[Trojan4evr]

Originally Posted by M2siast

Where did you get this info?

https://www.kbb.com/car-news/reports...0cars%20again.

https://www.carscoops.com/2023/09/no...normal-at-bmw/

https://www.carthrottle.com/news/com...int-bmw-m-cars

https://carbuzz.com/news/bmw-canning...ecome-standard

https://www.autoblog.com/2023/10/02/...ping-the-name/

And the links go on ...

[Trojan4evr]

Originally Posted by M2siast

All of your links point to the opposite of what you said, except the first one from KBB…
So if the list goes on as you say, then I’d question KBB and where THEY got their info from.

I'd question all of them. They're most likely using the same source and interpreting differently. Just like me sharing the links and not reading the articles.

[aerobod]

Originally Posted by Tag

The transmission has nothing to do with it. Both the MT and AT models are rated at 406 lb-ft of torque. It's the same as the base M3/4 with MT and AT.

The maximum torque rating is 600Nm based on ZF documentation for the GS6-53BZ transmission. BMW has stated in the past that the maximum torque of 550Nm on the manuals is due to limitations on the transmission, they are presumably being conservative and dyno results show that the engines in the MT M2/M3/M4 are making more power and torque than the published spec. From a marketing perspective, there is no reason why the manual and auto base cars would have a different engine, hence the manual torque limit also applies to the auto cars, although from an engine tuning perspective their is some evidence of torque limits applied to the manual car engines in 1st and 2nd gears.

Whatever BMW puts on paper, it is unlikely they will increase the actual torque anymore than it actually is now for the manual transmission (in reality, vs what is published), as that would break the ZF torque limit, if they use the same GS6-53BZ transmission.

In reality the current published 550Nm at up to 5,870RPM gives 338kW (453bhp/460PS) output at 5,870RPM and maintains it to the 6,250 peak power revs, so the "paper" change may just be to give max torque at up to 5,600RPM of 600Nm which would be 352kW (472bhp/479PS) at that speed, with the max quoted power of about 356kW (477bhp/484PS) at a slightly higher RPM, such as the current 6,250RPM. The dyno measurements taken so far indicate that the engines already meet that "paper" spec.

[Tag]

Originally Posted by aerobod

The maximum torque rating is 600Nm based on ZF documentation for the GS6-53BZ transmission. BMW has stated in the past that the maximum torque of 550Nm on the manuals is due to limitations on the transmission, they are presumably being conservative and dyno results show that the engines in the MT M2/M3/M4 are making more power and torque than the published spec. From a marketing perspective, there is no reason why the manual and auto base cars would have a different engine, hence the manual torque limit also applies to the auto cars, although from an engine tuning perspective their is some evidence of torque limits applied to the manual car engines in 1st and 2nd gears.

Whatever BMW puts on paper, it is unlikely they will increase the torque anymore than it actually is now, as that would break the ZF torque limit, if they use the same GS6-53BZ transmission.

In reality the current published 550Nm at up to 5,870RPM gives 338kW (453bhp/460PS) output at 5,870RPM and maintains it to the 6,250 peak power revs, so the "paper" change may just be to give max torque at 5,600RPM of 600Nm which would be 352kW (472bhp) at that speed, with the max quoted power of 478bhp at a slightly higher RPM. The dyno measurements taken so far indicate that the engines already meet that "paper" spec.

The G87 shares the same AT as the G80/2 which is a 8HP (GA8HP76). We know it can handle at least 479 lb-ft because that's what the M3/4c are rated at. BMW also underestimates their power figures, they always have. If they say it's making more power, it will make more power. You'll also see more power being made on the dyno between a MY23-24 AT and a MY25 AT. The MY25 AT will also put out more than what BMW advertises.

[aerobod]

Originally Posted by Tag

The G87 shares the same AT as the G80/2 which is a 8HP (GA8HP76). We know it can handle at least 479 lb-ft because that's what the M3/4c are rated at. BMW also underestimates their power figures, they always have. If they say it's making more power, it will make more power. You'll also see more power being made on the dyno between a MY23-24 AT and a MY25 AT. The MY25 AT will also put out more than what BMW advertises.

It may, but may not be anything that can be measured between engine variability. The current M4 vs M2 base engines are meant to be 20bhp different, the reality is that there is no measurable performance difference with cars close to the same weight. On track driving the auto M2 and even the M4 Comp in the same sessions on the same tyres and in convoy accelerating on the straights at the same time, neither car can gain ground on the other, so even if the power differences are quoted and real to some degree, in reality they don't mean much.

The thing is the torque and power curves for all the standard s58 variants (not including the CS and CSLs) all overlay each other until over 5000RPM, so the work under the curve is the same up to that point. Playing around with the torque curve duration and peak at higher RPM only adds a bit to the top end performance. Power is just a function of torque and how high the max torque value can be maintained to.

I wouldn't be surprised if no performance difference can be measured between a MY23,24 or 25 car even if the spec is different on paper, assuming they are all still the "base" model.

[Tag]

Originally Posted by aerobod

It may, but may not be anything that can be measured between engine variability. The current M4 vs M2 base engines are meant to be 20bhp different, the reality is that there is no measurable performance difference with cars close to the same weight. On track driving the auto M2 and even the M4 Comp in the same sessions on the same tyres and in convoy accelerating on the straights at the same time, neither car can gain ground on the other, so even if the power differences are quoted and real to some degree, in reality they don't mean much.

The thing is the torque and power curves for all the standard s58 variants (not including the CS and CSLs) all overlay each other until over 5000RPM, so the work under the curve is the same up to that point. Playing around with the torque curve duration and peak at higher RPM only adds a bit to the top end performance. Power is just a function of torque and how high the max torque value can be maintained to.

I wouldn't be surprised if no performance difference can be measured between a MY23,24 or 25 car even if the spec is different on paper, assuming they are all still the "base" model.

In the most simplistic terms torque is the power an engine produces while hp is how fast it'll put that power down. If two cars have the same torque but one has more hp it will be measurably quicker. The 20hp bump for the manual transmission MY25 G87 will have an impact on the cars power output. Couple the hp increase with a bump in torque for the automatic MY25 G87 and it will be even quicker.

Tuners will be ready to put this to the test once they get their hands on MY25 G87s.

[DrewNewM2]

I don’t care about power increases but ima be pissed if some badass colors get released for the g87. Why don’t I care about power? Because my car will eventually get downpipes and tune…Maybe E85 and 20-30 HP stock HP increase will be irrelevant. Also, max torque figures for 6Mt are just a safe # BMW has to put on it and their #s are likely way lower than reality. Are there a lot of busted transmissions and clutches on any s58 manuals? I don’t see many posts or threads.

[aerobod]

Originally Posted by Tag

In the most simplistic terms torque is the power an engine produces while hp is how fast it'll put that power down. If two cars have the same torque but one has more hp it will be measurably quicker. The 20hp bump for the manual transmission MY25 G87 will have an impact on the cars power output. Couple the hp increase with a bump in torque for the automatic MY25 G87 and it will be even quicker.

Tuners will be ready to put this to the test once they get their hands on MY25 G87s.

That is a non-scientific view of the relationship between power and torque. At a given RPM they can't change independently. Power (in W) by definition is 2 Pi times the torque (Nm) times the rotational speed (revs per second).

There is no independent modification of torque without the proportional modification of power, they can both be derived directly from each other. More power is made by keeping a given torque value to a higher RPM.

[Tag]

Originally Posted by aerobod

That is a non-scientific view of the relationship between power and torque. At a given RPM they can't change independently. Power (in kW) by definition is 2 Pi times the torque (Nm) times the rotational speed (revs per second).

There is no independent modification of torque without the proportional modification of power, they can both be derived directly from each other. More power is made by keeping a given torque value to a higher RPM.

MY23-24 G87 S58 engine mapping

• 453hp @ 6250 rpm
• 406lb-ft @2650-5870 rpm

406 * 5870 / 5252 = 453hp

MY25 G87 S58 MT engine mapping (same as base M3/4)

• 473hp @6250 rpm
• 406lb-ft @2650-6130 rpm

406 * 6130 / 5252 = 473hp

[aerobod]

Originally Posted by Tag

MY23-24 G87 S58 engine mapping

• 453hp @ 6250 rpm
• 406lb-ft @2650-5870 rpm

406 * 5870 / 5252 = 453hp

MY25 G87 S58 MT engine mapping (same as base M3/4)

• 473hp @6250 rpm
• 406lb-ft @2650-6130 rpm

406 * 6130 / 5252 = 473hp

Yes, the torque curve (plateau in this case) is exactly the same until 5870RPM (as seen on dyno plots, for example from IND), so no extra work or performance is achieved until that point. The only extra performance is achieved in the extension of the torque plateau by 260RPM.

This is why the base M3/4 and M2 with weights within a few kg of each other in reality have the same acceleration when tested head to head. The useful extra work (bearing in mind the rev range used in each gear) is only 2% or less different between the engines, compared with the 4% power difference, assuming both engines are revved to 7200RPM.

[Tag]

Originally Posted by aerobod

Yes, the torque curve (plateau in this case) is exactly the same until 5870RPM (as seen on dyno plots, for example from IND), so no extra work or performance is achieved until that point. The only extra performance is achieved in the extension of the torque plateau by 260RPM.

This is why the base M3/4 and M2 with weights within a few kg of each other in reality have the same acceleration when tested head to head. The useful extra work (bearing in mind the rev range used in each gear) is only 2% or less different between the engines, compared with the 4% power difference, assuming both engines are revved to 7200RPM.

Measuring a cars power on a dyno which is at the wheels introduces parasitic losses and is not comparable to engine power which is rated at the crank. Dyno numbers also are useful as a baseline when tuning to see gains you are making in relative realtime. They are also useful when pitting two cars against each other under the exact same conditions. No two dynos will show the same results for the same car and the only way to usefully test the difference in power is to test two cars against each other on the same day, under the same weather conditions and using the same correction factors on the same dyno.

[M2PDX]

Mineral Red???? What the heck is that?

[yousefnjr]

Powwaaaaaa!

[aerobod]

Originally Posted by Tag

Measuring a cars power on a dyno which is at the wheels introduces parasitic losses and is not comparable to engine power which is rated at the crank. Dyno numbers also are useful as a baseline when tuning to see gains you are making in relative realtime. They are also useful when pitting two cars against each other under the exact same conditions. No two dynos will show the same results for the same car and the only way to usefully test the difference in power is to test two cars against each other on the same day, under the same weather conditions and using the same correction factors on the same dyno.

The proof is in the car acceleration, which seems to indicate no usable power difference. If you look at the shape of the dyno plot, the boost is curtailed at the 5870RPM point on the M2 tune (1st plot), producing a downward kink at the end of the torque plateau, in the second plot you can see the same kink at higher RPM for the M4. Both torque curves then follow the same track again close to the redline. What this means is that if in a lower gear revs drop down to 4500 or so, between 4500 and 7200 only more power is made from 5870 to 6900 or so, effectively 40% of the acceleration time.

The torque curve "bump" for the 473bhp curve above the 453bhp one isn't a linear upward move, it is delaying the drop to the right, consequently the power bump is only 20bhp at 6250RPM and less either side of it, so only averaging about 2/3 of that amount going by the curve shapes. This would mean an additional amount of work of only about 1% between the two engines at full throttle from 4500-7200RPM.

Assuming about 260kW of power put to the wheels on average over that rev range for 5 seconds of acceleration in 2nd gear, that would be an additional 1.300MJ of KE vs 1.315MJ (assuming relatively low drag and rolling losses at 2nd gear speeds), about 1.1% difference, only a quarter of the 4.4% power difference.

[Tag]

Originally Posted by aerobod

The proof is in the car acceleration, which seems to indicate no usable power difference. If you look at the shape of the dyno plot, the boost is curtailed at the 5870RPM point on the M2 tune (1st plot), producing a downward kink at the end of the torque plateau, in the second plot you can see the same kink at higher RPM for the M4. Both torque curves then follow the same track again close to the redline. What this means is that if in a lower gear revs drop down to 4500 or so, between 4500 and 7200 only more power is made from 5870 to 6900 or so, effectively 40% of the acceleration time.

The torque curve "bump" for the 473bhp curve above the 453bhp one isn't a linear upward move, it is delaying the drop to the right, consequently the power bump is only 20bhp at 6250RPM and less either side of it, so only averaging about 2/3 of that amount going by the curve shapes. This would mean an additional amount of work of only about 1% between the two engines at full throttle from 4500-7200RPM.

Assuming about 260kW of power put to the wheels on average over that rev range for 5 seconds of acceleration in 2nd gear, that would be an additional 1.300MJ of KE vs 1.315MJ (assuming relatively low drag and rolling losses at 2nd gear speeds), about 1.1% difference, only a quarter of the 4.4% power difference.

Yes, that's how ICE engines make power, nothing new here. They are not electric motors with near instantaneous torque. That's why there is much focus on an ICEs power band and working to stay in its sweet spot. A tenth of a second which doesn't seem like much is used when testing acceleration and lap times. On average, not including a multitude of variables, a tenth of a second is roughly one car length ahead. If I take your 1% into account and am theoretically tracking a car and do a lap in 100s I should be able to do that same lap in 99s. Ten laps in I'd be ten seconds ahead. If, however, you never race or track your car then yes, you won't ever be able to tell the difference between 20hp. The AT which is also getting 37 lb-ft more torque in addition to the 20hp however will be noticeably faster on the street.

[junx]

Can they completely redesign the exterior while they are at it?

[yuzu]

BMW should charge the difference in price between MY23/24 and MY25 to get the new engine mapping. I’m a sucker and would pay 😂

[aerobod]

Originally Posted by Tag

Yes, that's how ICE engines make power, nothing new here. They are not electric motors with near instantaneous torque. That's why there is much focus on an ICEs power band and working to stay in its sweet spot. A tenth of a second which doesn't seem like much is used when testing acceleration and lap times. On average, not including a multitude of variables, a tenth of a second is roughly one car length ahead. If I take your 1% into account and am theoretically tracking a car and do a lap in 100s I should be able to do that same lap in 99s. Ten laps in I'd be ten seconds ahead. If, however, you never race or track your car then yes, you won't ever be able to tell the difference between 20hp. The AT which is also getting 37 lb-ft more torque in addition to the 20hp however will be noticeably faster on the street.

I do track quite a lot with a significantly faster lapping car (it can do about the same laptime as the 911 GT3 RS around the Top Gear track), compared with the M2, which is more of our "shopping" car. Full power is only used about 1/3 of the time, so 0.3s per lap at most, but less due to power not equating to distance covered directly. A stock M2 would only be good for track days, so pointless for best lap times.

[bumscum]

My money is on BMW not offering a comp, and will offer the base auto with torque bump starting MY25. Screwing over both auto/manual MY23-24 owners imo. MY24 autos are obsolete and manuals won’t have as much distinction from autos.

[yaymitch]

Originally Posted by M2siast

All of your links point to the opposite of what you said, except the first one from KBB…
So if the list goes on as you say, then I’d question KBB and where THEY got their info from.

Well one things is for sure at least for now. No M2 Comp

[Tag]

Originally Posted by DrewNewM2

I don’t care about power increases but ima be pissed if some badass colors get released for the g87. Why don’t I care about power? Because my car will eventually get downpipes and tune…Maybe E85 and 20-30 HP stock HP increase will be irrelevant. Also, max torque figures for 6Mt are just a safe # BMW has to put on it and their #s are likely way lower than reality. Are there a lot of busted transmissions and clutches on any s58 manuals? I don’t see many posts or threads.

Sorry to say, but there are going to be new colors for MY25 including some individual options.

[dead.pixel]

BMW refusing to beef up the manual so it can enjoy the full torque of the S58 is such a cruel joke.