G Series M5 V10

[avlnch]

The best thing that ever happened to the M5 was it's NA V10 engine. We all know BMW went down to a V8 mainly for green compliance. I think we got almost the best V8 one could ask for.. high revving unique design for minimal to zero turbo lag. They did a good job, but all of us E60 M5 owners miss the naturally aspirated V10.

Presently BMW has a fuel efficient fleet of basically every late model vehicles in all series. In addition to that, and most importantly, BMW has the iSeries (i3, i8..).

Considering all that, it gives promise that a reintroduction of a newly engineered V10 could be the power plant for the G Series M5.

Anyone fully understand CAFE and other green laws? I only have a basic understanding of it. If I remember right, it works on credits and it contributes/applies to an overall score for all BMW models.

The E60 V10 M5 was a complete game changer, and king of all high performance sedans. The F10 M5 was a compromise. The GXX M5 has the potential to regain the king status and once again be another game changer if it has a V10. Maybe they can design another great NA V10, but if their new TT design and technology is applied to a V10 power plant.. that would be one bad ass TTV10.

A bit unrelated to this post, but I think we can count on all the advancements made in the M3 like the use of carbon, upgraded DCT, etc to make it to the GXX M5. Along with maybe an optional AWD system and an always excellent in-car technology (DA pkg, lights, etc) and an improved iDrive.

So the actual question:
With BMW's current lineup, and with consideration to all the green laws including CAFE, is BMW now in a position and able to bring the V10 back?

[Boss330]

I'm not an expert on CAFE regulations, but do know a little bit about the EU equivalent. Since BMW first and foremost is a European manufacturer, I would assume that the EU legislatuon is just as important for them.

It's also preferrable from a financial perspective to make the same products for the international market. For instance if EU emissions legislation is the strictes, then that will also determine what cars the US get. It' not very likely that BMW develops a NA engine for the US and a smaller turbo engine for Europe...

Here are some of the posts I have writen on this subject previously (over on the F8x forum):

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...2#post15839912

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...2#post15518130

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...&postcount=138

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...&postcount=142

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...&postcount=150

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...&postcount=154

Originally Posted by Boss330

It seems simple in theory, but there are vital differences in how CO2 emission targets come into play here...

Porsche is part of a pool of 10 manufacturers under the VW umbrella. The pools combined CO2 emissions is what counts when the 130g/km of CO2 has to be met. In 2012 the VW pool had a combined CO2 of 120g/km, allready below the 130g/km level required for 2015.

BMW also has a pool, but only has BMW (incl. MINI), Rolls Royce and M GmbH in it's pool. In 2012 they had a combined CO2 of 124g/km, also below the 130g/km target for 2015.

However, M GmbH's average CO2 emissions was 231g/km in 2012 and they have set a target at 151g/km in order to meet their pool's requirements for future combined CO2 numbers of 90g/km (in 2020). Even the F8x at 199g/km exceeds that target...

AMG, in comparison, had a 2012 CO2 emission of just 177g/km and have the same target of 151g/km as M GmbH does. AMG is MUCH closer to meeting their CO2 requirements than M GmbH was back in 2012... (Quattro GmbH was at 219g/km and has a target of 147g/km).

If we look at Porsche's CO2 numbers, as a company and not as part of the VW pool, we will see that they had a 2012 CO2 emission of just 188g/km and has set a target of 153g/km. This tells us that Porsche allready has a combined corporate CO2 number that is LOWER than the best M GmbH car (the F8x at 199g/km).

M GmbH sold 6.375 cars in EU in 2012
Porsche sold 42.299 cars in EU in 2012

It's obviously easier for Porsche to make a few GT3's and such. They still only represent at VERY small percentage of total production numbers and make a small impact on corporate CO2 numbers.

BMW could also do a limited production NA version, but just a 500 production number would mean 8% of total production... And I'm not sure if Porsche makes as much as 8% (or 3.400) GT3's at 289g/km CO2 each year

If I'm not much mistaken the 997 GT3 sold about 1000 examples in the US over a two year period, and approximately the same in Europe. So 500 a year in Europe. 500 examples means 1,2% of total Porsche production. For M GmbH a limited edition model that makes a similarly small impact on total CO2 emissions as the GT3 does to Porsche would mean that they could only sell 76 cars per year in Europe (1,2% of 6.375).

It's hard to make a good business case for such a small production... And M GmbH has to meet their 151g/km target...

