Close

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 252
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BlackJetE90OC Click here to enlarge
    Yeah the 9k redline on the 991 GT3 is just insane, especially in a everyday production car.
    Don't RX8 and earlier Honda S2000 have 9,000RPM redlines? Click here to enlarge

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BlackJetE90OC Click here to enlarge
    8,400 sure is fun thoughClick here to enlarge
    I agree, my VG30DETT will be 9,000 RPM with solid lifter setup and a special port job.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Yeah with little baby bores. People would complain of lag these days. Plus the dual vanos and valvetronic and direct injection will create a torque curve the RB motors can only dream of.

    The R35 doesn't rev much higher either because it doesnt need to. Unless you are shooting 1,000WHP+. Click here to enlarge

    This is one of those motors that would be awesome to have, but suck to build.

    I'll stick to building my easy VG30dett for now. I swear eventually it will be done and I will post here!
    What do the bores have to do with anything and this isn't much bigger?

    The R35 isn't an inline-6 and not what I'm referring to.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Ferrari also with their 458. I remember when you were saying direct injection couldn't be used with high-rev motors! (Just giving you hard time, I prefer port injection as well for ease of use and valve cleaning)
    It's not that it can't be used it's that the time to inject fuel gets smaller and requires immense pressure. You can do it at their stock power levels but as you add power then what?

    The N54 is struggling at a lower RPM with fuel. This car will have fuel issues too.

    The S54 and S65 do not while revving higher.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Don't RX8 and earlier Honda S2000 have 9,000RPM redlines? Click here to enlarge
    The RX8 is a rotory and the S2000 isn't direct injected. What Porsche, Ferrari, Audi, and Lamborghini are doing with revs and direct injection blows anything BMW has done anyway.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    The RX8 is a rotory and the S2000 isn't direct injected. What Porsche, Ferrari, Audi, and Lamborghini are doing with revs and direct injection blows anything BMW has done anyway.
    And also priced much higher!

    I'm sure BMW could build some 16,000RPM DI Super V12..... But how many people are going to buy a $2.2million M car?

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    The RX8 is a rotory and the S2000 isn't direct injected. What Porsche, Ferrari, Audi, and Lamborghini are doing with revs and direct injection blows anything BMW has done anyway.
    I was just poking fun at his post.

    I feel the Direct injection deal is more of a cost issue... the higher end car companies can afford to do it with high revs because they charge good money for the car and have a customer base that will appreciate it.

    9,000RPM stock has been achieved before and they are all good cars!

    Except the "Type_R" Civic/Integra crap.... (not saying they can't be fast)

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    And also priced much higher!

    I'm sure BMW could build some 16,000RPM DI Super V12..... But how many people are going to buy a $2.2million M car?
    BMW managed to rev high before at a lower price point didn't they? Didn't they rev higher than a Gallardo priced at what again? So... your point is what?

    Revs = $? Yeah the S2000 sure proved that.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    What do the bores have to do with anything and this isn't much bigger?

    The R35 isn't an inline-6 and not what I'm referring to.
    The piston size and stroke have everything to do with the RPM ability, and how torque will come on. RB25/26 didn't care as much about fuel efficiency, emissions and lag.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    I was just poking fun at his post.

    I feel the Direct injection deal is more of a cost issue... the higher end car companies can afford to do it with high revs because they charge good money for the car and have a customer base that will appreciate it.

    9,000RPM stock has been achieved before and they are all good cars!

    Except the "Type_R" Civic/Integra crap.... (not saying they can't be fast)
    Sorry I just blew your point to pieces with my above post.

    Why you call the Integra or Honda motors crap I have no clue.

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    BMW managed to rev high before at a lower price point didn't they? Didn't they rev higher than a Gallardo priced at what again? So... your point is what?

    Revs = $? Yeah the S2000 sure proved that.
    Honda had excellent value engineering at that time. That is why there is a well deserved cult behind S2k. Click here to enlarge

    Plus low mass 2.0L I4 is easier to rev than a Dual-vanos, variable intake valve lift Direct inject 3.0L Inline six.

    Even for their 2.2L they had to drop redline to 8500RPM.

    This new BMW motor would need laggier turbos to support the CFM flow of say 550hp at 8500RPM. Not to mention possibly costlier DI, VANOS and Valvetronic components.

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    The piston size and stroke have everything to do with the RPM ability, and how torque will come on. RB25/26 didn't care as much about fuel efficiency, emissions and lag.
    You mentioned bore size and you're way off. The issue with RPM ability on an inline-6 as I specifically mentioned-6 in regards to vibration is due to the camshaft length in an inline-6. The R35 GTR being a V6 is not the correct analogy as the RB26DETT makes much more sense to look at in relation to revs.

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Sorry I just blew your point to pieces with my above post.

    Why you call the Integra or Honda motors crap I have no clue.
    Not the motors Sticky, the cars.

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Honda had excellent value engineering at that time. That is why there is a well deserved cult behind S2k. Click here to enlarge

    Plus low mass 2.0L I4 is easier to rev than a Dual-vanos, variable intake valve lift Direct inject 3.0L Inline six.

    Even for their 2.2L they had to drop redline to 8500RPM.

    This new BMW motor would need laggier turbos to support the CFM flow of say 550hp at 8500RPM. Not to mention possibly costlier DI, VANOS and Valvetronic components.
    So you explain the S85 V10 how again? The S54 again how? The S65 again how? Why aren't these costing 2.2 million?

    Valvetronic isn't costlier it's on the freaking N52. It makes the valvetrain heavier though.

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Not the motors Sticky, the cars.
    Pretty sure we're discussing motors.

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    You mentioned bore size and you're way off. The issue with RPM ability on an inline-6 as I specifically mentioned-6 in regards to vibration is due to the camshaft length in an inline-6. The R35 GTR being a V6 is not the correct analogy as the RB26DETT makes much more sense to look at in relation to revs.
    Once again:

    Plus low mass 2.0L I4 is easier to rev than a Dual-vanos, variable intake valve lift Direct inject 3.0L Inline six.

    Even for their 2.2L they had to drop redline to 8500RPM.

    This new BMW motor would need laggier turbos to support the CFM flow of say 550hp at 8500RPM. Not to mention possibly costlier DI, VANOS and Valvetronic components.

    I bet you that if the RB26 had come with the bores large enough to displace 3.0L, it would NOT have as high as a redline.

    Why didn't the 2JZ rev to 8K RPM stock? It makes GREAT power!

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    So you explain the S85 V10 how again? The S54 again how? The S65 again how? Why aren't these costing 2.2 million?

    Valvetronic isn't costlier it's on the freaking N52. It makes the valvetrain heavier though.

    I think you just answered your own question.

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    If anything, the S55 is in a completely different category than the S54/65/85. Not really the best comparison.

    Do we have any other Turbo DI motors from other manufacturers to compare S55 to?

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Once again:

    Plus low mass 2.0L I4 is easier to rev than a Dual-vanos, variable intake valve lift Direct inject 3.0L Inline six.

    Even for their 2.2L they had to drop redline to 8500RPM.

    This new BMW motor would need laggier turbos to support the CFM flow of say 550hp at 8500RPM. Not to mention possibly costlier DI, VANOS and Valvetronic components.

    I bet you that if the RB26 had come with the bores large enough to displace 3.0L, it would NOT have as high as a redline.

    Why didn't the 2JZ rev to 8K RPM stock? It makes GREAT power!
    I'm not disagreeing with you that it is easier to get a smaller motor to rev but you're acting like these are huge displacement differences and that BMW has not gotten large displacements to rev. They have a 5.0 liter V10 at over 8000 rpm. They did that years ago.

