S54B32 - the best engine this side of supercar lunacy!

[GuidoK]

Yes, E89, carbon fixed roof, s65 (or even s85) and some other mods like m3 rear axle (and some very aggressive styling), and you have a car thats as cool as a merc sls black series. But sadly bmw isn't in those kind of projects. (but why than race such a car in dtm )

 

[ga41]

Actually the V12 in the McLaren F1 was really rather special too!!

Indeed it was! Would hardly call it a series production engine though..

Let us just think about this it like this. What if told you of a V8 engine that makes more than 100 hp per litre, revs to 8400 RPM, advanced camshaft timing tech, lots of smart construction and yet isn't found in a mid engined supercar but in a 3 series! It's a miracle the bean counters ever approved it.

 

[ga41]

Yes, E89, carbon fixed roof, s65 (or even s85) and some other mods like m3 rear axle (and some very aggressive styling), and you have a car thats as cool as a merc sls black series. But sadly bmw isn't in those kind of projects. (but why than race such a car in dtm )

I presume you mean FIA GT3 not DTM, the DTM cars are pretty much bespoke prototypes.

www.bmw-motorsport.com/en/cars/bmw-z4-gt3.html

 

[abar121]

the block was iron for a reason.... means a very strong engine structurally.... perfect for high revs and BOOOOSSSTT... its the german 2jz.

Unless someone knows otherwise

I think otherwise :wink:

It's historical.
The s54 is off course a development from the s50 (it's virtually the same block/crank) which is based on the M50. An engine introduced in 1990.
In that time, aluminium engines were rather exotic.
When the m50 went out of production (1996) the all aluminium m52 was introduced (1994), but the s50 stayed for the m3. (the s50b32 was back then even much more ahead from the competition as the s54 was in its days; think of it: 320hp in 1996!)
The m52 went on becoming m52TU and finally m54. The m52/m54 block was probably designed for 3L max. The m54 is iron sleeved, and bmw probably doesn't dare to bore it 3mm extra to get to 3,2Liters. It has to cope with 'factory reliability', in contrast to tuners. So the cast iron block has more 'meat' to bore to a bigger displacement.
High revs is not something that really stresses the block, it's torque. Looking at the n54, with turbo, being open deck (m54 is closed deck, so even stronger) means that aluminium in itself is strong enough.
The s65 and s85 (bmw's best engine ) are also full aluminium, and reliable under boost. (a cast iron V10 might get a bit heavy also...)

So I think that's how it went.

Actually you think the same then :wink: You cut my quote which was if there was any consideration for turbo applications. I think the S77 was BMWs best road car engine, but even that is far from BMWs best engine full stop.

 

[sars]

Actually the V12 in the McLaren F1 was really rather special too!!

Great shout that OG, with over 100 bhp/litre for a normally aspirated car back in 1992

 

[Adamski]

So that I can keep up, can you please let me know which applications all the S77, S65, S85 engines etc have :lol:

I know the S50, S54, M54 and N52 etc - most of the Z4 and 3 series engines. Beyond that, I'm lost

Help! Please.....

 

[GuidoK]

I don't know s77 either. I guess it's a typo for s70

S65 is the v8 from the e9x M3, the S85 is the V10 from the e6x M5 /M6

I presume you mean FIA GT3

Yes I meant the gt3

 

[Adamski]

And the S70 was used in the McLaren F1, right? :?

 

[GuidoK]

Yes, mclaren F1, but also the 850csi (althoug that engine is only the same in basis, poweroutput is significantly different)

Actually I don't count the s70 from the F1 as a real bmw engine as it was bespoke engine for the F1.
It's imho more a special projects engine like bmw's race engines/f1 engines etc (they also raced that s70 in various cars)
Engines like the s65, s85 etc are just regular off the shelf bmw engines put into mass produced cars (compared to the f1)

 

[buzyg]

and another thing, engines that rev higher have less torque than those that rev lower. Just think of the old F1 V8's, they couldn't pull the skin off a rice pudding until they hit 16,000 rpm, which make them impossible to drive slowly.

And the problem with that, in a sports car, is what exactly . :?

 

[BMWZ4MC]

id love someone you guys to experience the s54 with my huge centrifugal blower, its has a whopping CFM rating of 1150, you feel NO sort of Turbo rushes, everything your stock s54 does just moved well up the graph, it feels mega, The very nature of a centrifugal blower means it still needs revv'd out to perform so its like an s54 on hulk mode. I swear if alot of you experienced it i think some more would dive into supercharging, the "relatively" low Tq and the way the power is unloaded is also very friendly to the components, the s54 is perfect for boost with its iron block and forged internals. In the usa theirs loads of us but in the UK i still believe I'm the only one on the z4m platform which really surprises me. bmwz4mc i think you need to come out this year and see me you only need alittle push. lol

If any body would like a ride out in spring/ summer be sure to PM me and ill take you out, whoever even better the car behaves totally docile when not on it. its so suited to the car its unbelievable.

even better if you able to code my M-track mode at the same time for a favour back :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:

You're absolutely right - the desire is there, but I'm trying hard to resist

 

[CornishRob]

I think just because a newer engine has more tech etc, like the N54 or others, it doesn't make them more desirable.

The N54 has no character and is boring. But it's obviously a great motor! Good for getting the job done of moving a car quickly, but it wouldn't be my choice for a sports car. Probably fine in a 3 series for normal car use!

Porsche are staying away from Turbo engines for a reason (Turbo aside), because the market dooesnt want it!

And let's be honest, it's all more stuff to go wrong further down the line!

 

[Adamski]

Next 911 will be turbo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CornishRob]

Next 911 will be turbo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How do you know that?

