Rumors: M5/M6 returning to V10, G31 M5 Touring and X1 M

[N & M]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

2016. The next phase of the BMW i8 philosophy. Less = more.

Fair enough. Let's see how it all develops.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by bradleyland

Larger displacement almost certainly means worse fuel economy than the existing V8, but why go smaller displacement with more cylinders? The typical answer to this question is to obtain a higher redline, but we know the trade-offs that come with this.

You know that the current BMW M engines are based on BMW AG engines, yes? Now you heard of official discussion, not to confuse with confirmation, of a next generation M3 with 4 cylinders, right? M3 with 4 cylinders would - according to the last BMW M cars - mean that the next M3 could get a 2.0l I4 named S48, based on the new 2.0l I4 B48. How do you like that? So I don't like that. How will this engine, in a 80K expensive car, differentiate from all other I4 engines? The M3 E30 also had such and engine, but it had more torque and revved much higher than all other I4 engines on the market. This will not be enough today. So what about a 2.0l I6? Well, that is a completely different story, it does have low displacement, but it has more cylinder and sounds different. That is enough value-adding. The same would go for a new V10. What speaks against? Only higher costs.

Originally Posted by Thurman Murch

S88B50X0 or S88B55X0

550c or 500cc

Chop two cylinders off wraith and let M team have it's way with two turbos

Not possible, BMW's V12 is 60°, and a V10 should be 90°, ideally 72°.

[Aapparition90]

My money is on 6 cylinders tt with hybrid tech from i8

[Thurman Murch]

Originally Posted by Levi

You know that the current BMW M engines are based on BMW AG engines, yes? Now you heard of official discussion, not to confuse with confirmation, of a next generation M3 with 4 cylinders, right? M3 with 4 cylinders would - according to the last BMW M cars - mean that the next M3 could get a 2.0l I4 named S48, based on the new 2.0l I4 B48. How do you like that? So I don't like that. How will this engine, in a 80K expensive car, differentiate from all other I4 engines? The M3 E30 also had such and engine, but it had more torque and revved much higher than all other I4 engines on the market. This will not be enough today. So what about a 2.0l I6? Well, that is a completely different story, it does have low displacement, but it has more cylinder and sounds different. That is enough value-adding. The same would go for a new V10. What speaks against? Only higher costs.



Not possible, BMW's V12 is 60°, and a V10 should be 90°, ideally 72°.

I didn't mean literally chop two cylinders off I meant a V10 based on the technical architecture applied to V10 or you could add the tech of the B48 + B58 together not inline V10 but this is where I'm not sure if they would draw in the 500cc or 550cc

I think BMW could build a decently revving V10 based on In house tech and maybe insight from Toyota on the LFA engine with ideas going to into the new supra

I'm sure the next M5 will have an improved
Version of the S63TU2 but I'm thinking this V10 could go
Into the M8 or new M halo car

Using cylinder dimming and SFI so
Both throttle body and fuel injection with improved piezo injectors I can see a V10 maybe making it depending on competition

Too bad dyson can't build some cyclonic injection or combustion chamber or turbo tech to bring to market

[clbmw]

Originally Posted by Thurman Murch

I didn't mean literally chop two cylinders off I meant a V10 based on the technical architecture applied to V10 or you could add the tech of the B48 + B58 together not inline V10 but this is where I'm not sure if they would draw in the 500cc or 550cc

I think BMW could build a decently revving V10 based on In house tech and maybe insight from Toyota on the LFA engine with ideas going to into the new supra

I'm sure the next M5 will have an improved
Version of the S63TU2 but I'm thinking this V10 could go
Into the M8 or new M halo car

Using cylinder dimming and SFI so
Both throttle body and fuel injection with improved piezo injectors I can see a V10 maybe making it depending on competition

Too bad dyson can't build some cyclonic injection or combustion chamber or turbo tech to bring to market

I agree that it would be logical if BMW are building a Ferrari/McLaren competitor that the V10 engine would stand some chance of appearing in this exotic model. Could be wrong though.

I reckon even if Dyson got involved and created some genius cyclonic tech for the engine, we'd wind up with an expensive plastic grey car with a plastic a ball at the back of the car instead of RWD.

I can see it now the new BMW Dyson DC08///M Animal with B-Drive

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by Levi

You know that the current BMW M engines are based on BMW AG engines, yes?

