4.4ltrs.?????

is it possible that the v8 will displace 4.4ltrs. and not 4.0 as we've been expecting?( 4.4 was just mentioned in the nov. road and track or automobile mag. i forget which). early on in the speculation 4.4 was tossed around as was 5.5ltrs. for the m5/m6, numbers that were consistent with the smaller sibling being an "8 10ths" derivative of the v10,of course the v10 ended up only displaceing 5.0 so does that dictate that the 8cyl. will displace 4.0?). i think that it's plausible that bmw would go 4.4 if possible for a couple of reasons;1) if the 335 has output of approx. 330-340hp/300ft-lbs. then the m3 with 4.0ltrs. will only have top-end superiority, more displacement would be needed to provide across the rev-range superiority (heir alex himself raised this issue a while ago), 2)the 335 would only be a chip away from leap-frogging the m3, 3)the audi rs4 with 4.2ltrs may have upped the ante.
questions:1) is it even possible for 4.4ltrs. to be achieved(bore-spacing, etc.)
2) if so is it necessary or desireable?

Gearing. The 335 will NOT be quicker than the M3. They will cripple the gearing like they did for the S54 powered MZ3s (lowered rear ratio from 3.23 to 3.15 versus 3.62 in E46 M3).

Engine in E90 M3 will be a rev monster, the current M5 has a 8250 red line, the 335 will not be able to come anywhere close.

Turbo lag.

Originally Posted by hector

is it possible that the v8 will displace 4.4ltrs. and not 4.0 as we've been expecting?( 4.4 was just mentioned in the nov. road and track or automobile mag. i forget which). early on in the speculation 4.4 was tossed around as was 5.5ltrs. for the m5/m6, numbers that were consistent with the smaller sibling being an "8 10ths" derivative of the v10,of course the v10 ended up only displaceing 5.0 so does that dictate that the 8cyl. will displace 4.0?).

It was Automobile you read it in (p. 22). I haven't read anything about maximum capacity for the design, but likely there is a little tolerance to enlarge for flexibility. If there is an upcoming C63 at 450hp, it would make sense for BMW to stay in that ballpark. Do we NEED that much power? Well, probably not, but it would sure be fun, as long as they keep the weight down.

Well the current motor started out as a 2.3L inline 6, so there was a bit of room for growth.

Originally Posted by Pinecone

Well the current motor started out as a 2.3L inline 6, so there was a bit of room for growth.

The S54 uses a different block than the previous iterations.

Originally Posted by Pinecone

Gearing. The 335 will NOT be quicker than the M3. They will cripple the gearing like they did for the S54 powered MZ3s (lowered rear ratio from 3.23 to 3.15 versus 3.62 in E46 M3).

Engine in E90 M3 will be a rev monster, the current M5 has a 8250 red line, the 335 will not be able to come anywhere close.

Turbo lag.

Love the sound of turbos

I wouldnt mind the increase 4.4l, hopefully less complexity and decrease chance for the engine grenading plus more torque. AMG has gone that route.

but given BMW fascination for hp per liter then 4.0l displacement would be sufficient. I would think they would at least match the current m3's 104hp per liter which would give 416 hp.

Originally Posted by Jeff_DML

I wouldnt mind the increase 4.4l, hopefully less complexity and decrease chance for the engine grenading plus more torque. AMG has gone that route.

but given BMW fascination for hp per liter then 4.0l displacement would be sufficient. I would think they would at least match the current m3's 104hp per liter which would give 416 hp.

Well, since it's based on the 5.0 liter M5 V10, if you just take 80% of its 503hp you get 402. Still plenty.

Originally Posted by Pinecone

Gearing. The 335 will NOT be quicker than the M3. They will cripple the gearing like they did for the S54 powered MZ3s (lowered rear ratio from 3.23 to 3.15 versus 3.62 in E46 M3).

Engine in E90 M3 will be a rev monster, the current M5 has a 8250 red line, the 335 will not be able to come anywhere close.

Turbo lag.

i did not say that the 335 would be quicker! the question was would it be desireable to increase the displacement to 4.4ltrs. in the m3 to FURTHER distance it from the 335! your supposed counter-point that the m3 would be a rev-monster actually reinforced my point that across the rev-range the two models would be closer in performance than their ultimate drag-strip times will reflect. you are of course correct about the gearing.

Originally Posted by GregW in Oregon

It was Automobile you read it in (p. 22). I haven't read anything about maximum capacity for the design, but likely there is a little tolerance to enlarge for flexibility. If there is an upcoming C63 at 450hp, it would make sense for BMW to stay in that ballpark. Do we NEED that much power? Well, probably not, but it would sure be fun, as long as they keep the weight down.

that rumored c63 would be insane in a straight line, even the expected c55 with about 380hp is gonna be seriously fast and torquey.