Spy Shot: 5er I6 Turbo mule
- Thread starter Kirby
- Start date
If I could find the turbo and manifold BMW used on my EXACT engine as an OEM option in the early 90's on the 7 series I would. Not to mention slapping a turbo on an already good engine only makes it better which is what bmw is doing. I can't even imagine how much better turbo engines are now-a-days with better fuel management, vanos, etc. What a great combination, you can now control everything that used to be bad on turbo motor's.
I agree, and like I said it's not like they are staying at a specific engine size (like the mitsubishi evo) and putting a huge turbo on that doesn't make any boost until 2500 rpm or more - they are starting out with an already powerful engine, and putting a turbo on. I don't see how this is sacreligious - bmw has done it SO many times in the past, and all the aftermarket tuners do it.
My opinion
Why would you want another 30-50 or so HP versus 80-100HP/100 Ft Pounds of TQE? BMWs chassis, brakes, and handling ALWAYS out perform their motors (by a Long shot). I also have several turbocharged vehicles in addition to the NA 330i ZHP. If there is anything my ZHP could use, it's a LOT more Power. You could say Im just biased since I have turbos, but I believe that I just have a broader referance to form my opinion from. BTW- I just sold my supercharged Toyota Pickup, so Im familiar with SCs as well. Im not denying that the V10 in the M6 is an incredible piece of engineering, Im just saying that the M6 could have easily been just as good/fast a car (and cheaper) if they would have turbo-charged the 7 series V8 and used that. (think about the savings in development costs, re-tooling, etc.). I also believe that the major downfall to ALL of the current BMW lineup is that they are getting WAY too high tech, at the expense of reliability. (Like I said before). Just my .03 cents anyways.
Why would you want another 30-50 or so HP versus 80-100HP/100 Ft Pounds of TQE? BMWs chassis, brakes, and handling ALWAYS out perform their motors (by a Long shot). I also have several turbocharged vehicles in addition to the NA 330i ZHP. If there is anything my ZHP could use, it's a LOT more Power. You could say Im just biased since I have turbos, but I believe that I just have a broader referance to form my opinion from. BTW- I just sold my supercharged Toyota Pickup, so Im familiar with SCs as well. Im not denying that the V10 in the M6 is an incredible piece of engineering, Im just saying that the M6 could have easily been just as good/fast a car (and cheaper) if they would have turbo-charged the 7 series V8 and used that. (think about the savings in development costs, re-tooling, etc.). I also believe that the major downfall to ALL of the current BMW lineup is that they are getting WAY too high tech, at the expense of reliability. (Like I said before). Just my .03 cents anyways.
I am not suggesting that at all. I am suggesting that BMW extract the same amount of horsepower naturally as opposed to going with forced induction. They were able to do it with the new V10 and I think they can do it with their 3 liter I6.
As for the turbocharged V8 idea, that just would not be the same. Sure, the V10 engine is expensive, but it's absolutely amazing in design and it revs to 8,250rpm. The first part to a good sports car experience is making the sure the engine is a high-revving screamer. Also, BMW is one of the best at providing extremely linear power delivery. A turbocharger provides a really nice band of torque but it is very non-linear when the engine is running off-turbo.
Also, I would like to say that I prefer a supercharger over a turbocharger.
As for the turbocharged V8 idea, that just would not be the same. Sure, the V10 engine is expensive, but it's absolutely amazing in design and it revs to 8,250rpm. The first part to a good sports car experience is making the sure the engine is a high-revving screamer. Also, BMW is one of the best at providing extremely linear power delivery. A turbocharger provides a really nice band of torque but it is very non-linear when the engine is running off-turbo.
Also, I would like to say that I prefer a supercharger over a turbocharger.
![[cheers]](/images/smilies/icon_smile_cheers.gif "Cheers [cheers]"){kind=icon}
![[rofl]](/images/smilies/icon_smile_rofl.gif "ROFL [rofl]"){kind=icon}
All the other car forums would be laughing at you guys being AGAINST having more power. Face it BMW has hit the max optimum power for the certain engines, and you simply aren't going to (cheaply) build so many 3.0 liter inline 6's for $28k cars and get 100hp/liter. It just won't happen. Until they come up with cheaper ways to build the engines without being high maintainence to get the 100hp/liter, it wont happen. The S54 (E46 M3 engine) is built a bit differently than the M54, the 3.0 in the rest of the 3's.Turbo 3 series!
