How does the M3 get 330hp from 3.2 liters?
- Thread starter gobble
- Start date
Mainly from 6 throttle bodies. The previous M3,
coded E-36, had 240 hp from a 3.2L with single
throttle body.
...........................................
coded E-36, had 240 hp from a 3.2L with single
throttle body.
...........................................
To add to that, the Euro-Spec M3 not sold in the US was in E36 form 3.2L I6 with 6 individual throttle bodies and Double Vanos, and made 321 hp (over 100 hp/liter). I'm not saying that it was JUST the fact that it had 6 TB's, but the fact that BMW squeezed every living hp out of that motor correlates to it having 6 TB's.
Though from what I hear, even with 80 more hp than the US spec it isn't THAT much quicker, mainly due to the fact that it's gearing is aimed at high speed autobahn driving as opposed to the lively American 0-60 standard.
The throttle bodies help, but that is not a primary factor. It is just an efficient, modern engine design. Plus, even though it has a REALLY long crank, the many mains let it wind out fairly well.
For comparison to an S2K:
240 hp/2L = 120 hp/L
333 hp/3.2L = 104 hp/L
Nice, but nothing to get too excited about.
For comparison to an S2K:
240 hp/2L = 120 hp/L
333 hp/3.2L = 104 hp/L
Nice, but nothing to get too excited about.
Shouldn't this thread be in the off-topic forum?
------------------
NA1 NSX-T
- Comptech Headers
- NA2 Brake Upgrade
- Eibach Springs
- Bilstein Shocks
- Zanardi F&R Sway Bar
- '02 OEM Wheels
------------------
NA1 NSX-T
- Comptech Headers
- NA2 Brake Upgrade
- Eibach Springs
- Bilstein Shocks
- Zanardi F&R Sway Bar
- '02 OEM Wheels
What's the redline on the E46 M3?
Your response makes a better "on-topic" subject than the one initially posted.
8000rpm...
but max hp at 7900rpm
With today's modern street NA engines it's very common to extract just over a 100 hp/liter, but this rule of thumb doesn't seem to hold as true for engines over 4 liters though.
333 HP out of a 3.2 HP engine is a nice accomplishment. The M5 gets 394 HP out a 5 liter engine and the Z06 gets 405 out of a pushrod 2 valve per cylinder 5.7 liter engine.
Of course, add forced induction and the problem is solved.
I'm hoping that the next gen NSX has a engine similar to the M5 but with even better output. Something like a 4.5L V8 with 425 NA horsepower, 9K redline, i-VTEC....
-Jim
------------------
1992 NSX Red/Blk 5 spd #0330
1991 NSX Blk/Blk Auto #3070 (Sold)
1974 Vette 454 4 spd Wht/Blk
Looking for 76-79 Honda Accords
333 HP out of a 3.2 HP engine is a nice accomplishment. The M5 gets 394 HP out a 5 liter engine and the Z06 gets 405 out of a pushrod 2 valve per cylinder 5.7 liter engine.
Of course, add forced induction and the problem is solved.
I'm hoping that the next gen NSX has a engine similar to the M5 but with even better output. Something like a 4.5L V8 with 425 NA horsepower, 9K redline, i-VTEC....
-Jim
------------------
1992 NSX Red/Blk 5 spd #0330
1991 NSX Blk/Blk Auto #3070 (Sold)
1974 Vette 454 4 spd Wht/Blk
Looking for 76-79 Honda Accords
That's 312 carnk hp for a 3L and (of course) 333 for a 3.2. Should not be too hard to get close.
The current M3 (E46?) does indeed have a lot of HP (343 in Europe = 105.7/liter). So? This is 2002. I also heard that it tends to blow up sometimes.
The NSX 3.0 managed a very nice 92 HP/liter eleven years ago. I have never read/heard the NSX blow its engine.
The NSX 3.0 managed a very nice 92 HP/liter eleven years ago. I have never read/heard the NSX blow its engine.
We had an US E36 (single throtle) and a EU E36 (6 throthle) side by side.
A run from 0 to 100 Mph showed a very small difference in the advantage for the EU M3, though personally it think that was more driver then engine related.