Yes, I'm perfectly aware of that, but what is your point?

Originally Posted by Levi

Now you heard of official discussion, not to confuse with confirmation, of a next generation M3 with 4 cylinders, right? M3 with 4 cylinders would - according to the last BMW M cars - mean that the next M3 could get a 2.0l I4 named S48, based on the new 2.0l I4 B48. How do you like that?

I don't like it. I don't like it at all. I was angry when I heard the rumor that the M2 was getting a turbo I4. I came around to the idea of a turbo I4 in a lightweight M, but in the M3/4, I still don't like it. Why do you think I scrambled to get an E92 M3 with the S65?

Originally Posted by Levi

So I don't like that. How will this engine, in a 80K expensive car, differentiate from all other I4 engines? The M3 E30 also had such and engine, but it had more torque and revved much higher than all other I4 engines on the market.

So, by the premise you've adopted, a TTV10 is the obvious answer to differentiate a car from turbocharged I4. That makes perfect sense...

Originally Posted by Levi

This will not be enough today. So what about a 2.0l I6? Well, that is a completely different story, it does have low displacement, but it has more cylinder and sounds different. That is enough value-adding. The same would go for a new V10. What speaks against? Only higher costs.

What speaks against a V10? I literally outlined all those points in my post, but you clipped them out, then didn't address any of them. You haven't brought anything of value to the conversation.

From an automotive enthusiast perspective, there is lots to love about the idea of a V10, but I'm asking hard questions. I'm asking them because I've been let down by these kinds of rumors so many times before. Specifically:

Q: How does a TTV10 fit in to BMW's plan for meeting the 2020 CO2 and fuel economy requirements, because any engine in development today will have to last that long to pay for itself?

Q: Is the engine being contemplated turbocharged, or is BMW looking at something entirely different (from the current status quo) like going naturally aspirated again.?

Q: If BMW plans to go naturally aspirated again, give us some shred of rumor as to how they're going to do that.

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by Thurman Murch

I didn't mean literally chop two cylinders off I meant a V10 based on the technical architecture applied to V10 or you could add the tech of the B48 + B58 together not inline V10 but this is where I'm not sure if they would draw in the 500cc or 550cc

I think BMW could build a decently revving V10 based on In house tech and maybe insight from Toyota on the LFA engine with ideas going to into the new supra

I'm sure the next M5 will have an improved
Version of the S63TU2 but I'm thinking this V10 could go
Into the M8 or new M halo car

Using cylinder dimming and SFI so
Both throttle body and fuel injection with improved piezo injectors I can see a V10 maybe making it depending on competition

Too bad dyson can't build some cyclonic injection or combustion chamber or turbo tech to bring to market

BMW absolutely know how to build a V10. BMW has built race-winning Formula 1 V10s, for crying out loud. They don't need Toyota's advice in that arena. The problem is that there are trade-offs involved in packaging a high-revving engine in to any production automobile. Toyota (Lexus) haven't solved these challenges either.

The question is this: Since the S85 was developed, has naturally-aspirated engine technology advanced sufficiently to allow BMW to build a V10 that meets specific output (HP/L) requirements while still meeting fuel economy and CO2 emissions standards?

I live in a town of about 150,000 people, so not a huge city, but not the smallest. There are three engine builders in town who can build me a 550 HP V8 (that I can drive back and forth to work reliably) in about two months time. That engine, if mated to the correct transmission and final drive, can even achieve over 20 MPG on the highway. However, that engine will have a redline in the 6,300 RPM range, and because I live in Florida, will never be hooked up to a smog sniffer.

My point is that simply building the engine isn't the challenge. Any number of engine builders can build a high HP engine. BMW must also meet fleet fuel economy and CO2 emissions standards. Want to know why the Challenger Hellcat makes 707 HP instead of 770 or 800? Because they had to meet emissions requirements. That is the challenge; that is the secret sauce. It might be true that some people within BMW want to go back to a V10. In fact, I'm certain there are people within BMW who would love it. Look at how many of us on the forum would love it, but I'm not setting myself up for another let down without asking some hard questions.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by bradleyland

Q: How does a TTV10 fit in to BMW's plan for meeting the 2020 CO2 and fuel economy requirements, because any engine in development today will have to last that long to pay for itself?

