Crown

The only reason that BMW (and perhaps other manufacturers - I fear Ferrari as well)  in general is going down the turbocharging route is EU emission regulations. A N/A engine can make as much power as a turbocharged engine and will always be infinetely more colourful and rev-happy. All you have to do is keep the engine in its boil, which itself is fun and part of the driving enjoyment! Also, NA engines of that caliber are so instant in their revving that all you have to do is downshift and hold on really tight! On a personal note, I hate the suppressed sound and unwillingness to rev of turbocharged motors. They may be powerful but they are a bit flat character-wise. AS for low down torque... I am sure truck drivers find it useful. 

REALZEUS:

The only reason that BMW (and perhaps other manufacturers - I fear Ferrari as well)  in general is going down the turbocharging route is EU emission regulations. A N/A engine can make as much power as a turbocharged engine and will always be infinetely more colourful and rev-happy. All you have to do is keep the engine in its boil, which itself is fun and part of the driving enjoyment! Also, NA engines of that caliber are so instant in their revving that all you have to do is downshift and hold on really tight! On a personal note, I hate the suppressed sound and unwillingness to rev of turbocharged motors. They may be powerful but they are a bit flat character-wise. AS for low down torque... I am sure truck drivers find it useful. 

Says somebody who drives a...wait....Ford Focus?  

You should update your profile...or stay away from these discussions.

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 997 Turbo, BMW X5 M, BMW M3 Cab DKG, Mini Cooper S JCW

What I drive daily is largely irrelevant to what I also drive and have driven in anger. Many people do not like to show off and frankly, if it weren't for the stupid insistense of the system to list a car, I would never put any personal information online. The F430, though a highly strung machine, is much more snappy at power ovesteer than many turbocharged cars with higher torque outputs low down, as its instant, free revving nature sends the tacho into the redline faster than one could mumble "RC".

PS: I am really dissapointed by the quality and ethos of the intervention of an adminitrator...

It is not irrelevant what you drive for this forum.

One benefit of this forum is that we are mainly owners/drivers discussing sports cars while other forums are full of a PS3/XBox crowd who think that real world driving is the same.

We have many users who don't own a sports car, we have no problem with that, some of them are participating in a very special way and their input is always appreciated.

You on the other hand are talking about certain cars as if you would own/drive them. Big difference.

Please do not feel offended by my words, this is the way it is. Tough crowd.

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 997 Turbo, BMW X5 M, BMW M3 Cab DKG, Mini Cooper S JCW

What I have explained to you is that I have driven and still drive such cars; the F430 example was from my experience. It's the snappiest car I have experience, even though its low down torque is not that impressive on paper and one would not have expected such a violent traction loss at lower revs. The secret lies in the fact that the 430 revs to its redline in no time, relying on revolutiuons, rather than torque. 

Then I guess you won't be offended by the simple fact that came along rather arrogantly and snobbishly... 

REALZEUS:

The only reason that BMW (and perhaps other manufacturers - I fear Ferrari as well)  in general is going down the turbocharging route is EU emission regulations. A N/A engine can make as much power as a turbocharged engine and will always be infinetely more colourful and rev-happy. All you have to do is keep the engine in its boil, which itself is fun and part of the driving enjoyment! Also, NA engines of that caliber are so instant in their revving that all you have to do is downshift and hold on really tight! On a personal note, I hate the suppressed sound and unwillingness to rev of turbocharged motors. They may be powerful but they are a bit flat character-wise. AS for low down torque... I am sure truck drivers find it useful. 

See the bold part, they are for the deficiency of the power delivery of a NA engine, they NEEDED to be kept in the power band in order for the car to be 'fun'.

Boosted engine have a flat power delivery, it will deliver pretty much max power anywhere on the rev range, doesn't matter they are in the right gear or not. That is called instant fun.

Not every one likes to keep and engine singing at 5k rpm all day.

I had the 6.2L AMG engine in my ML63 before, it is a high displacement high revving NA engine, on paper is a 'fun' engine, it is suppose to offer 'almost' the same low end torque of the 5.5 Kompressor engine on paper.  Trust me when I tell it does not. You don't really feel the power until 4k rpm, it has none of the instant throttle response of the 55K engine, it's pretty much a failure as a replacement for the 55K engine period, marginal gain on max HP but a big lose on the low end.

I will give you the sound quality, there is no equal for good sounding NA engines, the V8 in Vantage is one muscular tone, the V8s in Ferrari wails like there is no tomorrow.

There are two ways to look at this Whoopsy. Turbocharged engines run out of steam near their red line. I comprehend that it's a matter of personal taste but there are at least as many disadvantages for forced induction, as there are advantages.

--
FERRARI RULES!!!

