BMW M1 test car spotted testing on Nurburgring!

[mtla4]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

Bakes are a different story. They're not expected to last 150k miles, and don't have to deal with the kind of emissions cars do, or the fuel economy standards. The S2000 is a 2.2 liter. You need to post a link to an emissions legal 300Hp 4cyl if you want us to buy it.

Maybe you misunderstood. I said the highest that I've seen was the s2000 which is still relible. I'm not talking about race engine which needs a full rebuild after a few races.

[BMW269]

As I just said on the other thread:

-get a BMW 120i Coupé (E82)
-stripp it down
-put BMW M3 drivetrain
-put BMW 320si Motorsport engine (NA 2.0l I4, 275 PS and redline at 8.500 rpm)

It is the closest thing to an M3 E30 you can get.

By the way, about M1 and S54 engine, it is not that good. The car would be even more nose heavy. The S54 weighs more than the S65.

[BMW269]

Anybody interested in this:

NA 2.0l I4
203 PS @ 7100 rpm
215 Nm @ 5400 rpm
Redline @ 7.500 rpm
1200 kg
6 speed manual
FWD

[mtla4]

Originally Posted by Levi

Anybody interested in this:

NA 2.0l I4
203 PS @ 7100 rpm
215 Nm @ 5400 rpm
Redline @ 7.500 rpm
1200 kg
6 speed manual
FWD

FWD

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by mtla4

Maybe you misunderstood. I said the highest that I've seen was the s2000 which is still relible. I'm not talking about race engine which needs a full rebuild after a few races.

Yes, I did misunderstand. The S2000 makes 109Hp/L. That means to get to the 260Hp mark you'd need a 2.4 liter 4 cylinder. That's a lot of displacement for 4 pistions, and you're not going to get it to rev high enough because of the mass involved.

(And that should have read "bikes" instead of "bakes".)

[mtla4]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

Yes, I did misunderstand. The S2000 makes 109Hp/L. That means to get to the 260Hp mark you'd need a 2.4 liter 4 cylinder. That's a lot of displacement for 4 pistions, and you're not going to get it to rev high enough because of the mass involved.

(And that should have read "bikes" instead of "bakes".)

Bakes...you makes me hungry now..but seriously the revs most of us can do without them but it's the N/A feeling, sound, no lag, rawness. After owning a 135I for two years I can say that if Bmw could find a way to massage the 128I give it better brakes, ditch the feminine look of the car(ugly front bumper,back bumper) I would buy it in a heartbeat. Problem is that the 135I exists and that the car that I'm dreaming about would have less hp then a cheaper(money) 135I. That would be the perfect 1 series....128I with a nice engine(could be the 130I engine with some goodies), performance brakes(make them stock)get rid of the 135(too many HPFP failure lol), an ///M suspension, real seats bring the cheaper versions here 120, 123...I guy can dream

[oztiks]

[QUOTE=jeremyc74;7124389]The corners where the hood and fenders meet by the headlights could have used some work IMO. It's one of the few spots on the car where things just don't look right.[/QUOT

ChrisK....What this man says is what I mean...and NO it was not done on purpose, and it is very poor workmanship...will go to dealership and have them adjust it..and I won't settle for it's normal...it is not.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

Yes, I did misunderstand. The S2000 makes 109Hp/L. That means to get to the 260Hp mark you'd need a 2.4 liter 4 cylinder. That's a lot of displacement for 4 pistions, and you're not going to get it to rev high enough because of the mass involved.

The first four years of the S2000 used a 2.0 that revved to 9k, and made the same 240 hp, for a 120 hp/l. Just for comparison the F458 Italia makes 570hp from 4.5l, or 126.67 hp/l. So best case scenario, you'd need at least 2.3l to get around 260 hp, which isn't all that large, and is the same power and displacement as the Mazdaspeed3, oddly enough.

[jabwind51]

Originally Posted by mtla4

Bakes...you makes me hungry now..but seriously the revs most of us can do without them but it's the N/A feeling, sound, no lag, rawness. After owning a 135I for two years I can say that if Bmw could find a way to massage the 128I give it better brakes, ditch the feminine look of the car(ugly front bumper,back bumper) I would buy it in a heartbeat. Problem is that the 135I exists and that the car that I'm dreaming about would have less hp then a cheaper(money) 135I. That would be the perfect 1 series....128I with a nice engine(could be the 130I engine with some goodies), performance brakes(make them stock)get rid of the 135(too many HPFP failure lol), an ///M suspension, real seats bring the cheaper versions here 120, 123...I guy can dream

Good to hear validation on my efforts! (this is precisely what i am doing with my m sport 128i: better brakes, intake, exhaust, chip, 130i tune with 130i intake manifold, m3 control arms, m3 sway...etc...in the hope of 280 NA hp)

and at the risk of getting smacked on this heavily 135i forum , i'll say that i truly feel the 128i is the better sports car of the two but just needs "a lot of goodies" as you say...even without all that torque...

[mtla4]

Originally Posted by jabwind51

Good to hear validation on my efforts! (this is precisely what i am doing with my m sport 128i: better brakes, intake, exhaust, chip, 130i tune with 130i intake manifold, m3 control arms, m3 sway...etc...in the hope of 280 NA hp)

and at the risk of getting smacked on this heavily 135i forum , i'll say that i truly feel the 128i is the better sports car of the two but just needs "a lot of goodies" as you say...even without all that torque...

