Close

Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 252
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Rep Points
    2,017.3
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    Reputation: Yes | No
    The thing that keeps bothering me about the car is that they made a choice to stick with DI. After all the issues people have had over here with buildup, I am hoping that reliability wouldn't be an nagging issue.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    303
    Rep Points
    308.2
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Reputation: Yes | No
    390ft/tq still doesn't translate to 430hp@5000rpm though

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Flinchy Click here to enlarge
    i don't get it.. it only makes 430bhp, where n54's day in day out make hundreds more

    it adds weight, weight is bad... it hinders cooling, also bad

    there's no reason for them to have built it closed deck besides 'just 'cos' (unless their massive bore meant they needed a little more material.. or their non sleeved cylinders, (or both things) meant that too)

    and what gumby thought it was N54 based? everyone was saying N55, and the block, yeah, totally different bore.
    You don't get why factory motors are rated at less power than tuned motors? Ok... Click here to enlarge

    Some people said N54 based with some minor changes. Regardless, it's a very different design.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    Lets not make that assumption until we see what AMG releases with there new Biturbo 4.0L V8 that will come in a car with 4matic and be lighter than the current c63. I bet the benz comes out on top straight line the M has the low curb weight going for it to prob take the handling department. Not fair to compare a car not even released with a car that was released in 2008. Extra 1000 rpm on what? the M156 revs to 7200 stock and mine is set at 7600 thru Eurocharge and I don't think 370 pound feet of torque is a fatter torque curve than 450+ pound feet of torque from an N/A engine that lays it down from dusk till dawn.
    Benz has sat quietly thus far.

    We know they will have a 4.0 liter V8. We know it will have more muscle.

    All wheel drive plus DCT should make the straightline game in the C63's favor but what will it weigh? It's supposed to be lighter than the previous gen W204.

    So then BMW will release a Competition Package to make it even and then Mercedes can regain their lead with a P31 pack.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Autobahn335i Click here to enlarge
    Dry sump is for the gearbox only, not for the engine!
    WTF kind of bull$#@! is this?

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BavarianBullet Click here to enlarge
    Not sure about people taking issue with it vs saying some parts (rods, pistons, injectors, coils, valvetronic) on it are either similar or evolutionary from the N54/N55 and some parts from the S55 may be able to be used on the N54/N55. A big switch from the S65/S85 days.

    If nothing else, hopefully it means that dev efforts in the aftermarket may be reduced and could offer more options (and lower costs) for all of S55/N54/N55 engines.
    It would be nice if carryover of parts meant quicker aftermarket development but that won't be the case here as there is really nothing that applied. The main problem we'll see here is who is going to crack the ECU.

    Someone is going to have to sell somebody some codes... and I hear BMW has cracked down pretty hard on that.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    The thing that keeps bothering me about the car is that they made a choice to stick with DI. After all the issues people have had over here with buildup, I am hoping that reliability wouldn't be an nagging issue.
    If I could choose it wouldn't have it but we all knew it was coming. Nothing we could do to stop it...

  8. #158
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    2,937
    Rep Points
    2,858.9
    Mentioned
    78 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    29


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    The thing that keeps bothering me about the car is that they made a choice to stick with DI. After all the issues people have had over here with buildup, I am hoping that reliability wouldn't be an nagging issue.
    Direct injection allows us to get away with things PI motors could only dream of. Why in the world would they ditch it?
    2011 E90 M3 \ Melbourne Rot Metallic

    Click here to enlarge

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by lulz_m3 Click here to enlarge
    Direct injection allows us to get away with things PI motors could only dream of. Why in the world would they ditch it?
    Like lower revs?

    What is it an S65 is dreaming about?

    It's used for efficiency gains not higher performance. The McLaren MP4-12C was already mentioned and there is a reason they specifically chose not to use DI on their 8500+ rpm motor.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Points
    917.6
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    WTF kind of bull$#@! is this?
    I don't think BMW has implanted a dry sump system on any production engine EVER .
    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

  11. #161
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    2,937
    Rep Points
    2,858.9
    Mentioned
    78 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    29


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Like lower revs?

    What is it an S65 is dreaming about?

    It's used for efficiency gains not higher performance. The McLaren MP4-12C was already mentioned and there is a reason they specifically chose not to use DI on their 8500+ rpm motor.
    Because efficiency leads to higher performance. You have to keep pushing the boundary of the system until its able to support wherever you are trying to take it. If they just ditched DI, it will never get better. Remember how $#@!ty fuel injection used to be back in the day? Should we go back to carburetors now?
    2011 E90 M3 \ Melbourne Rot Metallic

    Click here to enlarge

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by lulz_m3 Click here to enlarge
    Because efficiency leads to higher performance. You have to keep pushing the boundary of the system until its able to support wherever you are trying to take it. If they just ditched DI, it will never get better. Remember how $#@!ty fuel injection used to be back in the day? Should we go back to carburetors now?
    No it doesn't. It's an efficiency technology that allows cars to run leaner for MPG gains. Also higher compression on pump gas before detonation. Keywords being pump gas.

