Leaked E90 Brochure

[All Wheel Drive]

I saw the brochure myself. I think they are trying too much with this design. IMO, it's starting to look like a Jag.

I love the ideea of new higher reving engines. Now, they will surely be ahead of the competition and in the same time keep those machines sporty.

There are things about design that bug me. But now I'm tired, I'll post later with comments.

[Anzeige eBay]

Hallo GIR,

 

kennst du schon Leaked E90 Brochure (Anzeige)? Dort ist vieles zu finden.

 

BMW Ersatzteile (Anzeige) | BMW Zubehör (Anzeige)

[LateNightCable]

Heavy is reletive, but I think it's fair to say that any car that is compact or sub-compact, which the A4 and 3-Series are, and border on 3,500 lbs. or more are heavy. Perhaps weight in the E30 range would be too much to expect in this day and age of power everything, and expectations of greater interior volume. But I don't see why any of these cars ( four wheel drive Audis' excluded ) have to weigh any more than 3,200.

I'm thinking that higher revs are not the best way to go for getting more power. The higher the revs, the greater the stress on internals ( even if they are designed for it ) and it holds no value as far as fuel consumption goes, so they might as well increase the displacement for all it matters, and get some more muscle down low ( variable valve timing helps, but still ). The M3 for one is an absolute gas guzzler, even compared to some V8s'. BMW does not need new sixes, the market simply demands new stuff, thats' all there is to it. And new engines are required to best facilitate the latest advancements.

[All Wheel Drive]

BMW does not need new sixes, the market simply demands new stuff, thats' all there is to it. And new engines are required to best facilitate the latest advancements.

If u mean they should design and introduce new engines, then I don't agree. The ones that they have are good enough and now they are getting better. Why invest money to develop something new when they can use what they already found in research on their actual engines?

I agree, more power always equals more fuel consumption (if this is the right English to use), whether it revs high, has bigger displacement or goes FI. But higher reving engines has always been the policy for BMW. Now, they are just sticking to what they know and what their faithful customers know. I can only admire that. And why the hell should they change it if it works and it is bought?!

I think Fox has something to say about this too...

@LateNight: If u know some economical changes on the engine market (changes that I surely don't know), please share. If not, plz explain why "the market simply demands new stuff".

[LateNightCable]

If u mean they should design and introduce new engines, then I don't agree. The ones that they have are good enough and now they are getting better.

My personal feeling is the same as yours, they don't need new engines. Thats' what I'm saying.

I admire BMW if they stick to their guns, but this means not bending to pressure and doing something that is not truely better, just to keep up with the Jones'.

Any " market demands " are not about economics, or what anybody needs, but rather what BMW feels the customers' want. Most people are not screaming out for new engines', but BMW wants' everyone to know that they are on the cutting edge, and the way to do that is to develop new engines. So when I say " the market simply demands new stuff. " It really means that BMW themselves demand to stay on top of the market. Because as far as the consumers go, most don't know VANOS from Veal. So, providing a basis for their latest technology is part of the reason for the new line of sixes, but mostly it's about BMW putting forth the right public perception." We're fresh, and on top of the game. " BMW is one of the manufacturers who are most dependant on this image.

[thepolarfoxqx]

BMW sells cars because they are the sportiest and best performing cars in their segments. The competition just can't outdo them, and that is what they sell on. Mercedes and Jaguar make more luxurious cars, Volvo makes a car that is safer and more ergonomical, audi makes one that is more versatile and better constructed, BMW banks on performance. The Audi A4 is way too heavy, even with the new 252hp 3.2L V6, it would have trouble beating a 225hp 3.0L 330i, but if you look at the new 252hp 3.0L X-Type or 272hp 3.5L C350 coming out, both of which are no heavier than a 3-series, they would blow the doors off it. Simply put, if i test drove a bmw and a benz and the benz performed better, i'd buy the benz. We test drove the X-Type 3.0 Sport, Audi 3.0L Quattro, and 330Xi, and the X-Type performed the best of the three, drove the best, and clearly had the power with it's short gearing and high-winding 3.0L, so it was the car we took home. BMW needs the power, it's nice and philosophical to say, yes stick to our guns, make cars the way we think cars should be, but BMW has more competition now than they have ever had before. They can't afford to be seccond string in terms of performance. They aren't totally new engines, the blocks stay unchanged, I give them credit for not bumping displacement to 3.0 and 3.5, because, despite what red-necks demanding displacement want to believe, a smaller, ligher engine is better, it makes for better weight distrobution, polar center of intertia, braking, acceleration, if a smaller, lighter engine can make more power, go with it. With modern assembly quality, 7,000-7,500 rpm redlines aren't out of line at all, jaguar is already at 7 grand in their 3.0L, audi will be there in their 3.2, and mercedes is moving from 6,000 to 6,500 for their 3.5L. The extra 500 rpms is good. Even honda pressed an extra 40hp from their 3.0L SOHC V6 for accord by winding a bit higher. Honda engines by nature wind high and are some of the most durable around. A lighter, higher winding engine is sportier by nature, and allows for a longer, flatter torque curve and more aggressive gearing. Furthermore, these revised engine are just updates, bringing the fantastic valvetronic system down to the sixes. It makes the engines smoother, more responsive, more efficient, and gives them flatter torque curves. BMW engines have always come alive as they revved, and if you want to look at this from an engineering standpoint, having torque up high is more important for acceleration than down low. Say you take off, you will wind through the lower rpms once - in first gear, at 7k you shift to 2nd and drop to 4,500 and rev up from there, so whatever torque you have below 4,500 doesn't matter, you can't use it, you want to wind gears all the way out to take advantage of the torque from gearing, lowend is nice if it's all you've got, but with my 1.8L engine in my 318i - that makes it's power all up high and has aggressive gearing, i deftly beat my buddy who has a V6 ford mustang, a car that is the same size and only heavier by the difference in weight between our engines, his 3.8L V6 makes lots of low end torque, but I beat him because he can't use any of it, sure, if we both slam the pedal down loafing at 2,500rpms, he'll pull ahead, but keep in mind, i can drop 2 gears and shoot up to 6,000 rpms and have tons of power and room to use it, if he drops two gears he'll overwind his big engine, if he drops one, he'll be out of his torque band and still won't be able to touch me.

BMW did this one right by updating their engines, giving them broad torque bands and letting them wind out. It fits their sporting spirit, and we are talking about BMW engine construction, it's not like ford, a BMW engine is crafted well, built precisely and is engineered with complete accuracy, 7k isn't hard at all on it. Also, for fuel economy, that big engine has to run that displacement all the time, if you have a small motor with a good flat torque curve, you can shift at low RPMs and still drive just fine, and it would function as a smaller engine not winding as high. Smaller engines allow better fuel efficiency. In every magazine test i've seen between M3 and corvette, the M3 scores much better observed gas mileage than the vette, despite the vetter being rated higher. BMW 3 series has best in class gas mileage now, and should continue that. Mercedes and Infiniti - both of whom had larger engines have some of the worst. Bigger engines being better for gas mileage is flawed logic. It takes more gas to run a bigger engine, if you drive your small high winding motor conservatively, shift short of high revs, you will get much better gas mileage, the valvetronic inline sixes have good torque curves and have plenty of bottom end.

BMW did this right, there's just no other way to look at it.

[All Wheel Drive]

Thx Fox, that's the post I was expecting. It brings to BMW what it deserves and it brings me further understanding of the engines.

[LateNightCable]

Fox is good with the techno jargon, a good internet search will net you that same information, you asked a question AWD, I answered it. Perhaps the way I word my info is above your head. But the thing is, there is really nothing wrong with the current engines. A more powerful, higher winding engine could be better in itself, though whatever the displacement, it will use a good amount of gas. But low weight will pay dividends in many ways. Not only in gas mileage, but acceleration, handling, body control, and when all is said and done, the car gets' more done with less, which is the very epitome of efficiency.

Everyone is focused on the quest for more power because they need it to get the numbers they want, and it sells, while at the same time they're all beefing out. Even supposed weight reductions are not that impressive. If BMW ( and everyone else ) really wanted to do right, they would focus greater attention to this increasingly neglected aspect.