However, a NA engine and hybrid powertrain in addition (Porsche 918), that could be a VERY interesting scenario that creates LOW CO2 emissions and the best of both worlds


The above calculations are obviously just simplified versions of a quite complex legislation

Source on CO2 emissions:

http://www.ademloos.be/sites/default...Oct%202013.pdf

Originally Posted by Boss330

Manufacturer fleet average is not where the M models will make a major impact. But it's also about public image and corporate responsibilty. Porsche have had Greenpeace demonstrations outside their HQ as they are viewed as a environmental bully...

But as BMW is about selling cars, the main thing (I suspect) is to have a product that is competitive, or even has an advantage, when it comes to Government taxation. To many European buyers, the tax burden based on CO2 has become a important buying criteria when looking for a new car, as illustrated by my example above.

BMW wants to achieve the following I guess:

-Have a public image as a green car company
-Have a competitive advantage over it's counterparts when it comes to annual CO2 tax burden (M3 vs RS4 vs C63)
-Avoid the CO2 fine of 95 Euro per gram CO2 over target per car sold if they miss the 130g/km limit by 2015 and 95g/km limit by 2020.

If BMW was to miss the 2020 target by 10g/km, each car they sell would have a fine of 950 Euro (USD1300,-). So even if the number of M models sold are small, it's still enough to have a impact on average CO2 emissions. Especially the higher the CO2 emission the M cars have. If the M cars only have a 1g/km impact on average numbers, then that would still make a difference if they end up at 131g/km in 2015 or 96g/km in 2020, pushing BMW over the max allowed average.

BMW will not want to be in the category of manufacturers NOT Meeting the fleet average. That would be bad for business... (disregarding a Euro 95 fine per car, even though that also will be A LOT of Money. But the real problem might be consumer alienation. CO2 is a BIG thing here in Europe).

Originally Posted by Boss330

Yeah, the calculations done are really a simplification of the real picture. Also a part of the picture is that manufacturers are getting "bonus CO2 deduction points" for electric cars and/or new tech that doesn't necessarily reflect on the emission numbers produced by the mandatory test cycles etc.

But, Ferrari and other smaller manufacturers such as Aston Martin, are in a different category and have been allowed to set their own targets on CO2 reduction and average CO2 emission. So one cannot compare to Ferrari as they don't have to meet the 130g/km limit by 2015 or the 95g/km limit by 2020... But of course a 10% reduction and the combined effect of EV and lower CO2 across the BMW range would have helped as well.

See page 7 on this report:

http://www.ademloos.be/sites/default...Oct%202013.pdf

Ferrari has a specific CO2 target of 303g/km...

Originally Posted by Boss330

Yeah, they don't make the M models simply as a means of meeting CO2 emission levels

In 2012 BMW had a EU fleet average of 138g/km.

If we look at the effect of both the M3/4 and M5 and assume they both sell 15.000 units a year, the effect of M cars starts to make a difference. And BMW needs to count all of their models in this calculation.

If we do the maths and include the M5 (forgetting the X5/6 M at the moment) and use the following CO2 numbers:

-133g/km for the 1,5M BMW models (assumption on 2014 FAE numbers)
-232g/km for the F10 M5,
-357g/km for the E60 M5,
-194g/km for the F8x M3/4 and
-263g/km for the E9x M3

FAE = (133*1.5M+xxx*30k)/(1.5M+30k) = xxx g/km

Example 1 - E60 M5 + E9x M3 impact on FAE CO2
FAE = (133*1.5M+357*15k+263*15k)/(1.5M+30k) = 136,47 g/km

Example 2 - F10 M5 + F8x M3/4 impact on FAE CO2
FAE = (133*1.5M+232*15k+194*15k)/(1.5M+30k) = 134,56 g/km

So, just counting the M3/4 and M5, we see a improvement of 1,91g/km on FAE CO2 emissions from the Exx generation M cars to the Fxx generation M cars. But we also see that even the "CO2 friendly" F10 M5 and F8x M3/4 increase BMW fleet average from 133 to 134,56g/km... So the M cars definitely make a difference in BMW's overall CO2 fleet average!

Pretty significant reduction by the Fxx gen M cars when they need to get below 130g/km by 2015, especially considering they only represent 30K vehicles out of 1.5M (or 2%) of BMW vehicles... Having the CO2 of the Exx gen M cars would be bad news for BMW in 2015...

