How much would you pay for the 4.4L from the factory?

[mkoesel]

Just curious how much people would pay beyond current MSRP.

I am talking about the S65B44 in the GTS, BTW. Not the S63B44 in the X5 M, X6 M, and upcoming F10 M5.

[e46e92love]

Well with other stroker's going for 22-30k, I would pay, (and I will be in the market for such an engine in the next 12 months) 35k-40k. I know, sounds crazy, but I figure having an engine that is designed by BMW, and will work well with the rest of the car, is worth a premium.

I'm sure PG would argue that the RD46 is as every bit as good as the S65B44, and that I'm crazy to spend that on an engine, but to have an engine that BMW would help trouble shoot and fix if something went wrong and is designed to run with the transmissions and everything else from the car would be nice. Not to mention all ECU tuning issues would be cast to the side as well. Now ask me how much I would pay if it came with a flat-plane crank

Course, the car would not be a daily driver at that point, just a weekend car/track car, and obviously I would really have to spend some SERIOUS time at the track making sure I could actually take advantage of such a awesome machine

Cheers,
e46e92

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by e46e92love

Well with other stroker's going for 22-30k, I would pay, (and I will be in the market for such an engine in the next 12 months) 35k-40k.

So you'd pay $100k+ for the car? Sounds like you'd be a candidate for the GTS then (if it were offered in the US). You get the motor plus a bunch of other modifications, although you lose a lot of the creature comforts that make the M3 practical to begin with.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by PencilGeek

Back to the OP's question: I think I'd pay about $5k for the 4.4L motor, and I think that's about what BMW would charge. There's nothing inherently more expensive about producing 4.4L vs. the factory 4.0L motor. The price difference would just be for R&D, not actual manufacturing costs.

That seems about right to me too. Although its hard to guestimate since there is a lot involved - not just with testing but with certifying the motor as well. Also, I think they'd have to make it the standard motor (rather than optional) to make it worthwhile too. So, the base price of the car would go up and naturally that would probably narrow the market a bit.

[duk]

3-4k more

[330CIZHP]

Between $5 - $8K more.

I thoroughly believe the 4.4 Liter V8 with 450 - 460 HP and 320 - 340 ft-lbs of torque is what is needed for the M3 to be the class leader in the future till 2013 or so since its handling is already the best, but I believe due to a better balance between power and handling in the C63 performance package, it is actually faster than the M3. Not to mention, RS5 will be faster than the M3 as well I think even with the competition package. Again, not due to cornering speeds, but more due to the back straight speeds.

They can put 480 - 490 HP in the GTS or whatever aside from all the suspension and stuff. I don't care much about it anyway.

[Technic]

I would pay... nothing. BMW should have come up with at least a 4.2L motor from the get go, not so much for hp but for torque.

Something is wrong when a 135i has more torque than an M car.

[BRDHNTR]

I'm surprised they didn't try to sneak this motor into a new package. Sure everyone will say that BMW never did that before, but they never had twin-turbo engines in M vehicles, M powered SUVs excuse me SAVs, or M powered AWD vehicles. There are a lot of firsts happening at M, so nothing surprises me anymore.

[adc]

Originally Posted by PencilGeek

To be honest, the pistons in the RS46 come from Mahle from the same assembly line as the factory pistons. They are factory pistons. The crank and rods in the RS46 are far superior to the factory crank and rods in every respect possible. The crank and rods in the RS46 are race quality parts. So that leaves the ECU. After driving the ESS ECU on the stroker, I'd say unequivocally that it was better than the factory ECU tune that came in my original car. So I'd say the whole RS46 package works better together than the factory package ever did. There's no evidence to suggest that BMW would get the 4.4L motor and tuning any better than what they did on the 4.0L motor (with all of the limp modes and cold start problems people are now experiencing. And that's not even talking about the DCT software fiascos at BMW.)

Perhaps true.


On the other hand BMW usually offers a 6 year / 100k mile warranty for CPO vehicles, and similar extended warranties for their new cars. Can you really vouch that the RD46 motor will still be there 100,000 miles from now? I am unfamiliar with the terms of the RD warranty (if any) and it may turn out that they do indeed offer such peace of mind - but somehow I doubt it.

Not really trying to stir trouble here, just offering a different perspective.

[r53s65e90]

((2 * 58 000 * ((450 / 420) - 1)) / 3) + ((1 * 58 000 * ((340 / 295) - 1)) / 3) + 1 500 = 7 211.0573

Assumptions: 1) MSRP of 4.0l = 58000 2) M3 GTS made up for RD 100% 3) Peak torque is 340lbft peak power is 450 4) Peak power matter 66% to me 5) 1500 feel better ///Marketing premium

What happened to the "ideal displacement per cylinder of 500cc"?

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by r53s65e90

What happened to the "ideal displacement per cylinder of 500cc"?

