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

[tarheel91]

Originally Posted by shift@red

For the 1M its going to be little lag but a weak top end due to the use of a small turbo. It would have been nice to see VTG turbos, but wont happen on a car that cheap. VTG allows for big turbos with nearly no lag but a lot of top end at the same time.

Did you miss the link to the EVO review saying the car uses larger turbos?

[Eccentric]

Just thought of this, and i know its not the point of the car, but if the n54 can be chipped to 400bhp on stock turbos, i wonder what the new larger turbos will be able to handle, in reference to peak horsepower, without them blowing up.

[esqu1re]

Other parts of the engine will probably go boom before the turbo.

[tarheel91]

Originally Posted by shift@red

I didnt read that link nor much of this thread. If they use larger turbos they will create more lag but have a better top end and sacrifice the lower end (which i dont see them doing). The top end on a regular n54 is pretty bad so im not sure how much better it will be on this car, but i guess well see after a test drive.

If you'd read the thread instead, you'd have seen that this has been said multiple times already, and that it's likely there are other reasons for going to the larger turbos, as well.

[Eccentric]

Originally Posted by shift@red

I agree, but we shall see. I still see weight and the engine as this cars weak points.

How do you figure? The car weighs 3200lbs.. not exactly fat. Similar size to the Z4 M coupe

[pokeybritches]

Originally Posted by ANILE8

Now to be perfectly fair every second had purchase requires investigation whether it has been 'tracked' or not.

Without such due diligence you are liable to get what you get.

A vehicle that has been tracked does not equal abuse or one that should be discriminated against by any informed buyer.

True, but the likelihood of a performance car seeing racetrack duty is much greater. Pushing the car to its limits for an extended period of time will reduce its lifespan, and it's something I would take into consideration. I wouldn't expect to get more than 100k miles out of a car that spends much of its time racing.

Why do some believe the turbos on the 335i/135i can handle the extra boost more so than the rest of the engine? I'm not so sure the engine internals are the weakest point. Sure, upping the boost will increase heat and cylinder pressure, but running a turbo past the point which it is most efficient will significantly affect its lifespan. Turbochargers spin at very high rpm and get red hot. I've seen plenty of non-BMWs go only 50k miles on stock turbos with just a mild increase in boost: WRX STI, 3000GT VR-4, Supra, and an Eclipse GST. The STI only lasted 35k miles on its stock turbo and was never tracked. The Eclipse's turbocharger exploded, spewing oil everywhere and giving me a pretty awesome demonstration of what happens when the limit is exceeded. I guess time will tell with the N54.

[tarheel91]

Originally Posted by pokeybritches

True, but the likelihood of a performance car seeing racetrack duty is much greater. Pushing the car to its limits for an extended period of time will reduce its lifespan, and it's something I would take into consideration. I wouldn't expect to get more than 100k miles out of a car that spends much of its time racing.

Why do some believe the turbos on the 335i/135i can handle the extra boost more so than the rest of the engine? I'm not so sure the engine internals are the weakest point. Sure, upping the boost will increase heat and cylinder pressure, but running a turbo past the point which it is most efficient will significantly affect its lifespan. Turbochargers spin at very high rpm and get red hot. I've seen plenty of non-BMWs go only 50k miles on stock turbos with just a mild increase in boost: WRX STI, 3000GT VR-4, Supra, and an Eclipse GST. The STI only lasted 35k miles on its stock turbo and was never tracked. The Eclipse's turbocharger exploded, spewing oil everywhere and giving me a pretty awesome demonstration of what happens when the limit is exceeded. I guess time will tell with the N54.

A properly designed and maintained turbo shoud last 10 times the life of the car. It's when you try to modify it and then doln't know how to maintain it that you run into trouble. Most people don't let a turbo car sit like it should on start up and shut down. As you said, turbochargers spin very high, frequently up to 40,000 RPM at IDLE. There's lots of heat in that turbine. You've got an air compressor right next to it with only a fluid bearing seperating it. Once the car shuts off (assuming it doesn't have a dry sump for the turbo), the oil flow stops, so if you don't let it sit, you've got a turbine spinning at God knows what RPM with tons of hot exhaust gasses right around it right next to a bearing, shaft, compressor, etc. Tons of heat sink. Not good. Same issue at start up.

