N20 vs N52 vs N54 Engine
- Thread starter GoSteve
- Start date
Smartbear said:Mr Tidy said:Smartbear said:
No more than you!:lol:
My reply was in response to the 3litre owners Lain, the n20 can outperform them
Rob
It would be interesting to see just how much of a difference in performance the N20 has compared to the 30i N52. The stock 28i and 30i figures in terms of performance are very very closely matched and there is hardly any difference between the two. Even the curb weight is just 15kg difference between the two. So yes a tuned 20i or 28i to around 280 bhp should be quicker than the 30i but it would be interesting to see exactly by how much. Maybe someone needs to put them side by side and time them / drag race them.
Wouldn’t sound as good though would itSilverstar said:Smartbear said:Mr Tidy said:No more than you!
My reply was in response to the 3litre owners Lain, the n20 can outperform them
Rob
It would be interesting to see just how much of a difference in performance the N20 has compared to the 30i N52. The stock 28i and 30i figures in terms of performance are very very closely matched and there is hardly any difference between the two. Even the curb weight is just 15kg difference between the two. So yes a tuned 20i or 28i to around 280 bhp should be quicker than the 30i but it would be interesting to see exactly by how much. Maybe someone needs to put them side by side and time them / drag race them.
Silverstar said:Smartbear said:Mr Tidy said:No more than you!
My reply was in response to the 3litre owners Lain, the n20 can outperform them
Rob
It would be interesting to see just how much of a difference in performance the N20 has compared to the 30i N52. The stock 28i and 30i figures in terms of performance are very very closely matched and there is hardly any difference between the two. Even the curb weight is just 15kg difference between the two. So yes a tuned 20i or 28i to around 280 bhp should be quicker than the 30i but it would be interesting to see exactly by how much. Maybe someone needs to put them side by side and time them / drag race them.
Rob
Smartbear said:Silverstar said:Smartbear said:My reply was in response to the 3litre owners Lain, the n20 can outperform them
Rob
It would be interesting to see just how much of a difference in performance the N20 has compared to the 30i N52. The stock 28i and 30i figures in terms of performance are very very closely matched and there is hardly any difference between the two. Even the curb weight is just 15kg difference between the two. So yes a tuned 20i or 28i to around 280 bhp should be quicker than the 30i but it would be interesting to see exactly by how much. Maybe someone needs to put them side by side and time them / drag race them.
EF0C88D8-4806-46CD-939E-BB54DE2D97E7.png
Rob
Those are computed / theoretical figures but it would be good to see them side by side on a track / drag strip and see exactly how far apart or not they are.
R60BBA said:
Yes I know that is one of the reasons why I decided to buy the N52 30i over the N20. If I really wanted more performance and didn't mind the extra maintenance costs I would just go for the 35i or 35is.
Smartbear said:I think the n20 is a good compromise, faster than the 30i yet better on fuel and cheaper to tax, the noise isn’t as good but a turbocharged 4 sounds good in its own right
Rob
Just out of interest what sort of real world fuel consumption do you get from your 20i?
How would an aftermarket exhaust setup sound with the N20? If it's good, one less reason to 'diss' the 4 potSmartbear said:I think the n20 is a good compromise, faster than the 30i yet better on fuel and cheaper to tax, the noise isn’t as good but a turbocharged 4 sounds good in its own right
Rob
Silverstar said:Smartbear said:I think the n20 is a good compromise, faster than the 30i yet better on fuel and cheaper to tax, the noise isn’t as good but a turbocharged 4 sounds good in its own right
Rob
Just out of interest what sort of real world fuel consumption do you get from your 20i?
It depends entirely on the journey and wether I’ve got my other half in the car or not
I’ve had up to 50mpg and as low as mid twenties, I've almost reached 500miles from a full tank driving carefully. I’ve had a couple of n52 zeds and the best i got was from my 3.0si e85 with 420miles. My 30i e89 only lasted a month before it expired so never got to know it as well as the si I had previously, official figures were around the same from memory, it had a handful of bhp less than my e85 but i didn’t really notice it. I liked them both.
Rob
enzed4 said:How would an aftermarket exhaust setup sound with the N20? If it's good, one less reason to 'diss' the 4 potSmartbear said:I think the n20 is a good compromise, faster than the 30i yet better on fuel and cheaper to tax, the noise isn’t as good but a turbocharged 4 sounds good in its own right
Rob
I’ve not heard one, there’s a few things to do to improve the sound, the exhaust valve mod helps as does removing the resonator evidently, then there’s the decat downpipe which can also give another 15/20bhp and faster turbo spool up.
I couldn’t be bothered with faffing about for the mot though :roll:
Rob
For performance cars the standard measure of performance is the 1/4 mile time, 60-130mph times are also a good metric. 0-60mph is a measure of traction so making theoretical assumptions based on power increase alone is a fools game.Smartbear said:Silverstar said:Smartbear said:My reply was in response to the 3litre owners Lain, the n20 can outperform them
Rob
It would be interesting to see just how much of a difference in performance the N20 has compared to the 30i N52. The stock 28i and 30i figures in terms of performance are very very closely matched and there is hardly any difference between the two. Even the curb weight is just 15kg difference between the two. So yes a tuned 20i or 28i to around 280 bhp should be quicker than the 30i but it would be interesting to see exactly by how much. Maybe someone needs to put them side by side and time them / drag race them.
EF0C88D8-4806-46CD-939E-BB54DE2D97E7.png
Rob
A turbocharged 4 pot will never sound as good as a naturally aspirated 6 pot. No matter what exhaust system is used.enzed4 said:How would an aftermarket exhaust setup sound with the N20? If it's good, one less reason to 'diss' the 4 potSmartbear said:I think the n20 is a good compromise, faster than the 30i yet better on fuel and cheaper to tax, the noise isn’t as good but a turbocharged 4 sounds good in its own right
Rob
A
Anonymous
Guest
It would be nice to have the data for a sizeable bunch other metrics such as the 1/4 mile dash etc , unfortunately BMW never published these numbers at least across all the models..
