else stated BMW designed the S65 b/c of the RS4 and that was not the truth, especially in engineering!

[footie]

Originally Posted by mapezzul

HA, it was not me! Someone else stated BMW designed the S65 b/c of the RS4 and that was not the truth, especially in engineering!

Sorry about that, I only read your post and not the one your were replying to.

Though to be fair the similarities between the RS4 outputs, capacity, rev ranges, one could interrupted this as BMW following Audi's lead but I reckon it was decided that no longer would the 3.2L inline6 cut it without going to turbos. So I suppose the logical step was to go V8 as BMW like to stick around the 500cc per cylinder, my only guess is the actual output figures were probably chosen to mimic the RS4 because no more would be needed to stay ahead of the competition.

I imagine at the time the M3's output figure was decided on the CSL was still very much in the picture and better to leave a little in reserve for that model, only worldwide events decided it's fate.

[Robo Squirrel]

i hope to god its inline...v6 would just not be very BMW-like

[positiveions]

though i am against BMW using a V configuration, but it is interesting to wait and see what will happen

[GregW / Oregon]

From the latest Car & Driver (June, p. 26):

2015: The next M3 will be the "best" M3 ever and faster than today's car, said Willisch [M Division head]. Work on the future M3 hasn't begun, but an inline-six and a V-6 are both being considered. Expect E30-like levels of mayhem."

[RandyB]

At this point, I would guess the next powerplant will be a 3.0-3.2 liter reverse-flow twin turbo V6.

[mkoesel]

Had some more thoughts on this.

I strongly, strongly believe that the M3 motor will be based upon the series equivalent just like the new S63 V8 in the X5/X6 (not to mention upcoming F10 M5) is based upon the N63 V8. Otherwise it will cost more than just using an I6 or detuned V8, even, IMHO, if you figure in the additional engineering needed to offset the slightly heavier weight a V8 would carry or offset the packaging disadvantages an I6 has. Plus a V6 would have the same advantages in any BMW as it would an M3 as well.

So, if the M3 gets a V6, so will the 3 series, and every other 6 cylinder BMW for that matter. In other words it will also mean the death of the N52, N53, and N54 and it will be time to kiss the legendary BMW I6 goodbye. IMHO, of course, but I would be very surprised if this is not all on the table. In other words when they say "the M3 might get a V6" they are really saying that "we might switch our entire engine strategy to V6", just as Mercedes did years back.

[ruff]

In honor of my man, Sir T Bone:

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/e60...ath-bmw-m.html

[mapezzul]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Had some more thoughts on this.

I strongly, strongly believe that the M3 motor will be based upon the series equivalent just like the new S63 V8 in the X5/X6 (not to mention upcoming F10 M5) is based upon the N63 V8. Otherwise it will cost more than just using an I6 or detuned V8, even, IMHO, if you figure in the additional engineering needed to offset the slightly heavier weight a V8 would carry or offset the packaging disadvantages an I6 has. Plus a V6 would have the same advantages in any BMW as it would an M3 as well.

So, if the M3 gets a V6, so will the 3 series, and every other 6 cylinder BMW for that matter. In other words it will also mean the death of the N52, N53, and N54 and it will be time to kiss the legendary BMW I6 goodbye. IMHO, of course, but I would be very surprised if this is not all on the table. In other words when they say "the M3 might get a V6" they are really saying that "we might switch our entire engine strategy to V6", just as Mercedes did years back.

How do you figure? The current ///M3 motor is ONLY used in the current ///M3, it is not used in any other vehicle; so why can't they do the same in the future? The V8 also weighs less than the I6 it replaced, they could have made it lighter as well if they chose to.

The future for the 1,3,5 series is in 3 and 4 cylinder motors; they are already prototyping many of them. The 4 cylinder may be here even sooner than you think as it began design earlier, and the N52 will be history when that happens, they can get the same output with greater efficiency and no negligible performance. The N54 should be tweaked in the not so distant future (I will go into this further at a later date) and will also end production with the end of the current model spans. When the X1 and 5er GT launch at the end of June I would not be surprised to see some new items in them.

Nothing for the M3 or the future models has been written in stone, they are trying to be as flexible as possible and are fearful of future legislation.

The 7er hybrid will debut an electric motor as a "booster" to increase performance and slightly improve efficiency. The idea is to use the electric motor in series to act like additional cylinders and have increased amounts of torque from a smaller displacement motor. It will be unable to run on electric power solely. This concept is almost like the idea of KERS but for continuous operation.... so if you apply this concept to a smaller lower displacement motor you could effectively make it an I-6 rather than an I-3.... so on and so forth.

I also believe the next ///M3 motor has great possibility of being a reverse flow V6 with a CCM (though it will only be able to provide a pulse every 120 degrees rather than 90 in the V8) but I am fairly certain the V6 will not be in other models.

At this point even though we have good information that certain things are happening, none of it may ever be green lighted as things continue to change and evolve (including brands cooperating).


-M

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by mapezzul

How do you figure? The current ///M3 motor is ONLY used in the current ///M3, it is not used in any other vehicle; so why can't they do the same in the future? The V8 also weighs less than the I6 it replaced, they could have made it lighter as well if they chose to.

The future for the 1,3,5 series is in 3 and 4 cylinder motors; they are already prototyping many of them. The 4 cylinder may be here even sooner than you think as it began design earlier, and the N52 will be history when that happens, they can get the same output with greater efficiency and no negligible performance. The N54 should be tweaked in the not so distant future (I will go into this further at a later date) and will also end production with the end of the current model spans. When the X1 and 5er GT launch at the end of June I would not be surprised to see some new items in them.

Nothing for the M3 or the future models has been written in stone, they are trying to be as flexible as possible and are fearful of future legislation.