So in that respect I don't necessarily agree that the M cars represent simply noise levels of CO2 reduction. It represents roughly 2g/km better FAE compared to the previous generation, but still represents a 1,5g/km increase in the total FAE. Without going FI on the M5 and M3/4 and staying at the same CO2 level as before on the M5 and M3/4 would mean a 3,47g/km increase in FAE... That is important when you're FAE is just above 130g/km one year before the deadline and a very real 95 Euro fine per gram over the limit per car sold...

Originally Posted by Boss330

If the 6MT meets it's targets is hard for me to answer as I don't know what targets BMW set for it

BUT, the DCT has 10g/km less CO2 emissions (204 vs 194) or roughly 5% lower than the 6MT, putting it in a greener emissions class in Europe:

https://www.bmw.de/de/neufahrzeuge/M...che-daten.html

The 6MT is classed in category "F" and the DCT in category "E". The majority of customers will buy the DCT and that will help BMW achieve a lower average of CO2 emissions on vehicles sold. Category "E" will also give tax benefits in many European countries.

So, I do believe that it was a goal for BMW to get better CO2 in the DCT as that is the main seller. The 6MT will probably account for a small percentage of sales and won't affect corporate average that much.

For instance in the UK, the annual CO2 tax will be:

-£425 (USD708,-) for the DCT
-£620 (USD1033,-) for the 6MT

http://carfueldata.dft.gov.uk/search-by-ved-band.aspx

And a F10 520i will have an annual tax of £175, a M5 will be at £840...

Other countries have higher taxation and the difference will be even more pronounced.

In Europe the manufacturers are required to display their car's CO2 efficiency:

http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/t...g/index_en.htm

I hope this answers some of your questions here

The M cars definitely make an impact on FAE (Fleet Average Emissions) in EU, and the next M5 definitely needs to get better CO2 emissions than the outgoing model. There are a couple of avenues to achieve that:

-smaller, more efficient turbo engine
-loose weight
-improve aerodynamics
-hybrid drivetrain

One possibility is that BMW is using a hybrid drivetrain like we have seen on the Porsche 918, LaFerrari and McLaren P1. The Porsche 918 has a CO2 of just 70-72g/km (the M4 DCT has 199g/km in comparison!!!) but still has a high rpm NA V8... Thanks to the hybrid drivetrain

This could be a solution also for the next M5, high rpm NA V10 (V8) combined with a hybrid drivetrain. The beauty of this is that you don't really have to compromise on low rpm driveability/torque from the NA engine, since you can use the electric motor as "torque fill" where the NA engine is "weak". You can basically make a more race spec NA engine, since driveability is taken care of by the hybrid drivetrain

Just imagine having a 9000rpm V10, coupled with the torque of a modern turbo diesel and fuel consumption/emission of a Prius...!!!!
Coincidentally, BMW and Toyota have started a cooperation, where Toyota gets access to BMW engines, and BMW to Toyota hybrid tech...

[RPiM5]

The V10 will return along with a hybrid assist power train. The next Nissan GTR is going for hybrid assist as well. I can't see M going with an NA V10 though, it's simply not efficient enough. TT-V10 FTW!

[avlnch]

Originally Posted by RPiM5

The V10 will return along with a hybrid assist power train. The next Nissan GTR is going for hybrid assist as well. I can't see M going with an NA V10 though, it's simply not efficient enough. TT-V10 FTW!

That's what I always wished for, V10TT.

If I remember right, BMW has already made a V10TT in the E60 M5 - it was a one-off car in white with M stripes given to one of their drivers.

[wisesoul]

Originally Posted by avlnch

That's what I always wished for, V10TT.

If I remember right, BMW has already made a V10TT in the E60 M5 - it was a one-off car in white with M stripes given to one of their drivers.

The M5 CSL/M5 25 Jahre had a bespoke 5.5L NA V10 with 580hp and a DCT. If BMW ever does go the V10 route (I highly doubt it) it is for sure going to be forced induction, hybrid, or both. I just cannot see a business case for an all new V10 when they can continually improve the S63tu for years to come.

[///M Power-Belgium]

///M5-6 with V10 + a couple of turbos = Probably 700 HP !
And that would be the long awaited answer to AMG .
Who knows....let's dream ....

[avlnch]

Originally Posted by wisesoul

The M5 CSL/M5 25 Jahre had a bespoke 5.5L NA V10 with 580hp and a DCT. If BMW ever does go the V10 route (I highly doubt it) it is for sure going to be forced induction, hybrid, or both. I just cannot see a business case for an all new V10 when they can continually improve the S63tu for years to come.

There you go that's what I was talking about. Thanks for the info. Couldn't find it on google until I used 25 Jahre in the search string.