RE: New BMW 1.5-litre engine revealed

[Pistonwot]

NotNormal said:

The only 1.5L BMW turbo engine worth getting excited about...

A mans engine for men.
Cant have that anymore, an idiot may harm itself.

[Robmarriott]

How much does it weigh?
Can input the 224bhp version in an E30?

That's all I want to know.

[Pistonwot]

kambites said:

Pistonwot said:

Could be worthwhile if BMW's rediculously fat cars were halved in weight. But they wont be and the tiny engine will be screaming its nuts off nearly all of the time returning poor MPG.

Why woult it be "screaming its nuts off"? It'll probably have more torque lower down the rev range than a similarly powerful N/A engine of twice the capacity.

Think it through.

[LewisR]

Where will it be built? Hams Hall?

[Agem]

I wonder if they can get + 200 bhp just with one turbo?.......or a twin set up (one eletric, one normal). Another cross my mind is what is stopping someone getting the "Base" 130 ish bhp & re-mapping to 200+ ?

Mike

[The Nur]

currybum said:

The Nur said:

Might well do, won't produce more power though

If you ran it on 95 ron fuel it probably would

Just to clarify, because I am a little confused, you are comparing the new road engine to the old f1 engine, right?

[v8250]

There will only ever be one 'true' 1.5ltr engine...the BRM V16. Listen to the music this babe makes at Goodwood

http://gpl.krej.cz/mp3/BRM%20-%20loud%20pass.mp3
http://gpl.krej.cz/mp3/BRM%20-%20in%20car.mp3
http://gpl.krej.cz/mp3/BRM%20-%20full%20track.mp3

and with the following power curve:

100 bhp (75 kW) at 5,000 rpm
175 bhp (130 kW) at 6,000 rpm
250 bhp (190 kW) at 7,000 rpm
335 bhp (250 kW) at 8,000 rpm
412 bhp (307 kW) at 9,000 rpm
525 bhp (391 kW) at 10,000 rpm
585 bhp (436 kW) at 11,000 rpm
600 bhp (450 kW) at 12,000 rpm

[clunkbox]

That engine would be pretty awesome in an e30.

[kambites]

Pistonwot said:

kambites said:

Pistonwot said:

Could be worthwhile if BMW's rediculously fat cars were halved in weight. But they wont be and the tiny engine will be screaming its nuts off nearly all of the time returning poor MPG.

Why woult it be "screaming its nuts off"? It'll probably have more torque lower down the rev range than a similarly powerful N/A engine of twice the capacity.

Think it through.

I don't get you?

[davepoth]

kambites said:

Still seems to be peaking at under 6k rpm from what I can see? I suppose that's the way the world is going though - might as well buy the diesel, really.

Peak HP is at 5000rpm, redline is 6500rpm according to the BMW Car Club of America.

http://www.bmwcca.org/node/4780

And for a modern turbo engine, it does sound nice and engine-y.

[jontysafe]

Terminator X said:

Find it all very depressing as it's not cars causing "climate change"

TX.

This is soo true. Just one container ship going from Taiwan to San Francisco and back again uses 1.5million gallons (albeit US gallons) of bunker fuel. There are almost 90,000 of these vessels travelling almost continuosly. Bunker fuel is THE dirtiest most polluting carcinogenic fuel in the world. It is estimated that 60,000 die every year as a direct result of micro particles which result in the burning of this bunker fuel.

Even this pales into insignificance looking at the green house gas emissions of energy generation and industry.

Read this if interested, and yes I know it`s the Guardian (I did eat my muesli this morning)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/feb/13/...

The car industry is leading the way cleaning up it`s act on emissions but shipping emissions aren`t even on the agenda to be discussed on UK gree house gas emissions and look to increase by 30% in the coming years.

I want my V10 back

[kambites]

Unusual to see such a gap between peak power and the red-line.

I'm sure it'll be a decent enough engine for shopping cars, but I can't imagine anything much less "sporty".

