[speedfan]

Originally Posted by 宝马.e90

I understand fuel efficiency but can a 4-cyl really be that much quicker than an I6 given that everything else remains about the same? That's pretty cool/interesting.

Kudos to BMW for building such a fantastic 4-cyl engine.

great point.

The power of N20 turbo is underrated by A LOT.
It pumps out much higher hp & torque comparing to the I6.

I'm very curious to know what's gonna happen if 2 engines put out the same hp at the crank. will there be any significant difference other than fuel efficiency?

[benzo23]

Originally Posted by The X Men

I agree, a 4 cyl. $50000 car is not for everyone, me included. Unfortunately, cars in the future have to be more efficient and we all know Americans like super sized cars like their super sized fast food My opinion is that, if I were to buy a 4 cyl. car, its would not be a $50000 BMW. I would just settle for a Honda or something like that. If I were to buy a BMW, I want it to be fast and smooth.

I agree 100%, decent options puts me at 55k for a 12' 528. You mean to tell me im going to spend that much for a car with leather and a 2.0L 4cyl? No thanks. I dont care if it has more "power" than the old I6. It sounds like a diesel at idle. Like I said for that money or less i would rather find a left over 535, or a 2012 335is thats loaded. But hey to each there own.

[LiveLarger]

Originally Posted by benzo23

You're absolutely right, weight has nothing to do with a cars performance. My mistake. A 4000 lb car should have a 4cyl in it.

It's irrelevant when comparing power output of a engine. The performance is related to what power the engine can deliver. Not the amount of cylinders. 245 horse power is well, just more then 208. It would not matter if you had 6, 8 or 12 cylinders if the engine delivers less HP and torque.

Why is this hard to understand?

[benzo23]

Originally Posted by LiveLarger

It's irrelevant when comparing power output of a engine. The performance is related to what power the engine can deliver. Not the amount of cylinders. 245 horse power is well, just more then 208. It would not matter if you had 6, 8 or 12 cylinders if the engine delivers less HP and torque.

Why is this hard to understand?

Thank you so much for clearing all of that up for me, I dont know what I was possibly thinking. My horrible mistake, I understand now that I wont be buying one either way.

[The X Men]

Hmmm, what ever happened to the horsepower vs weight ratio?

[LiveLarger]

Originally Posted by The X Men

Hmmm, what ever happened to the horsepower vs weight ratio?

exactly

[MSPORTWORLD]

Good video...informative, short, sweet and to the point.

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by e92_m3

In a drag race stock vs stock the turbo 4-cyl will win every single time over the NA 6-cyl.

In a proper race stock vs stock on a track, I'm pretty sure it will be a very close race considering the only difference between the two cars is the torque. However with a torque of 260 vs 230, the 2012 528i may be coming out of a corner a little faster than the 6 cyl.

Although the 2012 528i has more torque, it may all come down to the driver when it comes to a stock vs stock race on a track.

.....for what its worth I have nearly 130,000 miles on my N54 ~Frost

[kavehm]

"In a proper race stock vs stock on a track, I'm pretty sure it will be a very close race considering the only difference between the two cars is the torque. However with a torque of 260 vs 230, the 2012 528i may be coming out of a corner a little faster than the 6 cyl."

Keep in mind the number of times you'll be able to go around the track without high-temperature related issues, for a short spurt surely the turbo-4, but for a longer race i'd put my money on I6 (or any NA engine) any day.

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by 宝马.e90

I didn't see the distance of the sprint, any one know what it was? If it was short, the N20 is going to have the advantage like you said but how would the N52 compare in a proper race? That's what I would like to see but still, the 4-cyl N20 is a great engine.

The N20 generates more power across the range, and is 22 lbs lighter than the N52. If you took the same exact car and swapped between the N52 and N20, the N20 is going to win every performance category, with maybe the exception of endurance.

Originally Posted by Yallmb

So, I4 was quicker than the I6, I'm cool with that because the factory says that the I4 has 30lb-ft more torque than the I6. However, what's up with the HP ratings? The factory rated them both at 240 HP but the I6 only put out 208 HP at the crank on this particular dyno. Not really liking that. They should both be putting out at least 240 HP at the crank.

Originally Posted by Yallmb

Nope, the previous F10 528i used the N52B30 I6 that put out 240 hp and 230 lb·ft in US trim. Now, if they had said the hp output at the wheels was 208 I would have said "OK, driveline loss" but they actually said that it was 208 hp at the crank which should be 240. So, yeah, I think that they either screwed up the numbers as you said or there is something going on with that dyno or something wrong with the car.

