RE: BMW launches 320si
Discussion
Yes it's all very nice, but a few points:-
1) Honda have been doing this to engines (except the dubious CF cover) for YEARS! The 1993 1.6 VTi lump had 160bhp on-tap, Type-R engines between them have goodies such as oval profile titanium valve springs, ported heads, lightweight valves and rods, low-friction pistons, stiffer crank...
2) Those tyres are far too big...everyone's going for 'ring times, and frankly big tyres make a nice headline but do nothing for fuel economy, nvh, or handling finesse!
Rant over, it's still nice to see BMW trying their hand at this stuff...a (proper) 3-series Clubsport would be even better.
1) Honda have been doing this to engines (except the dubious CF cover) for YEARS! The 1993 1.6 VTi lump had 160bhp on-tap, Type-R engines between them have goodies such as oval profile titanium valve springs, ported heads, lightweight valves and rods, low-friction pistons, stiffer crank...
2) Those tyres are far too big...everyone's going for 'ring times, and frankly big tyres make a nice headline but do nothing for fuel economy, nvh, or handling finesse!
Rant over, it's still nice to see BMW trying their hand at this stuff...a (proper) 3-series Clubsport would be even better.
No Mate not at all , i just get sick and tired of the stick BMW attract they make good cars , ok not all of them but a lot.
So what if this car has less than 200bhp or only has an extra 23bhp over i sibling its probably a good all round motor and is a bit different .
Your opening post "Why" well why not , its called marketing and good luck to them they won a hotly contested race series
So what if this car has less than 200bhp or only has an extra 23bhp over i sibling its probably a good all round motor and is a bit different .
Your opening post "Why" well why not , its called marketing and good luck to them they won a hotly contested race series
wab172uk said:
As my dad used to say, you can't polish a t**d
Ahh such words of wisdom
Me thinks Marki drives a BMW.
My comment was purely to do with styling of the thing. Generally I am a fan of the latest BMWs (even the 1er has grown on me). They are so much more interesting than anything from Audi or M-B (CLS honourably excepted..). The 3er is just grim though!
minimax said:
can anyone explain why it has 23 extra horsepower and only gets another 2mph on the top speed? seems odd
Proabably (at least) two reasons:
1) Max power is available at 7k rpm, but you're not pulling 7k rpm in top at maximum speed - so Pmax isn't available ie the power 'increase' at Vmax is less than 23 bhp.
2) Wind resistance is proportional to velocity squared ie twice the speed requires 4 x the power. Hence the effect of an extra 23 bhp (or less - see (1) above) is much reduced.
If it's a homologation special it would tend to imply that they have had to change something fundametal on the vehicle so that they can use it on the WTCC. eg Cylinder head needed additional material to allow larger ports int he WTCC car. They would need to build and eventually sell enough of those cars with the larger cylinder haeds to allow the use of the head on the WTCC car. There could be no significant change to output or performance but it allows them to do what they like with the WTCC car. You however get to pay a little bit more and have a 'special' car. 
griffter said:
2) Wind resistance is proportional to velocity squared ie twice the speed requires 4 x the power. Hence the effect of an extra 23 bhp (or less - see (1) above) is much reduced.
It's cubed, not squared (since power = force x velocity)
It takes 8x as much power to go 2x as fast (aero factors only, but they are by far the most significant).
That is a step in the right direction. It is about time that BMW capitalised on its touring car prowess.
However:
Honda manages to get 240HP out of 2 litres. BMW should be able to deliver something like that.
High revving? The M5 with a 5.0 reves 1,000RPM higher. That 2.0 engine should be revving at least to 9,000RPM
I'm sure the car will still be too heavy.
I feel I need to purchase one just the same, because I love two litre naturally aspirated cars, and have been moaning about BMW not offering this sort of car for years. Too bad my old Clio would leave it for dead!
However:
Honda manages to get 240HP out of 2 litres. BMW should be able to deliver something like that.
High revving? The M5 with a 5.0 reves 1,000RPM higher. That 2.0 engine should be revving at least to 9,000RPM
I'm sure the car will still be too heavy.
I feel I need to purchase one just the same, because I love two litre naturally aspirated cars, and have been moaning about BMW not offering this sort of car for years. Too bad my old Clio would leave it for dead!
XM5ER said:
Wow, loads of people just looking at on paper stats AGAIN.
Look at the M3 CSL! It's not about the numbers on paper, it's about the driving experience.
This new car may have revised suspension, low-inertia engine internals, a gorgeous exhaust note, special dampers...
You can't just look at the engine output and weight and simple things. I'm pretty sure BMW have made it a corker to drive, which is cool. Lets get back to car not needing headline grabbing power figures to sell, let the cars sell on their driveability and fun factor again.
Power isn't really anything if the car is dull as ditch water, so this car will hopefully make up for that.
However, my only gripe is them HUGE wheels for such low power output. 225's at the back would have done, but I can't see 255's doing much but making the car NOT steer on the throttle at all with that engine!
