[mapezzul]

Originally Posted by Tweak48

Doesn't the cost of 2 turbos, intercooler, and associated h/w-s/w pretty much guarantee that the 335 will be substantially more expensive, and create a three model 3 series lineup?? I think a BMW 335 could get a $5 grand premium over the IS-350, and creates a nice nitch for the 330.

I have come to the conclusion that all this turbo stuff was developed along side the new MINI engine that was designed along with PSA so in fact the R&D cost was decreased immensely compared to previous engine designs. BMW finally has it's VW (Audi's understudy) in MINI so BMW does not have to bear the full load of R&D and they can mass produce items and share components to reduce the overall cost of items. I get this feeling b/c the engine designs appear to be heading in the same direction, minus the fact the MINI/PSA is a 4 banger and the BMW a 6. Components seem to be close in initial comparison. I don't think it is going to cost that much more to produce the turbo version, but who knows?????

[stressdoc]

I think the key issue is what the market will bear, regardless of developmental costs.

[EnI]

Originally Posted by Mono

The 335i isn't even out yet. How much is it going to weigh? How aggressive will the gearing be? It's not just about peak horsepower.

The Lexus is getting to a 100 mph a full second quicker than the current 330i. It's going to take a very impressive 335i to close that gap.

They've tested 335i against IS350. Just for fun, since they do not benchmark Lexus - its vice versa. Btw, it was like playing with a mouse.
The 335si (with 330HP) also trashed new Audi S4.
FYI.

[turbo]

The 306 Hp is only a guidance from BMW. Once you put a decent chip or do a ECU flash upgrade, we'll see numbers around 380 HP and 380 lb-ft. And all without sacrificing any reliability, at a cost around $100.

Then it's bye bye Lexus...

[Femme]

Originally Posted by mapezzul

I have come to the conclusion that all this turbo stuff was developed along side the new MINI engine that was designed along with PSA so in fact the R&D cost was decreased immensely compared to previous engine designs. BMW finally has it's VW (Audi's understudy) in MINI so BMW does not have to bear the full load of R&D and they can mass produce items and share components to reduce the overall cost of items. I get this feeling b/c the engine designs appear to be heading in the same direction, minus the fact the MINI/PSA is a 4 banger and the BMW a 6. Components seem to be close in initial comparison. I don't think it is going to cost that much more to produce the turbo version, but who knows?????

BMW has been producing turbo diesel engines for ages, nothing new here. The 535d 3,0 liter sequential turbo (272 hp) is actually one of the most powerful and rewarded diesel engines available today.

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by GregA

They've tested 335i against IS350. Just for fun, since they do not benchmark Lexus - its vice versa. Btw, it was like playing with a mouse.
The 335si (with 330HP) also trashed new Audi S4.
FYI.

When?What?Where? Am I missing something?Which test with WHAT 335i?

[lux.sh]

Originally Posted by turbo

The 306 Hp is only a guidance from BMW. Once you put a decent chip or do a ECU flash upgrade, we'll see numbers around 380 HP and 380 lb-ft. And all without sacrificing any reliability, at a cost around $100.

Then it's bye bye Lexus...

even without some chip or flash upgrade, if same 306hp rated BMW engine vs 310hp ranted Lexus engine = BMW will kill the lexus in every performance aspect.

[mapezzul]

Originally Posted by Femme

BMW has been producing turbo diesel engines for ages, nothing new here. The 535d 3,0 liter sequential turbo (272 hp) is actually one of the most powerful and rewarded diesel engines available today.

Yes but diesel ad gas (petrol) are 2 different animals and the new turbo is non-seguential in nature. The Direct Injection technology is a bit different. Essentially they needed to build from the ground up.

[england1987]

Originally Posted by ward

HP numbers mean EVERYTHING!!

I hope your being sarcastic, otherwise you have issues my friend. I do believe that torque is everything when it comes to moving. especially considering they derive HP figures from the torque numbers and not the otherway around! Where did the E54 come from anyway. I thought it was called the N54?

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by mapezzul

Yes but diesel ad gas (petrol) are 2 different animals and the new turbo is non-seguential in nature. The Direct Injection technology is a bit different. Essentially they needed to build from the ground up.

Indeed. Valvetronic doesn't quite like a turbocharger in its system, technically spoken. That's also why the new engines are DI, that technology suits much better with a turbo(hence VAG 2.0FSI Turbo , fantastic engine in i.e. the new Golf GTI)

[Hula-Hula]

I think they can push alot more torque out of the engine thats all...

[KL2DC]

Originally Posted by Hula-Hula

I think they can push alot more torque out of the engine thats all...

Saving that for the M3 model positioning ...

[Saintor]

Turbo (x2) is a stupid stupid idea for only 300HP. Even Audi abandonned it. They just had to throw in the "old tech" M3 engine and they would got... 333HP. In the end, these double-turbo engines takes as much fuel as larger engines and they would have been better with a larger displacement at the beginning. I owned 2 turbo cars. Harder to resell at high mileage, too.

Crazy move from BMW.

[mundo74]

Originally Posted by luxman999

So what is the real advantage of turbo charged 3.0 liter engine over naturally-aspirated 3.5 liter? ..

All your torque at 1500 RPM, in the range most people drive.

[mundo74]

Originally Posted by Saintor

In the end, these double-turbo engines takes as much fuel as larger engines and they would have been better with a larger displacement at the beginning.
.

Is the drop in fuel economy due to effeciency losses of having two turbines instead of one. Turbos engines are supposed to be more effecient than NA engines due to its ability to reuse some of the ~30% of fuel we waste in our exhaust. I can see if you chip it to get 400+HP and use it constantly, you would burn some extra fuel.

[Saintor]

So much for theory. On the pratical side, a Subaru 4 cyl. 2.5 turbo costs more in fuel than a Honda V6 3.0L for about the same HP output.

[gtaste]

Originally Posted by Saintor

Turbo (x2) is a stupid stupid idea for only 300HP. Even Audi abandonned it. They just had to throw in the "old tech" M3 engine and they would got... 333HP. In the end, these double-turbo engines takes as much fuel as larger engines and they would have been better with a larger displacement at the beginning. I owned 2 turbo cars. Harder to resell at high mileage, too.

Crazy move from BMW.

Old tech? Individual Throttle butterfly, 8k redline.. The history of this S54 block is long and evolutionary. Tolerance is low so handbuilt is required which costs more (17k for the engine). This is not an engine for bread and butter models. Drive it and you will know. It takes some concentration to drive it smoothly.. I have to take a deep breath everytime it gets fire up before driving off. It 's not about engine displacement and hp it generates.. It's all about how it delivers the power. Most will hate S54 block in a family sedan. Trust me I have one and loving it. It's highly strung and feels brutal. But that's the trade off. I drove the e90 330i, it's smooth.. so smooth that I love it as well.. performance asides, it's still different...

[akhbhaat]

Originally Posted by luxman999

So what is the real advantage of turbo charged 3.0 liter engine over naturally-aspirated 3.5 liter? Does it have better performance, better reliability, better gas mileage or cost less? I think answers are clear NO to all. I really don't know what BMW guys are smoking these days.....

Sorry if any of this has been answered already:

A well tuned bi-turbo setup delivers:
-Excellent torque
-Excellent power curve (note the 1500-5800 rpm torque plateau - talk about awesome highway performance/passing and in-gear acceleration)
-Better fuel economy under partial throttle (which is how most driving is done, of course)
-Lighter block weight (important for balancing the car's chassis - the 4 liter V8 used in the 540i, for example, is 70 kg heavier than the N54)

Forced induction essentially provides all the advantages of a larger naturally aspirated engine with fewer of the disadvantages (particularly in terms of day to day fuel economy). We will likely see this engine, at 3.0L with HPI, getting better than 30 mpg on the highway. Lexus' DI 3.5 rates at 28 (despite a six speed trans and very conservative - judging by how it behaved when I drove it - transmission behavior), and the BMW non-DI N52 3.0 is currently rated at 30.

Cost and reliability depend upon the setup and are impossible to determine from this side of things.

I don't know about you, but I love the torquey nature of the M52TU in my E46. I love being able to pass in 5th gear on the freeway with a lowly 2.5 liter engine. The low and mid range torque in the older BMW I6 engines was always a big selling point for me...this engine restores my faith in that ideal.

[akhbhaat]

Originally Posted by gtaste

Old tech? Individual Throttle butterfly, 8k redline.. The history of this S54 block is long and evolutionary. Tolerance is low so handbuilt is required which costs more (17k for the engine). This is not an engine for bread and butter models. Drive it and you will know. It takes some concentration to drive it smoothly.. I have to take a deep breath everytime it gets fire up before driving off. It 's not about engine displacement and hp it generates.. It's all about how it delivers the power. Most will hate S54 block in a family sedan. Trust me I have one and loving it. It's highly strung and feels brutal. But that's the trade off. I drove the e90 330i, it's smooth.. so smooth that I love it as well.. performance asides, it's still different...

Well said. Don't forget to mention that the S54 has terrible fuel economy because it makes its power in stratospheric rpms and compensates for this and the relatively weak lower end torque output with very aggressive gearing.

Anybody who thinks the S54 would make an appropriate engine for a fairly mainstream sedan clearly hasn't driven an S54 powered car, and/or doesn't understand the mechanical limitations of the engine.

[LIKEWATER]

There is a reason why BMW compares the:
4.0 liter V8(306hp / 287lbft) introduced last Sept. used in the 540i.
3.0 liter I6(306hp / 295lbft) to be used in the AG 335.

Anybody see the connection ?

[ssam]

Having a bmw turbo petrol engine in the NA market is an excellent thing.
I`m not afraid about the long term reliability....just look at the turbodiesel engines in Europe

I prefer a 3.0L turbo over a 3.5L NA because of the torque and the feeling it gives you at low rpm

when I compare my 325i to a 1.8Turbo VW GTI I have to say that the GTI feels faster AT LOW REV (under 3500rpm)

It gives you an impressive sensation of acceleration and an immediate response (which might be too brutal for some people but not for me)

The only thing we need to know at that point is.....the price of this baby
If they just move from 330i to 335i at the same price this car will kill the competition......but I highly doubt they will just drop the 330i......I thing 335i will cost much more than 330i

[gtaste]

Originally Posted by akhbhaat

Well said. Don't forget to mention that the S54 has terrible fuel economy because it makes its power in stratospheric rpms and compensates for this and the relatively weak lower end torque output with very aggressive gearing.

Anybody who thinks the S54 would make an appropriate engine for a fairly mainstream sedan clearly hasn't driven an S54 powered car, and/or doesn't understand the mechanical limitations of the engine.

Thanks! I got mix city/hwy of 20mpg.. Strangely though, if I see myself getting more than 21mpg I feel guilty for not been pushing it hard enough. I feel like I own it an explaination for not driving it like it meant to be driven.