A wheel dyno can't tell you crank HP. You can estimate crank HP, but unless you pull the engine and hook it up to a dyno, you won't know. A wheel dyno is only good for relative comparison. I wish they would have just published the numbers output by the dyno, rather than try to do the math.

[absolutezero]

Originally Posted by ron_jeremy

Well, regarding reliability,the turbo's is a part which breaks down within 130-180.000 km.
Which means within 6 years or so it/they need to be replaced.
It's not cheap, especially the modern turbo's.
What might be worse is when these breaks down, and you drive with it, the Hole engine can be destroyed!

So surely the NA 6 is more durable in the long run, but with these bullshit clima regulations, turbo's and downsizing is a must, sadly!

Can you show data that supports that a significant number of today's turbos will need replaced within that time/distance?

[absolutezero]

Originally Posted by The X Men

Hmmm, what ever happened to the horsepower vs weight ratio?

Exactly.

I can understand if someone likes the "smooth" I6 (I love mine), but from a strictly perf perspective, the 4 is the winner. Less weight, more power, oh and on top of that better gas mileage...

[bradleyland]

Regarding torque vs horsepower, keep a couple of things in mind.

Torque is a measure of force. I can generate 240 lb ft of torque with a torque wrench. Imagine you attach a wrench to the drive line of a 5-series. I can generate 240 lb ft of torque, but what do you think my 0-60 time would be? I can answer that for you: I'll be dead before I get that car to 60 MPH!

So if you want to know how well an engine will perform in your car, you don't just care about torque. The correct question to ask is, how many revolutions per second can I produce at 240 lb ft of force?

Horsepower is the answer to that question. The formula for HP is

t(r)/5252

Where t is torque and r is RPM. So torque times RPM, divided by 5252.

So back to the original quandary. You're all staring at me asking, "Ok smart guy, if it's not the torque that explains why the N20 is faster, wtf is it?"

To say the N52 or N20 generates 240 HP at the crank is a pretty shallow insight, because that's peak HP. Care to venture a guess how long the engine spends at peak HP during an acceleration run? It's a really small fraction of the time.

More relevant is the question of HP curve over the RPM range. Turbo engines have a huge torque swell early in their RPM range. Compare the HP generated by the N20 at 2500 RPM vs the N52 at 2500 RPM and you'll begin to see why the N20 performs so well. The N20 accelerates the car faster, earlier because it's generating more force (torque!) earlier in the RPM range (horsepower!).

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by absolutezero

Can you show data that supports that a significant number of today's turbos will need replaced within that time/distance?

No one has any long term reliability data on modern turbos because, well, they're modern! They haven't been around long enough to know.

I think it's a pretty safe assumption to say that a naturally aspirated engine should (statistically speaking) outlast a comparably engineered turbo engine. Turbochargers live a very hot and abusive life. They push the boundaries of material science. It's not unreasonable to say that they'll suffer failure before a naturally aspirated engine that is inherently simpler.

EDIT: That said, I'll take the surging rush of a turbo car over N/A any day of the week. I'm addicted to FI!

[somonster]

Originally Posted by Greenkirby21

a street racing video by a dealership is being featured on bimmerpost?

that is SHAMEFUL.

this dealer should be sanctioned by BMW, they have the nerve to film themselves ABUSING their PRE-DELIVERY cars.

jerks.


and BTW, how do they measure "at the crank" hp? anyone help me out here? (thanks)

.

[TheRealOrosie]

Originally Posted by bradleyland

Regarding torque vs horsepower, keep a couple of things in mind.

Torque is a measure of force. I can generate 240 lb ft of torque with a torque wrench. Imagine you attach a wrench to the drive line of a 5-series. I can generate 240 lb ft of torque, but what do you think my 0-60 time would be? I can answer that for you: I'll be dead before I get that car to 60 MPH!

So if you want to know how well an engine will perform in your car, you don't just care about torque. The correct question to ask is, how many revolutions per second can I produce at 240 lb ft of force?

Horsepower is the answer to that question. The formula for HP is

t(r)/5252

Where t is torque and r is RPM. So torque times RPM, divided by 5252.

So back to the original quandary. You're all staring at me asking, "Ok smart guy, if it's not the torque that explains why the N20 is faster, wtf is it?"

To say the N52 or N20 generates 240 HP at the crank is a pretty shallow insight, because that's peak HP. Care to venture a guess how long the engine spends at peak HP during an acceleration run? It's a really small fraction of the time.

More relevant is the question of HP curve over the RPM range. Turbo engines have a huge torque swell early in their RPM range. Compare the HP generated by the N20 at 2500 RPM vs the N52 at 2500 RPM and you'll begin to see why the N20 performs so well. The N20 accelerates the car faster, earlier because it's generating more force (torque!) earlier in the RPM range (horsepower!).

