[Adem1534]

Summed up nicely by M3 Adjuster

Turns out that this engine almost feels like a detuned S55 than a tuned N55 (that sounds better )

Thoughts?

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

Closed DECK

It refers to the space between the cylinders on the deck surface (where the head mounts). Closed deck means the space around the cylinder is solid. This equals strength. Open deck means the space is open. This offers better cooling and lighter weight at the expense of strength.

open deck engines tend to be just fine for natural aspiration, its forced induction that can get the better of the design. , the open deck design offers better cooling and this is because a)there is waterpockets very close to the combustion chamber and bore and b)the bore and cc are cooled more uniformly. high revving engines produce much more heat and this design suites them well as long as they're naturally aspirated.

for extreme outputs and forced induction a closed/semi closed deck is much more reliable and durable.

Forged Crankshaft

Since there are probably books dedicated to this.. suffice it to say that
When it comes to metals... Forged metal is stronger than Cast metal.


Along with the other items reworked

Turbocharger integrated into the exhaust manifold
Aerodynamically tuned air intake manifold
Separate oil cooler
Pistons with a modified top ring


It appears that the internals of this motor have been reworked for much higher durability... which of course is needed whenever you are elevating boost levels....which is of course the easiest way to make power in a turbo motor application. Well.. that and changing out turbos.. Which is probably the final piece of the puzzle that has not been released.

[Artemis]

[JustChris]

Good summary, but are we clutching at straws a bit? Doesn't the M235i have a forged crankshaft....yet I see folk lining up to say it's not an M engine and I'd agree. There is a reason M engines get an 'S' I guess.

Closed deck, excellent news yes, but the S55.....is still very different isn't it?

[hyperzulu]

Less interested in the design - more what they do with it to enhance the N55 experience.

[fuddman]

As far as I'm concerned, what's news about the M2 engine is that it's the same engine as the one going into the X4.
Do I like that the X4 and the M2 share identical engines? Not only NO!.....well, you know the rest of it.
The X4 weighs 4200 lbs and does 0-60 in 4.7. With that stat, not only does the X4 have the same engine as M2, the X4 has the better version of the same engine .
Getting less interested.

[Adem1534]

Originally Posted by fuddman

As far as I'm concerned, what's news about the M2 engine is that it's the same engine as the one going into the X4.
Do I like that the X4 and the M2 share identical engines? Not only NO!.....well, you know the rest of it.
The X4 weighs 4200 lbs and does 0-60 in 4.7. With that stat, not only does the X4 have the same engine as M2, the X4 has the better version of the same engine .
Getting less interested.

They're not identical

[fuddman]

Originally Posted by Adem1534

They're not identical

You're right. The X4 has the better engine.

[hyperzulu]

Originally Posted by fuddman

As far as I'm concerned, what's news about the M2 engine is that it's the same engine as the one going into the X4.
Do I like that the X4 and the M2 share identical engines? Not only NO!.....well, you know the rest of it.
The X4 weighs 4200 lbs and does 0-60 in 4.7. With that stat, not only does the X4 have the same engine as M2, the X4 has the better version of the same engine .
Getting less interested.

I'm not sure I follow... the M2 will probably share the engine going into the X4 M40i that along with a ZF8 transmission is supposed to propel that car to 60 in 4.7 seconds. You're saying that the M2 will get a weaker version of this engine because you have documents showing that it will take the M2 more time to reach 60?

I keep re-reading your comment and it's like I'm aimlessly turning a Rubik's cube. That shit makes 0 sense to me.

[Adem1534]

Originally Posted by fuddman

You're right. The X4 has the better engine.

lol? explain?

[PackPride85]

Originally Posted by fuddman

You're right. The X4 has the better engine.

What are you basing that conclusion on?

[Adem1534]

Originally Posted by PackPride85

What are you basing that conclusion on?

I think he might be trollling? Definitely don't see where he's making this conclusion when the M2's version will have a higher output.

[hyperzulu]

Originally Posted by Adem1534

I think he might be trollling? Definitely don't see where he's making this conclusion when the M2's version will have a higher output.

Yeah I don't get it. It's like BMW told him the M2 will reach 60mph in 5.0s so therefore the heavier car that does it in 4.7s must have the better engine. But I don't know where on earth he dug up 0-60 times for the M2. Even the M235i can do 60 in better time than that.

C&D managed a 4.3s 0-60 with the M235i and the ZF8. The M2 with DCT and overboost along with the upgraded engine, extra rubber on the ground and stiffer chassis is probably going to churn out a time rivaling C&D's M4 time to 60.

[allthatisntnow]

Originally Posted by Chris The Manx

Good summary, but are we clutching at straws a bit? Doesn't the M235i have a forged crankshaft....yet I see folk lining up to say it's not an M engine and I'd agree. There is a reason M engines get an 'S' I guess.

Closed deck, excellent news yes, but the S55.....is still very different isn't it?

N55 in M235i guise does have a forged crank, yes, but due to its long throw and tuning set up peak power is made around 5800rpm.

Materials alone does not a motorsport engine make though, imho

Whilst the S55 is a totally different block and shares almost no parts with the N55. Its 3.0L displacement is made up of a larger bore and shorter throw, hence its higher redline. High redline seems to be one of the keys to making an engine an 'M' one. That combined with better top end power delivery.

That combined with a good chassis and power to weight ratio = M Car

[JustChris]

Yes indeed M235i peak power up to 6000RPM. X4 M thingy engine same power band range as the M235i likely by design so yes hoping the M2 revs out much past 6k

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by Artemis

Attachment 1291937

photo is spot on. Its definitely more of an uprated or re-designed N55 than a detuned S55. The only S motor they would have put in the car would have been a 4 cylinder.. so since they didn't do that.. This is certainly fine by me. I've never been disappointed with the 335 hp N54 in my 1M..

I can't decide if my current vote is " still in the market for one" or " maybe, still need more info.. "

I'm not making any buying decisions til I know curb weight, MSRP and Euro Delivery pricing .

[fuddman]

Originally Posted by PackPride85

What are you basing that conclusion on?

As I mentioned, the X4 M40i weighs 4200 lbs and does 0-60 in 4.7 seconds.
The M2, weighing, probably, some 800 lbs less, does 0-60 in, maybe, 4.2 seconds.
To me, that comparison means the M Division put the better engine in the X4.

[Gibson6594]

Originally Posted by fuddman

As I mentioned, the X4 M40i weighs 4200 lbs and does 0-60 in 4.7 seconds.
The M2, weighing, probably, some 800 lbs less, does 0-60 in, maybe, 4.2 seconds.
To me, that comparison means the M Division put the better engine in the X4.

Come on man, really?

[fuddman]

Originally Posted by hyperzulu

But I don't know where on earth he dug up 0-60 times for the M2.

M Division people, in interviews, have said the M2 will take about 4.5 to 4.6 seconds to get to 100 kilometers per hour. That, at best, is equivalent to about 0-60 mph in 4.2 seconds.
The other point I'd make is - I refer to performance times promoted by the manufacturer, not times achieved by others.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by fuddman

As I mentioned, the X4 M40i weighs 4200 lbs and does 0-60 in 4.7 seconds.
The M2, weighing, probably, some 800 lbs less, does 0-60 in, maybe, 4.2 seconds.
To me, that comparison means the M Division put the better engine in the X4.

yep you are definitely trolling.... The X4 M40 motor is likely optimized for more torque.

•355 hp @ 5800-6000 RPM
•343 lb-ft @ 1350-5250 RPM


The same motor in the M2 is rumored to be 370 hp (likely 365hp US) and I would bet it comes with a higher rpm peak as well

[PrematureApex]

Originally Posted by fuddman

As I mentioned, the X4 M40i weighs 4200 lbs and does 0-60 in 4.7 seconds.
The M2, weighing, probably, some 800 lbs less, does 0-60 in, maybe, 4.2 seconds.
To me, that comparison means the M Division put the better engine in the X4.

Traction!

[hyperzulu]

Originally Posted by fuddman

M Division people, in interviews, have said the M2 will take about 4.5 to 4.6 seconds to get to 100 kilometers per hour. That, at best, is equivalent to about 0-60 mph in 4.2 seconds.
The other point I'd make is - I refer to performance times promoted by the manufacturer, not times achieved by others.

Oh ok... cool. You are talking about interviews given by people who do things like downplay a future product to fool competing manufacturers with false benchmarks which they later obliterate. Got it!

[hyperzulu]

And if we want to use BMW's number, fine. They rate the M235i RWD with ZF8 at 4.5s 0-60... the XDrive version is 4.4s to 60. The M2 doing it in 4.5 to 4.6s is just BS, I don't care who it comes out the mouth of. 4.6s to 62mph does not translate into 4.2s to 60, so whoever said that is just really throwing baseless numbers out.