    Why exactly are the VANOS, DI, and Valvetronic components getting costlier all of a sudden? Doesn't the Audi RS4 cost less than what this will and it revs higher? The Audi RS5 is about the same price range and it revs higher with direct injection. So do you have any support based in reality on your point?

    Why would the RB26 not rev as high with larger bores? Don't they have larger bore motors in Japan doing 10k+? Isn't it more the weight of the piston and the valvetrain compnents as well as dampening of vibration?

    I don't know why the 2JZ doesn't rev higher. Why don't all motors rev higher?

    Your points hold no water thus far.

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    If anything, the S55 is in a completely different category than the S54/65/85. Not really the best comparison.

    Do we have any other Turbo DI motors from other manufacturers to compare S55 to?
    It's an S motor how is it a different category? It's perfectly fair to compare M motors to M motors.

    We have other direct injection motors to compare it to, sure. I'm not saying the S55 is a bad motor by any means.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    I think you just answered your own question.
    You're right. Hence why it isn't on high revving motors as I have pointed out. The S65 doesn't have it, the S85 doesn't have it, the S54 doesn't have it, etc.

    Is it even necessary? Is direct injection even necessary? If the McLaren MP4-12C doesn't need any either of these... oh wait, maybe that's why it revs freely to 8500.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    298
    Rep Points
    272.3
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Is direct injection even necessary?
    Of course it is, if you want your car to consume less fuel. There is a huge difference in fuel consumption between port injection and direct injection. Direct injection is the reason why a 335i can run with 13.x AFR values sometimes to the redline and not get damaged.

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    298
    Rep Points
    272.3
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Overall, a great car, with so many improvements over the standard car and engine. Its power to weight ratio is equal or better than the current M5, so it should be very fast. I think it should be good for 11.x in 1/4 mile in stock form.

    They really adapted the twin-turbo engine to the track, taking every possible measure to ensure it can survive track conditions. The closed deck engine block coupled with the forged crankshaft are probably good for 100hp with only a software tune (that is, if the tuners can get past the Valvetronic stuff Click here to enlarge )

    A DTM driver said "the rear axle is much better than in the previous model". The rear axle is fixed to the body, without bushings. Great stuff for eliminating wheel hop at launches Click here to enlarge

    Overall I think the new M3 will be worth its money, and is a big departure over the standard 335i/335is/etc. not only in terms of engine but in everything else.

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Points
    917.6
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Who cares about 8400rpm redline, if the first 5000rpm are unusable?

    The S55 has the potential to be EPIC, dare I say the next 2JZ? *flamesuit on*. No one will miss the S65, get over it Sticky.

    BMW fixed one potential weakness of the N54 and made the S55 closed deck. The cooling issues also seem to be a thing of the past.

    Performance Pack will put the output to at least 450hp.

    I predict that a stock M4 will be faster on racetracks than the E92 M3 GTS. Again, get over it Sticky.
    E92 335i SB / Black Leather / 6AT / Navi Prof / Sunroof / Active Steering
    Mods: Performance Seats / Performance Exhaust / RB Turbos / M3 CF Roof / Brembo GT BBK 355/345 / Rollcage / M3 Mirrors / Forge FMIC / QUAIFE LSD / Ohlins R&T / M3 Suspension Parts / Vorshlag Camberplates / Megan Toe Links / LeatherZ Gauges / Extended M3 DCT Paddles / ER Sports OC / AR OC / Aux Radiator / AR catted DP / COBB Pro-Tune
    Next: GTS Wing

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,683
    Rep Points
    31,529.1
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by cstavaru Click here to enlarge
    Of course it is, if you want your car to consume less fuel. There is a huge difference in fuel consumption between port injection and direct injection. Direct injection is the reason why a 335i can run with 13.x AFR values sometimes to the redline and not get damaged.
    Huge difference? Really?

    Isn't the McLaren MP4-12C V8 the cleanest and most efficient high performance V8 out there without direct injection?

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •