3.5 Turbo

[cbj]

Again tons of praises for the turbo engine in the NY Times yesterday. Why this engine has not made it into the X3 is a strange or at least the X5. I would love to try to drive a car with the new turbo - I may go for the 5 wagon next time.

[calgaryx3]

You mean the 3.0 twin turbo (N54) as found in the 335I?

It took a while for the 5 series to adapt that motor, and with the new 135I being launched early next year, I can see the N54 becoming more ubiquitous amongst the North American BMW line-up.

That said, if the European sourced 3.0 diesels hit our shores first, it's my view that both the X5 and X3 will likely get that engine first.

Asif

[Andrew*Debbie]

Again tons of praises for the turbo engine in the NY Times yesterday. Why this engine has not made it into the X3 is a strange or at least the X5. I would love to try to drive a car with the new turbo - I may go for the 5 wagon next time.


Lots of reasons.

The current X3 is near the end of the design life. It just got the last face lift before the next model comes out. Costs money to put the turbo into the X3. May not make enough extra in sales to justify the cost.

Price. How many customers would be willing to pay the extra $$$$ for the turbo version.

Cooling. The 335i had some cooling problems. I think they've gotten it worked out. Possible the X3 can't provide enough cooling for the motor.

Fuel Economy. The X3 isn't all that great. With the turbo it may push the BMW fleet economy down too low.

Weight. The new motor in the X3 uses an alloy block. The turbo motor is cast iron. It weighs more.

Don't be so fast to write off the new NA motor. 260 HP is enough for an X3. I drove ours on the Autobahn. At 100MPH it pulled up hills no problem and still had ample power to pass. After all not that many people RACE X3s. How much power do you really need???


As for the X5, well there is a V8 if you want more power. . .

[Evlengr]

Cap'n I need more power. Hahaha I get my X3 into the 80+ range all the time. My X3 was a compromise to getting a sportier vehicle and still having some utility based functions.

Given the right circumstances I would have it above 100 all the time. :-) (provided my little girl is not in the vehicle).

[iamthewalrus]

Cap'n I need more power. Hahaha I get my X3 into the 80+ range all the time. My X3 was a compromise to getting a sportier vehicle and still having some utility based functions.
.

When I first got my 2006 X3 3.0i, I thought it was underpowered, but after 3 weeks, I'm convinced it's not. I have the manual transmission, and I've found that if I'm not afraid to let the engine rev, it's got plenty of power. If you're used to shifting down below 3K RPMs all the time, then yes, the 3.0i feels sluggish. But the power is high up in the revs around 5K RPMs and if you're willing to go find it (and suffer the gas mileage hit in return) this thing really moves! It's surprisingly fun to drive!

When I was shopping for convertibles back in 2006, I decided on a 330Cic, rather than a used M3 convertible. I'd rather use the full power of the engine than feel like I was only tapping into 30% of the potential power for most driving. I think we've all let the marketing people get into our heads. Suddenly anything less than 300 horsepower is weak? I'm only in my mid thirties, but I remember when a car with 170 horsepower was really fast! ;)

[Andrew*Debbie]

Yeah and current X3 has more power than your '06.

The only X3 that is a bit underpowered is the old 2.5i with Steptronic. Even that one is ok, but I could understand why some might complain.

What do you mean 170HP isn't fast? My Miata has a 170HP 2.0L motor. It does just fine thank you. 0-60 is around 7.5 seconds. :D

A Catherham 7 with a lowly 105HP K engine can pull 0-60 in 6.5 seconds. The 125HP Ford motor lowers that to 5.9.

BMWs are too darn heavy.

[chonko]

Lots of reasons.

The current X3 is near the end of the design life. It just got the last face lift before the next model comes out. Costs money to put the turbo into the X3. May not make enough extra in sales to justify the cost.

Price. How many customers would be willing to pay the extra $$$$ for the turbo version.

The N54 in the 5 series only attracted $800 increase, and the sales thus far has outstripped last years numbers. Adding the N54 engine to the X3 will further reduce the cost of the engine.



Cooling. The 335i had some cooling problems. I think they've gotten it worked out. Possible the X3 can't provide enough cooling for the motor.

Fuel Economy. The X3 isn't all that great. With the turbo it may push the BMW fleet economy down too low.

The extra torque from the engine will compensate for weight increase thus reducing the fuel economy.

Weight. The new motor in the X3 uses an alloy block. The turbo motor is cast iron. It weighs more.

The N54 engine is an Aluminium cast engine, while the N54 is Magnesium/Aluminium cast.

Don't be so fast to write off the new NA motor. 260 HP is enough for an X3. I drove ours on the Autobahn. At 100MPH it pulled up hills no problem and still had ample power to pass. After all not that many people RACE X3s. How much power do you really need???


As for the X5, well there is a V8 if you want more power. . .

If there is any vehicle in the BMW fleet that needs the N54 engine, it is the X5. Getting a V8 just for the extra power incurs some fuel economy penalty. An X5 with the N54 engine will be a perfect fit.

[Hofmeister_NV]

Cap'n I need more power. Hahaha I get my X3 into the 80+ range all the time. My X3 was a compromise to getting a sportier vehicle and still having some utility based functions.

Given the right circumstances I would have it above 100 all the time. :-) (provided my little girl is not in the vehicle).



[The late James Doohan with ludicrous Scottish accent]: "Cap'n . . . the dilithium crystals are overloadin' now; a bit more ah this . . . an I canna guarantee the safety of the ship!"

[Andrew*Debbie]

The N54 engine is an Aluminium cast engine, while the N54 is Magnesium/Aluminium cast.



My bad.


If there is any vehicle in the BMW fleet that needs the N54 engine, it is the X5. Getting a V8 just for the extra power incurs some fuel economy penalty. An X5 with the N54 engine will be a perfect fit.


Yeah. I believe it is more of a market issue with the larger X5. Maybe marketing wants more space between the two X5 trim levels sold in the US. The N54 might cut into V8 sales. There is also that $800 or so price bump. They may be trying to hit a price point with the 3.0si trim. :dunno:

Then again the X5 3.0si is "wicked fast." Or at least it is according to that Ford commercial. :rofl:


Back to the OP and diesels. The latest rumor is the 335d and 535d will be the initial diesel offerings for the US.

[chonko]

The N54 engine is an Aluminium cast engine, while the N54 is Magnesium/Aluminium cast..

Oops- I meant the N52 being an Aluminium/Magnesium cast.

[Andrew*Debbie]

I missed that too. I read it as N54 / N52.

I've stopped putting the M or N numbers in my post. Lets see if I screw this one up. (Doing this all from memory!!)

Sure the turbo is more powerful, but the N52 has its advantages. People miss that the N52B30 is based on a newer block design then the N54B30. The N54B30 is a steel lined aluminum block pretty much carried over from the old M54. THe N52B30 uses the new ultra light Magnsium/Aluminum block. It also has the latest power saving features like an electric water pump and variable output oil pump. The N52B30 is amazingly light for the displacement. I think BMW claimed it is the lightest production 3L motor ever. Dropping 100 lbs from the heavy X3 has got to help.

I'm a little concerned about long term durablility of these new engines. Just a gut feeling. I've got no real facts to base that on. We got our X3 on a 2 year lease.

I think the N52 is a good match for the X3. X5 is a bit too much car for it.