tekstar

I think this blog is just saying that BMW is testing out new motors for 2010, not the current 1 series being produced now.

11k rpms?? sounds like fun

Just curious, what other cars out there are high revving? I know the RS4 has an 8250 redline, but what else is out there?

Triple-H

You meant to say already an overweight best?

protokultur

Exactly, if the car still weighs 3300 lbs then what is the point. Take off 1000 lbs and then you've got something cool.

Crazy S2000

Where did you hear that nonsense? As long as the engine is taken care of (valve adjustments) then it will last a long time.

There are MANY that are easily over 100k already without issues.

JonBoy

That rumor doesn't make much sense since the motor doesn't make much sense (unless it's a very small motor, ie < 1.5L displacement).

You go to high revs to make up for a paucity of torque and/or displacement - you make it breathe well up top and let the revs give you the power. You also typically run fairly high compression and run shorter gearing.

You go to turbo to make up for a decrease in low-end torque or small displacement and you run low boost and moderate compression or high boost and low compression. You do not typically rev that high with a turbo motor (most are 7000 rpm or less in production vehicles).

This engine is at odds with itself. Twin turbos on a small motor with high revs sounds like a race engine (think older F1 car or Champ Car). Even the old E30 M3 with a normally aspirated 4-banger revved to just 8000 rpm (200 hp). Add boost and you're playing with fire (literally).

With the twin turbos, this theoretical motor doesn't need to rev and it will definitely be a nightmare to keep reliable if they boost it and run the revs that high.

This is a very complicated solution to a question that hasn't been asked. Ergo, I'm fairly positive this motor is purely speculation and will never see production.

duboseq

With the high revs and depending on gearing and powerpand it could still haul ass.

Vanishing Point

Think Deutsche Tourenwagen Masters (German Touring car Masters) Championship.

Elistan

Assuming N/A, 11k rpm and 220 hp, the engine would probably be about 115 lb-ft of torque and 1.5 liters assuming street-legal trim.

That'd work if you were racing in a class that limited you to 1.5 liters (for example, the Toyota engine used in the Formula Atlantic series - 1600cc, 240hp at 9500rpm) but I don't see the point in a street car.

HankookS2K

yea but i just couldnt tell people i have a twin turbo 4 cylinder with only 260 hp no matter how fast it is

i like saying we have a 4 cylinder n/a with 240

but who knows, the powerband could be REALLY nice and do pretty well, but if they put it in the 1 series.....power to weight ratio is what they gotta be worried about now.

JonBoy

The output numbers don't really make sense. Turbos give you torque down low but rarely do they breathe well up top unless they're fairly small (and these should be). So, torque will taper up top...but even a normally aspirated motor should make well over 200 hp at 11,000 rpm.

Let's compare to a 1.6L motor that has direct injection and is turbocharged (think JCW Mini Cooper S) - it makes 207 hp and 192 ft-lbs at peak.

192 ft-lbs is available to 5600 rpm, which roughly corresponds to the peak power output. Let's say torque tapers off to 150 ft-lbs (22% drop) after that. Even then, at 11K rpm, you'd still make 314 hp. If torque drops to 125 ft-lbs (35% drop), you'd still make 262 hp.

To be at only 200 hp at 11,000 rpm, the torque would have to be a measly 95 ft-lbs (which is ridiculous - less than half the peak torque of the motor). That corresponds more to a modern normally aspirated motor that is about 1.3L in size!

Doesn't add up, at all, unless they're practically using a modified motorcycle engine (1000cc) and even those bikes typically make 70-75 ft-lbs at the wheels (80 ft-lbs at the crank, give or take).

I think too much...