1M is out... How does it compare to our cars?

[doozyj]

Originally Posted by gatorfast

I understand BMW not using the S65 in the 1M for fear of pissing off M3 owners (there are a lot more M3 owners out there than there will be 1M owners and its a more expensive car and flagship of the company).

However, BMW could have waited another year or so until they were getting ready to stop producing the current M3 and then dropped the S65 into the 1M (kind of like they did to the Z4 M shortly before they stopped producing the last generation M3). That way M3 owners would be less hurt since their cars would then be a generation old anyway and BMW could have gotten more use out of the S65 (and made the 1M insane!). Just my thought...

Not to mention it would pretty be the final nail in the coffin for M3 sales, I agree they should have waited till after the end of the e92 before producing the 1M. Regardless, I think the 1M will be fine in representing the M badge.

[chickdr]

Originally Posted by tarheel91

@chickdr: The S52 has a 20% boost in power versus a 14% increase in displacement compared to the M52. There really isn't much else going on. As I said before, just a few changes. A more aggressive cam and an adjusted lubrication system. That's it.

It is still a different engine designation. Is the motor in the 1M called something other than an N54? Nope... It isn't a different beast. Same motor as the Z435is(which is not called an M car)

[ANILE8]

Originally Posted by doozyj

Not to mention it would pretty be the final nail in the coffin for M3 sales, I agree they should have waited till after the end of the e92 before producing the 1M.

Sorry, I do not understand the first half of that sentence.

What does 'pretty' have to do with things?

[tarheel91]

Originally Posted by ANILE8

I am sure BMW could have pulled something out by increasing the capacity. Who says it has to be restricted to 3 litres.

Look at the Nissan 370Z engine.

3.7-liter DOHC 24-valve V6 aluminum-alloy engine
332 hp @ 7,000 rpm
270 lb-ft @ 5,200 rpm

BMW already has a 6 cylinder that makes that kind of power. It's called the S54, the one in your car.

Am I reading this right? BMW enthusiasts want BMW to go with a V6 over an I6 just because the I6 isn't unique enough? Huh? That would be diluting the brand way more than any "non ///M" engine ever would. I won't even bring up the myriad of ways an I6 is superior to a V6.

[ANILE8]

Originally Posted by tarheel91

BMW already has a 6 cylinder that makes that kind of power. It's called the S54, the one in your car.

Am I reading this right? BMW enthusiasts want BMW to go with a V6 over an I6 just because the I6 isn't unique enough? Huh? That would be diluting the brand way more than any "non ///M" engine ever would. I won't even bring up the myriad of ways an I6 is superior to a V6.

Good points and I agree.

However, I was not suggesting that it would be my preference to see BMW go to a V6 over the S54 if given a choice.

It seems that in BMW's infinite wisdom they have decided to axe the S54 engine permanently along with the S65 and S85.

I think the S54 would have been a much better choice for the 1M over the N54.

[Eccentric]

i think the s54 would be good and bad. Obviously we all boner-up over the S54, but it is time for a change imo.

Ok so lets play with this scenario: What if the 1M got an M-exclusive engine that was turbocharged? Would you guys be opposed to it if the redline was the same, and it didnt run out of gas before revlimiter? Just curious, im not making a snide, subsequent point.

I'll say it again, i think that turbos are the way of the future, and i think BMW is making a small car that is fast and practical. All M engines are based off of existing engines (race engines, or street non-M ones) so the "N54" in the 1M should be good if there are a number of performance and efficiency upgrades. I.e. hpfp...

[Finnegan]

From this thread

BMWs Compared:

• E46 M3 CSL - 7:50
• E90/E92 M3 - 8:05
• E63 M6 - 8:09
• 1 series M coupe - 8:12
• Z4 M-Coupe - 8:12
• E60 M5 - 8:13
• Alpina B3 Biturbo - 8:14
• Z4 M-Roadster - 8:15
• Alpina Roadster S (Z4) - 8:15
• E46 M3 - 8:22
• 335i E92 Coupe - 8:26

The Z4M was run on those crappy Contis. With PS2s (which were available at the time) it would surely have performed better. I'd say in terms of "how does it compare" the Z4M is a little up on the 1M if equipped with comparable tires.

[Finnegan]

Originally Posted by Eccentric

i think the s54 would be good and bad. Obviously we all boner-up over the S54, but it is time for a change imo.

Ok so lets play with this scenario: What if the 1M got an M-exclusive engine that was turbocharged? Would you guys be opposed to it if the redline was the same, and it didnt run out of gas before revlimiter? Just curious, im not making a snide, subsequent point.

