Posted on Thursday 27 March 2008
BMW CEO Norbert Reithofer recently revealed plans to phase out diesel V8 engines across the board, but as drastic as this sounds it could be just the tip of the iceberg for the carmaker’s future plans to shakeup its powertrain lineup. BMW’s hallowed ‘M’ division could also be affected by the new wave of environmental consciousness sweeping carmakers across the world, the end result being smaller engines and turbochargers in future M cars.
Speaking with Auto Motor and Sport, Reithofer said BMW would focus on its six-cylinder engines as it attempts to improve emissions and fuel consumption levels in light of stricter regulations set to roll in over the next decade in both the U.S. and Europe. During the same interview he told reporters that he’d like to see future M cars lose a few cylinders and shed more weight. He gave the example of BMW’s brilliant 300hp twin-turbo 3.0L six as a future direction he’d like to take.
Although purists may scoff at the idea of a turbocharged M3 or even M5, it’s a direction rival performance house AMG is likely to take as well, and with the current practice of one-upmanship amongst carmakers BMW may not have a choice.
Via: The Truth About Cars
Purists can scoff all they like, but the original M3 had a smaller engine as well, and was very peaky and hard to get the most out of (kind of like the current Evo and STi).
But I don’t see anything wrong with a pavement ripping inline 6 with a couple of turbos strapped on (ala the old Supra, which was a monster in tuner’s hands).
If there’s one thing better than a V8, it’s a proper inline-6.
BMW + Turbo”s” = VERY NICE S**T
Had a E34 B10 Bi-Turbo once. Straight Six with two Turbos. Very nice.
I have never driven this car in any of itsiterations but believe this would be a good move and one Audi and MB would be well advised to copy. Correct me if I’m wrong but the V8 is heavier than a V6, even with turbos on it, and so not the correct engine for a sports coupe.
well hector, i think the one thing that needs to be said is that it wouldnt be a V6… it would be an I6. and yes there is a huge difference. in many ways, an I6 is a smother engine than a good V8. even a really good I5 has more potential than a V8. It’s got everything to do with geometry. with an I6, you have 3 power strokes per rotation. on a V8, you only have 2. and I5 has 2.5, and an I4 in many ways is similar to the V8, in that it also has 2 power strokes per rotation. V6? 1.5.
basically, you get a smother ride. the engineers are left to figure out what to do with the inherent vibrations of an inline engine, but that can be taken care of. Volvo has made a great name by making everything from I3 to I6 engines. It may seem rediculous now, but there was a time when an I8 was a mark of luxury. because it’s basically one half of a V16.
regardless; volvo has been packaging some great inline engines and I think that the german makes would stand to improve their image of refined quality and luxury if they did away with the V engines.
Actually V8 in current m3 is 33Lbs lighter than than I6 in previous generation of M3. So V8 can weight less than i6, given it’s new V8 vs old i6.
And turbos, especially 2, can add a lot of weight on front of the car.
Take any subaru or mazda, they have similar models with or without turbos. Models with
turbos have to be adjusted for extra weight, but putting different front suspension to compensate for extra weight.
ivan; comparing a new engine to an old engine isnt fair, and I know for a fact that the mazda speed 3 is about 250 lbs heavier than the 3hatch, but it has little to do with the engine. in these sportier models, the chassis is stiffened, heavier mechanicals are used, and generally there is more sound insulation as well.
adding a turbo, even a bi-turbo, will not add much weight. the point is that an I5 is smoother than a V8. an I6 is that much more so. theres a certain level of premium that you get when you have an inline engine over 4 cylinders (or equivalently, a V engine over 8 cylinders).
I’m certain that BMW could have made a new I6 that would have been lighter than the V8 that replaced the old I6. A V block inherently has more metal per cylinder than an I block because of the stresses at the inside of the angle itself. more metal needs to be filled into the V, making it more or less triangular.
basically the point here is that BMW is a luxury make, and if they have to drop the number of cylinders then they should go back to an I configuration, because of the smooth feel.
and i brought up packaging because the volvo C30 has a transverse mounted I5 turbo. thats right. 5 cylinders, mounted sideways. in a compact hatch. it’s not like you need a long nosed car like a deusenburg just to fit a big (read: larger than 4 cyl) Inline engine. If volvo can mount an I5 transversely in an AWD compact car, then BMW should have no problem making a mid sized car with a transverse AWD I6 a cylinder is only as wide as your arm after all.
I used to have what is probably the best engine ever made, the 3 liter I6 in the late 80’s MB 300E. Man what a smooth engine, and it was so easy to work on, one cam cover, plenty of room on either side.
But I think part of the V engine’s popularity is the compactness. You can push it further back in the car, wheras the I6 took up a long length of room.
Thanks for the lesson on power pulses per revolution, Chris, did not know that.
Yeah Chris but you will not seen transversal mounted engines in a BMW. They didn’t started it in the 1 series why should they do in another model? The whole balance of the car is just better when you mount the engine longitunal behind the front axle. When you don’t do it look at the Audi A4 what happens.
Well I mentioned transverse because all the M’s (besides the M3) are AWD, and by the time you saw the results of this article, you can guarantee the M3 would be AWD as well. Transverse mounting doesnt really matter in AWD mounting wise.
As for weight distribution, the issues come with pushing the transmission into the engine bay. But BMW could take some cues from ingenious FWD engineering and push the wheel base to be larger. Once key example that comes to mind is the current Mazda 3. Just about everything infront of the front fender is just body kit.
point being is that BMW gets a lot of praise for being a pure driving experience but that’s cause they’ve been doing nothing but taking the simplest formula and doing it well. front engine. rear drive.
they’re capable of more.
I maintain that they could package a good I6 all the way down to the 3 series. The 1 will never have AWD, so transverse makes no sense in that car. god knows BMW will never go FWD.
Chris…. Man, you were on a roll there, came off looking very well informed, until you said “all the M cars, with the exception of the M3, are AWD” WTF????? There has NEVER, EVER, been an AWD M car. The M3 will never be AWD, nor will the M5, M6, or any other M car, as it violates the basic philosophy of the M car. (Lots of power, lots of revs, LOW WEIGHT, RWD) BMW only started building the AWD system into their cars because they didn’t want to lose their segment of the market to the idiots who believe such a thing is necessary on a road car. AWD REDUCES performance on a road, inducing understeer and adding vast amounts of weight. You will NEVER see a BMW M with AWD, I guarantee. I
readily agree with your thoughts on inline engines, however, especially an I6, as they have inherent balancing qualities. I have never seen/felt a smooth I5, though… Ford/ Volvo I5s sound and act like diesels. BMWs policy in the past has been that turbos are a lazy, uninspired way to get power out of a motor. Sad to see the M division change their philosophy so dramatically. But, I’d still like to see the BMW/Brabham engine from the ’80’s in a car… 1.5L I4, 1500hp… the ultimate tire-shredding machine.