It meets BMW's plan exactly as BMW told in regards to the introduction of the X7. Otherwise BMW would not give the 7 Series G11 a 6.6l V12 Biturbo, nor would the Rolls-Royce Phantom successor get any V16 (has yet to be confirmed).

Originally Posted by bradleyland

Q: Is the engine being contemplated turbocharged, or is BMW looking at something entirely different (from the current status quo) like going naturally aspirated again.?

It is very unlikely for this engine to be NA. It is also at very unlikely for such and engine at all to come, but the logic behind is prestige and differentiation.

Originally Posted by bradleyland

Q: If BMW plans to go naturally aspirated again, give us some shred of rumor as to how they're going to do that.

The only way BMW would go NA is with the help of hybrid-tech. But this also is unlikely.



Knowing BMW's strategy, the only possible version of the V10, is a 5.0l 90° engine, based on the new modular engine block. Its application? Possible M7. There is demand for such a car in the Middle-East, Russia, and Asia.

The 4.4l V8 was also to be replaced by a new 4.0l V8, looks like it won't happen with the coming of the 7er G11.


As for the issue of fleet, BMW has a whole range of MINI and up-coming FWD BMWs. Not to forget the 3 cylinder 3er and 4 cylinder 5er.

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by Levi

It meets BMW's plan exactly as BMW told in regards to the introduction of the X7. Otherwise BMW would not give the 7 Series G11 a 6.6l V12 Biturbo, nor would the Rolls-Royce Phantom successor get any V16 (has yet to be confirmed).

Yes, but the rumor here is about the M5/M6; cars which currently have a V8. The trend across the BMW line up has been downsizing engine cylinder counts and displacement. The F01 has a V12 already, so that is not an upsizing or a downsizing. It's simply maintaining the status quo, and I think they have to with the 7er because the buyer for that car demands it. Upsizing the M5/6 to a V10 seems counter to the emissions and fuel economy strategy that has been used everywhere else.

You simply cannot factor Rolls Royce in to the equation. Their models are such low volume, and price points so high that the normal rules of mass production do not apply.

Originally Posted by Levi

It is very unlikely for this engine to be NA. It is also at very unlikely for such and engine at all to come, but the logic behind is prestige and differentiation.

Agree 100%, and that's part of what I've been trying to communicate. There have been quite a few responses in this thread expressing excitement about a return to something similar to the S85. My goal is to inform those people of the reasons why that is tremendously unlikely.

Originally Posted by Levi

The only way BMW would go NA is with the help of hybrid-tech. But this also is unlikely.

Agree, incredibly unlikely, but probably the most interesting combination we could hope to see. What happens if you augment an engine similar to the S85 with a hybrid system including energy recovery? Can you get the fuel economy you need? What if you couple the hybrid system with cylinder deactivation, ultra-lean burn, etc? It likely wouldn't have an 8k RPM redline, but it might still be a more exciting engine to purists than a TT setup.

I agree with you that it's incredibly unlikely, but this is exactly why I hate rumor drops like this. It leads to wild speculation and ultimately, let down.

Originally Posted by Levi

Knowing BMW's strategy, the only possible version of the V10, is a 5.0l 90° engine, based on the new modular engine block. Its application? Possible M7. There is demand for such a car in the Middle-East, Russia, and Asia.

Yes, but again, have a look at the original rumor post. There's no mention of the 7-series with regard to a V10; only the M5/6. I don't understand how the possible M7 has anything to do with the M5/6?

Originally Posted by Levi

The 4.4l V8 was also to be replaced by a new 4.0l V8, looks like it won't happen with the coming of the 7er G11.

As for the issue of fleet, BMW has a whole range of MINI and up-coming FWD BMWs. Not to forget the 3 cylinder 3er and 4 cylinder 5er.

So the theory is that by making concessions in other parts of their line up, they've managed to make room for a TTV10 in the M5/6? That sounds at least plausible.

[mkoesel]

bradleyland, you're questions are good ones, but I think there is a much simpler reason why the V10 is a non starter: they don't need it.

