2014 BMW M3/M4, will it be tri turbo or not? Answer is sort of

  • Thread starter Thread starter LMSCorvetteGT2
  • 379 comments
  • 35,653 views
Messages
22,551
United States
Arizona
Messages
HamiltonMP427
So I received my monthly subscription of auto magazines and saw reports that the new M3 is rumored to have three turbos. Yet other reports say it will have two twin scrolls. However, all reports do agree that the car will run a six cylinder engine getting back to the roots of what the M3 is. This obviously makes sense with the F10 being a V8 now instead of the V10.

Motor Trend talks a little bit about the tri-turbo for 2013, the article is Cadillac ATS-V (another nice thread to start I suppose) vs. BMW M3. However, back in 2011 Road & Track disclaimed these rumors, yet now the April issue of Motor Trend says different.

I'd like to see a tri-turbo M3 it would be different and far more unique than the first and only BMW M3 V8.
 
Isn't the tri-turbo strictly a BMW diesel thing?

Supposedly from the article it will now be a M3 thing or might. With the third turbo being electrically powered. The transmission choices that are being hinted at are also nice.
 
I hope its not a strictly diesel thing, and it's obvious that the concept could easily be applied to petrol and diesel engines alike, it'd be fan-blo'dy-tastic if it were tri-turbo, but I think we'll still all be happy if it turns out to be twin scroll, I mean, it only has 3 cylinders each if that's the case isn't it (right?)? Imagine a tri-scroll! 2 cylinders each!
 
I hope its not a strictly diesel thing, and it's obvious that the concept could easily be applied to petrol and diesel engines alike, it'd be fan-blo'dy-tastic if it were tri-turbo, but I think we'll still all be happy if it turns out to be twin scroll, I mean, it only has 3 cylinders each if that's the case isn't it (right?)? Imagine a tri-scroll! 2 cylinders each!

To be honest I haven't looked at the schematics to see how twin scroll work on modern age cars. The last twin turbo systems I studied were those used RB25, RB26 and 2JZ with limited studying up on the VR38. So when and if this hits the deck I'll really want to see it and learn.
 
Nothing is known for sure at this stage. It's all rumours at this stage, anything is speculation, even SCOTT26 over at bimmerpost.com hasn't confirmed anything other than different engines are being/have been tested.
 
I don't think an I-6 would be too bad. However, it would have to be pretty light. I prefer handling to massive amounts of power (E30...).
 
2013_bmw_m3_f80_official.chysmg2hzyo8ooggowokk0ko4.a5fuq7lrqzkgc0ccw4ss08gso.th.jpeg


^ This is supposedly what it will look like.

Now the place that I got this image from is saying a different story than all the big magazines with the foundation being the same however. The car will have a six cylinder engine but here is the twist from the others, instead of 450 it will have 500 possibly 500+ and no turbos but a single supercharger instead.

I don't know if I'm to believe this over the big auto magazines/websites. Though this is all rumor right now. The amount being churned on this one car is quite fun. I never have been this excited to see a BMW. (not a bimmer fan but a Audi and Merc guy when it comes to german cars)

I don't think an I-6 would be too bad. However, it would have to be pretty light. I prefer handling to massive amounts of power (E30...).

The car is claimed to have weight shaved from the last one and not just due to the V8 being replaced and using a I-6. Carbonfiber-reinforced plastic, high-strength steel and aluminium pieces. Also the rear diff will be a big performance key as well.
 
Last edited:
The car is claimed to have weight shaved from the last one and not just due to the V8 being replaced and using a I-6. Carbonfiber-reinforced plastic, high-strength steel and aluminium pieces. Also the rear diff will be a big performance key as well.

You do realize the weight difference between a V8 and an I6 is approximately nil, right? If anything, I6s are heavier.
 
I don't think an I-6 would be too bad. However, it would have to be pretty light. I prefer handling to massive amounts of power (E30...).

The earlier M-Cars had I-6's I believe, so it would be nice to go back to them.
 
E28
The earlier M-Cars had I-6's I believe, so it would be nice to go back to them.

