RickF1

I just read in the new Motor Trend rag that the V10 in the new M5 was tested back at the factory at 10,000rpms for a considerable amount of time and the engine held up nicely(pg 145). Of course they had to make the production engine more reliable and what not so they lowered the redline.

My question is, Let's say that BMW made the V10 smaller(around 3 or 4 liters) could they increase the redline to 10,000 for the production engine model? Of course since the M5 is so heavy they probably needed the 5.0 liter engine size. But what if they made a smaller V10 for other cars?

Maybe the new M3 could use a 3.5 liter V10 or something that goes up to 10,000rpm reliably.

I'm not an engineer so I don't know what the hell I'm talking about. But could it be possible to have a reliable 10,000rpm redline in a production car?

Diatomic

Engineering wise, it's probably entirely possible. But economically it's probably not worth it. Basically they'd have to dump a lot of R&D time into creating virtually a whole new engine, only to be used in 1 model.

But I think this is the same story for almost everything. Engineering wise, we can do almost anything. The limiting factor is just economics.

hpark

probably could...decrease stroke and bore to get a 4.0l or so....but i'd take the M5 engine in the M3 happily

derryck

The next generation M3 will have the M5's new V10 with 2 cylinders shaved off and I would be surprised if it has a lower redline than the new M5.

Saab9-3

Nismo Skyline redlines at 10k I believe

protokultur

You don't count bike engines?

Rob Nance

It's simple, for a mass produced car you have a few basic things you want when making the car. Reliability is a big part of that. No matter how great something is engineered, friction will always be your enemy in an engine. They would much rather build a 500hp engine that can run at a lower RPM and make that power, as opposed to a higher revving engine making the same amount. A higher revving engine, especially a non inline, is going to require it to be built to more exacting standards, and will be more suspectible to engine failure further on in life as parts wear and balancing (even minor) issues arise. An engine running at 2000 rpms for 100 hours would see less than half the rotations of a car running at 4000 rpms for 100 hours, and on top of that the higher heat of the car running at 4000rpms would be even more detrimental. We are talking minor stuff here, but in the long run it all adds up.

Basically what you are asking for is an F1 engine. They are 3 liter V-10s that rev in excess of 20k RPM.

So my point is, manufacturers are always going to want a lower revving engine making more power, from a reliability standpoint.

JonBoy

Is any F1 engine at 20K rpm during a race, yet? I thought 19.5K was the highest...

Not trying to prove you wrong, just genuinely wondering.

hellothere

Not too mention the manufacturing costs to build something to those tolerances. Agree with the people who have stated of course it could be done but economics wise BMW decided it was not worth it.

mav

The next gen E90 M3 will have the M5's engine minus 2 cylinders to make it a V8. I have read some rumors on an 9,500 or 10,000 RPM redline...