I'll say it again, i think that turbos are the way of the future, and i think BMW is making a small car that is fast and practical. All M engines are based off of existing engines (race engines, or street non-M ones) so the "N54" in the 1M should be good if there are a number of performance and efficiency upgrades. I.e. hpfp...

Like I said last night, that would be perfect. Variable geometry turbos would provide a means to this end. This gives the turbo the ability to act as a small fast-spooling turbo and a huge turbo in one package (great low and top end performance). Assuming the price point has dropped (or will drop) a bit use these and the bitching we have about top-end performance would end. That would be an "S" version of the motor so to speak. I think you could probably use the "guts" of the same engine but then the intake/exhaust would be tuned to take advantage of the super-high performance turbos.

[Eccentric]

Originally Posted by Finnegan

From this thread

The Z4M was run on those crappy Contis. With PS2s (which were available at the time) it would surely have performed better. I'd say in terms of "how does it compare" the Z4M is a little up on the 1M if equipped with comparable tires.

Fin, where's the info about the Moupe tires? I cant find specifics about that lap. It's annoying the BMW didnt give an official time for the car.

[ANILE8]

Originally Posted by Eccentric

i think the s54 would be good and bad. Obviously we all boner-up over the S54, but it is time for a change imo.

Ok so lets play with this scenario: What if the 1M got an M-exclusive engine that was turbocharged? Would you guys be opposed to it if the redline was the same, and it didnt run out of gas before revlimiter? Just curious, im not making a snide, subsequent point.

I'll say it again, i think that turbos are the way of the future, and i think BMW is making a small car that is fast and practical. All M engines are based off of existing engines (race engines, or street non-M ones) so the "N54" in the 1M should be good if there are a number of performance and efficiency upgrades. I.e. hpfp...

Way of the future?

Please remind me if you would be so kind as to why BMW had to axe the multi award winning naturally aspirated high revving S54 ,S65 and S85 engines again.

Fuel Economy vs Performance?

• Porsche
• Ferrari
• Audi
• Mercedes-Benz
• Lamborghini
• Aston Martin
• HSV
• Chevrolet
• Dodge
• Holden

The above list of manufacturers are but some who come to mind that currently provide a selection of fantastic high revving naturally aspirated engines to suit all types of performance enthusiasts instead of relying on turbo technology.

BMW is somehow different?

[Eccentric]

Originally Posted by Finnegan

Like I said last night, that would be perfect. Variable geometry turbos would provide a means to this end. Assuming the price point has dropped (or will drop) a bit use these and the bitching we have about top-end performance would end. That would be an "S" version of the motor so to speak.

I agree 100%. Any news on whether the N54 in the 1M will get a different designation?

[Finnegan]

Originally Posted by Eccentric

Fin, where's the info about the Moupe tires? I cant find specifics about that lap. It's annoying the BMW didnt give an official time for the car.

I'll be honest, I can't provide a source. Was all over the place today (too many windows open) and ran across the tire piece somewhere. Wish I'd saved that link. I guess we'll have to go with "we'd assume it was running Contis as that's what the car came with stock". Which may be a bad assumption.

I guess we can just call it a wash given the lack of source and say we've still got a car that's damn good!

[johanness]

Originally Posted by chickdr

It is still a different engine designation. Is the motor in the 1M called something other than an N54? Nope... It isn't a different beast. Same motor as the Z435is(which is not called an M car)

really good point

[tarheel91]

Originally Posted by ANILE8

Good points and I agree.

However, I was not suggesting that it would be my preference to see BMW go to a V6 over the S54 if given a choice.

It seems that in BMW's infinite wisdom they have decided to axe the S54 engine permanently along with the S65 and S85.

I think the S54 would have been a much better choice for the 1M over the N54.

The problem with the S54 is that it's performance is on par with the N54 (I'm sure we all know about it being underrated, most likely so that the new 335i didn't steal sales from the aging E46 M3). The car wouldn't be much quicker (if at all) than a 135i in a straight line. Upgrading the N54 was the only way they could create a car quicker than the 135i but not quite as fast as the M3.

[Finnegan]

Good point Tarheel.

Also, didn't the S54 fail too meet emissions and CO2 requirements in the EU and US? I seem to recall reading that somewhere along the line--although I could be completely wrong.

I'm not sure BMW had a choice on retiring it without extensive work. Although you'd have to wonder what things like ionic knock detection, higher power ECU, DFI, and other goodies could have brought to the party to upgrade and refresh what was already a great design. Ford seems to have found a way to get good economy, emissions, and performance out of its latest efforts with the Coyote engine.