The 7er hybrid will debut an electric motor as a "booster" to increase performance and slightly improve efficiency. The idea is to use the electric motor in series to act like additional cylinders and have increased amounts of torque from a smaller displacement motor. It will be unable to run on electric power solely. This concept is almost like the idea of KERS but for continuous operation.... so if you apply this concept to a smaller lower displacement motor you could effectively make it an I-6 rather than an I-3.... so on and so forth.

I also believe the next ///M3 motor has great possibility of being a reverse flow V6 with a CCM (though it will only be able to provide a pulse every 120 degrees rather than 90 in the V8) but I am fairly certain the V6 will not be in other models.

At this point even though we have good information that certain things are happening, none of it may ever be green lighted as things continue to change and evolve (including brands cooperating).

It is very much conjecture at this point, but I think keeping a V8 is a very slim shot. If they can get at least 400 lbs out, a competent six could be great. I am not a turbo fan, but I must say I have virtually no experience with them (drove a few Merkur Hertz rentals!). I do like the high reving NA powerplant, and if we lose that in the Ms, I think it will be a real shame.

[swamp2]

Wow, I would have thought the whining would not have started so soon. Whining certainly, but not this soon. This crazy process happens with every generation of Ms and it is just about exactly the same every time. Everyone gets their panties in a bunch very early (but again not typically quite this early...) and so many simply resist the inevitable - change. Each time BMW M produces an overall better and faster car that also looks better. Eventually the vast majority of those who had such "grave concerns" are completely turned around after the car astonishes the international motoring press.

Even Ferrari has said they must stop the new "hp war" and refocus on getting performance from lower weight. BMW has said the same. If BMW is serious about this, which I believe they are, the next generation car will probably be lighter than the existing one. This is a great direction that M purists should be very excited about. Every element of the car will harmoniously progress, engine, suspension, handling, electronics/telematics, braking (possibly KERS ), aesthetics, etc., etc. The big change this time is that emissions and efficiency are going to take a nice big jump along with all the other things that get improved. Come on folks, being green - even in sports cars - and hell even in racing, is morally required. The resulting car will be uniquely BMW, uniquely M and certainly worthy of the M3 badge. The car will eclipse all prior M3s in all important performance metrics.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by mapezzul

How do you figure? The current ///M3 motor is ONLY used in the current ///M3, it is not used in any other vehicle; so why can't they do the same in the future? The V8 also weighs less than the I6 it replaced, they could have made it lighter as well if they chose to.

Its not that they can't. But I just think they won't. Clearly (if rumors hold, which I think they will, and I'll bet you do too) they are going a different route for the M5 this generation - using a motor based on an existing series motor. So I don't see the M3 being spared from this convergence either. Thus, the M3 motor will likely be based on the corporate 6 cylinder. Whether that's a V6 or I6 is not yet known.

The future for the 1,3,5 series is in 3 and 4 cylinder motors; they are already prototyping many of them.

Yep, I've seen that report too, but surely there will still be a 6 cylinder. In fact, the theoretical V6 could easily share an architecture with the I3. Maybe the 6 doesn't go in the 1 series. Maybe not even the 3 series (though I personally think it will). But surely the 5/6 will still have a 6 cylinder, and likely the 7 will too. And the X models. And probably the Z4 too.

Nothing for the M3 or the future models has been written in stone, they are trying to be as flexible as possible and are fearful of future legislation.

Fearful of legislation indeed. Also clearly (and rightfully so) eager to save development costs as witnessed by the the N63->S63 now that the high revving M motor has been killed by said legislation. Sure, they could have designed an all new turbo M-specific motor that was more efficient than the V10. Perhaps even a turbo charged S65. Makes sense in principle given the S65 roots. But they didn't do that because it doesn't make financial sense when the N63 is already there to start with. Similarly, I don't see them developing a V6 for the M3 unless there is already a series V6 in development on whch to base it.

I also believe the next ///M3 motor has great possibility of being a reverse flow V6 with a CCM (though it will only be able to provide a pulse every 120 degrees rather than 90 in the V8) but I am fairly certain the V6 will not be in other models.

Could be. We'll have to wait and see. Like you said yourself, nothing is set in stone yet. I just don't see the M-specific engine strategy surviving the current generation.

[footie]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Yep, I've seen that report too, but surely there will still be a 6 cylinder. In fact, the theoretical V6 could easily share an architecture with the I3. Maybe the 6 doesn't go in the 1 series. Maybe not even the 3 series (though I personally think it will). But surely the 5/6 will still have a 6 cylinder, and likely the 7 will too. And the X models. And probably the Z4 too.

Sound reasoning that I happen to agree with. I too believe that the new M3 engine will be v6 and ever since the news broke about the inline3 I considered the idea of this engine forming the basis of a v6, this is nothing new to manufacturers, VAG have done it, in fact the TT-RS inline5 is based on half of the RS6 v10 and the first M3 to use a inline6 was in fact half of the Mclaren F1.

I doubt you will see anything bigger than the 4 cylinder in the 1 & 3 series (long term) but the 5, 6, 7, X5 & X6 I bet will using a simplified version of the M3 engine in much the same way as the M5, X5/6M use a version of the one currently seen in the X5/6 50i.

[Jake C]

Reading this month's Roundel I think it's interesting that the new M3 will have less HP than the 414HP currently offered. So less weight and less HP.

- J

[e46e92love]

If its not high-revving, it ain't an //M to me. The high revving engines is a big part of what turned my liking of //Ms into an obsession. I never considered myself a porsche guy; never owned one and never really lusted after one (except for the GT3). But if they are the only ones left making high-revving engines under 200k, well I guess I will become a Porsche guy.

I don't mind FI as long as they they don't dump the high-revving characteristics. If they dump that, I dump ever buying an //M again.

Cheers,
e46e92