When BMW was building naturally aspirated engines, you had to keep increasing displacement to keep your horse in the race, and the only way to push displacement up and up while keeping stroke (and cylinder size in general) in check is to add cylinders. Forced induction changes everything and means that cylinder displacement is not as important as it was. You just add boost instead. So that's what they'll do. Sure, you can build a small displacement V10 but that's not the cheapest route so it won't make the cut.

[jippii ensio]

Originally Posted by bradleyland

Displacement is definitely an interesting question. BMW targets 500cc per cylinder for optimum cylinder displacement. Going smaller means lower piston masses and shorter stroke, which allows for higher RPM operation with less exotic materials. However, there are some severe limitations of the high-RPM strategy that I think make this entire notion extremely dubious.

You have to couple your engine to a transmission. The reason that GM can get 26 MPG out of the 6.2L V8 in the C7 is because of gearing. The final in the C7's new 7-speed is 0.42:1. You can put a ridiculous final drive in the C7 and still get decent fuel economy on the highway. Contrast that to the M-DCT in the M3 (just as an example of a high revving engine) with a 7th gear ratio of flat 1.0:1.

So why can't you simply drop a 0.42:1 ratio in the M3? Because of transmission RPM limitations. When your redline is 8,300 RPM, you have to take care not to exceed the transmission's maximum RPM on the output shaft. This is precisely the reason that the M-DCT in the M3 didn't have an overdrive. The transmission couldn't handle the RPM on the output side, should someone run it up to max RPM in top gear. The C7 doesn't have this problem with its 6,600 RPM redline.

So, how does this all come back to the question of the displacement of this rumored V10? The S63 is a 4.3L V8 with individual cylinder displacement of 550cc. Just as an aside, BMW targets 500cc as an "optimal" displacement. The S85 cylinder displacement was 500cc. Likewise with the S65 at 4.0L; again we see 500cc cylinder displacement.

So what does BMW do with a V10 in the next gen M5/6? Will it be 5.0L again? How are they going to extract better fuel economy out of it? They can't get by with 11/17 MPG in the coming years. This is a car that isn't even here yet, and it will have to last 8-ish years in to the future during its lifecycle.

Larger displacement almost certainly means worse fuel economy than the existing V8, but why go smaller displacement with more cylinders? The typical answer to this question is to obtain a higher redline, but we know the trade-offs that come with this.

I'm really struggling to understand how a V10 fits in to BMW's future. Trust me, I'd love to see it. I'm clinging to the S65 in my M3 with everything I've got. I don't care about the extra performance of the new cars; my heart belongs to the S65. I need more convincing than a drive-by rumor drop.

If you look at M4 DCT gearing you can see that it has an two last gears as overdrive. Still the 6MT which has only one overdrive gear has similar MPG. I believe the peak torque in the speeds driven in the cycles don't benefit of overdrive gears when the peak torque i.e. efficiency is not at rock bottom revs.

[BMW269]

Such rumors are not just out of the air. There are thoughts and discussions, but just as the M1 Hommage, the CS, the 8 Series Coupé, and the VFL, such cars will not make it. The only thing we are getting is an X7 and a Z4 replacement.

[SCOTT26]

Originally Posted by Levi

Such rumors are not just out of the air. There are thoughts and discussions, but just as the M1 Hommage, the CS, the 8 Series Coupé, and the VFL, such cars will not make it. The only thing we are getting is an X7 and a Z4 replacement.

Since BMW already have their strategy for the compact and sub-compact market in place.
The focus returns to developing the rest of the line and taking advantage of segments previously unexplored.

In regards to meeting legislation. The MINI/BMW joint strategy of around 20 potential models provides the portfolio its reasons to do so.

Add in the latest in petrol and diesel engine development and the fact of the BMWi models which will increase in the portfolio as well as the BMWe line which will offer every model with plug-in hybrid option.

And of course BMWs innovation in Carbon Fibre development which not only assists the cars in making them as light as possible but puts BMW at the forefront of using this innovation across a wide spectrum but also re cooperates the initial investments as BMW will outsource supply to other industries.

The mistake being made about the Vision Future Luxury Concept is that it is not based on the upcoming 7er but the next Rolls-Royce Phantom as it previews its advance of the i8 Carbon passenger structure.

To provide economies of scale there is global potential for a flagship BMW with the upmost exclusivity. Potential customers across the globe who have seen the car on its current Tour are in praise for the ultimate expression of a luxury vehicle bespoke and exclusive in personality.