On the subject of the carmaker's specialties, Audi builds good quality cars, but I wouldn't say they are built better than a BMW, and Bimmers also rank favorably as far as safety goes. If you've ever wrecked in a BMW, or seen the photos of one, it's obvious to see that Volvo has nothing on them in this respect. This also explains some of the weight, no premium maker is really leaps and bounds ahead of any other in safety anymore. By their very nature, the frames are well thought out, and there are ever tightening standards to be met.

[thepolarfoxqx]

If you look at survival statistics from major accidents, the only automaker even close to volvo is mercedes-benz. Clearly there are lots of reasons for this, but I can tell you just by the feel of the cars, a volvo is a heck of a lot more vault like and solid, and i'd feel more confident in one. Volvo puts saftey first, above all else, volvo debuted side airbags and 3 point seat belts. All premium cars are safe, but none are safer than volvo. For their XC90, they have an active gyroscopic suspension, if the car begins to roll far enough that a threat of roll is detected, the suspension acts against it, a first on any car. In terms of initial quality reviews and numbers of issues within the first year of ownership, BMW, mercedes, jaguar, all do very poorly (clearly more sophisticated vehicles will have more bugs, and in the first year it's all warrantee anyhow, we know that these are all durable cars) but audi's do much better. In terms of interior craftsmanship, i as well as the automotive press believe no one holds a candle to them. As for performance and sporting ability, BMW is the only name you need to know. BMW did not just improve power, they improved handling with radical suspension geometry (as previously seen on the 5 and 7), added an active rear differential, i'm sure larger brakes and worked towards weight reduction.

If BMW left their engines alone, they would be the least powerful and slowest cars in their class. Why would you pay top dollar to get the slowest car with the most dated engineering?

You wouldn't. It's just common sense. They just updated their engines, who can argue with a better, more powerful, responsive, efficient, and smooth engine?

[LateNightCable]

I don't know about the old 318, but the 740 feels pretty vault like. Volvo is a pioneer in the field of new safety measures, but all the same, BMW is at no loss.

Audi does indeed craft the finest quality interiors ( over a wide range of models ), but the best in the business would have to go to Rolls or Bentley as far as craftsmanship goes. What I meant originally, was more about overall fit and finish. I don't find them to be better in an Audi than a BMW.

The point I'm making about the engines, is that performance and efficiency all go back to weight, that is the root of the matter, and the old engines' are hardly out-dated, they remain among the best in the world. In fact, while new ones may produce more power ( which otherwise could easily be made up for with massive weight reduction, with all of the resultant benefits ) don't count on engines' getting much smoother, responsive, and efficient than they already are. It's a rat race for the most part, plain and simple.

[All Wheel Drive]

Thx Fox, that's the post I was expecting. It brings to BMW what it deserves and it brings me further understanding of the engines.

Fox is good with the techno jargon, a good internet search will net you that same information, you asked a question AWD, I answered it. Perhaps the way I word my info is above your head. But the thing is, there is really nothing wrong with the current engines.

I apreciate ur answers as well as I apreciate Fox'. There is no doubt about that. Your words weren't above my head, either.

My comment was about the fact that I was anticipating a post like this from Fox. And he did it. It also brought me new knowledge and I thanked him.

I meant nothing more with my post. I have nothing more to add. We can carry on with the car stuff.

[Anzeige eBay]

Hallo GIR,

 

schau doch mal hier zum Thema Zubehör für BMW (Anzeige)? Eventuell gibt es dort etwas Passendes.

[thepolarfoxqx]

Hey cable, on the topic of safety and weight reduction, if you were to rip the reinforced side impact beams, airbags, head restraints, crumple zone members, controlled impact seat movement systems, safety cages, roof reinforcements all out of the new BMW 3, it wouldn't weigh that much more than my E30. It's an interesting thing to note, but safey gear makes up a lot of the weight in a modern luxury car. You can't just "make a car lighter", you have to take stuff away. BMW is trying to have it both ways be removing wieght by efficiency, I give that a thumbs up, look at E60, it worked. If you want to do without those fine interiors, sophisticated climate control, audiophile stereo systems, comfort seats, and lots and lots of safety features and noise deadening, you can save a lot of weight, but those are compromises few people want to make for an expensive car. BMW's engines were good and very advanced (especially when compared to what some american auto makers still use), but the fact stands that what MB and Audi are coming out with would make them look dated, tell me, what was damaged by updating the engines. I see only good things from it.