All the other car forums would be laughing at you guys being AGAINST having more power. Face it BMW has hit the max optimum power for the certain engines, and you simply aren't going to (cheaply) build so many 3.0 liter inline 6's for $28k cars and get 100hp/liter. It just won't happen. Until they come up with cheaper ways to build the engines without being high maintainence to get the 100hp/liter, it wont happen. The S54 (E46 M3 engine) is built a bit differently than the M54, the 3.0 in the rest of the 3's.
THANK YOU!
And they say that common sense isn't that common. I was hoping on a forum such as this there would be more informed, up-to-date knowledgable car people. Maybe so, maybe not. The previous comment about the turbos lack of low RPM power has recently become a thing of the past. The manufacturers have used new technologies to combat Turbo lag very successfully. The use of Variable Valve Timing and smaller or 2 stage turbo compressor housings/Variable inlet guide vanes/ball bearing/ceramic bearing turbos have reduced turbo lag to a a miniscule amount. It will soon be a topic that will be discussed in the same cnversations as points ignitions, single coils, and carburators. Of course there will always be people that will repeat old outdated information (they are probably the same ones changing their synthetic oil every 3000 miles). Mass Producing a NA motor that will produce 100HP per liter is still very expensive in terms of money AND reliability, and it will still never keep up with a turbo or supercharged motor of the same displacement. I will gladly wait 1000 RPM or so for an extra 100 FT LBS or more of TQE, followed by a rush to Redline that will push you back in your seat more than any NA motor ever will. Isn't BMW in the buisiness to actually sell cars anyways? Wouldn't they want to compete with and beat other makes such as Audi/MB/Japanese? Supercharging is another good option, but for maximum power and aftermarket tunability, Im hoping for a turbo. With any luck, my next 3 series will be a turbo in a year or 2 (with 6 speed MANUAL transmission, cloth seats, some type of M suspension, like my ZHP..... and hopefully less gadgets.... I don't see the gadget s stopping any time soon).
My .02 cents FWIW.
epj3 said:
All the other car forums would be laughing at you guys being AGAINST having more power. Face it BMW has hit the max optimum power for the certain engines, and you simply aren't going to (cheaply) build so many 3.0 liter inline 6's for $28k cars and get 100hp/liter. It just won't happen. Until they come up with cheaper ways to build the engines without being high maintainence to get the 100hp/liter, it wont happen. The S54 (E46 M3 engine) is built a bit differently than the M54, the 3.0 in the rest of the 3's.
And they say that common sense isn't that common. I was hoping on a forum such as this there would be more informed, up-to-date knowledgable car people. Maybe so, maybe not. The previous comment about the turbos lack of low RPM power has recently become a thing of the past. The manufacturers have used new technologies to combat Turbo lag very successfully. The use of Variable Valve Timing and smaller or 2 stage turbo compressor housings/Variable inlet guide vanes/ball bearing/ceramic bearing turbos have reduced turbo lag to a a miniscule amount. It will soon be a topic that will be discussed in the same cnversations as points ignitions, single coils, and carburators. Of course there will always be people that will repeat old outdated information (they are probably the same ones changing their synthetic oil every 3000 miles). Mass Producing a NA motor that will produce 100HP per liter is still very expensive in terms of money AND reliability, and it will still never keep up with a turbo or supercharged motor of the same displacement. I will gladly wait 1000 RPM or so for an extra 100 FT LBS or more of TQE, followed by a rush to Redline that will push you back in your seat more than any NA motor ever will. Isn't BMW in the buisiness to actually sell cars anyways? Wouldn't they want to compete with and beat other makes such as Audi/MB/Japanese? Supercharging is another good option, but for maximum power and aftermarket tunability, Im hoping for a turbo. With any luck, my next 3 series will be a turbo in a year or 2 (with 6 speed MANUAL transmission, cloth seats, some type of M suspension, like my ZHP..... and hopefully less gadgets.... I don't see the gadget s stopping any time soon).
My .02 cents FWIW.