BMW are also enjoying the attention the car has received especially in regards the potential in the global market. A 7er , 9er , Rolls-Royce Ghost and Phantom would be able to co-exist and stand out more than an S-Klasse in 4 sizes.

[clbmw]

Surely if costs are based upon fleet emissions then the answer is anything mass produced will have an efficient downsized engine. Anything exotic, limited run and very expensive will not be constrained by the same rule because the costs will be built into the price. Then of course there is the hybrid option which will reduce average CO2 as well.

I would say we don't have enough information yet to decide if this rumour will come true or not, but it is not unreasonable to assume that turbo charging of some description will be present.

[advantage20]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

A 7er , 9er , Rolls-Royce Ghost and Phantom would be able to co-exist and stand out more than an S-Klasse in 4 sizes.

Isn't there also need for an 8er in Coupé, Cabrio and Gran Coupé guise extending the 7er offer in order to fight off the S-Class variants?

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

bradleyland, you're questions are good ones, but I think there is a much simpler reason why the V10 is a non starter: they don't need it.

When BMW was building naturally aspirated engines, you had to keep increasing displacement to keep your horse in the race, and the only way to push displacement up and up while keeping stroke (and cylinder size in general) in check is to add cylinders. Forced induction changes everything and means that cylinder displacement is not as important as it was. You just add boost instead. So that's what they'll do. Sure, you can build a small displacement V10 but that's not the cheapest route so it won't make the cut.

Occam's Razor.

[ezmaass]

I bought my 2015 R8 V10 before Audi changes over to the new R8 (rumored 2016 model) because there's a real fear the NA V10 will disappear. And I'll just say this... there's nothing like a powerful, linear TIDAL WAVE of power screaming to nearly 9k RPM behind your head. Yes, you can get better economy with a TTV8, blah, blah, blah... but power alone should only be part of the story. Power delivery is really important to car people. But FI, and the need to continue pushing down CO2 while improving mileage, is counter-productive to what "feels best" in a high performance car.

I'd love for BMW to reintroduce a V10 into the line-up, but I just don't see it happening. As others have said, the trend is to go smaller on cylinders and displacement while trying to make it all up with turbo-charging. To me, the power delivery is suffering, and the "active sound" isn't helping the experience!

I'm guessing the M5 will stick with a TTV8.

[BMW Rolls]

bradlyland...You might be right, but a recent chassis dyno of the Hellcat produced results showing it would be in excess of 730 hp at the crank, with a 12% parasitic loss. It's well underrated for whatever reason, maybe even for the same reasons they used in 1969 and 1970.

[JOHNBMWM5]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

When BMW was building naturally aspirated engines, you had to keep increasing displacement to keep your horse in the race, and the only way to push displacement up and up while keeping stroke (and cylinder size in general) in check is to add cylinders. Forced induction changes everything and means that cylinder displacement is not as important as it was. You just add boost instead. So that's what they'll do. Sure, you can build a small displacement V10 but that's not the cheapest route so it won't make the cut.

I support these thoughts also, it just does not make sense to go V10 with the current emissions targets.
Boost is the way to go.

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by F10 Rolls

bradlyland...You might be right, but a recent chassis dyno of the Hellcat produced results showing it would be in excess of 730 hp at the crank, with a 12% parasitic loss. It's well underrated for whatever reason, maybe even for the same reasons they used in 1969 and 1970.

Appreciate the remarks. The Hellcat engine is a helluva achievement. However, whatever the actual HP is, interviews with engineering team members indicate that meeting/beating emissions requirements were the limiting factor. There's more power in the motor (apparently), but it can't beat the CO2 requirements.

[M_Power_Fan]

the new M5/M6 with V10 ? never ever!

what we know so far from BMW:

- new M6 will be smaller than current car (which i think is very good news)
- new M6 will have 600hp
- will be lighter - goal is to reduce 250kg


greetings

Claudius

[RPiM5]

Originally Posted by M_Power_Fan

the new M5/M6 with V10 ? never ever!

what we know so far from BMW:

- new M6 will be smaller than current car (which i think is very good news)
- new M6 will have 600hp
- will be lighter - goal is to reduce 250kg


greetings

Claudius

Where did you hear that the new M6 will be smaller than the current car? I've never heard that before.