[Unknownsoldier]

Hi Guys,

Couldn't find if this had been discussed, but I saw the new M3 the other for the first time (and I almost gouged my eyes out at how ugly it was........), but was also informed it is now a TURBO!!!!!!!!! FGS BMW, please the pleasure of M's is that they are NA, not turbo/supercharged.

Anyone else here think the Turbo is against the 'M' 'philosophy'?

Tom

 

[DSK]

All M3's (all M cars in fact) to date have been n/a's, including the new M3 4.0ltr V8.

To be honest, we now have small cars with 5.0ltr-6.3ltr engines in them to get the bhp produced. I honestly think that we are getting to the point where, in this BHP competition between manufacturers will require smaller displacement engines using supercharging and turbo charging to get good strong power in future models. You can't simply get to the stage where such cars are kept n/a with 8ltr engines in them, its absurd.

BMW introduced the 335i using twin turbos as they had to keep up with other manufacturers whilst still trying to lead the way. Whilst I have not driven the 335i, I haven't heard anything negative regarding its power delivery or turbo technology.

Turbos also offer peak torque at very low revs and maintain that through to the top end. This makes cars effortlessly quick rather than having to wait for revs to build. Turbos and Superchargers also offer a wider scope to further tune performance without much hassle.

The one thing the M cars have always had, in my opinion, is a very precise and accurate feel, they are like precision tools ina class of their own (combined package of power delivery, response, chassis tuning, weight distribution, calibration of driver aids and sensors etc). Turbo charging will be fine, provided BMW calibrate devices to to retain a precision and accurate feel. Mercedes will probably use turbo's like sledge hammers as AMG's have always been the brute power house champions, so they will be able to get away with not being as precise with their models.

 

[[email protected]]

All M3's (all M cars in fact)

.....BMW introduced the 335i using twin turbos as they had to keep up with other manufacturers whilst still trying to lead the way. Whilst I have not driven the 335i, I haven't heard anything negative regarding its power delivery or turbo technology.

Turbos also offer peak torque at very low revs and maintain that through to the top end. This makes cars effortlessly quick rather than having to wait for revs to build. Turbos and Superchargers also offer a wider scope to further tune performance without much hassle.

The one thing the M cars have always had, in my opinion, is a very precise and accurate feel, they are like precision tools ina class of their own (combined package of power delivery, response, chassis tuning, weight distribution, calibration of driver aids and sensors etc). Turbo charging will be fine, provided BMW calibrate devices to to retain a precision and accurate feel. Mercedes will probably use turbo's like sledge hammers as AMG's have always been the brute power house champions, so they will be able to get away with not being as precise with their models.

Interesting I should read this today. I have had my 335i for nearly 18 months, in that time finding it effortless, but feeling at times it is not as quick as I thought it would be. I came across an e46 M3 today whilst on the M54. He took the bait, and we had some 50-xxx drag races and we seemed to be level pegging, and as DSK says, pretty effortlessly. It would be interesting to see the engines performance in a higher state of tune, BUT, the essence IMO of the M cars is in their driving experience, particularly the handling. This is one area where the 335i, even with sports suspension lags.

I have test driven a new M3. I felt it was 10% quicker, handled 15% better, same inside but was 20% more expensive hence me not changing.

A good turbocharged engine always feels like it punches above its weight becuase of the prodigious torque they produce versus the na variants. Just try a VAG 2.0T to illustrate, punches way above its weight. As such, I reckon a turbo would suit the M series to a tee. Only my opinion though.

 

[magic312]

i can imagine the drive of it is the nutts, but by the love of god they could of made it look more exciting, it looks the same as a 320i coupe. The e36 and e46 m3 had a more aggressive look than a standard coupe which is what people pay the extra for, plus the s*** load of extra power. just my opinion tho!!!!

 

[[email protected]]

i can imagine the drive of it is the nutts, but by the love of god they could of made it look more exciting, it looks the same as a 320i coupe. The e36 and e46 m3 had a more aggressive look than a standard coupe which is what people pay the extra for, plus the s*** load of extra power. just my opinion tho!!!!

Could not agree more.

 

[RicePipe]

The new M3 isn't turbocharged, are there plans for the next generation M3 to be so?

 

[Ronnie]

As mentioned No turbo or charger on the M3 E90/92/93

 

[[email protected]]

There is a trend away from big capacity NA engines by the german manufacturers allegedly, as shown by Audi with the forthcoming RS4 going to forced induction. Been a bit in the press suggesting future BMW M's may be super/turbo charged. That was how I interpreted the OP.

 

[Unknownsoldier]

As mentioned No turbo or charger on the M3 E90/92/93

Interesting, I was only going by what I was told...... as I have no real interest in purchasing any 'M' other than an e30 one, or an E39/90 M5, I don't often look.

But even so it is interesting peoples thoughts on the use of Turbo's Super's as opposed to NA of engines.

