M3/M4 [Spy Shots] 2014 BMW M3 (Impressions, SpyPhotos, Renderings)

[bmwownage]

I didn't had problems with the sound of the S54.. anyway.
For the M3 sedan, i actually encounter more E90 M3s than E92s and let alone E93s, so no idea why they're ditching it and considering a touring version instead, which is equally (or more) costly than transforming the sedan.

 

[klier]

I personally never liked the E46 M3 engine, it's scream as it approached the redline was one of the most annoying sounds to my ears, I know each to their own but that's how I felt about that engine.

And, of course, you were too young to remember the E46 M3 engine, most probably.

 

[Mr Robert]

Tell me, do you dislike the noise made by the current M3? After all it's not an in-line 6 that so many crave.

Also you claim V6 isn't sexy, what about an V6 Alfa? Now there was one of the most glorious sounding engines of all time.

Anyhow, when turboing there is benefits to be had with a Vee formate. I wonder did McLaren think "what about making the engine in-line instead of a Vee?". Doubt it.

I like the current M3 engine but not at all as much as the previous.

V6 in general is the least sexy configuration, no doubt about it. However, Alfa used to have a couple of gems, I agree.

 

[footie]

And, of course, you were too young to remember the E46 M3 engine, most probably.

Funny you should mention that because I hear one of those on a regular basis, having got the hold of one for my nephew about 14months ago. Oh and if you class having a son that will soon be driving as too young to remember the E46 M3 when it came out then thank-you very much.

 

[footie]

I like the current M3 engine but not at all as much as the previous.

V6 in general is the least sexy configuration, no doubt about it. However, Alfa used to have a couple of gems, I agree.

Come on, a Vee configuration is far more impressive to look at than an in-line.

 

[chonkoa]

Come on, a Vee configuration is far more impressive to look at than an in-line.

]

I agree a V-6 looks better than an I-6, but it is less efficient than an I-6 config.

 

[footie]

]

I agree a V-6 looks better than an I-6, but it is less efficient than an I-6 config.

Apart from BMW, who else chooses in-line configuration when developing a hi-performance engine of decent capacity?

If this was the case then McLaren, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Porsche, Mercedes, Audi , etc would all be following suit don't you think.

 

[klier]

Apart from BMW, who else chooses in-line configuration when developing a hi-performance engine of decent capacity?

If this was the case then McLaren, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Porsche, Mercedes, Audi , etc would all be following suit don't you think.

It is the case, my child. V6 sucks, particularly if it's a VAG V6.

 

[SKY]

I drive two cars with the "same" engine in both V6 and I6 configurations. The 2004 E320 CDI has 204hp I6, and the ML has a V6 320 CDI with 224hp. The E has the 5G-Tronic, and the ML the 7G.

The E accelerates in a different manner, sportier, more linear. The ML I think it has turbo lag, or the gearbox is not as quick (something difficult, as the 7G tronic is much newer).

 

[Mr Robert]

Come on, a Vee configuration is far more impressive to look at than an in-line.

No, I don't think so.

I have always thought of a V6 as a poor man's V8.

 

[footie]

It is the case, my child. V6 sucks, particularly if it's a VAG V6.

Do I make claims that BMW are shit? Of course not because they are a quality brand that make some brilliant products.

Why post such bias tripe?

Some may support such a comment but the rest who are car enthusiasts will view you as a single minded BMW fanboy.

 

[Mr Robert]

Nothing wrong with a VAG V6. In a VAG car. In a BMW? I would never buy it.

 

[footie]

Nothing wrong with a VAG V6. In a VAG car. In a BMW? I would never buy it.

Now that is a statement I can understand and accept as each brand design and develop their engines to have a different characteristic. But Klier is solely giving the impression of a narrow minded fanboy and not someone who fully appreicates motorcars.

 

[footie]

I drive two cars with the "same" engine in both V6 and I6 configurations. The 2004 E320 CDI has 204hp I6, and the ML has a V6 320 CDI with 224hp. The E has the 5G-Tronic, and the ML the 7G.

The E accelerates in a different manner, sportier, more linear. The ML I think it has turbo lag, or the gearbox is not as quick (something difficult, as the 7G tronic is much newer).

These cars are so different that even the same engine will appear completely different.

 

[chonkoa]

Apart from BMW, who else chooses in-line configuration when developing a hi-performance engine of decent capacity?

If this was the case then McLaren, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Porsche, Mercedes, Audi , etc would all be following suit don't you think.

It is beyond thinking, I know for a fact:an Inline configuration is more efficient that a V configuration.

 

[footie]

It is beyond thinking, I know for a fact:an Inline configuration is more efficient that a V configuration.

Please enlighten us with regards to that comment, because I am pretty sure there is an equally valid reason why the rest of the performance manufacturers are choosing not to go that route.