Yes, up high in the rev range the NA does have the upper hand, forced induction engines 'stalls' just about when the NA engine start making real power.

But at those rev ranges the point is only valid for racetracks, where absolute rpm does rule more than low end power, a race car with it's matched gearbox keep the revs in the sweet spot for NA engines.

In the real world even for canyon carvers, I have yet to met someone who feels a Turbo/supercharged engine runs out of revs on the road, modern cars are just simply too fast for ordinary roads. And I do know a bit about canyon roads, there is this little Sea-to-Sky Highway right here where I live, it used to be a single lane both way undivided highway with no barrier next to a cliff winding up and down, about 100km in length between Vancouver and Whistler. I have been speeding up and down that road since I was 17, took everything from a Miata to what I have now in my garage for a trip. :) Fun time when I was young and stupid, it's normally a 2hr drive, my best time was 45mins in my cousin's 1st gen RX7. Now my wife yells at me if I do even a sub-2hr pace :(

Of course all engine design have trade offs.

Roots type supercharger like those in AMG 55K engine makes instant power boost from idle, but they have the lowest rpm ceiling. A Turbine type supercharger like those from Vortech provides more rpm head room, but trades off idle throttle response, they react more like a old school turbo. Either type takes a ton of HP to make the extra HP.

Turbo engines doesn't take HP to make HP, but they do suffer turbo lags, the bigger the turbo the bigger the lag but the bigger the potential power gains. Some get around the lag by using smaller turbos for smaller absolute gains, some use sequential turbos of equal or unequal sizes, and the newer tech is variable veins or the twin screw turbos in BMW. But all these techs are still limited by the 'stall' speed of the size of the turbo they use, thus all turbo charged engines are rpm limited.

NA engines are actually limited by their intake track, without forced induction they have to suck in the air themselves, long intake runners makes more power down low but sacrifices the top end, short runners the reverse, it's always a trade off in designing NA engines. Engineers tuned the intake tract to resonance at a certain rpm to 'force feed' air into the engine like a supercharger, but this effect only last a very narrow rpm range. Variable intake length gets around this limit somewhere and extends the 'powerband'. This is one of the reason why NA engines' power curve is shaped like they are, gentle slope up until a certain rpm, then it slope sharply up as the resonance kicks in until the max power point, then it drops off greatly again.

Whoopsy:

And I do know a bit about canyon roads, there is this little Sea-to-Sky Highway right here where I live, it used to be a single lane both way undivided highway with no barrier next to a cliff winding up and down, about 100km in length between Vancouver and Whistler.

Since this is an M5 thread, I couldn't resist

Spec: 1992 M5 Euro Spec, 3.8L 340hp

indeed shifting is ancient technology - so is a fuel burning engine..  I happen to like both :) 

PS: Pic #4 shows Bowen Island, I lived there for 3 summers

indeed shifting is ancient technology - so is a fuel burning engine..  I happen to like both :) 

Whatever the new M5 has or will not have, it will look same as other 5 series. It will also be too tall and too heavy to be anything but a fast taxi cab.

At least Porsche came up with a actual sports sedan when they created the Panamera. Its just ugly as hell. It might not be light either, but its not the aerodynamic barn door that a 5 series is and its roll center is likely at least 200mm lower.

But both the Panamera and any M5 seem like a colossally bad way to spend money. They just arent worth the price they ask for them.

Whoopsy:

Yes, up high in the rev range the NA does have the upper hand, forced induction engines 'stalls' just about when the NA engine start making real power.

But at those rev ranges the point is only valid for racetracks, where absolute rpm does rule more than low end power, a race car with it's matched gearbox keep the revs in the sweet spot for NA engines.

In the real world even for canyon carvers, I have yet to met someone who feels a Turbo/supercharged engine runs out of revs on the road, modern cars are just simply too fast for ordinary roads. And I do know a bit about canyon roads, there is this little Sea-to-Sky Highway right here where I live, it used to be a single lane both way undivided highway with no barrier next to a cliff winding up and down, about 100km in length between Vancouver and Whistler. I have been speeding up and down that road since I was 17, took everything from a Miata to what I have now in my garage for a trip. :) Fun time when I was young and stupid, it's normally a 2hr drive, my best time was 45mins in my cousin's 1st gen RX7. Now my wife yells at me if I do even a sub-2hr pace :(

 

 

Of course all engine design have trade offs.

Roots type supercharger like those in AMG 55K engine makes instant power boost from idle, but they have the lowest rpm ceiling. A Turbine type supercharger like those from Vortech provides more rpm head room, but trades off idle throttle response, they react more like a old school turbo. Either type takes a ton of HP to make the extra HP.