Tom

 

[DSK]

But even so it is interesting peoples thoughts on the use of Turbo's Super's as opposed to NA of engines.

Tom

With the amount of power being developed by such cars these days, n/a is becomming less suitable so manufacturers are being forced to look into and use forced induction.

 

[Unknownsoldier]

Sadly so, perhaps it's the nerdy engineering part of me that just wishes people could hold on and really take these to the limit, like BMW developing something along the lines of Vetec or VVTI.

Tom

 

[DSK]

Sadly so, perhaps it's the nerdy engineering part of me that just wishes people could hold on and really take these to the limit, like BMW developing something along the lines of Vetec or VVTI.

Tom

Forms of VVTI exist in many different form across manufacturers, such as BMW's VANOS.

N/A engines can be pushed further. Manufacturers are making V8's that rev to and beyond 8,000rpm to get the power..... but would you want an engine that gets to the point of tune making it unsuitable or unreliable for everyday/road use? The bigger these engines get, the less interior cabin space you will receive.

Whilst I have driven and owned some high revving cars (still have my bike as well which rev's to 14,500rpm), I can't say that I'm a fan of them. In everyday situations you don't to want to 1) rev the nuts off the vehicle 2) you certainly do not want to hang around with an egg timer waiting for revs to build so that you can go. By the time you put your foot down in normal high revving cars, the other traffic (mundane peugeot diesel's) will have all cleared off in a puff of black smoke making you're high revving useless and dare I say, irrelevant.

 

[Ronnie]

Also a turbo is pretty much free power so while BMW spend vast amounts extracting every last inch of power from a N/A engine other manufacturers simply bolt on a turbo and blow BMW out of the water and for cheaper too. A 2.0 litre Duratec Ford engine can be made to prod 300bhp but the ££££££ is silly, if BMW went down that line there cars would be big money

 

[[email protected]]

Manufacturers are being forced down this forced induction route with ever tightening emission regulations too.

Great thing about forced induction of course is the torque they produce, which in everyday driving I would suggest is more beneficial than outright power. Like DSK, I have had a few bikes, a 400cc 4 cylinder that revved its nuts off but had naff all torque and was a pain unless you were 10 tenths everywhere, then in contrast, my current GSXR1000 has top end power but torque all the way through which makes it so much easier to ride at 1 tenth.
Forced induction lends itself to an anything less than 10 tenths drive IMO.

 

[DSK]

Manufacturers are being forced down this forced induction route with ever tightening emission regulations too.

Great thing about forced induction of course is the torque they produce, which in everyday driving I would suggest is more beneficial than outright power. Like DSK, I have had a few bikes, a 400cc 4 cylinder that revved its nuts off but had naff all torque and was a pain unless you were 10 tenths everywhere, then in contrast, my current GSXR1000 has top end power but torque all the way through which makes it so much easier to ride at 1 tenth.
Forced induction lends itself to an anything less than 10 tenths drive IMO.

The GSXR1000's have been in a league of their own imo, powerhouse engines but with excellent torque curves over the competition. For some reason I don't fit on the GSXR's.

I rode the 08 R1 in November, got very excited, whilst it was a stunning machine and ridiculously easy to ride fast, it just had no torque, I wasn't expecting that from this 1000cc lump. At 6,000rpm the torque staretd to come in, but it was just there rather than being a satisfying amount. Didn't feel as good as the previous generation R1's wich were more savage low down in the rev range. After the ride, I felt like I'd ridden faster 600cc lol. I know the manufacturers are pegging these bikes back quite heavily with engine tuning wizards in white lab coats to help stop riders getting thrown off at low revs, especially when exiting corners etc, enough racer's were flung off lol. Suzuki have got it right on their new bikes though with the 3 stage selectable power options.

I didn't know the turbos's helped with regards to emissions! thats something new I've learned today

 

[[email protected]]

... help stop riders getting thrown off at low revs, especially when exiting corners etc, enough racer's were flung off lol.

I wish they had tried harder, I highsided mine at Donington at Schwantz, broken collarbone, 3 ribs and dislocated shoulder !

 

[DSK]

I wish they had tried harder, I highsided mine at Donington at Schwantz, broken collarbone, 3 ribs and dislocated shoulder !

Ouch! :frown Have you healed up now?

I bet you tried to powerslide like Rossi comming out didn't you

 

[[email protected]]

Yeah, did it 2 years ago, started physio after a week which is not recommended from a pain point of view, but sorted it quicker in the end. I was skiving work so could not have time off, just stayed out of the office for a couple of weeks!

My mate behind me said it was quite impressive till he realised I had not saved it !

Still got the bike, I had replica fairings and crash bungs on it, all I had to do was replace a crankcase cover, so lucky it just slid onto the damp grass, albeit a fair way.

 

[DSK]

Lucky!! I have seen bikes completely destroyed over minor spills on trackdays!