[rwindmill]

will261058 said:

Terminator X said:

Find it all very depressing as it's not cars causing "climate change"

TX.

Agree fully, but if it makes the fuel last longer then I can put up with it.

This is what it is really about, not climate control, but management of the ever dwindling stocks of fuel.

However, all of this frugality is for nothing if the big manufacturers dont start reducing the weight of their new models. Year on year cars have gotten heavier and heavier (with the occasional exception). They need to get lighter

[E30M3SE]

NotNormal said:

The only 1.5L BMW turbo engine worth getting excited about...

The Nur said:

Another photo of a proper 1.5l BMW engine

You two have the right idea ..... and someone else totally missed the point.

davepoth said:

And for a modern turbo engine, it does sound nice and engine-y.

My money is on that 'noise' being synthesised, in the first 10 seconds of the video clip it sounds from the outside like an old sewing machine, if that noise is from the car which I guess it is.

Edited by E30M3SE on Tuesday 18th September 15:27

[FisiP1]

Almost breaks the rev counter when he floors it, surely doesn't lose traction so what the hell?

I think it sounds good, but needs the rev limit raised a bit. Innovations like this excite me, much more interesting than the 4-pots we have all become accustomed to.

[TallTom]

226Bhp and 176lb ft, I think there is something slightly off with those numbers

For example my AGP produces 155BHP and near the same torque, 170 lb·ft and its a 1.4 Turbo, I would expect the peak torque to increase as it has just over 70Bhp more


I would also expect the lower power turbo models will use different turbos and intercoolers to ensure that you cannot just map it to the higher power level while ensuring long term reliability?

[kambites]

FisiP1 said:

Innovations like this excite me, much more interesting than the 4-pots we have all become accustomed to.

"Innovation"? Where? It's just another low capacity turbocharged engine like everyone else has been doing for years.

[Captain Muppet]

doogz said:

Captain Muppet said:

So just like the TV dampers that engines all have already then?

Or something new and interesting?

I'm sure you wouldn't have mentioned it if it wasn't new and interesting, in which case I'd like to hear more about it please.

The vibration characteristics are every bit as impressive as the unit’s lightweight and compact dimensions. In this respect, the three-cylinder engine shares a number of common features with the six-cylinder in-line engines – neither of them generates free inertial forces nor free moments of inertia. The three-cylinder engine is also free of first and second order inertial forces and the roll torque, which is very small compared to the six-cylinder engine, is completely eliminated by the use of a balance shaft. Thanks to its torsional vibration damper, which works on the principle of a centrifugal pendulum, the engine behaves immaculately even at low rpm, providing an extremely comfortable ride.


http://www.bmwblog.com/2012/09/14/bmw-unveils-new-...

Ah, so it's just a normal TV damper. Journalists eh?

The balance shaft is more noteworthy, as the Ford Fox manages without one, and because it actually does what the article claimed the TV damper did.

[joe58]

FisiP1 said:

Almost breaks the rev counter when he floors it, surely doesn't lose traction so what the hell?

I think it sounds good, but needs the rev limit raised a bit. Innovations like this excite me, much more interesting than the 4-pots we have all become accustomed to.

Indeed I don't see what all the fuss is about. F1 engines are tiny capacity too. With the lighter weight and smaller dimensions comes better packaging and hopefully smaller, lighter cars. Who wouldn't want that? Also this would be pretty good too in a lightweight Morgan. A pretty good home I would think.

[nickfrog]

kambites said:

Pistonwot said:

kambites said:

Pistonwot said:

Could be worthwhile if BMW's rediculously fat cars were halved in weight. But they wont be and the tiny engine will be screaming its nuts off nearly all of the time returning poor MPG.

Why woult it be "screaming its nuts off"? It'll probably have more torque lower down the rev range than a similarly powerful N/A engine of twice the capacity.

Think it through.

I don't get you?

Not many people do.