[skyline_r34v]

BMW sells cars because they are the sportiest and best performing cars in their segments. The competition just can't outdo them, and that is what they sell on. Mercedes and Jaguar make more luxurious cars, Volvo makes a car that is safer and more ergonomical, audi makes one that is more versatile and better constructed, BMW banks on performance. The Audi A4 is way too heavy, even with the new 252hp 3.2L V6, it would have trouble beating a 225hp 3.0L 330i, but if you look at the new 252hp 3.0L X-Type or 272hp 3.5L C350 coming out, both of which are no heavier than a 3-series, they would blow the doors off it. Simply put, if i test drove a bmw and a benz and the benz performed better, i'd buy the benz. We test drove the X-Type 3.0 Sport, Audi 3.0L Quattro, and 330Xi, and the X-Type performed the best of the three, drove the best, and clearly had the power with it's short gearing and high-winding 3.0L, so it was the car we took home. BMW needs the power, it's nice and philosophical to say, yes stick to our guns, make cars the way we think cars should be, but BMW has more competition now than they have ever had before. They can't afford to be seccond string in terms of performance. They aren't totally new engines, the blocks stay unchanged, I give them credit for not bumping displacement to 3.0 and 3.5, because, despite what red-necks demanding displacement want to believe, a smaller, ligher engine is better, it makes for better weight distrobution, polar center of intertia, braking, acceleration, if a smaller, lighter engine can make more power, go with it. With modern assembly quality, 7,000-7,500 rpm redlines aren't out of line at all, jaguar is already at 7 grand in their 3.0L, audi will be there in their 3.2, and mercedes is moving from 6,000 to 6,500 for their 3.5L. The extra 500 rpms is good. Even honda pressed an extra 40hp from their 3.0L SOHC V6 for accord by winding a bit higher. Honda engines by nature wind high and are some of the most durable around. A lighter, higher winding engine is sportier by nature, and allows for a longer, flatter torque curve and more aggressive gearing. Furthermore, these revised engine are just updates, bringing the fantastic valvetronic system down to the sixes. It makes the engines smoother, more responsive, more efficient, and gives them flatter torque curves. BMW engines have always come alive as they revved, and if you want to look at this from an engineering standpoint, having torque up high is more important for acceleration than down low. Say you take off, you will wind through the lower rpms once - in first gear, at 7k you shift to 2nd and drop to 4,500 and rev up from there, so whatever torque you have below 4,500 doesn't matter, you can't use it, you want to wind gears all the way out to take advantage of the torque from gearing, lowend is nice if it's all you've got, but with my 1.8L engine in my 318i - that makes it's power all up high and has aggressive gearing, i deftly beat my buddy who has a V6 ford mustang, a car that is the same size and only heavier by the difference in weight between our engines, his 3.8L V6 makes lots of low end torque, but I beat him because he can't use any of it, sure, if we both slam the pedal down loafing at 2,500rpms, he'll pull ahead, but keep in mind, i can drop 2 gears and shoot up to 6,000 rpms and have tons of power and room to use it, if he drops two gears he'll overwind his big engine, if he drops one, he'll be out of his torque band and still won't be able to touch me.

BMW did this one right by updating their engines, giving them broad torque bands and letting them wind out. It fits their sporting spirit, and we are talking about BMW engine construction, it's not like ford, a BMW engine is crafted well, built precisely and is engineered with complete accuracy, 7k isn't hard at all on it. Also, for fuel economy, that big engine has to run that displacement all the time, if you have a small motor with a good flat torque curve, you can shift at low RPMs and still drive just fine, and it would function as a smaller engine not winding as high. Smaller engines allow better fuel efficiency. In every magazine test i've seen between M3 and corvette, the M3 scores much better observed gas mileage than the vette, despite the vetter being rated higher. BMW 3 series has best in class gas mileage now, and should continue that. Mercedes and Infiniti - both of whom had larger engines have some of the worst. Bigger engines being better for gas mileage is flawed logic. It takes more gas to run a bigger engine, if you drive your small high winding motor conservatively, shift short of high revs, you will get much better gas mileage, the valvetronic inline sixes have good torque curves and have plenty of bottom end.