    Why then did BMW introduce it on their pedestrian motors when it was notably absent from their high performance M motors?

    If it led to higher performance why is the N54 struggling while the S65 is breaking records?

    Nobody is saying go back to carburetors your point is the equivalent of saying let's ditch modern cars for horse drawn buggies, not applicable.

    Weird the vast majority of racing series' don't use direct injection...

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Autobahn335i Click here to enlarge
    I don't think BMW has implanted a dry sump system on any production engine EVER .
    That does not mean they could not have started finally.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Points
    917.6
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    That does not mean they could not have started finally.
    How many engines have been lost due to oil starvation?
    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

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Autobahn335i Click here to enlarge
    How many engines have been lost due to oil starvation?
    Let me check the list I keep under my pillow detailing every motor in every M car ever lost to oil starvation. Hold on.

  16. #166
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    303
    Rep Points
    308.2
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    Yeah, that's what their release said too:

    The i-6, internally called S55, is the heart of the new car; Norbert Siegl, who was responsible for the development of the all-aluminum powerhouse, maintains that it is essentially a new unit - even though he started out with the BMW AG's N55. The 3.0-liter inline-six will make slightly over 420 horsepower and "far beyond 369 lb-ft," BMW says. Our educated guess is that it will make around 390 lb-ft. The engine is boosted by two relatively small Mitsubishi turbochargers which provide up to 18.1 PSI. (BMW disingeniously sticks to the "Twin Power" designation, which signifies little. The same moniker is stuck to the single-turbo N55 engine.). There is an electromechanical wastegate and a large intercooler, which sits atop the engine - and which is the reason for the massive bulge on the M3/M4's aluminum hood.

    According to my calculations:

    If the car is making 430HP between 5,000-7,000rpm, it needs to at least be making:

    451.50 ft/tq @ 5,000rpm
    376.25 ft/tq @ 6,000rpm
    322.50 ft/tq @ 7,000rpm
    Loe P.
    B8.5 Audi S5 3.0"T" - GIAC stage II ECU / GIAC DSG TCU / AWE-tuning Pulley / AFe filter / 034 TBB / mod airbox / X-pipe
    - 09' E90 M3 7-DCT Interlagos Blue / Novillo Silver - gone Click here to enlarge
    [K&N filter|MS pullies|test pipes|Evolve Stg II tune/Servotronic/GTS-DCT Tune|Euro MDM]


  17. #167
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by cstavaru Click here to enlarge
    It just doesn't matter whether it is V8 or a six-cylinder if they have the same capacity.

    And when they say "it's the most...in it's class" this is just marketing, because in a "class" they can put any restrictions they want: "high-performance, over 600hp, V8, non-direct-injected, etc." Basically they can create the "class" to include only the engine they are talking about, and then for sure it will be the first in class Click here to enlarge

    And to further realize what direct injection can bring to the table, just compare the 263g/km emissions of the e92 M3 with the 232g/km of the F10 M5 (which has 10% more capacity !).

    Another example: the BMW 330i from 2006, which is naturally aspirated without direct injection, has a city fuel consumption of 12.7l/100km , while the 330i from 2008, which has direct injection, has a city fuel consumption of 10l/100km.

    There is just no point in denying the advantages of direct injection.
    It does matter if it's a V8 or six-cylinder because my point specifically mentioned high-performance V8 not just any motor you can throw out there. You then provided a six-cylinder. What 600+ horsepower V8 is cleaner than the McLaren's? Is the GT500's?

    Class is marketing? Seems to me the McLaren is in a over $200k+ sports car class so you are comparing it to what? Everything out there? That doesn't make any sense it should be compared to other cars in that class which the Porsche 911 Turbo is simply not in. The 458 Italia and Gallardo would be more in that class don't you think?

    I'm not saying direct injection does not have efficiency advantages. I'm saying you don't need it as the McLaren MP4-12C demonstrates which was the entire point and it has a VERY clean motor. And engineering awards support this point do they not? Clearly direct injection also has disadvantages when it comes to performance hence why it is primarily used as an efficiency technology and why McLaren omitted it. BMW M also omitted it in their naturally aspirated M motors. I don't want it in my high performance motor. If you want to save the polar bears or save a couple bucks on gas go for it.

    There is no denying the disadvantages of direct injection.

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,116
    Rep Points
    962.7
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Benz has sat quietly thus far.

    We know they will have a 4.0 liter V8. We know it will have more muscle.

    All wheel drive plus DCT should make the straightline game in the C63's favor but what will it weigh? It's supposed to be lighter than the previous gen W204.

    So then BMW will release a Competition Package to make it even and then Mercedes can regain their lead with a P31 pack.
    Yupp they havent released much info on it but you can be sure in typical AMG fashion it will be a monster ! Same motor will be in the SLC and capable of almost 600hp which im sure is mostly software so their should be alot of potential in that motor. No doubt the AMG will be the straightline winner with 2 more cylinders and 33% more displacement coupled with AWD and finally a true DCT. They have stated it will deff be lighter than the current c63 but I doubt it will be close to 3300 BMW hit a home run with the curb weight on this car. Honestly im not the biggest fan of AWD sure its good for stoplight races but the control,feel, and excitement of RWD is on another level for me. I had a X6 before my c63 and loved it for a truck if benz doesnt offer RWD on the next C63 or C55 I have a good feeling ill be sitting in a alpine white m4.