Turbo engines doesn't take HP to make HP, but they do suffer turbo lags, the bigger the turbo the bigger the lag but the bigger the potential power gains. Some get around the lag by using smaller turbos for smaller absolute gains, some use sequential turbos of equal or unequal sizes, and the newer tech is variable veins or the twin screw turbos in BMW. But all these techs are still limited by the 'stall' speed of the size of the turbo they use, thus all turbo charged engines are rpm limited.

NA engines are actually limited by their intake track, without forced induction they have to suck in the air themselves, long intake runners makes more power down low but sacrifices the top end, short runners the reverse, it's always a trade off in designing NA engines. Engineers tuned the intake tract to resonance at a certain rpm to 'force feed' air into the engine like a supercharger, but this effect only last a very narrow rpm range. Variable intake length gets around this limit somewhere and extends the 'powerband'. This is one of the reason why NA engines' power curve is shaped like they are, gentle slope up until a certain rpm, then it slope sharply up as the resonance kicks in until the max power point, then it drops off greatly again.

 

Nice writing!  I agree on everything, apart from the last sentence. You can have an engine that produces its maximum power at its RPM limit, as Ferrari does. 

JimFlat6:

But both the Panamera and any M5 seem like a colossally bad way to spend money. They just arent worth the price they ask for them.

Not sure how much the M5 will cost but last time I put together a Panamera Turbo to my liking, I ended up with slightly over 180000 EUR. Ouch.

Let me think: For this kind of money, I could actually get myself an almost new C63 AMG dealer car and an almost new 997 Carrera S.

When our X5 M lease ends in aprox. 24 months, I actually have to decide which way to go...a cheaper family car and a 991 or a Cayenne Turbo S, Panamera Turbo S. Tough decisions to be made.

@REALZEUS: My wife has a BMW M3 Cab DKG. Due to the high rev engine and the lower low end torque, this car really sucks in the city. The only thing which is fun is the exhaust sound, everything else can be enjoyed above 160 kph only. For the race track or even the Autobahn, high rev engines are a lot of fun but not as daily drivers.

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 997 Turbo, BMW X5 M, BMW M3 Cab DKG, Mini Cooper S JCW

RC, I have an E90 S65 as daily driver , and I like ik a lot (more than our 330d E93...) .

Would also prefer a C63 though. 

New M5 will be nice, but too big for me.

RC:

JimFlat6:

But both the Panamera and any M5 seem like a colossally bad way to spend money. They just arent worth the price they ask for them.

 

Not sure how much the M5 will cost but last time I put together a Panamera Turbo to my liking, I ended up with slightly over 180000 EUR. Ouch.

Let me think: For this kind of money, I could actually get myself an almost new C63 AMG dealer car and an almost new 997 Carrera S.

When our X5 M lease ends in aprox. 24 months, I actually have to decide which way to go...a cheaper family car and a 991 or a Cayenne Turbo S, Panamera Turbo S. Tough decisions to be made.

@REALZEUS: My wife has a BMW M3 Cab DKG. Due to the high rev engine and the lower low end torque, this car really sucks in the city. The only thing which is fun is the exhaust sound, everything else can be enjoyed above 160 kph only. For the race track or even the Autobahn, high rev engines are a lot of fun but not as daily drivers.

Christian,

I disagree with you on S65's lack of torque. Maybe it is not a 997 Turbo but I'm very satisfied with my E92 M3's low end torque. Maybe the reason is that my M3 weights over 200 kg less than your wife's M3 cab. but still I find "this car really sucks in the city" comment rather harsh. I'm absolutely not offended by your post just because I have an M3 but especially V8 engine in M3 has enough torque at the low end and sings loud and clear at the high end. The sound of the engine/exhaust gives the car personality. People may think different, though.

In fact, I found 997.1 Turbo soul-less especially with Mercedes 5 speed autobox. When I had my 997.1 Carrera S, it gives me more joy than my friend's 997.1 Turbo w/tipt., at least for me. 997.1 Turbo is one of the fastest cars out there,  but once you get on the "G-addict" train, you'll never satisfied. I personally love exhaust/intake sound on sports cars and thats why I would prefer 458 over Turbo S. For me that sound gives the car a new personality, a new character. This is why I love the sound of my akrapovic exhaust. The car is the same, maybe, BUT I feel different when driving the car after Akra.

Well, let me take the discussion another area. Which one would you prefer:

1M coupe with the current Turbo charged 345 hp engine with lots of torque and is to tune 60/70 hp more easily;

OR 1M Coupe with a CSL NA engine which puts down slightly more hp on the road but significantly has less torque than the turbocharged 3.0L.

IMO, CSL's screaming high revving engine suits much better to 1M. That engine with that marvelous intake noise and 8100 rpm redline would be a blast. Ohh well, 3.0L turbocharged engine has much more torque and easier to drive in the city but I won't care less.