Well, BMW decided against a 4.5L V9 engine, so 550cc per cylinder had to suffice.

[adc]

Originally Posted by r53s65e90

What happened to the "ideal displacement per cylinder of 500cc"?

Went out the window awhile ago. 1996+ E36 M3, E39 M5 and E46 M3 didn't have it.

[Finnegan]

Originally Posted by Technic

I would pay... nothing. BMW should have come up with at least a 4.2L motor from the get go, not so much for hp but for torque.

Something is wrong when a 135i has more torque than an M car.

Good point and answer! I'll retract my earlier answer and resubmit this one.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by BRDHNTR

I'm surprised they didn't try to sneak this motor into a new package. Sure everyone will say that BMW never did that before, but they never had twin-turbo engines in M vehicles, M powered SUVs excuse me SAVs, or M powered AWD vehicles. There are a lot of firsts happening at M, so nothing surprises me anymore.

Those things you mentioned all had very strong business cases, and will probably be very profitable for BMW.

Its not so immediately clear that BMW can make any money by putting the 4.4L engine in the car, unfortunately.

[Griz]

Originally Posted by e46e92love

but to have an engine that BMW would help trouble shoot and fix if something went wrong and is designed to run with the transmissions and everything else from the car would be nice. Not to mention all ECU tuning issues would be cast to the side as well.

If the dealerships won't program the motorsport seats, I imagine it will be difficult to get them to work on a swapped engine.

Edit: Or are we working off of the assumption that the 4.4 would be an option from the factory (i.e. not a swap)?

[King Tut]

I would pay another $3000 for the 4.4L engine. I don't believe it costs BMW any more to build that engine than the 4.0L engine.

[Green///Hell]

Originally Posted by King Tut

I would pay another $3000 for the 4.4L engine. I don't believe it costs BMW any more to build that engine than the 4.0L engine.

True and we don't even know the gains pros vs cons on a simple 4.4l change
Some more torque and more fuel consumption, but in all honesty we don't know the full specs to determine the capacity of the engine let alone the tuning

[cap_freez]

5k$ max. But I do wonder how the car would perform if someone tried to fit them with the X6M engines...

[Trier Germany]

5K max and thats pushing it.

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

So you'd pay $100k+ for the car? Sounds like you'd be a candidate for the GTS then (if it were offered in the US). You get the motor plus a bunch of other modifications, although you lose a lot of the creature comforts that make the M3 practical to begin with.

I would have been.....I run my own company and after many years of sweat, tears and not much money, things are exploding, just as we had forecasted. So the whole time I couldn't bring myself to order an e92 //M, I was hoping that I could justify all of my agonizing over not having one with "hey, when you are REALLY comfortable, you should have not just enough for an //M, but any CSL-type that they hopefully bring to the U.S. this time around". So imagine my disappointment, but not surprise, when the GTS couldn't be brought here. Its a big reason why I have followed PG and KT so closely along with their problems and success, because a stroker was the next best option.

That being said, my quote of what I would be willing to pay is based on having to PAY FOR THE ENTIRE ENGINE AFTER ALREADY PURCHASING THE CAR WITH THE S65 IN IT, if you are asking me how much would I be willing to pay additionally if when I ordered my car they would drop it in her instead of the S65, then that is a whole different question....I thought you were asking how much we would pay just for the engine.

However, I live on the east coast, so many of the options the West Coast guys have in terms of not just stroker, but in the tuning software (if you choose not to go with the maker of the stroker as PG has chosen to do) just are much more difficult for me because of shipping times and everything I really would lose the car for months and months.

Let me ask this, anyone have a "educated" guess as to what the invoice cost for the S65 is and what the invoice cost for the S65B44 might be?

Cheers,
e46e92

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by PencilGeek

To be honest, the pistons in the RS46 come from Mahle from the same assembly line as the factory pistons. They are factory pistons. The crank and rods in the RS46 are far superior to the factory crank and rods in every respect possible. The crank and rods in the RS46 are race quality parts.

You are assuming that the pistons, rod and crank in the S65B44 would not be on par if not superior to the ones in the S65 and those in the RS46; I assume that as RDSport upgraded the internals on the their stroker so would BMW on the S65B44. But again, perhaps that is a dangerous assumption on my part.....

One important point: does the S65B44 retains the same redline and peak power points as the S65, or lower (peak power) while maintaining the same redline as the RS46 does? Not saying lowering the max HP point is a bad thing if redline stays the same, as many would argue that would yield better acceleration because you can actually shift right past the peak power for better acceleration, such as in the 911s, i.e. GT3 with 7800 max HP, but 8400 redline.


Cheers,
e46e92

[330CIZHP]

Originally Posted by rockrboy

5k$ max. But I do wonder how the car would perform if someone tried to fit them with the X6M engines...

Too big, too heavy, only 7000 rpm redline and sounds like a vacuum cleaner.