 

[chonkoa]

Please enlighten us with regards to that comment, because I am pretty sure there is an equally valid reason why the rest of the performance manufacturers are choosing not to go that route.

The advantage of the V-Config over the Inline config is basically geometrical.
A V-configuration is more compact(shorter in length and height) than an inline configuration. With this compactness it allows the manufacturer to have a shorter bonnet than a longitudinal mounted inline configuration would.
A V configuration also gives a lower COG than an Inline configuration with a Flat engine being the lowest COG.

The advantages of a inline configuration over the V-config are the following:

• Inherently balanced:less losses due to vibration.
• 1/2 as many camshaft as a V config would for overhead camshafts
• Lower internal piston frictional losses thus more power to the crank-shaft.

I am sure there are more but these are the ones I can quickly remember.

 

[footie]

The advantage of the V-Config over the Inline config is basically geometrical.
A V-configuration is more compact(shorter in length and height) than an inline configuration. With this compactness it allows the manufacturer to have a shorter bonnet than a longitudinal mounted inline configuration would.
A V configuration also gives a lower COG than an Inline configuration with a Flat engine being the lowest COG.

The advantages of a inline configuration over the V-config are the following:

• Inherently balanced:less losses due to vibration.
• 1/2 as many camshaft as a V config would for overhead camshafts
• Lower internal piston frictional losses thus more power to the crank-shaft.

I am sure there are more but these are the ones I can quickly remember.

Correct on every count. In fact I am sure you could have asked google to provide you with the benefits of both and simply copied and pasted these remarks, such widely known are they. Not to say that you did this. But this was why I commented on the fact there are very valid reasons for not chosing an in-line configuration, especially as the capacity and cylinder count goes up.

The reality is that the difference in efficiency between both designs is small, but the packaging benefits can be huge. Which is why almost everyone else choses Vee instead of in-line. Another fact is that add turbos and the Vee also proves easier to package and I believe is the more efficient, so why stick with in-line. I'm pretty sure Martinbo is in agreement that given the choice of configurations for the next M3 he too would chose the V6, and for very good reason.

 

[Sunny]

Okay lot of bs and fallacies here again. Don't confuse V6 vs I6 with V8/V4 vs I8/I4 arguments. V6 is intrinsically unbalanced cause of the odd number of cylinders per bank. A V8/V4 does't suffer from the same disadvantage. No one including BMW is using a I8 over V8.

Of all the companies you mentioned none of the better ones like Ferrari or Porsche or Lamborghini makes a V6. Mercedes only switched to V6 in 98 with M112 for to save money by chopping off 2 cylinders from M113 (or the other way, not sure which came first). And Audi couldn't use a I6 even if they wanted to cause AWD/FWD platforms would need a mile of front overhang to hang it. And yet they use I5 in transverse application despite it probably being the worst of both worlds cause it is neither balanced like I6 nor as compact as a V6. And using your 'it is bad cause no one else is doing it' logic, it should really suck, cause no one is using else is using an I5. And by the same accord Boxter engines should also suck, cause only Porche and Subaru uses them.

 

[chonkoa]

Correct on every count. In fact I am sure you could have asked google to provide you with the benefits of both and simply copied and pasted these remarks, such widely known are they. Not to say that you did this.

Very true but the engineer in me knows the physics and engineering involved, I guess it was easy for me to point out the obvious pros and cons.
With respect to packaging yes, a V-config does present better packaging benefits viz-a-viz turbo but it doesn't negate the advantages of the in-line engine. I am sure you do understand the downside of placing the turbo in the valley: heat management

But this was why I commented on the fact there are very valid reasons for not chosing an in-line configuration, especially as the capacity and cylinder count goes up.

I am sure there is a valid reason why we do not get inline-8 engines in cars.
In engine design there are competing forces: geometry vs efficiency. Beyond 6 cylinders the benefits of geometry out-weighs those offered by efficiency.

The reality is that the difference in efficiency between both designs is small, but the packaging benefits can be huge. Which is why almost everyone else choses Vee instead of in-line. Another fact is that add turbos and the Vee also proves easier to package and I believe is the more efficient, so why stick with in-line.

You need to be careful with the use of the word "efficient". From a purely mechanical POF an in-line engine will always be more efficient than a V-config engine.
From a systemic POF 6 cylinders is the cut-off point where the V-config adds the strongest benefits.

I'm pretty sure Martinbo is in agreement that given the choice of configurations for the next M3 he too would chose the V6, and for very good reason.

Other than strong philosophical reasons, from an engineering POF I think engineers out to open to either an I-6,V-config or even a flat 6.
If you want a lower COG, better weight distribution thus traction a V-6 config sure sounds like a good option, a flat will be the best.
From the philosphical POF - who knows. That is the interesting thing because company philosophy influences engineering design as well.