This topic is like discussing double clutch vs manual. I happen to like NA high revving engines w/double clutch trannies.

--

ONUR

11 M3 Coupe AW

09 Audi TTS Coupe - 07 997 Carrera S - 05 M3 Coupe - 03 M3 Coupe - 96 M3 Coupe EVO (PASS TIME HISTORY)

RC:
When our X5 M lease ends in aprox. 24 months, I actually have to decide which way to go...a cheaper family car and a 991 or a Cayenne Turbo S, Panamera Turbo S. Tough decisions to be made.

@REALZEUS: My wife has a BMW M3 Cab DKG. Due to the high rev engine and the lower low end torque, this car really sucks in the city. The only thing which is fun is the exhaust sound, everything else can be enjoyed above 160 kph only. For the race track or even the Autobahn, high rev engines are a lot of fun but not as daily drivers.

A combination of an almost new C63 AMG/M3 and a 991 Carrera S would suit me better than a Cayenne/Panamera Turbo S. Desicions, desicions..

ONUR

11 M3 Coupe AW

09 Audi TTS Coupe - 07 997 Carrera S - 05 M3 Coupe - 03 M3 Coupe - 96 M3 Coupe EVO (PASS TIME HISTORY)

Get a C63. You can actually own it and not regret it.

BMWs are just lease mobiles. No one in their right mind keeps any recent BMW after 50k miles.

JimFlat6:

BMWs are just lease mobiles. No one in their right mind keeps any recent BMW after 50k miles.

  Well...you said it. 

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 997 Turbo, BMW X5 M, BMW M3 Cab DKG, Mini Cooper S JCW

pride355:

A combination of an almost new C63 AMG/M3 and a 991 Carrera S would suit me better than a Cayenne/Panamera Turbo S. Desicions, desicions..

There  might be a nice solution available for you next year, can't go into details though but let's say bi-turbo, still nice exhaust sound, M3 price range, 4WD, four doors...

RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Porsche 997 Turbo, BMW X5 M, BMW M3 Cab DKG, Mini Cooper S JCW

This may be last photos with camoflague:

 Looking great!! 

Not sure. Hope it deviates from the standard 5's M Sport somewhat.

throt

"I didn't do it"

throt:

Not sure. Hope it deviates from the standard 5's M Sport somewhat.

It will be similar difference like M3 compared to 3 Coupe with M package.

Shakal:

throt:

Not sure. Hope it deviates from the standard 5's M Sport somewhat.

It will be similar difference like M3 compared to 3 Coupe with M package.

Then they are going to be too similar

ONUR

11 M3 Coupe AW

09 Audi TTS Coupe - 07 997 Carrera S - 05 M3 Coupe - 03 M3 Coupe - 96 M3 Coupe EVO (PASS TIME HISTORY)

Yep, too similar. And is it just me or is this model kind of late on the market? Been waiting forever...

indeed shifting is ancient technology - so is a fuel burning engine..  I happen to like both :) 

pride355:

Shakal:

throt:

Not sure. Hope it deviates from the standard 5's M Sport somewhat.

It will be similar difference like M3 compared to 3 Coupe with M package.

Then they are going to be too similar

Cool, that means 3 Coupe with M package also looks good

Difference will be bigger than it was on E60, which was too similar IMO. F10 M5 will also have different bumper's design (similar to E92 M3 - lines will be opposite to those on M package) and wider fenders.

 Are those the final wheels?

 imo a big part of the M5 and M3 attitude has always been on the wheels and these just don't look the part, we've seen the same style on the old M6 and similar ones on the M sport 7 Series and the X6/5M.

Enmanuel:

 Are those the final wheels?

 imo a big part of the M5 and M3 attitude has always been on the wheels and these just don't look the part, we've seen the same style on the old M6 and similar ones on the M sport 7 Series and the X6/5M.

Those wheels are standard (19"):

And darkened 5-spoke will be optional..

Shakal:

Enmanuel:

 Are those the final wheels?

 imo a big part of the M5 and M3 attitude has always been on the wheels and these just don't look the part, we've seen the same style on the old M6 and similar ones on the M sport 7 Series and the X6/5M.

 

Those wheels are standard (19"):

And darkened 5-spoke will be optional..

This is a very crafty/rip off tactic so every buyer upgrades and ticks the wheel option box. Audi and others all do it, the standard RS5 wheels are poop too..

Maybe its just me, but I hate specking new buys....... If I recall correctly, TVR use to charge customers extra for different colour piping around the edge of the floor mats , what a joke..

throt

"I didn't do it"

 those don't look the part either. So the sales tactic will work for them.