I believe the 991 GT3 RS in N/A?

If the next gen 911 carerra is a turbo, what's a Turbo, or a GT2 called?

 

[GuidoK]

Porsche are staying away from Turbo engines for a reason (Turbo aside), because the market dooesnt want it!

That is total BS.
Porsche has a very long history with turbo engines (almost as long as BMW :wink: ). They make both turbo AND NA engines. Everything they call turbo up to now has a turbo. And I think the GT2 (one of porsche's most desireable models) has twin turbo. It's not that the market doesn't want it, most of the time they can't afford it.
Likewise with ferrari. All NA exept 1 or 2 of the most desireable ferraris of the last 30 years (F40 and 288gto). And those are epic cars. No real car enthusiast would get it in his head to pass on such a car (or the GT2) 'because it has a turbo'.....
Or did you choose your z4m over the F40 for that?....


It's very strange that 'when a car has a turbo' people don't want it, except when it's a non plus ultra model, then its somehow awesome.

 

[CornishRob]

Porsche are staying away from Turbo engines for a reason (Turbo aside), because the market dooesnt want it!

That is total BS.
Porsche has a very long history with turbo engines (almost as long as BMW :wink: ). They make both turbo AND NA engines. Everything they call turbo up to now has a turbo. And I think the GT2 (one of porsche's most desireable models) has twin turbo. It's not that the market doesn't want it, most of the time they can't afford it.
Likewise with ferrari. All NA exept 1 or 2 of the most desireable ferraris of the last 30 years (F40 and 288gto). And those are epic cars. No real car enthusiast would get it in his head to pass on such a car (or the GT2) 'because it has a turbo'.....
Or did you choose your z4m over the F40 for that?....

I didn't go into a long answer about the Porsche Turbos. Obviously they have had them for a long time! It's in the name of the model!

What I meant was they are not making all of their engines Turbo engines, because part of their market don't want it! If you want a Turbo, you buy a 911 Turbo or GT2 etc, but if they stop making NA, you have no choice! I'm sure the GT3 customers like the high revving NA engine, and don't want it Turbo!

Believe me, I don't think the Z4m is the best thing since sliced bread but it's not bad for the price and overall package.

Your probably the only person to ever compare a Z4m and F40 in the same sentence.

 

[GuidoK]

I'm sure the GT3 customers like the high revving NA engine, and don't want it Turbo!

Maybe, but the gt3 customers hardly are the 'market' what porsche is concerned. I bet that a lot of regular 911 owners would trade theirs for a turbo in a heartbeat.
'The market' is the majority (or at least the profitable majority). (and for porsche thats the cayenne/panamera customer; nowadays they're a SUV brand, not a sportscar brand :lol: )

My point is/was that no one complains that the f40 has a turbo. (or the 288gto for that matter). And both those cars are much more desireable than its NA successor the f50.
It's not the turbo, it's how you make the complete package (and how that package matches the expectations of the customer)

 

[sars]

and another thing, engines that rev higher have less torque than those that rev lower. Just think of the old F1 V8's, they couldn't pull the skin off a rice pudding until they hit 16,000 rpm, which make them impossible to drive slowly.

And the problem with that, in a sports car, is what exactly . :?

Absolutely nothing if you're able to keep rev's high, it's when you're not that it's not so great and I'm not saying that the S54 is in the same category as the RX8.

 

[GuidoK]

I don't think that 'engines that rev higher have less torque than those that rev lower'
It's a matter of compression ratio, piston area and stroke. Not revs.
The s54b32 has more specific torque than the m54b30. (112Nm/L vs. 101Nm/L). And there are a lot of low revving engines from that time that sit way below that.

 

[Babw]

Porsche are staying away from Turbo engines for a reason (Turbo aside), because the market dooesnt want it!

That is total BS.
Porsche has a very long history with turbo engines (almost as long as BMW :wink: ). They make both turbo AND NA engines. Everything they call turbo up to now has a turbo. And I think the GT2 (one of porsche's most desireable models) has twin turbo. It's not that the market doesn't want it, most of the time they can't afford it.
Likewise with ferrari. All NA exept 1 or 2 of the most desireable ferraris of the last 30 years (F40 and 288gto). And those are epic cars. No real car enthusiast would get it in his head to pass on such a car (or the GT2) 'because it has a turbo'.....
Or did you choose your z4m over the F40 for that?....

I didn't go into a long answer about the Porsche Turbos. Obviously they have had them for a long time! It's in the name of the model!

What I meant was they are not making all of their engines Turbo engines, because part of their market don't want it! If you want a Turbo, you buy a 911 Turbo or GT2 etc, but if they stop making NA, you have no choice! I'm sure the GT3 customers like the high revving NA engine, and don't want it Turbo!

Believe me, I don't think the Z4m is the best thing since sliced bread but it's not bad for the price and overall package.

Your probably the only person to ever compare a Z4m and F40 in the same sentence.

I like how you assume turbo engines available now and into the very near future from companies like Porsche, BMW and even the VR38 in a GTR is somehow inferior to their historical N/A engines. Firstly I suggest you go and drive some of the new turbo cars if you haven't already, the 991 turbo makes the S54 seem a laggy non responsive turbo unit. The response is unreal, a GTR with EFR 6758 is again just outrageous response and performance you can only dream of plus running near 800bhp it returns not much worse MPG than an S54. The S55 again is amazing, at low revs due to the torque the response is in another world to the S54 and it revs to 7600 rpm so 300rpm short of an S54 but the top end is more potent.

Inferring that turbo engines of today are inferior are just baseless, how exactly are they worse than N/A engines from 15 years ago?