Very well said.

[boostaholic786]

Originally Posted by somonster

that is SHAMEFUL.

this dealer should be sanctioned by BMW, they have the nerve to film themselves ABUSING their PRE-DELIVERY cars.

jerks.


and BTW, how do they measure "at the crank" hp? anyone help me out here? (thanks)

.

haha Thats really funny you just wrote that. This dealer did a favor for you and obviously everybody else on bimmerpost since it was the cover of the front page on bimmerpost. So obviously it holds some weight in the community for them to put it on the very front page. What they are trying to show you is that this 4 cyl turbo motor can outperform the previous one in every way including horsepower, weight, FUEL ECONOMY, performance, ect... BMW has mastered the engineering of there turbo motors to really make them very durable and efficient. The technology that BMW has today is probably 5-10 years ahead of its time. The reason that they perfected the turbo technology is because very soon and I mean very soon, cars will have more restrictions on engine sizes and liter displacement. In the near future all cars are going to be electric or hybrid of some sort. It big time sucks but hey, the government can do what they want to do. and yes I would by a $50000 dollar car with all the amenities that a even base 528 has. I would by it for the way it handles and sounds. I would buy it because its a quality product and is faster than the previous I6 engine that was in it.. Numbers dont lie, neither do motortrend or car and driver. If your wanting a luxurious sedan that get incredible gas mileage and is actually fun to drive, then this would be the car. One of the above post said "if im going to get a 4 cyl i would rather get a honda lol. Have fun with the plastic and fake vinyl or whatever they use for the dash haha. Nothing has changed her except the new 528 just got even better and thats all they were trying to show which is exactly what they did. Go drive one then come comment back if it ANYTHING like a 4 cyl and back and post your results. like I said BMW is on top of turbo game and has damn nearly perfected it. Oh and also, DINAN for instance sell tunes/software for BMW's and with the new 4 cyl motor Steve Dinan stated that there is ALOT of room to make A LOT more power I bet with the DINAN stage 1 tune will give us almost 60-70 whp where as the 2011 I6 DINAN software gives you i think maybe 9 horsepower and the stage 2 software that is like 1500 bucks will give you 13 horsepower .Its going to be one fun engine from what I hear The only thing think they should have done differently is not try and calculate crank horsepower and just give us the real dyno numbers.

[blueridger]

Originally Posted by absolutezero

Exactly.

I can understand if someone likes the "smooth" I6 (I love mine), but from a strictly perf perspective, the 4 is the winner. Less weight, more power, oh and on top of that better gas mileage...

All true. The 4-cyl is a real performer. The car feels more nimble, but the sound is just not what I'm after. I would have a hard time adjusting to it.

[Audionut]

I was in the camp too which believed that a 4 cyl does not belong in a 5. But after I got a 528 loaner when my 335 6mt was in the shop I became a believer. I just ordered a lightly optioned 528 which was sold at invoice; add the $1500 credit, Edmunds $1500 rebate, BMWCCA $1000 rebate, and the car was closer to mid 40ks. Does it sound like an I6? No, but the car is so well insulated that you'd have to drive with the windows opened to appreciate the sounds under the hood from the 535. I just hope they don't start putting M5's and M6's in the loaner pool

[Gator335i]

I think the answer to the sound issue of the 4-cylinder engine is for BMW to engineer an exhaust system that can mimic the sound of a 6 or even 8-cylinder engine.

I'm wondering what this 4-cylinder would sound like if you put a BMW Performance Exhaust on it.

[996911]

Originally Posted by bavarian19

Turbo's staying around for only 4 years? I think not. Based on that logic, the 335 powerplant should have been dead for a few years already.

Change is difficult sometimes. I personally would like the turbo 4 instead of my NA I6. More torque would make it more fun.

Exactly people talk like turbo cars are a new thing. What about all the other turbo smooth power delivering cars out there. I for one low my 2012 35 X5.

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by Gator335i

I think the answer to the sound issue of the 4-cylinder engine is for BMW to engineer an exhaust system that can mimic the sound of a 6 or even 8-cylinder engine.

I'm wondering what this 4-cylinder would sound like if you put a BMW Performance Exhaust on it.

Exhaust system design can only do so much. Ultimately, the firing order and number of cylinders determines the harmonics that give each cylinder layout its unique tone. If you put BMW Performance Exhaust on the N20, it's still going to sound like a 4-cylinder.

That said, a 4-cylinder doesn't have to sound like a riced out Honda. Have a listen to the E30 M3 for a great example of a kick ass four banger exhaust note.