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Points
    917.6
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Let me check the list I keep under my pillow detailing every motor in every M car ever lost to oil starvation. Hold on.
    See, surely much less than to, let's say rod bearing issues. It's understandable that BMW does not make this a top priority. Although it surely would be nice. Maybe it will be in the next M1 (if it ever comes) with a proper M race engine.

    The F82 M4 is plenty fast around the track as is. Word is the Ring time is 7:38. Compare that to the 7:48 of the E92 M3 GTS!
    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

  20. #170
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    2,937
    Rep Points
    2,858.9
    Mentioned
    78 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    29


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    No it doesn't. It's an efficiency technology that allows cars to run leaner for MPG gains. Also higher compression on pump gas before detonation. Keywords being pump gas.

    Why then did BMW introduce it on their pedestrian motors when it was notably absent from their high performance M motors?

    If it led to higher performance why is the N54 struggling while the S65 is breaking records?

    Nobody is saying go back to carburetors your point is the equivalent of saying let's ditch modern cars for horse drawn buggies, not applicable.

    Weird the vast majority of racing series' don't use direct injection...

    I would argue that anything that is high performance must also be high efficiency. You say DI only offers advantages on pump gas, its actually much more advantageous on ethanol as the cooling effect is multiplied vs normal PI of ethanol. Direct injection is not going anywhere, and i'm willing to bet it will trickle its way into race cars over the next 10 years.
    2011 E90 M3 \ Melbourne Rot Metallic

    Click here to enlarge

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,618
    Rep Points
    1,904.6
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    20


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Let me check the list I keep under my pillow detailing every motor in every M car ever lost to oil starvation. Hold on.
    Actually think the S65 is prone to oil starvation. Some of the failures I have seen first hand at track days have to be related. Just recently saw a DCT M3 with only about 10k miles blow up at COTA. There is a couple turns with extended lateral g's.

  22. #172
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    London and USA
    Posts
    2,061
    Rep Points
    1,442.9
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Autobahn335i Click here to enlarge

    The F82 M4 is plenty fast around the track as is. Word is the Ring time is 7:38. Compare that to the 7:48 of the E92 M3 GTS!

    7.38 is fluffing quick

    Also AWD is to understeer as God is to RWD and some tail end slippy-doo-dah-day (oversteer)
    2005 Porsche 996 TTS RWD - Eurodyne 60-130 in 6.50s
    2015 Audi A3 2.0 TFSI - Eurodyne 0 - 100 in 10.67s
    2015 McLaren 650S (RHD) - UK - 1/3rd owner yet to drive


    Click here to enlarge



  23. #173
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    Yupp they havent released much info on it but you can be sure in typical AMG fashion it will be a monster ! Same motor will be in the SLC and capable of almost 600hp which im sure is mostly software so their should be alot of potential in that motor. No doubt the AMG will be the straightline winner with 2 more cylinders and 33% more displacement coupled with AWD and finally a true DCT. They have stated it will deff be lighter than the current c63 but I doubt it will be close to 3300 BMW hit a home run with the curb weight on this car. Honestly im not the biggest fan of AWD sure its good for stoplight races but the control,feel, and excitement of RWD is on another level for me. I had a X6 before my c63 and loved it for a truck if benz doesnt offer RWD on the next C63 or C55 I have a good feeling ill be sitting in a alpine white m4.
    I don't know if it will be mostly software for the SLC as they may be giving the motor a different designation which implies more differences than just a tune: http://www.benzboost.com/content.php...package-option

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Autobahn335i Click here to enlarge
    See, surely much less than to, let's say rod bearing issues. It's understandable that BMW does not make this a top priority. Although it surely would be nice. Maybe it will be in the next M1 (if it ever comes) with a proper M race engine.

    The F82 M4 is plenty fast around the track as is. Word is the Ring time is 7:38. Compare that to the 7:48 of the E92 M3 GTS!
    Where did this word come from regarding the ring time?

    If that's accurate it's very impressive.

    Regarding why dry sump is not a priority... well, it should be for any serious track car.

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,824
    Rep Points
    31,567.1
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by lulz_m3 Click here to enlarge
    I would argue that anything that is high performance must also be high efficiency. You say DI only offers advantages on pump gas, its actually much more advantageous on ethanol as the cooling effect is multiplied vs normal PI of ethanol. Direct injection is not going anywhere, and i'm willing to bet it will trickle its way into race cars over the next 10 years.
    Ok so once again it has been shown that you can have both without direct injection. It isn't some must have to be efficient.

    I said it allows a compression ratio gain on pump gas which is what most people run.

    What does ethanol's cooling effect do for it against say an S65 with more power? It let's you talk about the cooling effect on forums while getting your ass handed to you is what it does.

    Direct injection isn't in race cars now which should tell you plenty. Are there any Formula 1 motors revving to 18k+ with direct injection?

Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... 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
  •