37 Votes

Who is next to follow BMW's lead into turbo technology?

Agent001 submitted on 7/27/2007 Official Bell & Ross Timestamp: 1:36:55 PM

52 user comments | Category: Spy News | Source: www.autospies.com

Tag Links: 2010 Infiniti, BMW, Turbo

Thanks to a great tip from an internal mole, the Spies were first to announce that BMW was going to jump back in and start producing turbo's in their mainstream product line, almost two years before it actually was announced.

And boy has that decision paid off for them!

It’s put them years ahead of the competition.

But the Spies have obtained exclusive information that they won’t be able to rest for long.

Arch rival Infiniti’s engineers are already hard at work, trying to reverse engineer their magic and should have a response for the 2010 model year.

No further details were available from our source but we will stay close to this tip and update you as we get more information.

Remember where you heard it first!

Who is next to follow BMW's lead into turbo technology?

About the Author

The way a man treats his car is how he treats himself.
— Agent001 (View Profile)

User Comments

I was referring to the new breed of 'lagless' turbo's

001
— Agent001 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 2:25:53 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3

Since 001 give credit to BMW about the turbo, maybe BMW should give credit to Mitsubishi for helping them.

BMW is using their turbo.

— Brembo (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 2:40:20 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 7

So True! Mitsu's turbo technology is used everywhere!
— M35MT (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 3:47:56 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4

Lagless turbo is the key here. Turbo has been around since the turn of the century, and BMW went away from it because of performance lag. Since the development of the proper metallurgy, they engine can sustain much higher tolerances necessary for both zero lag and high fuel economy to occur at the same time.

thats why this engine is special. 34miles to the gallon at 75mph on the highway. 20.2 mph overall.
— Qwazywabbit (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 5:38:35 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

Qwazy, youre completely correct, I average about 30 miles a gallon at highway speeds averaging 80mph. Im truly amazed how good the gas mileage is, 350+ miles between fill-ups. And this great mileage comes when youre still driving the car like a hooligan.
— Chip (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 6:56:57 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

I want supercharged, not turbo.. I never did trust turbos as their bearings operate in extreme temperatures and early turbos were prone to failure for that reason. Separate cooling systems for turbo bearings help a lot but manufacturers' brochures don't get into the details of their turbo technology so customers don't really know what they are getting -- auto industry marketing needs a huge overhaul. They need to learn how to properly communicate technical improvements to their market. Right now I'd rather have a larger normally aspirated engine than a small high-revving turbo.
— EnnNorak (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 2:00:08 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

The reason why BMW switched back to turbo's on their petrol cars is because of the fuel consumption and torque. With turbo's smaller displacements can be achieved without killing the performance. BMW could up the current 330i engine with 272 horsepower easily to 3.2 litres and 300+ hp if they wanted it. Making a twin-turbo set-up with direct injection, valvetronic, vanos, etc.. is much harder.

Alright BMW isn't perfect - that makes them only more human - there were some oil cooling issues in the beginning but that's it. Other than that the 3.0 TT has been praised as the best engine in its class and of its time. Numerous engine awards prove this as well as many editors state that no other big petrol V6 (Infiniti 3.5 and 3.7, Lexus 3.5, etc..) has the same grunt, torque, refinement, smoothness or fuel consumption.
— SevorbeupstryIsBack (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 4:41:36 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

sevor- Very true. Except one thing; weight was one of the largest factors in their decision. They stated themselves that the same power from a n/a engine would add more weight than the turbo setup they have now.
— henbmw (View Profile)

Posted on 7/30/2007 9:58:42 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

I think it's fair to say that most high-end brands have excellent turbo technology. I'm thinking of Audi, Mercedes, BMW, Porsche and amongst mainstream brands, definitely Mitsubishi and Subaru.
— Bill (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 1:58:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

"definetley mitsubishi and subaru." yep, all thx to their rally history.
— Htay7500 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 10:28:48 PM | | Votes: 2

Mitsu and Subaru still have a lot of turbo lag on their high-boost models. I remember a test of Top Gear where they tested a Evo 8 FQ400 (or so) and it had HUGE turbo lag.
— SevorbeupstryIsBack (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 4:43:45 PM | | Votes: 1

yep, its sux tht you can only reduce it instead. it fabulous in the 335 though.
— Htay7500 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 6:29:38 PM | | Votes: 1

