Close

    • AutoBild claims to have the 2014 BMW F82 M4 specifications - Lightweight emphasis, twin turbo S55 3.0 liter inline-6, 7800 rpm, 416 horsepower

      Things are getting interesting. So those reports of the BMW F82 M4 having 444 horsepower that had fanboys complaining? It is looking like it will have even less than that out of the gate with a claimed 416 horsepower. Please do not throw anything at your monitor. BMW is having fun charging twice for horsepower these days with "Performance" software swaps so it is basically a certainty that just like the M5/M6 the M3/M4 will have a Competition Package that should boost output above the 444 horse figure reported earlier with a claimed 35 horse gain from the package.


      Horsepower is one part of the equation and not the be all end all. What is interesting is that the redline is claimed to be 7800 rpm. That is pretty good and the highest redline of any BMW production turbocharged motor. It is not E46 M3 S54 8000 rpm good, or E92 M3 S65 V8 8400 rpm good, or E60 M5 8250 rpm good, but it's good and better than expected if true. Keep in mind spy shots of the tach captured by BimmerBoost members have shown a lower redline.

      The F10 M5 and F12/F13 M6 need their horsepower and torque to move their huge asses, especially the M5 which is a fat pig. An emphasis on lighter weight is exactly what BMW needs. Frankly, it's long overdue but clearly BMW is responding to the warranted criticism. It is difficult to claim to be Efficient and Dynamic when the cars outweigh the competition.

      If what AutoBild reports is true then the M4 will weigh 100 kilograms less than the standard 4-Series. That would mean a curb weight in the ~3300 pound range. It sounds almost too good to be true but with optional ceramic brakes and various lightweight body pieces they may hit that weight. That would make this the lightest M3 (shut up Bimmerboost knows they are calling it an M4) since the E36. Now that is something to be proud of. It also makes the F80 and F82 chassis designations versus the F30 for the 3-Series and the F32 for the 4-Series suddenly make sense if the construction materials differ greatly.

      Other options other than the ceramic brakes and competition package include a valved exhaust system and 20 inch wheels. Oh, and a 6-speed manual option of course. The 7-speed DCT will not be forced on you (as it should not be in a drivers car).

      This is much, much better than anticipated if accurate. It seems BMW is finally responding to the criticism of fat cars that no longer offer the best driving experience in their class. It is a certainty that the new W205 C63 AMG will outpower this car with its 4.0 liter twin turbo V8 but if the new M3 is significantly lighter it will not need as much power to compensate while at the same time running circles around the C63 AMG on the roadcourse.

      Limp mode issues will still be a concern with the turbo motor on the track and we will have to just wait and see how it holds up in a racetrack environment.

      BMW and M are certainly not back as that once special M shine and swagger will forever be diminished but this is at the very least (once again, providing it is accurate) a step back in the right direction after quite a long string of BMW and M disappointments. Let's all keep our fingers crossed.

      This article was originally published in forum thread: AutoBild - BMW M4 specs started by BlackJetE90OC View original post
      Comments 103 Comments
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
        Twin scroll actually describes the turbine wheel on the turbo, it means there are two separate inlets for the turbine that press on usually slightly different turbine wheels. That allows for better spooling at low RPM with no boost penalty.
        I'm quite familiar with what twin scroll means you missed my point that stating a car is twin turbo does not specify what type of turbochargers it is using only that it is using two turbochargers. So by saying twin turbo it does not mean they are not twin scroll.

        If you want some reading on the benefits of the extra exhaust pulses: http://www.bimmerboost.com/content.p...and-S63-motors
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bigdnno98 Click here to enlarge
        how are you going to have 2 twin scroll turbos? there are only 6 exhaust ports. each turbo is going to get 3. twin scroll takes the exhaust gasses and sends them through a divided housing, one port is for quick response and the other is for top end. how are you going to divide 3 exhaust ports into 2 ports for the turbine housing? Yes the N63 does have 2 twin scroll turbos but..... it can divide the 4 exhaust ports on each side evenly, 2 per port in the turbine housing. runners for the smaller port are probably short in order to create higher velocity gasses to spool the turbo faster while the other runners are probably longer will less angle promoting better top end. bottom line is the S55 will not be twin-twin scroll. @VargasTurboTech please correct me if i'm way off here.
        BMW worked their manifold magic with the V8 although it makes more sense with that setup, yes. BMW is hyping the twin scroll stuff let's jut wait and see what they do with the manifold design.

        Also, it's the S63 that has the twin scroll turbos not the N63.
      1. bigdnno98's Avatar
        bigdnno98 -
        ah, ok. i thought they both had twin-twin scroll turbos actually. the N63TU doesn't?

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        BMW worked their manifold magic with the V8 although it makes more sense with that setup, yes. BMW is hyping the twin scroll stuff let's jut wait and see what they do with the manifold design.

        Also, it's the S63 that has the twin scroll turbos not the N63.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bigdnno98 Click here to enlarge
        ah, ok. i thought they both had twin-twin scroll turbos actually. the N63TU doesn't?
        No the S63 advantage is its trick manifold and turbos. Everything else is basically the same between the motors.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by MisterEm Click here to enlarge
        You missed the main point and it is not fuel efficiency nor peak HP. A loss of 220 lbs over the 4 series variant (if true) is a major improvement and is "///M philosophy" to a T. Shave 220 lbs from your E9X M3 or E46 M3 and change NOTHING else - and it will transform the driving dynamics of the car - acceleration, handling, turn-in and braking.

