Absolute POWER! Performance through Greater Efficiency

[klier]

No, I see what you mean, but just a clay model for M6 GC would maybe be a bit too little

 

[Sunny]

And in my scenario, the M3 V8 is downrated and not the uber NA V8 like the previous I6 in the M3 was. The V8 is dumbed down because it would make the M5 obsolete, nor does it break any records like the I6 did in it's day. It pretty much boils down to the same thing in my book.

Besides, a 523i and 528i is the same engine with different tuning, so this really is nothing new or anything like that. I don't see the problem besides the fact that BMW nowadays is too lazy to build a bespoke engine...

420HP from a 4l V8 revving to 8k+ rpm and you think it is downrated? Any way I digress. My point was not if they pushed the S65 to the limit or not, but that they didn't play stupid marketing game with the numbers. They market it with whatever number the engine makes. And yes, BMW has done it in the past, but not M AFAIK. The closest is probably E46 M3 and Z4 M. Both had S54. But in M3 it was rated at 333HP vs 316HP in Z4M. But I think the reason was technical and not marketing - Z4M had more restrictive intake/exhaust cause of lack of space

 

[Betty Swollocks]

The closest is probably E46 M3 and Z4 M. Both had S54. But in M3 it was rated at 333HP vs 316HP in Z4M. But I think the reason was technical and not marketing - Z4M had more restrictive intake/exhaust cause of lack of space

I think that was due to emission regulations in the U.S. In Europe the E46 M3 and Z4 M both had 343hp.

 

[south]

The closest is probably E46 M3 and Z4 M. Both had S54. But in M3 it was rated at 333HP vs 316HP in Z4M. But I think the reason was technical and not marketing - Z4M had more restrictive intake/exhaust cause of lack of space

Are you sure about that? Z4M and E46 M3 had the same rating in Europe (343PS).


Best regards,
south

 

[klier]

420HP from a 4l V8 revving to 8k+ rpm and you think it is downrated?

Yes actually. Compared to the 343 hp 3.2 I6 it's downrated and less amazing.

But I get your point, hope you get mine too. Where BMW left off after the 3.2 I6/V10 M5, Porsche took over. They're now at 500 hp from a 4.0 B6. That's progression.

 

[Sunny]

Are you sure about that? Z4M and E46 M3 had the same rating in Europe (343PS).


Best regards,
south

I thought Z4 M was rated at 325HP else were. It was rated at 315HP here in US and E46 M3 at 333HP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_S54B32

 

[klier]

Proves how little you can trust Wikipedia So many errors over there lately....

Z4 M EU = 343 ps, the exact same as M3 E46 EU spec.

 

[south]

Just looked it up, Z4M was rated at 330hp in the US which is 3hp down compared to the E46 M3.


Best regards,
south

 

[klier]

BTW, isn't a turbo per definition fueled by exhaust gasses, and the tri turbo actually is a bi/twin turbo with an electric compressor?
Sounds a lot less fancy

Also, the V8 diesel in the E65 7er had 333 hp I believe...I expect at least 350 hp for the new I6.

 

[Beemer B773ER]

To me it smacks of engineering disingenuity.

IMO, it's less about M engineers not being clever enough, but rather that their hands are tied thanks to the bean-counters. I imagine all those M engineers would love nothing more than to get busy developing incredible bespoke motors for each new M car, but budget just probably isn't there for M-Division right now. I agree though, there's absolutely no reason to drop the M5's output by 20hp just to try and make it clear to everyone that the M5 isn't as good as the M6 GC. I don't see any problem with both of these vehicles being the flagship for M, especially when you consider the M5's invaluable reputation.

 

[SCOTT27]

IMO, it's less about M engineers not being clever enough, but rather that their hands are tied thanks to the bean-counters. I imagine all those M engineers would love nothing more than to get busy developing incredible bespoke motors for each new M car, but budget just probably isn't there for M-Division right now. I agree though, there's absolutely no reason to drop the M5's output by 20hp just to try and make it clear to everyone that the M5 isn't as good as the M6 GC. I don't see any problem with both of these vehicles being the flagship for M, especially when you consider the M5's invaluable reputation.

The problem is that some of you are too impatient. M6 Gran Coupe is scheduled for a late 2013 market launch. By then the new M5 will be celebrating it's second birthday, therefore any changes to the M6 Gran Coupe can be transferred to the M5. And we are looking at introducing a Carbon Racing Technology Packet with the M5 After the M6 Gran Coupe has been launched.

 

[Sunny]

IMO, it's less about M engineers not being clever enough, but rather that their hands are tied thanks to the bean-counters. I imagine all those M engineers would love nothing more than to get busy developing incredible bespoke motors for each new M car, but budget just probably isn't there for M-Division right now. I agree though, there's absolutely no reason to drop the M5's output by 20hp just to try and make it clear to everyone that the M5 isn't as good as the M6 GC. I don't see any problem with both of these vehicles being the flagship for M, especially when you consider the M5's invaluable reputation.

Yes, my rant was against the marketing hobnobs fudging numbers to make things look different, not the engineers.

 

[SKY]

BTW, I find disturbing that the 6er GC will be more expensive than the Coupe, when BMW sedans are cheaper than coupes. Maybe same case than with the X6 vs X5?.

 

[skbmw]

... Tri-Turbo diesel which will be found in the BMW X6xDrive50d with 354PS.

Pretty dissapointing if that is the case. The 640d already has 313ps. I was expecting the M50d to break the 400ps barrier. With the M50d BMW will only match the performance of Audi performance diesels on the A8 and Q7 which have been available for long.

 

[skbmw]

350d OH Yes!

I wouldn't hold my breath if I was you. Unless BMW has come up with some revolutionary desgin, they won't be able to fit the engine in the 3-series.

 

[Beemer B773ER]

BTW, I find disturbing that the 6er GC will be more expensive than the Coupe, when BMW sedans are cheaper than coupes. Maybe same case than with the X6 vs X5?.

Well the 6er GC isn't a sedan so that pricing structure doesn't apply. The 6er GC will cost more than a 6er Coupe because it offers more utility.

 

[Betty Swollocks]

Well the 6er GC isn't a sedan so that pricing structure doesn't apply. The 6er GC will cost more than a 6er Coupe because it offers more utility.

I don't think it's got anything to with utility, but more BMW just creaming off as much profit as possible with relatively small development costs.

The 5 Series is much cheaper than the 6er GC will be, and that offers even more "utility". The 6 Series is basically a 5 Series underneath.

 

[klier]

Pretty dissapointing if that is the case. The 640d already has 313ps. I was expecting the M50d to break the 400ps barrier. With the M50d BMW will only match the performance of Audi performance diesels on the A8 and Q7 which have been available for long.

BMW blog says 400 hp for the 'tri-turbo' (twin turbo with kompressor)

 

[SKY]

BMW blog says 400 hp for the 'tri-turbo' (twin turbo with kompressor)

That would be amazing.