RE: BMW M6: Catch It While You Can
Discussion
t and sound bad to bootRoverP6B said:
Inferior, as in, zero character. The M5/6 unit today is basically an updated version of what you'll find under the bonnet of an early Bentley Arnage - BMW's tried-and-tested 4.4 litre unit, with twin turbochargers. It's not a proper M engine, just a slightly tweaked mass-produced so-what forced-induction V8. Yeah, it makes a bit more power than the S85, but what sort of substitute is extra bhp for the howl of the naturally-aspirated V10 at over 8000rpm? 507bhp isn't exactly lacking, and there's a lot you can do to those engines - they were originally intended to have a longer stroke, giving 5.5 litres (which BMW's M5 CSL prototype has, and the same was done with the E92 M3 GTS, the S65 engine of which is 8/10ths of the S85), cams, intake etc can all free up a bit more power... and if you really want forced-induction torque, a G-power centrifugal supercharger conversion would enable you to blow the turbo nonsense into the weeds.
If it indeed is the old 4.4 litre from E39 540 and E60 545 (not newer 4.8 from E60 550) that, to me, isn't really a bad thing since those engines are build to last (minus Nikasil issue in late 90s but we'll skip that).I do admit I don't know all the details, but weren't most M car engines from S series build based on regular M or N series engines? The V10 is somewhat special but the rest are related to their regular siblings, as are Alpina engines.
The whole purist N/A conversation isn't something I'll get into as from performance standpoint I don't mind a turbo and once you past 5-6k RPM, turbo or not, in a V8 you will get a howl.
You won't get a howl in a V8, turbo or not, but the turbo is all done by 6000rpm, no point taking it past that, and the sound is killed stone dead right across the rev range. Yes, most ///M engines were based on production engines, but most were different in every detail - bespoke block (except in the M88's case, it was an M30 block), bespoke head, bespoke internals. Just slapping a pair of turbos on a production engine does not an ///M engine make. It'll probably be OK reliability-wise (as far as any downsized turbo engine is), but character? Nope.
RoverP6B said:
You won't get a howl in a V8, turbo or not, but the turbo is all done by 6000rpm, no point taking it past that, and the sound is killed stone dead right across the rev range. Yes, most ///M engines were based on production engines, but most were different in every detail - bespoke block (except in the M88's case, it was an M30 block), bespoke head, bespoke internals. Just slapping a pair of turbos on a production engine does not an ///M engine make. It'll probably be OK reliability-wise (as far as any downsized turbo engine is), but character? Nope.
Before we get into "What a howl and whats a roar" conversation I think I'll just come back to the original point. IMO M6 E63/E64 fell off the ugly tree hitting every branch on the way. It might have a great "personality" and "character" but looks are important. And M6's looks strike it off the list.
RoverP6B said:
Whatever. The replacement is not pretty either. If you want pretty, buy something Italian, or a Jag or Aston.
For me the replacement *is* pretty. You don't think that but that's ok. Do you think that E63/64 was pretty?IMO the car does not have to be pretty. But I don't want something catastrophically ugly either.
The engine discussion is less relevant as I'm not a purist or a BMW fanatic.
I'm guessing you have a suggestion for something italian in the same price bracket?
cerb4.5lee said:
The beemer will work when you want it to though.
No more so than the British or Italian stuff. Jaguar top of the reliability tables these days, Ferrari/Maserati aren't bad either, and BMWs can be a pain in the arse... one of mine refused to start last night, had mysteriously drained its battery since I last used it earlier in the week...Bladedancer said:
For me the replacement *is* pretty. You don't think that but that's ok. Do you think that E63/64 was pretty?
IMO the car does not have to be pretty. But I don't want something catastrophically ugly either. The engine discussion is less relevant as I'm not a purist or a BMW fanatic. I'm guessing you have a suggestion for something italian in the same price bracket?
Well, I don't see the new one as any prettier than the E63, which I only find unattractive from either end - it's quite nice side-on IMO. The engine is what defines the car, you'll get it as soon as you hear one. As for Italian stuff, yeah, the Maserati GranTurismo is a direct 6er rival. Jag XK now discontinued but much the same sort of thing again. F-type rather smaller. I understand a new XK is on its way and will be a proper 4-seater where the old one was more of a 2+2.IMO the car does not have to be pretty. But I don't want something catastrophically ugly either. The engine discussion is less relevant as I'm not a purist or a BMW fanatic. I'm guessing you have a suggestion for something italian in the same price bracket?
RoverP6B said:
Well, I don't see the new one as any prettier than the E63, which I only find unattractive from either end - it's quite nice side-on IMO. The engine is what defines the car, you'll get it as soon as you hear one. As for Italian stuff, yeah, the Maserati GranTurismo is a direct 6er rival. Jag XK now discontinued but much the same sort of thing again. F-type rather smaller. I understand a new XK is on its way and will be a proper 4-seater where the old one was more of a 2+2.
Dang. I forgot about the Maserati. I think I would go for that over 6. Though M6 4 door would still be tempting...Good thing I'll never have a dilemma like that :P
The only bad angle on the E63 is when the bootlid is open and it looks abit 'fussy'.
That said, for a car that came out in 2004 it has not aged dramatically and still looks pretty fresh, even in stock 630i trim.
The M6 looks the most exclusive of the lot, quad exhausts, carbon roof, unique paint, massive wheels and brakes. It really sets it apart.
That said, for a car that came out in 2004 it has not aged dramatically and still looks pretty fresh, even in stock 630i trim.
The M6 looks the most exclusive of the lot, quad exhausts, carbon roof, unique paint, massive wheels and brakes. It really sets it apart.
Schermerhorn said:
The only bad angle on the E63 is when the bootlid is open and it looks abit 'fussy'.
That said, for a car that came out in 2004 it has not aged dramatically and still looks pretty fresh, even in stock 630i trim.
The M6 looks the most exclusive of the lot, quad exhausts, carbon roof, unique paint, massive wheels and brakes. It really sets it apart.
I've looked at E63 many times and I'm yet to find a good angle on it (maybe from underneath would work?).That said, for a car that came out in 2004 it has not aged dramatically and still looks pretty fresh, even in stock 630i trim.
The M6 looks the most exclusive of the lot, quad exhausts, carbon roof, unique paint, massive wheels and brakes. It really sets it apart.
I guess every one to its own.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff