[DieGrüneHölle]

Good news. Nice to see some cars staying NA.

[MediaArtist]

Originally Posted by Petros

Can they be daily driven problem-free for hundreds of thousands of kilometers as a daily driver?

No one buys a GT3, Scuderia, or Zonda as a daily driver that they can drive "problem free for hundreds of thousands of kilometers", even if they did have engines that could rev that high, make that kind of noise, and last for that many km/miles, your back would give out far before you hit that magical mileage range.

[-Wingman-]

Originally Posted by Year's_End

[B]VAG has the benefit[\B] of a giant pool of fuel-sippers from VW, Skoda, and the bottom-tier Audi's to balance out thelow-volume big guns from Lamborghini (and the R8) and whatnot.

Yes. VAG has great benefits.

[Petros]

Originally Posted by MediaArtist

No one buys a GT3, Scuderia, or Zonda as a daily driver that they can drive "problem free for hundreds of thousands of kilometers", even if they did have engines that could rev that high, make that kind of noise, and last for that many km/miles, your back would give out far before you hit that magical mileage range.

That's exactly my point. No one puts high mileage on those exotic cars. But plenty of people do that on an M3. No one buys an M3 just to drive it 2 or 3 days a year like those exotics. Yes BMW might have been able to tweak the S65 to squeeze more power out of its 4 L displacement, and match the specific output of that GT3 or 458 or whatever, but making an already high strung engine even more so might have affected long term reliability and durability.

[stefan]

Originally Posted by Petros

How so? It's already putting out 414 hp, with as much as 440-450 hp with bolt on mods and a tune. All of that out of a tiny V8 with only 4 L displacement. I fail to see how you can significantly improve on that without either forced induction, or a significant increase in displacement.

Honestly man, I wish I could give you the reference. I actually spent some time after posting this scrounging around and looking for the interview. A specific power target was not mentioned, but that there is significant room for improvement in that engine. I do remember two of the technologies mentioned was DI and internal materials. I'll try to look around for you. But I can assure you that, at one point, M's direction was to carry on with NA development. I think this was neutered shortly after the S65 went mainstream and new emissions regulations and corporate fuel efficiency targets came into effect.

That said, you're right about the GTS. That's a good indication, in some ways. 450hp is quite easily obtainable. The GT2 car makes 480hp. Perhaps that technology could be made more reliable and trickle down to the mainstream vehicle.

Don't dismiss the other "exotic" manufacturers as using "exotic" engine materials for their specific output. That technology which was developed a few years ago is very much available to BMW now.

[The Automotive Enthusiast]

The S65 was pretty exotic for its time, though. Did the engine have more potential? I think so.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by Petros

That's exactly my point. No one puts high mileage on those exotic cars. But plenty of people do that on an M3. No one buys an M3 just to drive it 2 or 3 days a year like those exotics. Yes BMW might have been able to tweak the S65 to squeeze more power out of its 4 L displacement, and match the specific output of that GT3 or 458 or whatever, but making an already high strung engine even more so might have affected long term reliability and durability.

Lexus managed to improve on their 5.0l V8 and so will Audi with their 4.2l V8, engines which are no better than or more expensive than the S65. BMW just chose the easier and more importantly cheaper way. And it looks like it is going on with X5/X6 M (S63) and M2 (N55).

[MediaArtist]

Originally Posted by Petros

That's exactly my point. No one puts high mileage on those exotic cars. But plenty of people do that on an M3. No one buys an M3 just to drive it 2 or 3 days a year like those exotics. Yes BMW might have been able to tweak the S65 to squeeze more power out of its 4 L displacement, and match the specific output of that GT3 or 458 or whatever, but making an already high strung engine even more so might have affected long term reliability and durability.

The reason people are theorizing about a tuned S65 is because the M4 sounds like a 1998 Honda Civic with a modded exhaust.

The M3, C63, and RS5 are the entry-level to the performance oriented sports segment, and people who buy in this segment are usually concerned about performance, looks, and sound, usually in that order.

Maybe they could have went with a blower, or stuck with the same engine, but the current I6 TT sounds like ass which is why this discussion is popping up.

[aajami]

Originally Posted by Rupes

Car and Driver just confirmed it and it will be better than the last one. Really disappointed BMW didn't just improve on the S65 instead of designing a totally new engine.

Agreed. I would have loved a further iteration on the S65B44 in the GTS and CRT for the F8x.

[aajami]

Originally Posted by MediaArtist

No one buys a GT3, Scuderia, or Zonda as a daily driver that they can drive "problem free for hundreds of thousands of kilometers", even if they did have engines that could rev that high, make that kind of noise, and last for that many km/miles, your back would give out far before you hit that magical mileage range.

I understand your point, though the GT3 is a bad example here. I had a coworker who bought a 997.2 GT3 CPO. It had one previous owner and he (my colleague) used it as his DD for the better part of two years before trading it in for a CPO 997.2 Turbo S, which he also uses as a DD.

Never had a problem with the GT3, and no problems with the Turbo S so far.

[The Automotive Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by MediaArtist

The reason people are theorizing about a tuned S65 is because the M4 sounds like a 1998 Honda Civic with a modded exhaust.

The M3, C63, and RS5 are the entry-level to the performance oriented sports segment, and people who buy in this segment are usually concerned about performance, looks, and sound, usually in that order.

Maybe they could have went with a blower, or stuck with the same engine, but the current I6 TT sounds like ass which is why this discussion is popping up.

I'm interested to see what Mercedes does with the C63 AMG V8, which is essentially two A45 AMG four liter engines put together.

[MediaArtist]

Originally Posted by aajami

I understand your point, though the GT3 is a bad example here. I had a coworker who bought a 997.2 GT3 CPO. It had one previous owner and he (my colleague) used it as his DD for the better part of two years before trading it in for a CPO 997.2 Turbo S, which he also uses as a DD.

Never had a problem with the GT3, and no problems with the Turbo S so far.

Yeah, the 997 engine has proven quite resilient actually. I don't DD my car because it is pretty harsh on normal streets. In South OC the roads are usually in great condition and I have no problem. It's when I have to commute into LA County, or North OC, then the pot holes, rocks, and other road imperfections begin to take a toll on me physically. Just ask any of the 335i owners who have lowered cars, and low profile tires, and live in LA. LA roads are ridiculously bad in some places.

[MediaArtist]

Originally Posted by Rev ///Me

I'm interested to see what Mercedes does with the C63 AMG V8, which is essentially two A45 AMG four liter engines put together.

I have a feeling it will sound a lot better than the M4, that's my early prediction.

[The Automotive Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by MediaArtist

I have a feeling it will sound a lot better than the M4, that's my early prediction.

It will have a flat plane crank. I'm sure it will.

[MikeyV]

Originally Posted by stefan

This was partially why BMW bought Mini a while back as a brand emissions reducer. Now onto the M3..... I think it's still sufficiently low volume that they could have made a proper engine for it. But it's much cheaper to tweak the N55.

No it wasn't, not even close, read this it'll help you understand why BMW bought them.

Why did BMW buy Rover?

This is a very interesting question. For a company with the prestige of BMW to have purchased a car company and then dumped Rover after such a short time, questions must be raised as to why exactly did they buy the company in the first place, and did they ever really intend to keep it?

BMW had a highly developed and nurtured image. However, they also had a very limited market into which they sold cars. BMW had been described as a company that 'made only one saloon, but in three different sizes'. Although their market was expanding, global consolidation of the motor industry threatened either their independence or their ability to continue to make cars competitively, depending on how you viewed it.

BMW therefore needed to expand their market, and thus their product base. However, to do this threatened to destroy their carefully nurtured image. If they were to develop a cheaper range of cars to compete with VW, Ford, Fiat and other mass market players, surely this would devalue the BMW brand. Other companies had already seen it become increasingly difficult to have a brand stretched between the extremes of a small budget car and a large luxury car. Ford failed to achieve a quality reputation with their Scorpio when they also produced the Fiesta. Fiat's Croma was a dismal market failure, whereas their small cars like the Uno were market successes that sold extremely well. Where companies have had successes in both of these market areas, they have achieved this with multiple brands, such as the VW Group's use of Skoda at the lower end of the market, going through Seat and VW up to Audi at the premium end of the marketplace - as well as owning exclusive brands like Bentley. Ford now have multiple brands as part of their 'Premier Automotive Group' (Jaguar, Lincoln, Aston Martin, Volvo and Land Rover) and have all-but abandoned the high end of the market under the Ford badge.

The options that faced BMW were to either buy an existing brand (or brands), or to build a new brand from scratch. The latter option, the route taken by the Japanese with Toyota creating Lexus, Honda creating Acura for the American market and Nissan creating Infiniti, also for the North Americans, was initially the route that BMW appeared to be taking. Spy shots and leaked information showed that BMW were at least investigating, if not actually developing for production, front-wheel-drive technology. Front-wheel-drive is something that would never appear in a BMW-badged car, as rear-wheel-drive is a core value of the brand. However, this is not the route that BMW eventually took.

The opportunity arose to look at Rover when BMW were to supply diesel engines to the Rover Group for the new Range Rover. The Rover Group had recently had a huge upswing in sales to continental Europe when the market there was contracting, Rover being the only company to actually grow their sales at that time. Furthermore, their sales were actually on course to overtake BMW's.

When BMW looked at Rover, they were impressed. Their opinion was that in terms of quality, Rover were as good as, if not in some cases better than, BMW. Rover appeared to fit perfectly with BMW. There was very little in the way of overlap. Rover cars would be able to fit below BMW in the line-up. Land Rover did not compete with BMW at all, and yet had a luxury image that complemented BMW's perfectly, and an under-developed, 'latent' brand of Mini (Bernd Pischetsrieder, BMW's chairman was the nephew of Sir Alec Issigonis, the Mini's designer). However, best of all, there was a cupboard-full of heritage that BMW could exploit (MG, Riley, Austin-Healey, Triumph, etc) - and to an Anglophile like Pischetsrieder, this was manna from Heaven.

The deal to buy the Rover Group from British Aerospace was completed in a whirlwind 10 days. BAe were keen to dispose of Rover, as the company did not fit well with their core interests of Aerospace and defence. The high capital-consuming business of long-run, mass production of low-cost consumer products had little synergy with the low capital-consuming, build-to-order, niche production of high-value items such as Airbus wings or military jets. BAe were keen to sell, BMW wanted to buy.

Honda were the only problem. Honda, Rover's partner for over a decade, were deeply entwined with Rover's fortunes. Rover cars were not only heavily dependent on Honda for their engineering, but the company was 20% owned by Honda (the Rover Group owning the remaining 80%) and the Rover Group owned 20% of Honda's UK manufacturing facility in Swindon. Honda, however, were not interested in working with BMW. They did not want to retain their equity stake in a Rover now owned by a competitor and they wanted their 20% of Swindon back. The cross-holding was quickly unwound.

However, this background does not tell us exactly why BMW shelled out so much to purchase Rover. Did BMW buy to expand their portfolio and manufacturing base or to thwart their competitors? Although at the time, it was seen as the former, the latter objective cannot easily be dismissed as fantasy. If, as was believed at the time, Rover were on course, with their Honda-derived vehicles, to overtake BMW in terms of sales volume in Europe - and Rover were definitely trying to become "Britain's BMW" - was strangulation from inside the only way of stopping this threat? It was also the case that killing the Honda-Rover partnership would set back the European plans of Honda - another "quality competitor", as viewed by BMW.

[MikeyV]

Originally Posted by Petros

That's exactly my point. No one puts high mileage on those exotic cars.

Unless your Rowan Atkinson and daily drive you F1, his F1 has over 100,000 miles on the clock.

[KingOfJericho]

Originally Posted by MikeyV

Unless your Rowan Atkinson and daily drive you F1, his F1 has over 100,000 miles on the clock.

That's a massive exaggeration. He had 38,000 on it when he last crashed it in 2011 after 14 years of ownership. That's under 3,000 miles annually. Unless he ramped that up to 21,000 a year since then, he probably has 45k on it now.

[BMW269]