Kind of. The E30 M3 had an I4. The rest of the early M-Cars are I6, at least until the E39 M5, which had a V8 (if you only count full Mx cars, not counting M-tuned cars like M540i or M-Cars without the badge, ie. 850CSi).
 
If we're going back to M-Car roots, I believe a 500 horsepower 2.3 liter I4 would do nicely.

That would give you something relatively light compared to a four liter V8, and it'll be quite entertaining, to boot.
 
You do realize the weight difference between a V8 and an I6 is approximately nil, right? If anything, I6s are heavier.

Depends, in most cases I agree with you. The best example I use to show that I-6 vs V8 is the SC300 compared to the SC400. The 2jz was quite heavier than the 1UZ. Also the article says that the I-6 is said to weigh less than the V8 hence why I say what I said in the comment.

If we're going back to M-Car roots, I believe a 500 horsepower 2.3 liter I4 would do nicely.

That would give you something relatively light compared to a four liter V8, and it'll be quite entertaining, to boot.

Exactly that would be highly interesting.
 
If we're going back to M-Car roots, I believe a 500 horsepower 2.3 liter I4 would do nicely.

That would give you something relatively light compared to a four liter V8, and it'll be quite entertaining, to boot.

4L I4. Want.
 
If we're going back to M-Car roots, I believe a 500 horsepower 2.3 liter I4 would do nicely.

That would give you something relatively light compared to a four liter V8, and it'll be quite entertaining, to boot.

That's something interesting and definitely quite entertaining. I don't care what sound it will make as long as the performance is there, I'm on it. I'm just worried about these people whining and attacking about the cars losing all the sound and bla bla bla...
 
Agree that this new M3 needs to be freaking anorexic.....It must be lighter than the 1MCoupe. It has to be much better than the 1M Coupe otherwise there is no point in introducing the model. Im hoping for a turbo I6. Hopefully they go crazy with the carbon fiber! but not so much with the cost...
 
It must be lighter than the 1MCoupe.

You mean, lighter than the current 1M Coupe? To be honest, I really doubt that. The 1M weight at 1495KG and considering that this new M3 is bigger and theoretically should be a tad heavier, I'd say it could be about the same or a little more heavier.

But, there is a point in introducing this model. I think you do realise the 1M Coupe was a limited production? ;)

EDIT: They can go crazy with CF but that thing isn't cheap so yeah, unless they somehow can get the cost reduced.
 
It will certainly be interesting to see what BMW uses - the most common rumour being the tri-turbo setup, it'd be the first in the class to move to turbos on the highest-performing models (Audi's re-used the RS5's engine for the RS4, and Mercedes is still running the old 6.2L for the C, probably until the next model change).

The rumours of them dumping the inline configuration for a vee may be true, but I'd like to think that's at least another generation away - we already know the I6 fits just fine in the current 335i, so it's unlikely they'd mess with that, especially if that engine is going to form the basis of the M3's.

It's still disappointing though, that M engines are now just higher-boosted versions of engines already available in the lineup. Part of the appeal, at least for me, was that the M models always had unique engines. As for weight - the current V8 was lighter than the old 3.2L I6 it replaced, and while the new engine is aluminium, the associated turbo bits and bobs might not represent much of a weight savings over the V8. That said, the base car is now lighter than the old one, so that bodes well. Lighter than the 1M, though? Unlikely.
 
I think 1450 KG would be a good target weight to aim for, but for a car of the size of a 3-series, it would require a lot of CF in the construction.

If BMW will go for an ultra-high-boost 3 liter, it will share many features of the lower-end turbocharged mills, but will probably have to have bespoke internals to handle the stresses. In the end, it may well be possible to boost the standard 3 liter to those levels, but not without sinking a lot of money into it.
 
Last edited:
I've just read something in BMWBLOG and they reckon that from all the reports it seems like a turbocharged Inline-6 is very likely to end up in the M3.