Hmmmm, so maybe a lost cause. Will have to wait and see for reviews!
Dave
Thats all very well however, the engine is not as powerful as their Italian homologation special e30 320iS from the 1980's.
Admitedly that car would struggle to pass modern emissions regs but 7000rpm is hardly high reving for a 2 litre inline 4, not when you compare it to Hondas vtec engines.
It strikes me that they dont want to make it more powerful than their lower capacity 6 cylinder engines (which is daft as their early M3 pissed on their 6 cylinder rivals).
Again, WHY does it matter?
Honda can make all sorts of fancy things, but from what I hear, the Civic Type R is about as dull as a car can get for pushing along and extracting big grins from.
There is a problem with the Gran Tursimo generation. The DC5 Integra is on paper an absolute monster, but drive it hard and I hear the DC2/3 are much more "drivers" cars.
The Civic Type R is the same, the current one is pretty dull, though a very effective machine.
What BMW may have got here is a car that maybe doesn't add up on the spec sheet to a winner, but on the road it may well deliver. We don't know yet!
Most days on the road my car with a measly 167bhp is too much, but when I can use it all, the chassis is lively enough for me to fully enjoy it! I look at these Cupra R's and wonder how fast people really need to go. In a bend they are not that fast, they have poor traction due to the torque, and who finds it that fun storming along in a straight line anyway?
I'd prefer this BMW to loose out on the straights to a Civic Type R, but catch up in an instant under braking and under amazing body control, fully involving the driver with every bump and camber through the seat and steering, with an engine always on the boil through good gearing and torque spread. Arriving at the destination feeling like you'd had a fun fast drive without having broken the law at every moment on the straights, but made up for that in the bits where it matters, the challenging bends and bumps!
A 911 GT3 and a Clio Williams may well be worlds apart, but at the end of a journey, both could give the same grin factor and feeling of achievement getting a series of bends right.
Tis not how fast you go, it's how you go fast!
Dave
Mr Whippy said:
A 911 GT3 and a Clio Williams may well be worlds apart, but at the end of a journey, both could give the same grin factor and feeling of achievement getting a series of bends right.
Tis not how fast you go, it's how you go fast!
Dave
Spoken as befits a true petrolhead, Sir! 
eein said:
what kind of power output does the actual race car have? If this is a homologation car, that would suggest it is similar?
The race car would have to have about 280HP. That is the figure quoted for last years' cars at least.
The homologation might well be for the 4 cylinder engine, as last year they were using a 6.
"I'd prefer this BMW to loose out on the straights to a Civic Type R, but catch up in an instant under braking"
Somehow, I very much doubt that would be the case.
"but from what I hear, the Civic Type R is about as dull as a car can get for pushing along and extracting big grins from. "
I wouldn't call gratuitous lift-off oversteer dull, I'd use other derogatory terms.
With regards to the Why?/Why not? how about because it's more expensive and less exciting (educated guess) than existing cars. What's the point in making something when you know the competition is better and cheaper?
I totally agree with the "big fun doesn't need big power" argument, but when you're trying to lug around a tonne and a half leviathan on stupidly big tyres you'll need more than Radio 4 to keep you amused.
Somehow, I very much doubt that would be the case.
"but from what I hear, the Civic Type R is about as dull as a car can get for pushing along and extracting big grins from. "
I wouldn't call gratuitous lift-off oversteer dull, I'd use other derogatory terms.
With regards to the Why?/Why not? how about because it's more expensive and less exciting (educated guess) than existing cars. What's the point in making something when you know the competition is better and cheaper?
I totally agree with the "big fun doesn't need big power" argument, but when you're trying to lug around a tonne and a half leviathan on stupidly big tyres you'll need more than Radio 4 to keep you amused.
Mr Whippy said:
Some sensible stuff but castigated the later Type R's a bit unfairly
The Civic Type R / DC5 Integra Type R's only real failing as drivers cars is steering feel and feedback...a trait they share with pretty much every car built off the MkIV Golf platform.
The engine is a true gem - it's got enough torque in the mid-range that you don't feel shortchanged while cruising (the DC2 Integra and the S2000 are both a little lacklustre out-of-VTEC, the DC2 gets by despite this because of very light weight), and it's still got a load of beans...and a very nice 4-pot exhaust note...once you hit the silly cam. The 6-speed 'box is very good and well judged (better ratio-spacing than the DC2 AND the Celica VVTi-L).
And overall, the braking, poise, turn-in etc. are very high-up in the sub-£20k and hot-hatch brackets...a Clio 182 feels a bit looser and more willing to play, the Focus ST-170 more fluid and rewarding (DC5 is v. close), but the Hondas are still very capable point-to-point (not driven a Golf MkV to comment)
There's some torque-steer and tramlining, but no more than any of the other cars running similar power on 17"s and MacP-struts.
I know what you're saying. But I bet this BM still weighs in at well over 1,300kg, which won't help it's "drivers car" credentials. And the engine IS a thinly-disguised sop to the WTCC regs - it's only 173bhp and 7,000rpm 'cause they didn't want to spend the real money necessary on making it a proper performance engine, not with all those cheap-to-build 6-pots in their line-up.
Yeah, the CTR isn't as dull as about any other car, what I should have said was many other supposedly "hot" hatches. The older breeds were infact *more* fun, though with less on paper/track potential... Speaking to many owners of such cars has reinforced this view.
Yeah, that BMW will no doubt be not so great due to the huge tyres, how can 170bhp and 255 section rear tyres work?
If they were 215/225 f/r then maybe it'd become more of a hooligan.
As per weight etc, yeah, again, it'll let it down, but lets see what the spring rates and dampers are like. It could be setup for proper drivers, not Kirby vacuum salesmen.
As per the cars engine, the cyclinder head sounds like it's been made ready for tuning. Look at the Mi16 Peugeot engine. Stock it was 155/160bhp, but with relatively huge valve seats to be taken back several mm's, and already big valves and high rev ability, it could quite easily be tuned to 220bhp with throttle bodies, big valves and some smoothing.
Look at the RS500, sent out with 220bhp, but with a big turbo, the engine would go to 350bhp stock, if not more, then in full race trim/qualifying setup was 550-600bhp!
Pretty sure at the time that was good though, 220bhp was alot then, but the car was hugely over-engineered wrt the engine etc as a homogolation car, so it's intended purpose of a racing car could be fulfilled.
I fear that it could be another bag of pants like the 330Ci clubsport, which could have been a great car, but that seems to have been half met with the M3 CS.
Lets just hope BMW have made a corker here, and just re-think them big tyres!
Dave
Yeah, that BMW will no doubt be not so great due to the huge tyres, how can 170bhp and 255 section rear tyres work?
If they were 215/225 f/r then maybe it'd become more of a hooligan.
As per weight etc, yeah, again, it'll let it down, but lets see what the spring rates and dampers are like. It could be setup for proper drivers, not Kirby vacuum salesmen.
As per the cars engine, the cyclinder head sounds like it's been made ready for tuning. Look at the Mi16 Peugeot engine. Stock it was 155/160bhp, but with relatively huge valve seats to be taken back several mm's, and already big valves and high rev ability, it could quite easily be tuned to 220bhp with throttle bodies, big valves and some smoothing.
Look at the RS500, sent out with 220bhp, but with a big turbo, the engine would go to 350bhp stock, if not more, then in full race trim/qualifying setup was 550-600bhp!
Pretty sure at the time that was good though, 220bhp was alot then, but the car was hugely over-engineered wrt the engine etc as a homogolation car, so it's intended purpose of a racing car could be fulfilled.
I fear that it could be another bag of pants like the 330Ci clubsport, which could have been a great car, but that seems to have been half met with the M3 CS.
Lets just hope BMW have made a corker here, and just re-think them big tyres!
Dave
As a homologation special it presumably has been done as a basis for racing, hence it doesn't really matter how good it is as a road car -- and of course being a BMW it will sell.
But it does look like it could become a Puma RS -- great handling but insufficient power for the price. Around 500 of those were made when the plans were for 1000. Not quite the same I agree, but close. My Forester has more power than this, but maybe the handling's not quite as good....
But it does look like it could become a Puma RS -- great handling but insufficient power for the price. Around 500 of those were made when the plans were for 1000. Not quite the same I agree, but close. My Forester has more power than this, but maybe the handling's not quite as good....
Mr Whippy said:
However, my only gripe is them HUGE wheels for such low power output. 225's at the back would have done, but I can't see 255's doing much but making the car NOT steer on the throttle at all with that engine!
Dave
Which may give you an indication that this is a marketing special rather than a special car to drive. A stripped out lightweight would have been more interesting to a petrol head but BMWs marketing department probably know a damn site more about selling cars in volume than we do.
I still think the power output is tailored to its position in the 3 series range, a bit like the Porsche Coxster.
Mr Whippy said:
Honda can make all sorts of fancy things, but from what I hear, the Civic Type R is about as dull as a car can get for pushing along and extracting big grins from.
There is a problem with the Gran Tursimo generation. The DC5 Integra is on paper an absolute monster, but drive it hard and I hear the DC2/3 are much more "drivers" cars.
Dave
I think you're on the wrong track here, my next door neighbour has an M3 for weekends and a Civic Type R for day to day and he's in his early 60s (I think).
Peter Ward said:Oh, I dunno...an Impreza on stilts would probably be rather good fun, while an overweight exec-mobile with ultra-wide tyres could be rather boring.
My Forester has more power than this, but maybe the handling's not quite as good....
"handling" has nothing to do with grip.
And I'm rather afraid this BM will become a white elephant.
Gassing Station | BMW General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff