BMW's New 3.0 Liter Inline-6 Info

[Deadpool]

BMW's latest generation 3.0 liter inline 6 engine will be launched this September as the new base engine for the 6 series. It will then gradually replace the current 3.0 liter inline 6 engine in all other model ranges.
This new engine generates 258 HP at 6,600 rpm with a maximum torque 300 Nm (221 lb-ft) at 2,500 rpm. The current engine pumps out 231 HP at 5,900 rpm / 300 Nm (221 lb-ft) at 3,500 rpm).



http://mediapool.bmw.com/daten/pczoom/P0014626.JPG

[OpenWheelRacing]

Sweet!

[HyJynX]

Nice! http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[6speeder]

I'll take the VQ35, thank you. Cheaper w/more torque.

[camber]

I'll take the VQ35



I don't know if futher revisions have happened to the engine since I drove one in the G35 and 350Z but the VQ35 isn't as smooth as the VQ30. The VQ30 isn't as smooth as the 2.8 or 3L inline sixes of BMW.

BMW's inline sixes are their best engines IMO.

[6speeder]

I'll take the VQ35



I don't know if futher revisions have happened to the engine since I drove one in the G35 and 350Z but the VQ35 isn't as smooth as the VQ30. The VQ30 isn't as smooth as the 2.8 or 3L inline sixes of BMW.

BMW's inline sixes are their best engines IMO.



.5 and .7 liters difference in displacements and a 'V' design vs. inline can affect smoothness. The old 3.0 liter VQ is smoother than the current 3.5. I'll trade a tiny bit of refinement for a boatload more torque and $15,000 more in my pocket anyday.

[Big_Bronze_Rim]

Very cool. I reserve a special place for BMW's inline 6s. So smooth and torquey as well as being some of the best sounding engines. Im gald that see that the power output has improved considerably.

[pelucidor]

I'll take the VQ35, thank you. Cheaper w/more torque.

Nothing beats the smoothness and willingness to rev of a small inline-6 (except perhaps a V12 or a rotary engine). Very impressive - if the styling was there (especially interior) I would seriously consider a BMW with this engine.

But I thought BMW was bringing out a 3.5 liter I-6 in the next 6 months with around 260HP - what happened to that (or is this it)?

[M_TYPE_X]

BMW engines may be small and smooth, but so are Hondas.
They are coming up with a brand new engine, but it's the same size and the top power rating is only a little better.

Remind me... when I redesign the Jetta, don't change it too much, but increase the price a lot! DAS IST PROFIT auf Deutsch!!!11!!!!!1!!! http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[pelucidor]

I like the fact that the engine is the same size (3.0 liters). I hate the idea that the average engine is getting bigger every year for most manufacturers. Remember small engines are a plus point for sales in most countries outside the USA (and even then 3 liters is pretty huge).

And Honda makes the best 4-cylinder engines without doubt, but I give the nod for the smoothest 6-cylinder to an inline 6 every time (e.g. my old IS300 and my very old BMW 320i).

[M_TYPE_X]

I like the fact that the engine is the same size (3.0 liters). I hate the idea that the average engine is getting bigger every year for most manufacturers. Remember small engines are a plus point for sales in most countries outside the USA (and even then 3 liters is pretty huge).

And Honda makes the best 4-cylinder engines without doubt, but I give the nod for the smoothest 6-cylinder to an inline 6 every time (e.g. my old IS300 and my very old BMW 320i).



Look here, Englishman. I could care less about what hamsters run your Vauxhall! http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif

This is the U.S. of A. BRING IT ON! http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/mad.gif
Let's see your HEMI! http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/mad.gif

http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/mad.gif Now I've got my cowboy boots on and I'm in my badass full-size truck with ... it's got so many liters, I can't count them on one hand!

... I'll race you in my 1.8 Honda. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[DeanG35c6]

Cool. That's more power than the E36 M3. if BMW can keep the weight down, the 430 will be quicker than the G35c. I'm sure Nissan will answer. They already bumped up the HP in the Coupe and Sedan.

[camber]

.5 and .7 liters difference in displacements and a 'V' design vs. inline can affect smoothness. The old 3.0 liter VQ is smoother than the current 3.5. I'll trade a tiny bit of refinement for a boatload more torque and $15,000 more in my pocket anyday.



I wish Nissan stuck with the VQ30 a little bit longer and cranked up the revs to get more HP.

One of factors that stopped me from buying a G35 sedan when they first came out(well that and lack of a MT) was the fact that the VQ35 was much rougher all through the rev range compared to the VQ30. I was left rather unimpressed.

When an engine is rough like that I don't feel like playing with it because I feel it might fly to bits http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[6speeder]

.5 and .7 liters difference in displacements and a 'V' design vs. inline can affect smoothness. The old 3.0 liter VQ is smoother than the current 3.5. I'll trade a tiny bit of refinement for a boatload more torque and $15,000 more in my pocket anyday.



I wish Nissan stuck with the VQ30 a little bit longer and cranked up the revs to get more HP.

One of factors that stopped me from buying a G35 sedan when they first came out(well that and lack of a MT) was the fact that the VQ35 was much rougher all through the rev range compared to the VQ30. I was left rather unimpressed.

When an engine is rough like that I don't feel like playing with it because I feel it might fly to bits http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/tongue.gif



You want a rough-sounding engine? Try a 2004 Corvette.

[joeB]

Or anything GM. http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[camber]

You want a rough-sounding engine? Try a 2004 Corvette.



not sounding....

feeling...

But the Corvette thing... That's my exact point!

Some people will spend the money to get something more polished even though it might not offer the bang for the buck(ie 911, NSX, M3 etc..).

Sometimes power isn't everything to everyone.

[joeB]

You dont like power? http://forums.freshalloy.com/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[camber]

You dont like power?



Never said I didn't.....

BUT... If power to price point were the only thing that influenced buying decisions then alot of people on this board should be driving Pontiac Grand Prix GTPs instead of Altima's and Maxima's.

Or look at how the Sentra Spec V has been a failure for Nissan in the sport compact segment. It has a big torquey engine but the engine is not enjoayble to rev as say the engine found in the RSX.

[6speeder]

You dont like power?



Never said I didn't.....

BUT... If power to price point were the only thing that influenced buying decisions then alot of people on this board should be driving Pontiac Grand Prix GTPs instead of Altima's and Maxima's.

Or look at how the Sentra Spec V has been a failure for Nissan in the sport compact segment. It has a big torquey engine but the engine is not enjoayble to rev as say the engine found in the RSX.



Where do you get your information? I see far more spec Vs on the road than any version of RSX and the RSX has been on the market much longer.

[camber]

Sentra entire line sells about 8-10 k units a month in US. RSX 2-3K units a month.

The Spec V would have to represent about 20-30% of total Sentra Sales a month just to have the same sales as the RSX....

But this goes even beyond just sales. In every major comparo that the Spec V has been in, the Spec V lost. It has done little to bolster Nissan image to the youth market.

Just look at the aftermarket for the RSX and the Spec V....

[6speeder]

Sentra entire line sells about 8-10 k units a month in US. RSX 2-3K units a month.

The Spec V would have to represent about 20-30% of total Sentra Sales a month just to have the same sales as the RSX....

But this goes even beyond just sales. In every major comparo that the Spec V has been in, the Spec V lost. It has done little to bolster Nissan image to the youth market.

Just look at the aftermarket for the RSX and the Spec V....



Let's talk about those comparos. It's almost always up against the Neon SRT-4 which has over 200HP and is no doubt a faster car, yet costs atleast $3000-$4000 more. So that point has no validity, IMO.
You might as well go ahead an compare the SRT-4 to my 6sp Maxima which cost $22,000. The SRT-4 might edge it out slightly in speed tests, but the maxima is helluva alot more car for the money and a much more pleasant ride. So who wins there?

As for RSX sales being stronger, that may be true but it's far from apparent around here(Philly area).

[camber]

Even before the SRT-4 came out the Spec V lost all the comparos I read.

[6speeder]

Sentra entire line sells about 8-10 k units a month in US. RSX 2-3K units a month.

The Spec V would have to represent about 20-30% of total Sentra Sales a month just to have the same sales as the RSX....

But this goes even beyond just sales. In every major comparo that the Spec V has been in, the Spec V lost. It has done little to bolster Nissan image to the youth market.

Just look at the aftermarket for the RSX and the Spec V....



I don't modify my cars, but I would still take a spec v over an rsx-s. Maybe you enjoy keeping your engine above 6500 RPM to get your 115 lb-ft of torque or whatever it is, but I don't.

[camber]

I don't modify my cars, but I would still take a spec v over an rsx-s. Maybe you enjoy keeping your engine above 6500 RPM to get your 115 lb-ft of torque or whatever it is, but I don't.



If you like the vehicle you bought that is great but their are good reasons why the Spec V hasn't been a big hit in sport compact arena.

The refinement of the power plant is one of them.

[6speeder]

I don't modify my cars, but I would still take a spec v over an rsx-s. Maybe you enjoy keeping your engine above 6500 RPM to get your 115 lb-ft of torque or whatever it is, but I don't.



If you like the vehicle you bought that is great but their are good reasons why the Spec V hasn't been a big hit in sport compact arena.

The refinement of the power plant is one of them.





I don't agree. It has more to do with not being powerful enough, not refinement(not that I don't think it could be more refined-2.5L is about as big as 4cylinders get).

If what you're saying was the case, then the 4cyl altima wouldn't be the sales hit it is, seeing that it costs more and uses the same engine as the spec v.

[camber]

If what you're saying was the case, then the 4cyl altima wouldn't be the sales hit it is, seeing that it costs more and uses the same engine as the spec v.



The 4 cylinder Altima isn't aimed at the enthusiast market or sport compact car market. People looking at a 4 cylinder Altima probably don't put the same kind of empahsis on drivetrain perfomance as a person in the sport compact car market.

[6speeder]

If what you're saying was the case, then the 4cyl altima wouldn't be the sales hit it is, seeing that it costs more and uses the same engine as the spec v.



The 4 cylinder Altima isn't aimed at the enthusiast market or sport compact car market. People looking at a 4 cylinder Altima probably don't put the same kind of empahsis on drivetrain perfomance as a person in the sport compact car market.



Then you just negated your original point. People in the sport compact segment are looking more for performance than refinement. A more expensive, loud, and unrefined(but more powerful) SRT-4 winning the comparos attests to that fact.

[camber]

Then you just negated your original point. People in the sport compact segment are looking more for performance than refinement. A more expensive, loud, and unrefined(but more powerful) SRT-4 winning the comparos attests to that fact.




No I didn't negate my original point.

Engine refinement is a major component of "Drivetrain performance".

[6speeder]

Then you just negated your original point. People in the sport compact segment are looking more for performance than refinement. A more expensive, loud, and unrefined(but more powerful) SRT-4 winning the comparos attests to that fact.




No I didn't negate my original point.

Engine refinement is a major component of "Drivetrain performance".





If that were the case, then the SRT-4 wouldn't be winning the comparos.

[camber]

I haven't driven a SRT4 so I can't comment on that.

I haven't read one anything bad thing about the Neon SRT4's engine. However the SRT4 seems to be in a league of it's own performance wise in this segment. Most people negative comments come from the loud exhaust.

IMO Dodge struck up a better refinement to performance to cost ratio then anything else in the segment. That's why it wins.

[6speeder]

I haven't driven a SRT4 so I can't comment on that.

I haven't read one anything bad thing about the Neon SRT4's engine. However the SRT4 seems to be in a league of it's own performance wise in this segment. Most people negative comments come from the loud exhaust.

IMO Dodge struck up a better refinement to performance to cost ratio then anything else in the segment. That's why it wins.



Gee, in every comparo I've read with read the SRT-4, refinement was NEVER part of that ratio you mention. Performance vs. cost, yes.

[Irie_eyes]

Some people will spend the money to get something more polished even though it might not offer the bang for the buck(ie 911, NSX, M3 etc..).



LOL. The majority of those people will spend the money to show they have money to spend.
I can afford this "badge", you can't.

Out of curiosity, would you prefer a B-series motor over the K-series?

[camber]

Really?

The Featherweights: Serial Thrillers (http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=6569&page_num ber=5)


An acceptable compromise between rudeness and refinement, the SRT-4 really earns its tickertape shower by being nothing at all like its mild-mannered alter ego.




I think the C&D comparo was the first big comparo the SRT-4 was in too....

[Irie_eyes]

What's funny about your argument is people go and slap on loud exhausts and intakes to take this "refinement" out for more "power".
More people buy the RSX because it "looks nicer", it's a Acura, and Acuras have a much larger fanboy base than many many cars, including the Sentra.
So all this stuff about refinement and what not is kinda irrelevant. I highly doubt the fanboy RSX buyers chose it for "drivetrain refinement"

[camber]

LOL. The majority of those people will spend the money to show they have money to spend.
I can afford this "badge", you can't.




Yes.... No....

Majority of people who buy a 911, NSX, M3 or even a Corvette are poseurs. However, there are more then a few people who enjoy driving and will buy the car that rewards them with the highest degree of driving pleasure.


Out of curiosity, would you prefer a B-series motor over the K-series?



If both are stock and same displacement?

K series.

[camber]

What's funny about your argument is people go and slap on loud exhausts and intakes to take this "refinement" out for more "power".
More people buy the RSX because it "looks nicer", it's a Acura, and Acuras have a much larger fanboy base than many many cars, including the Sentra.
So all this stuff about refinement and what not is kinda irrelevant. I highly doubt the fanboy RSX buyers chose it for "drivetrain refinement"



Well... I know a few of my dad's old racing friends love Integras/RSX's because of the exact same reason and these were guys who use to road race SE-Rs.

Honda really got those cars right. It's the closest thing to a formula car for the street in that price range.

There is a real reason why people buy these car beyond being "fanboys". Honda put some serious effort into both the B & K series engines to be winners.


Let me ask you this....

Why do you think the original Sentra SE-R was a critical favorite and the Spec V is not?

[6speeder]

[QUOTE]



Let me ask you this....

Why do you think the original Sentra SE-R was a critical favorite and the Spec V is not?



Original sentra se-r was a favorite simply because of the bang for the buck performance(back in '91) and it's serious sleeper status.

The spec v is not as successful for the simple reason that it doesn't have enough power to stand out from the crowd. If it came from the factory with 230+ horsepower anywhere south of $20,000 it would easily be king of the hill.

[camber]

When the orignal SE-R(140 hp) was around the Honda had the Civic Si(125 hp right?) and Intergra (140, 170hp), Mazda MX-3 SE(130hp)....

Now no one will say that the SE-R was a better car then a Integra GSR but their was a reason why it showed up on eveyone's car of the year lists was because it was VERY light and had the very rev happy SR20DE.

SR20DE was happy to go and down the rev range and felt a natural at doing it.

I don't know if the same can be said about the QR25 and that takes something away from the overall driving experience. The power of the QR was never in doubt but the Sentra lost alot of its fun to drive nature with this engine.

[6speeder]

When the orignal SE-R(140 hp) was around the Honda had the Civic Si(125 hp right?) and Intergra (140, 170hp), Mazda MX-3 SE(130hp)....

Now no one will say that the SE-R was a better car then a Integra GSR but their was a reason why it showed up on eveyone's car of the year lists was because it was VERY light and had the very rev happy SR20DE.

SR20DE was happy to go and down the rev range and felt a natural at doing it.

I don't know if the same can be said about the QR25 and that takes something away from the overall driving experience. The power of the QR was never in doubt but the Sentra lost alot of its fun to drive nature with this engine.



The old civic si and integra gs-r were torqueless wonders(just like honda 4 bangers today) that had nothing below 5500 rpm(6500 rpm in the case of the gs-r). So it's no wonder the old se-r would stand be remembered more fondly than the hondas, not to mentinon it was cheaper. I don't remember the mx-3 se, so no comment there.

Like i said before, I would take the instant-on torque of nissan's 4cyl over any torqueless honda 4cyl. If you like revving your engine to 7000rpm only to still get no torque, that's fine. Maybe, I'll wait for ya' at the next stop light.

[camber]

Like i said before, I would take the instant-on torque of nissan's 4cyl over any torqueless honda 4cyl. If you like revving your engine to 7000rpm only to still get no torque, that's fine. Maybe, I'll wait for ya' at the next stop light.




Liking to "REV" means an engine climbs quickly up to the redline wihout giving back alot bad noises, vibration or harshness. IT doesn't mean it's a "torqueless" wonder.

The SR20DE gave great midrange torque and could rev well over 7k rpm

See this thread: The King of Sports Sedans (http://forums.freshalloy.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB17&Number=67783550&page =0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1)

If you want to see what I mean for yourself and why many enthusiast don't like the QR as a performance engine test drive a 2.5L 4 cylinder Subaru or any of the older big bore Porsche 4 cylinders and then compare that to the QR.


Like i said before, I would take the instant-on torque of nissan's 4cyl over any torqueless honda 4cyl. If you like revving your engine to 7000rpm only to still get no torque, that's fine. Maybe, I'll wait for ya' at the next stop light.



Well personally if I was straight line racing I probably wouldn't use a Sentra, Integra, MX-3, Civic...

I'am so not into drag racing and none of these cars were really meant for that.