        Secondly, the throttle response component you mention is mere speculation. I doubt the difference in responsiveness between the outgoing powerplant and the new one is the chasm you implied. The motor will be less responsive than the N/A V8 no doubt - but not on par with the turbo-lag conspiracy I have been hearing from E9X owners. If we use the current turbo charged motors in the fleet as a comparison - F30 328, 335, and the 328d - we should be expecting slightly better responsiveness to merit the M badge.

        I want to see the final weight of the sedan, and a stock dyno plot (particularly the torque curve) before I cast final judgement and a deposit.
        Exactly with less weight everything improves. How does adding horsepower improve braking or handling? Less weight will also mean the car won't get overwhelmed quite as fast.
      1. maxnix's Avatar
        maxnix -
        Amazing that 416HP and 400 ft. lb. of torque from a 4L I6 is deemed "not enough."
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by maxnix Click here to enlarge
        Amazing that 416HP and 400 ft. lb. of torque from a 4L I6 is deemed "not enough."
        3.0 liter.

        I find that amusing with the fanboys attacking the S65 V8 for a perceived lack of power.
      1. whoosh's Avatar
        whoosh -
        I was thinking of that when I posted earlier.

        415hp from 3.0l is actually quite impressive for a stock motor. Even better to get 450hp with the power pack if you want to shell out the cash for OEM tune.

        How it stacks up to the competition will need to be seen. If the weight is truly down as low as they speculate, this car will be quite impressive even against the higher power competitors. I have a hard time believing this thing is 33xx even unladen.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by whoosh Click here to enlarge
        I have a hard time believing this thing is 33xx even unladen.
        Same here.
      1. Group.america's Avatar
        Group.america -
        3300 lb unladen... love how we have gone from laden weight specs 10 years ago to unladen ... so with a tank of gas, me, my dog and stuff and a lightweight broad this thing will be 3900 lbs
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Group.america Click here to enlarge
        3300 lb unladen... love how we have gone from laden weight specs 10 years ago to unladen ... so with a tank of gas, me, my dog and stuff and a lightweight broad this thing will be 3900 lbs
        Laden specs make no sense. Why count variables? The car doesn't change in weight but your broad does.
      1. whoosh's Avatar
        whoosh -
        Leave the dog and stuff at home, and why are you ever letting your broad out of the kitchen?
      1. BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
        BlackJetE90OC -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Laden specs make no sense. Why count variables? The car doesn't change in weight but your broad does.
        Exactly. This were a lot of the confusion is going to come. People will go on BMWUSA and quote the unladen E92 M3 weight of 3,700 lbs and think oh the new M4 is so much lighter. In actuality when you put the E92 on scales it is much lighter. BMW is going to continue to play games with weight figures in all marketing up until its debut in Detroit. Flaunting weight figures left and right. It all started with the rumor of near E46 M3 weight.

        Funny thing is you can go on BMWUSA right now, the 435i weighs more than the E92 335i.
      1. BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
        BlackJetE90OC -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Group.america Click here to enlarge
        3300 lb unladen... love how we have gone from laden weight specs 10 years ago to unladen ... so with a tank of gas, me, my dog and stuff and a lightweight broad this thing will be 3900 lbs
        Add to that, they are using a weight from a fully optioned M4. Carbon fiber seats, carbon ceramic brakes, etc...

        The seats won't even make it to the US.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BlackJetE90OC Click here to enlarge
        People will go on BMWUSA and quote the unladen E92 M3 weight of 3,700 lbs and think oh the new M4 is so much lighter. In actuality when you put the E92 on scales it is much lighter
        This is where the misconception the E92 is heavy comes from and trying to explain it to people is almost impossible. I just accept them as stupid and move on.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BlackJetE90OC Click here to enlarge
        Add to that, they are using a weight from a fully optioned M4. Carbon fiber seats, carbon ceramic brakes, etc...

        The seats won't even make it to the US.
        Good point on the seats. The seats never make it...
      1. Mike@VAC's Avatar
        Mike@VAC -
        Click here to enlarge

        Click here to enlarge

        3855 (our cheater car - lol)

        Subtract 235lb driver = 3,625. Car had VF620, Brembos, 2 Racetech seats, pictured wheels/tires - otherwise stock.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BlackJetE90OC Click here to enlarge
        Exactly. This were a lot of the confusion is going to come. People will go on BMWUSA and quote the unladen E92 M3 weight of 3,700 lbs and think oh the new M4 is so much lighter. In actuality when you put the E92 on scales it is much lighter.
      1. KB's Avatar
        KB -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Laden specs make no sense. Why count variables? The car doesn't change in weight but your broad does.
        I agree...its $#@!ing stupid adding weight for driver and luggage. Who the $#@! drives around with luggage? Just weigh the $#@!ing car...I could see requiring a certain amount of gas but that's it.
      1. KB's Avatar
        KB -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Good point on the seats. The seats never make it...
        Which is bull$#@!!
      1. timore's Avatar
        timore -
        Were talking 415hp to the crank, right? So -15% for drivetrain loss. Thats around 352 to the wheels. Not impressed...