Drove the E46 the other day, and i must say, thats a pretty strong engine.
Didn't run nice though.
Dutchy
A run from 0 to 100 Mph showed a very small difference in the advantage for the EU M3, though personally it think that was more driver then engine related.
Drove the E46 the other day, and i must say, thats a pretty strong engine.
Didn't run nice though.
Dutchy
I think that's debatable considering all the E46 engines that have been grenading recently.
------------------
1994 Red/Black NSX #418
Forums Nazi Groupie
makes me wonder if Honda Co. is ever going to build a iVTEC 6 (Type R Class)
Considering the amount of investment made into electric hybrids and increasing emissions standards.
Pretty much kiss iVTEC 8 goodbye for the nex gen NSX.
Considering the amount of investment made into electric hybrids and increasing emissions standards.
Pretty much kiss iVTEC 8 goodbye for the nex gen NSX.
Horsepower.... shmorspower. I want to know how they get all that torque from that 3L motor. It's over 240 ft/lbs, right?
SIMPLE:
They are'nt called "Bavarishe MOTOR Werke"
for nothing!?
and nsx engine IS 11 years old.
in 21'th century S2000 has a 237Hp dos'nt it?
237hp/1.997liter=118hp/litre if my math is right,and that's more then the M3!
Am I right,or am I right???
So New NSX neads a new,modern engine.
They are'nt called "Bavarishe MOTOR Werke"
for nothing!?
and nsx engine IS 11 years old.
in 21'th century S2000 has a 237Hp dos'nt it?
237hp/1.997liter=118hp/litre if my math is right,and that's more then the M3!
Am I right,or am I right???
So New NSX neads a new,modern engine.
Not all of them are driver error... one recently threw a rod just accelerating up a long straightaway.
Also, their BRAKES don't seem to last long, and you can get them under braking in most cases.
You got that right! BestCar, Japan's magazine publication authority on future supercars, stated in the March (?) issue that they are NOT planning to put a V-8 in it, at least not for the 2004 MY. Hybrid is the way. 300HP from a longer stroked V-6 that puts out high torque #'s in the low end and another 100HP from IMA (integrated motor assist) to all 4 wheels. In other words, the Dualnote DN-X IS the forefather/prototype for the 2004 NSX. Estimated 50mpg !! Wowie!
------------------
1999 Zanardi Edition NSX #50
2001 Silver/Red S2000
hope all that comes with a 50 speed CVT....
Excuse my ignorance, but there are a few references to iVTEC in this post.
Ive seen this term pop up a few times, whats the "i" stand for? I understand the RSX has this iVTEC, but what exactly is this new iVTEC, and whats so different about it compared to traditional VTEC which we all know and love?
-B
Ive seen this term pop up a few times, whats the "i" stand for? I understand the RSX has this iVTEC, but what exactly is this new iVTEC, and whats so different about it compared to traditional VTEC which we all know and love?
-B
i-VTEC is the latest version of VTEC. It is supposed to create more low end torque. I just drove a 2002 Civic Si with i-VTEC. In comparison to my 2000 si, I thought the car was slow and didn't feel much better down low. In i-vtec's defense, the RSX Type S engine feels great.
Oh, btw, "i" stands for intelligent.
[This message has been edited by NetViper (edited 06 June 2002).]
Oh, btw, "i" stands for intelligent.
[This message has been edited by NetViper (edited 06 June 2002).]
"...By design, the straight-6 configuration develops more torque than a V-6 configuration, all else being equal..."
I'm not sure I understand why this would be? What engineering reason would make a straight 6 deliver more torque than a V-6?
-Jim
------------------
1992 NSX Red/Blk 5 spd #0330
1991 NSX Blk/Blk Auto #3070 (Sold)
1974 Vette 454 4 spd Wht/Blk
Looking for 76-79 Honda Accords
I'm not sure I understand why this would be? What engineering reason would make a straight 6 deliver more torque than a V-6?
-Jim
------------------
1992 NSX Red/Blk 5 spd #0330
1991 NSX Blk/Blk Auto #3070 (Sold)
1974 Vette 454 4 spd Wht/Blk
Looking for 76-79 Honda Accords