2013-bmw-m3-0111-655x464.jpg


[Info and picture courtesy of BMWBLOG.com]
 
I've just read something in BMWBLOG and they reckon that from all the reports it seems like a turbocharged Inline-6 is very likely to end up in the M3.

Sounds like it could be good. I mean, the only compromise with losing the V8 is noise. And that doesn't really matter when compared to performance.
 
So I received my monthly subscription of auto magazines and saw reports that the new M3 is rumored to have three turbos. Yet other reports say it will have two twin scrolls. However, all reports do agree that the car will run a six cylinder engine getting back to the roots of what the M3 is. This obviously makes sense with the F10 being a V8 now instead of the V10.

Motor Trend talks a little bit about the tri-turbo for 2013, the article is Cadillac ATS-V (another nice thread to start I suppose) vs. BMW M3. However, back in 2011 Road & Track disclaimed these rumors, yet now the April issue of Motor Trend says different.

I'd like to see a tri-turbo M3 it would be different and far more unique than the first and only BMW M3 V8.

I don't really see reducing cylinders as getting back to the roots of the car, especially if going turbo. And I'm pretty sure it'll be twin, tri would be awesome, but it'll be twin.

It went up to 8 cylinders so it could perform better against its rivals, and its come back down to 6 cylinders with turbos so it'll be more efficient and more powerful.
 
Here's a video from November last:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeOsjLw711s (embedding disabled by request)

There are two cars, the first with the weird wheels looks to be a manual, and the one with black wheels appears to be an auto of some kind. They sound subtly different, too; sort of a cross between an N55 (twin-scroll single-turbo) and an N54 (twin-turbo).

Maybe that sound points to tri-turbo, especially if they plan on running "massive" boost to massage ~470 bhp from the existing 3-litre units.
Similarly, a triple-scroll single-turbo could be fun, I don't think it's ever got past being experimental. I can imagine that's something for the M people (ha) to get their teeth into, but the returns over a twin scroll in terms of response are probably minimal, and the plumbing and / or firing order may need serious attention (actually, that would apply more to triple, parallel turbos, which are probably pointless).

I suspect that for moderately high boost (in production car terms) they would want to go with a twin-turbo setup (i.e. two separate turbo-compressors) for better flexibility over the single twin-scroll, and less weight and complexity vs. the tri-turbo as it's configured on the N57 Diesel. That leaves open the idea of using one twin-scroll turbine, and one mono-scroll turbine, like on those patents, with a similar (to the tri-turbo system) medium-to-high-engine-speed switch-over to eke out maximum boost at maximum volume throughput (that is, ignoring the third, larger, "sequential", low-pressure unit, and focusing on the behaviour of the two, smaller, "semi-parallel" ones on the Diesel.) That could also explain the sound in the above video, to a lesser extent.


As for "electronic turbo", are they thinking of (electric) turbo compounding? Keith Duckworth was after that eventually for Ford's "TEC" turbo F1 engine (Cosworth GBA) introduced in ~1986, but nothing came of it because of regulation changes for '88. There's also room for turbo compounding in the 2014 F1 regs, to complement the existing KERS.
I've read that the returns are small (~5% in fuel economy, < 10% in peak power output), and they'd probably stick it on a Diesel first because that's been done already in goods / freight vehicles (lower exhaust temperature, smaller operating range). But BMWs are, in relative terms, still big, heavy cars, and cruising at Autobahn speeds will always need so much power... perhaps not in an M car just yet, though, eh?
 
Autoweek say's next M3 will be sedan only.

http://www.autoweek.com/article/20120807/CARNEWS/120809892

and more importantly to alot of people this bit of new's.

"But purists might still question the decision to go with a turbocharged engine that will bring an end to an illustrious era of naturally aspirated powerplants for the M3. Additionally, for the first time since its inception in 1986, there will be no manual gearbox."
 
Last edited:
Truthfully I didn't as I don't keep up with BMW new's too closely anymore, the second part of my post is what I thought would be important to the M3 news here.
 
That's a bit disappointing, but not overly surprising given the crowd that the M3 is marketed towards these days.
 
Back