Your 128 will be closer to what an ///M car is all about then my old modded 135I. Let us know how it goes once your done

I won't smack you. With my 135I I felt like I was driving a mustang it was a totally different experience from what I've experienced from past Bimmers. Some like it some don't I didn't like it so I won't like the new M1.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

The first four years of the S2000 used a 2.0 that revved to 9k, and made the same 240 hp, for a 120 hp/l. Just for comparison the F458 Italia makes 570hp from 4.5l, or 126.67 hp/l. So best case scenario, you'd need at least 2.3l to get around 260 hp, which isn't all that large, and is the same power and displacement as the Mazdaspeed3, oddly enough.

I stand corrected on the S2k. I had forgetten it used the 2L originally.

The 2.3L requirement isn't all that large, but it's too large to rev to 9k, and you're going to need at least that to get to the power levels you're talking about. The weight of the pistons becomes a huge issue at those high RPMs. It's why the exotics use low displacement 12 cylinders for high RPM. Big pistons put too much stress on the rod during direction change at the top and bottom of their stroke.

A non-exotic 4cyl

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

I stand corrected on the S2k. I had forgetten it used the 2L originally.

The 2.3L requirement isn't all that large, but it's too large to rev to 9k, and you're going to need at least that to get to the power levels you're talking about. The weight of the pistons becomes a huge issue at those high RPMs. It's why the exotics use low displacement 12 cylinders for high RPM. Big pistons put too much stress on the rod during direction change at the top and bottom of their stroke.

A non-exotic 4cyl

Consider the flat crank 4.5l in the F458, it's essentially two 2.25l four cylinders running on a shared crankshaft. And guess where it redlines?

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Consider the flat crank 4.5l in the F458, it's essentially two 2.25l four cylinders running on a shared crankshaft. And guess where it redlines?

You're ignoring the "non-exotic" part. The engine in the 458 will be a service nightmare. It will require an expensive tuneup every 5k miles (or less) and costs a fortune to build.

If you want some idea of what I'm talking about, take a look at this:

http://www.sportscarmarket.com/articles/archives/939

It's not all drivetrain related, but I think you get the idea.

[ChrisK]

[QUOTE=oztiks;7124807]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

The corners where the hood and fenders meet by the headlights could have used some work IMO. It's one of the few spots on the car where things just don't look right.[/QUOT

ChrisK....What this man says is what I mean...and NO it was not done on purpose, and it is very poor workmanship...will go to dealership and have them adjust it..and I won't settle for it's normal...it is not.

Then why did you buy the car?

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by ChrisK

Then why did you buy the car?

WTF is with this response every time someone says something negative about the car? It's really old at this point. You asked where the problem was, and you got a reasonable answer. Please try and respond in kind.

It is possible to be critical of something and still like it you know.

[ChrisK]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

WTF is with this response every time someone says something negative about the car? It's really old at this point. You asked where the problem was, and you got a reasonable answer. Please try and respond in kind.

It is possible to be critical of something and still like it you know.

"It's really old at this point?" Have you read all of your own posts? If it ain't FORD, you're blind, blah, blah.

You are not the forum policy, please stop criticizing everything I post.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by ChrisK

"It's really old at this point?" Have you read all of your own posts? If it ain't FORD, you're blind, blah, blah.

You are not the forum policy, please stop criticizing everything I post.

YOU are the one directing a response at me. If you can't take a little mild critisism about the car without getting all bent out of shape, you should probably just move on.

[oztiks]

[QUOTE=ChrisK;7125354]

Originally Posted by oztiks

Then why did you buy the car?

Only noticed quite a few iffy things after purchase... point being..you said it was designed that way, and it clearly isn't. This is something I would expect to see on a Russian car Now stop asking stupid questions, or I will come see you in real life and adjust the hood for you

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

WTF is with this response every time someone says something negative about the car? It's really old at this point. You asked where the problem was, and you got a reasonable answer. Please try and respond in kind.

It is possible to be critical of something and still like it you know.

I realize that, but the Honda makes the same power per liter, for all intents and purposes, and isn't all that exotic. More of a proof of concept, just napkin math.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

I realize that, but the Honda makes the same power per liter, for all intents and purposes, and isn't all that exotic. More of a proof of concept, just napkin math.

Yeah, but notice what Honda did when they bumped the displacement by .2L. They lowered the redline by 1k RPMs. That should tell you they were up against a barrier, and had to back off a little.

[vsabw]

needs a facelift.

[///Mangler]

Originally Posted by mtla4

Thats what I think too..bmw cant just slap some go fast parts on the N54 or N55 and sell it as an ///M.
Being honest I dont see the hype over this car...people are complaining that STI are glorified WRX...M3 glorified 3 series what about this M1 or whatever they call it...it's even closer to the 135 than the other cars that I've mention above. I know we havent seen the complete detail list btw...too much hype....don't hold your breath...you guys might be disappointed.

This car will probably share engine with other bimmers while the STI, M3, EVO are models on their own. They have their own engines etc...not a massaged N54/55 that our guys have been tuning and playing with for the last 4 years.

I dont want to sound like a debbie downer but let's face it guys this car is based on an old outgoing platform this car will not revolutionize the market.

It will be an S engine the same way that these engine became "S" engines:

M42>S42
M52>S50B32
M54>S54
M62>S62
M70>S70

N55>S55

It will be an "S" engineered engine. Unless they fuck up like they did with the US S52.

T