The 0-60 and 0-62 figures were published and I assume they were at worst a reasonable representation of what a competent person could do in a fresh car..at best they were using a very professional, highly experienced test driver in a carefully selected car.
They could of course had merely computed them based on relatively simple Newtonian mechanics..
The interpolation for the re mapped N20 engines takes a smoothed line through the BMW published data..
One assumes the same techniques were used for all E89s but maybe they weren’t..
On the type of tyres used, likely surface and available power subject to appropriate launch technique then for the range of horsepower tested tyre grip wouldn’t be a limiting factor..
For the simple comparison of the 30i vs a remapped N20, more bhp and more torque over a broad range would ensure the N20 some numeric supremacy..
On such a short dash whether you need to change gear once or twice has a marked effect on the times especially either with a manual or the slower shifting 6 speed ZF box..
Now if anybody can find me a standardised set of figures fir all the normal E89s I’d be happy to do some additional calculations..
The 0-60 and 0-62 figures were published and I assume they were at worst a reasonable representation of what a competent person could do in a fresh car..at best they were using a very professional, highly experienced test driver in a carefully selected car.
They could of course had merely computed them based on relatively simple Newtonian mechanics..
The interpolation for the re mapped N20 engines takes a smoothed line through the BMW published data..
One assumes the same techniques were used for all E89s but maybe they weren’t..
On the type of tyres used, likely surface and available power subject to appropriate launch technique then for the range of horsepower tested tyre grip wouldn’t be a limiting factor..
For the simple comparison of the 30i vs a remapped N20, more bhp and more torque over a broad range would ensure the N20 some numeric supremacy..
On such a short dash whether you need to change gear once or twice has a marked effect on the times especially either with a manual or the slower shifting 6 speed ZF box..
Now if anybody can find me a standardised set of figures fir all the normal E89s I’d be happy to do some additional calculations..
I did the 60-130mph in 9.44s over winter and that was a slight incline. I've upped the boost since then so will re-test it and a do it both ways to try remove error from incline. I should be faster than a stock M4 at the least and I've seen them clocked at 9.38s.
If you want to measure your time then any external GPS that runs at 10Hz or higher will work fine. There's a popular one called Dragy around that even corrects for incline/decline.
If you want to measure your time then any external GPS that runs at 10Hz or higher will work fine. There's a popular one called Dragy around that even corrects for incline/decline.
Smartbear said:Silverstar said:Smartbear said:I think the n20 is a good compromise, faster than the 30i yet better on fuel and cheaper to tax, the noise isn’t as good but a turbocharged 4 sounds good in its own right
Rob
Just out of interest what sort of real world fuel consumption do you get from your 20i?
It depends entirely on the journey and wether I’ve got my other half in the car or not
My 30i e89 only lasted a month before it expired so never got to know it as well as the si I had previously, official figures were around the same from memory, it had a handful of bhp less than my e85 but i didn’t really notice it. I liked them both.
4852A7F4-CAE3-4B00-BBD7-C72BDED54F2A.jpeg6FB7B1C4-AE8E-4681-A033-C1574253D0D2.jpeg
Rob
That is interesting, I ask because many of these new downsized turbos cars do not achieve anywhere near their published MPG figures, my 2016 F20 118d never got anywhere near the claimed MPG yet all my older NA BMWs have always achieved near enough the official numbers. My current 30i gets around 44 MPG on long run and in around town around 22 to 24 MPG. So it isn't that far off from what the N20 will do.
R60BBA said:A turbocharged 4 pot will never sound as good as a naturally aspirated 6 pot. No matter what exhaust system is used.enzed4 said:How would an aftermarket exhaust setup sound with the N20? If it's good, one less reason to 'diss' the 4 potSmartbear said:I think the n20 is a good compromise, faster than the 30i yet better on fuel and cheaper to tax, the noise isn’t as good but a turbocharged 4 sounds good in its own right
Rob
Absolutely correct a 4 pot just isn't going to sound as good as a 6 no matter what you do to it. Put a nice aftermarket exhaust on a 6 pot and there is simply no comparison compared to the 4 pot.
Pbondar said:It would be nice to have the data for a sizeable bunch other metrics such as the 1/4 mile dash etc , unfortunately BMW never published these numbers at least across all the models..
The 0-60 and 0-62 figures were published and I assume they were at worst a reasonable representation of what a competent person could do in a fresh car..at best they were using a very professional, highly experienced test driver in a carefully selected car.
They could of course had merely computed them based on relatively simple Newtonian mechanics..
The interpolation for the re mapped N20 engines takes a smoothed line through the BMW published data..
One assumes the same techniques were used for all E89s but maybe they weren’t..
On the type of tyres used, likely surface and available power subject to appropriate launch technique then for the range of horsepower tested tyre grip wouldn’t be a limiting factor..
For the simple comparison of the 30i vs a remapped N20, more bhp and more torque over a broad range would ensure the N20 some numeric supremacy..
On such a short dash whether you need to change gear once or twice has a marked effect on the times especially either with a manual or the slower shifting 6 speed ZF box..
Now if anybody can find me a standardised set of figures fir all the normal E89s I’d be happy to do some additional calculations..
It's great to have all these figures on paper but I would like to see a real world test, two cars side by side and see how far apart or not they really are. I am guessing there really isn't much between the standard 28i and 30i. A tuned 20i or 28i to around 280 BHP obviously should be a bit quicker than a 30i but by how much?
Similar threads