Then again I think DFI in it's present form with the required HFPF has been a disaster. BMW reliability (current issue of Roundel is just a tad better than Dodge (25th out of 27 in the US)--for everything except the M3 which not surprisingly uses port-based fuel-injection.

[ANILE8]

Nonsense.

Someone tell me how the following current naturally aspirated high revving engines do not have a problem meeting tight Euro emission standards.

• Mercedes 6.2L - V8
• Lamborghini 5.2L - V10
• Ferrari 4.5L - V8
• Audi 5.2L - V10
• Porsche 3.8L - F6

[ANILE8]

But somehow the BMW S54 engine uses more fuel then any of the above so it had so be axed...

[Thisisdudewhoru]

Originally Posted by Eccentric

I agree 100%. Any news on whether the N54 in the 1M will get a different designation?

99% positive 1M engine has N54 designation.

[Finnegan]

Originally Posted by ANILE8

But somehow the BMW S54 engine uses more fuel then any of the above so it had so be axed...

Who said anything about fuel economy?

CO, NO, CO2: emissions. The engine actually had to be modified to meet the US standards at the time it was released (cats in the headers).

As standards, particularly CARB and EU standards standards have become increasingly stringent , it's not unreasonable to think that to continue its use would have necessitated some significant redesign. Not to mention the darn thing is out of production which is a bit inconvenient as well.

BMW simply went a cheaper (and from our--enthusiasts--perspective less desirable) route and raided the current parts bin. (Which is just what they did with the Z4M for that matter except in our case there was a nice S engine available at the time and the E46 M3 was out of production.) Can't use the S65, the S54 has been out of production for some time and resurrecting (and R&D to make it compliant) for the just 1M just wouldn't make business sense--so what's left?

I don't disagree with the sentiment about it being a better engine since it fits my idea of what a sports-car engine's dynamics and characteristics should be, but given the business case I can understand BMW's decision (even if I don't agree with it).

[ANILE8]

Originally Posted by Finnegan

Who said anything about fuel economy?

CO, NO, CO2: emissions. The engine actually had to be modified to meet the US standards at the time it was released (cats in the headers).

As standards, particularly CARB and EU standards standards have become increasingly stringent , it's not unreasonable to think that to continue its use would have necessitated some significant redesign. Not to mention the darn thing is out of production which is a bit inconvenient as well.

BMW simply went a cheaper (and from our--enthusiasts--perspective less desirable) route and raided the current parts bin. (Which is just what they did with the Z4M for that matter except in our case there was a nice S engine available at the time and the E46 M3 was out of production.) Can't use the S65, the S54 has been out of production for some time and resurrecting (and R&D to make it compliant) for the just 1M just wouldn't make business sense--so what's left?

I don't disagree with the sentiment about it being a better engine since it fits my idea of what a sports-car engine's dynamics and characteristics should be, but given the business case I can understand BMW's decision (even if I don't agree with it).

That still goes not way at all in explaining how Lamborghini, Ferrari, Porsche, Mercedes and Audi can continue to get away with what they are doing in terms of producing wonderful high revving naturally aspirated motors and BMW somehow cannot.

Fuel economy is directly related to emissions. The less fuel you burn per 100km the less emissions will be produced as a consequence.

Do you really think the Mercedes 6.2L - V8 produces less emission per 100km then the BMW S54...

[BlackMoupe]

I'd just like to point out that no matter how much we love it and admire it...the S54 is a heavy, old engine... The newer engines are much more physically and economically efficient, S65 is smaller and 30lbs lighter. The S54 is a godly engine but it has it's flaws.

I think we can all agree here that for an "M" Car, the S54>N54.

[ga41]

Originally Posted by ANILE8

That still goes not way at all in explaining how Lamborghini, Ferrari, Porsche, Mercedes and Audi can continue to get away with what they are doing in terms of producing wonderful high revving naturally aspirated motors and BMW somehow cannot.

Fuel economy is directly related to emissions. The less fuel you burn per 100km the less emissions will be produced as a consequence.

Do you really think the Mercedes 6.2L - V8 produces less emission per 100km then the BMW S54...

Mate, when were all those engines that you mentioned put into production? The S54 was introduced in 2001 and it takes at least 3 years to design and finalise an engine, it's now more than 10 years old. I dont think they couldnt make it comply with current regulations but it wouldnt be very cost effective for such a niche engine...

The 6.2 litre M156 AMG V8 was put into production in 2006 but is already being replaced with the 5.5l M278 twin turbo V8 for the same reasons. All the other engines you mentioned are also much newer than the S54...