[krnnerdboy]

they just posted an unofficial nurburgring time of 8:12 for the 1m compared to our 8:15 e85 and 8:12 e86.

our cars aren't bad considering the tire and torque disadvantage for the ring times

it also appears that bmw has given it more revs by 500 rpm vs the standard n54 that runs out of steam by 5500
"It immediately feels like a very fast car: pin it in second and the initial thrust is V8 M3-strong. It keeps pulling hard in the mid-range, and only when the rev-counter shows around 6000rpm does the shove subside. The first time it did this, a little bit of me was disappointed, but then I began to explore the flexibility of this impressive engine and, honestly, I didn’t give its inability to smear itself against a 9000rpm rev-limiter a second thought."

[Finnegan]

Not to take this discussion totally off track (like that ever happens around here ), looks like the next Gen Cayman S will be a bit bigger, 100 pounds lighter, and have a 4 cylinder turbo powerplant (and cost around 10K more). Base model will probably be about 60K, and offer the same power level as the current S model.

Link

A new "baby" entry level roadster may be added with a 1.6L 4 cylinder engine rated at 200 HP.

My main point here is that it looks like Porsche is going the same route as BMW--turbos. NA, sadly, seems like it's on the way out everywhere. They don't seem to have infiltrated the 911 line yet which is staying NA, but then again if you're looking for something new unless you can cough up well over 100K for a 911 NA is looking more and more like it's on the way out in the "lower priced" Porsche segment. I won't be surprised though if we start most P-cars as well with snails....

Ch-ch-ch-ch-Changes....

Like I've said elsewhere in this thread, as long as an engine's performance and dynamic characteristics (e.g. S65 or S54) can be maintained I'm willing to turn and face the strain (apologies to Bowie).

[pokeybritches]

Good find. I wonder if they will use an inline or boxer design.

[chickdr]

Originally Posted by Eccentric

How do you figure? The car weighs 3200lbs.. not exactly fat. Similar size to the Z4 M coupe

It actually weighs 3296 according to the 1M thread...
http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=463733

[Eccentric]

Originally Posted by chickdr

It actually weighs 3296 according to the 1M thread...
http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=463733

Oops? Even so 3300 is not heavy

[tarheel91]

Originally Posted by Eccentric

Oops? Even so 3300 is not heavy

My E36 328i is 3300 pounds with me in it (with power and heated seats + a sunroof, no less). Cars continue to get bigger.

[chickdr]

Originally Posted by Eccentric

Oops? Even so 3300 is not heavy

I don't know about that. We are being conditioned to accept heavier and heavier cars. I like the Porsche Boxster's under 3,000lbs(for BOTH standard and S models) better. It has been a learning curve between my 2850# S2K and the 3200# Z4M.

[Eccentric]

Originally Posted by chickdr

I don't know about that. We are being conditioned to accept heavier and heavier cars. I like the Porsche Boxster's under 3,000lbs(for BOTH standard and S models) better. It has been a learning curve between my 2850# S2K and the 3200# Z4M.

Youre right, Dude

But bc everything is relative, I meant that it was light compared to supposed performance cars that weigh 3800lbs.

The 1M is a pretty light car if you ask me. More power and less weight than the e46 m3, which is about 300lbs or so lighter than than the e90 m3.

[Finnegan]

I think it's a move in the right direction. It's not "light" yet in my book (as a relative comparison, next gen Cayman will come in under 2,900 lbs, and be larger, that's 100 lbs less than mine). But like you said E, way lighter than the E9x M3, lighter than the E46 M3, and lighter than the regular 1 series. Still heavier than our Z4Ms (which would be even better around 3,000 lbs or under IMO). Let's hope BMW keeps pushing the weight numbers down....

[lucid]

I don't see BMW weight numbers coming down significantly. They cater to a different market than Porsche in many respects.

BMW makes "all-rounder" cars. That's what they do/sell best. Making things lighter means they either use exotic materials and drive costs up, or take stuff out, which doesn't gel with the all-rounder functionality.

The proof is the Z4M. People bitched and whined about why BMW wasn't making a 3000lb/300hp car for years. They produced something that was close, and almost nobody bought it.

[aerobod]

Originally Posted by chickdr

I like the Porsche Boxster's under 3,000lbs(for BOTH standard and S models) better. It has been a learning curve between my 2850# S2K and the 3200# Z4M.