BMW did this right, there's just no other way to look at it.

Holy shit paragraphs man, paragraphs.

[thepolarfoxqx]

i enjoy this forum because i can disregard spelling, grammar, formatting and textual style, i can just write how I talk. Only the TV news man talks in paragraphs.

[skyline_r34v]

I know that but it's hard as hell to read all that mumbo jumbo shit that's massed all together.

Putting things in paragraphs only makes it easier for the viewers to read.

Hence, why TV stations and Newspaper editorial columnists write/type long stories but in paragraphs.

I had to quote your post then separate sentences into paragraphs just so I could be able to read it.

[thepolarfoxqx]

complaints, complaints.

[LateNightCable]

Nothing wrong with updating the engines, just not the most important thing they could be doing. I know that a lot of the weight of contemporary cars is from the beefed safety structure, and most of those things are good, but much more attention I think should be focused on the use of materials that would make those items lighter, so nothing important would be taken away. Aluminum of all things is still thought of as exotic in the world of production cars for some reason, even though a Coke can is made of the same stuff. Steel is cheap, so it's hard to put down I guess.

At the very least, I think it would be appropriate for a machine such as the M3 to be stripped down as standard. That is, no power seats ( which are used quite infrequently anyway ), power windows, any kind of excessive bulk that is not related to safety. With the option of adding content in the form of stages. Stage 1, Stage 2, etc. which I mentioned in a thread a long time ago. So, the poseurs could have their add ons, and the racers could have the stripped down, back to basics car.

Manufacturers such as Mitsubishi have touched upon this possibility, with the likes of the EvoVIII, and the cheaper, lighter, and faster Evo RS.

[thepolarfoxqx]

power seats are only a little bit heavier too, and they sell. M3 made them an option - guess what, nearly everyone goes for them. Aluminum in coke cans, if you've noticed, is very soft, aluminum alloy - as in what you might build an A8 or XJ from is more expensive. Also, you need special body shops to fix aluminum, it's much much harder to do body repair. Keep in mind cars keep getting bigger. More leg room, more car, more car, more weight.

[LateNightCable]

aluminum alloy - as in what you might build an A8 or XJ from is more expensive. Also, you need special body shops to fix aluminum, it's much much harder to do body repair.

I still think they are just stalling when it comes to using anything that isn't steel or cheap plastic.

The E39 5-Series set new standards with it's great use of aluminum in the chassis and suspension, and that was 1997, on a car that would have been 55-$60,000 anyway. The Plymouth Prowler contained 900lbs. of the stuff, even some pre-99' Ford Taurus' had aluminum decklids. Most of the cheapest cars on the market are available with aluminum alloy wheels, so it doesn't have to be expensive. Aluminum bodywork is costly to repair, but using it for internal components ( which are sheltered unless you total the car ) makes sense.

The cost of automotive-grade aluminum is about four times that of steel, and tooling is more difficult. But manufacturing processes like self-piercing rivets, and just the basic act of producing more auto-grade aluminum lowers the cost of it. It just takes real industry acceptance to make things affordable.

[thepolarfoxqx]

The E39 - despite it's aluminum suspension and subframe usage was still a barge. True, it was a larger car than E34 and did not weight that much more, but the E34 was a brick house. Aluminum is nice and helps a lot, but can't overcome a less than efficient design. When done well, like on the XJ8, it pays off, making the full size XJ lighter than any of their competitors midsize sedans, whereas the aluminum audi A8 is still well over 4,400 lbs. My E30, the lightest modern BMW for effective purposes has iron suspension arms. I'd love to get aluminum arms for it, but it's a lightweight car despite having iron underpinings. My 1991 volvo had a fiberglass hood, that was - to me, a very nice weight saving measure. I didn't know it was fiberglass till I knocked on it.

[LateNightCable]

The 5 is hardly more brick-like than most other cars in it's class. And certainly not more than an Audi. And ideally, if aluminum is going to be used, a car's design will be efficient.

[thepolarfoxqx]

The E39 540i was pretty well the heaviest car in it's class. Even the AWD A6 was only a few pounds heavier. That said, the BMW is perfectly proportioned if heavy.