It isn't under 3000lbs in the current model, if you use the same standard EU measurement that BMW does.

Using the EU weight method:
Base Boxster is 1410kg (3109lbs)
Boxster S with PDK is 1455kg (3208lbs)
Z4M Roadster is 1485kg (3276lbs)
S2000 is 1320kg (2910lbs)
1M Coupe is 1570kg (3461lbs)
Cayman S is 1425kg (3142lbs)
Z4M Coupe is 1495kg (3296lbs).

So, in an apples-to-apples comparison, using the Z4M Roadster as 100%
Base Boxster is 95% of the weight
Heaviest Boxster (-S with PDK) is 98% of the weight
S2000 is 89% of the weight.
1M Coupe is 106% of the weight.
Cayman S is 96% of the weight.
Z4M Coupe is 101% of the weight.

Using the DIN weight that Porsche also quotes, base Boxster is 1355kg (2987lbs), Boxster S with PDK is 1380kg (3042lbs). Viewing the online tech spec weights for Porsche US, the weight varies considerably for each model, depending on which screen or brochure you are looking at.

The problem is that worldwide different manufacturers use different weight standards in different countries. The only standard that is commonly mandated is the EU standard.

[Finnegan]

Originally Posted by lucid

I don't see BMW weight numbers coming down significantly. They cater to a different market than Porsche in many respects.

BMW makes "all-rounder" cars. That's what they do/sell best. Making things lighter means they either use exotic materials and drive costs up, or take stuff out, which doesn't gel with the all-rounder functionality.

The proof is the Z4M. People bitched and whined about why BMW wasn't making a 3000lb/300hp car for years. They produced something that was close, and almost nobody bought it.

.

Totally agree--BMW does make an all-rounder. Cars that offer some practicality while performing well (e.g. not a Camry).

As for no one buying the Z4M, yep. Except of course on this forum!

[pokeybritches]

Originally Posted by Finnegan

. As for no one buying the Z4M, yep. Except of course on this forum!

Yes, we are the vocal, pissy ones... otherwise known as purists! I think many of us will hold onto our cars as long as possible. The ones that have the money and "get it" upgrade to a Porsche. The ones that don't get E9x M3s or the dreaded turbo models. I might wind up in a C6 Z06 next, but it still doesn't steal my heart like the Z4M. I hope to keep this car to the day I die.

I've read that production numbers were about right for the 2006 Z4M. Demand seemed greater than anticipated, so production was increased for 2007. The extra cars didn't sell, and the 2006 estimates were correct. Regardless, I'm not complaining because my car was a STEAL for what it is.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by pokeybritches

I've read that production numbers were about right for the 2006 Z4M. Demand seemed greater than anticipated, so production was increased for 2007. The extra cars didn't sell, and the 2006 estimates were correct.

Interesting. Not many cars made overall either way. ~9750 Z4Ms in total. Hard to imagine that yielded positive margins, but I guess it might have since they had a good pool of components to work with. Still takes a lot of effort to engineer the car and set up a new production line. As a comparison, they made 18000+ E30 M3s (over a longer period of time though).

Coupe
ECE (LHD): 1,652 produced from 4/06 through 7/08 (Plus 65 pre-production examples produced 10/05 through 3/06)
ECE (RHD): 1,054 produced from 4/06 through 6/08 (Plus 1 pre-production example produced 2/06)
NA (LHD): 1,801 produced from 4/06 through 8/08 (Plus 14 pre-production examples produced 10/05 through 4/06)

Roadster:
ECE (LHD): 1,325 produced from 1/06 through 7/08 (Plus 100 pre-production examples produced 11/04 through 10/05.)
ECE (RHD): 916 produced 1/06 through 7/08 (Plus seven pre-production examples produced 12/04 through 9/05.)
NA (LHD): 2,998 produced 2/06 through 8/08 (Plus 44 pre-production examples produced 11/04 through 11/05.)

http://www.bmwmregistry.com/faq.php

[Eccentric]

what BMW loses profit-wise, with cars like the z3m, z3m, and 1m it should make up for with new fanboys like most of us.

Merc puts the same set of engines in each of their cars, and bmw is doing the same.

Cut down the number of models, not the number of engines.