BMW's lead in turbo technology don't make me laugh, if any body has a lead its gotta be nissan. They have been producing turbocharged cars sinds the 70's.
— STJ88 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 2:00:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

And BMW has had a turbocharged performance car since 1972, the 2002 Turbo. So what does this mean? Absolutely nothing. I am sure Nissan makes a good turbocharged engine, but class-leading? I don't think so.
— Bill (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 2:09:42 PM | | Votes: -1

I would agree that they do not lead in the development of the turbos themselves. However, in the application and production of Turbocharged engines, they have proven with one brilliant engine that they are ahead of most other brands.
— henbmw (View Profile)

Posted on 7/30/2007 10:01:46 AM | | Votes: 1

Ford twin force w/ E85.
— Bmw8ter (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 2:23:13 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

The turbocharger was invented by Swiss engineer Alfred Buchi, who had been working on steam turbines. His patent for the internal combustion turbocharger was applied for in 1905. Diesel ships and locomotives with turbochargers began appearing in the 1920s.

One of the first applications of a turbocharger to a non-Diesel engine came when General Electric engineer, Sanford Moss attached a turbo to a V12 Liberty aircraft engine. The engine was tested at Pikes Peak in Colorado at 14,000 feet to demonstrate that it could eliminate the power losses usually experienced in internal combustion engines as a result of altitude.

Turbochargers were first used in production aircraft engines in the 1930s before World War II. The primary purpose behind most aircraft-based applications was to increase the altitude at which the airplane can fly, by compensating for the lower atmospheric pressure present at high altitude. Aircraft such as the Lockheed P-38 Lightning, Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress and B-29 Superfortress all used exhaust driven "turbo-superchargers" to increase high altitude engine power. It is important to note that the majority of turbosupercharged aircraft engines used both a gear-driven centrifugal type supercharger and a turbocharger.

Turbo-Diesel trucks were produced in Europe and America (notably by Cummins) after 1949. The turbocharger hit the automobile world in 1952 when Fred Agabashian qualified for pole position at the Indianapolis 500 and led for 100 miles before tire shards disabled the blower.

The Corvair's innovative turbocharged flat-6 engine; The turbo, located at top right, feeds pressurized air into the engine through the chrome T-tube visible spanning the engine from left to right.The first production turbocharged automobile engines came from General Motors. The A-body Oldsmobile Cutlass Jetfire and Chevrolet Corvair Monza Spyder were both fitted with turbochargers in 1962. The Oldsmobile is often recognized as the first, since it came out a few months earlier than the Corvair. Its Turbo Jetfire was a 215 in³ (3.5 L) V8, while the Corvair engine was either a 145 in³ (2.3 L)(1962-63) or a 164 in³ (2.7 L) (1964-66) flat-6. Both of these engines were abandoned within a few years, and GM's next turbo engine came more than ten years later.

— autopro (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 2:27:07 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Exactly. I also believe the first car with variable turbo geometry was American. Something with Garett.
— SevorbeupstryIsBack (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 4:52:28 PM | | Votes: 0

cummins = Chrysler/Dodge. lots of dodges heavy-duty diesel engines found in the rams are from them.

— Htay7500 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 6:34:41 PM | | Votes: 1

The 2.0 TFSI engine has the exact same technology and came out 2 (or more) years earlier.
— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 2:39:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

Ok I think it is fair enough to say that BMW's latest turbo engine uses some nifty technology and achieved things not achieved in most turbo cars of past.
-------------------------------------------------------
Onto everyones BS.

"Since 001 give credit to BMW about the turbo, maybe BMW should give credit to Mitsubishi for helping them.

BMW is using their turbo."

And they could just as well been using other turbo manufacturers units, and more than likely achieved similar results. I am sure they had a good reason for choosing mitsu, I assume quality.

"BMW's lead in turbo technology don't make me laugh, if any body has a lead its gotta be nissan. They have been producing turbocharged cars sinds the 70's."

If you had any clue regarding turbo technology you would surely not reference Nissan. Although I love Nissan their most notable turbocharged engines the RB, and SR are simply mediocre in overall turbo progression. Sure they product great HP, and are very reliable, but beyond that they are just good turbo engines. Not even a well tuned SR produces the kind of mileage that BMW is getting.
-------------------------------------------------------
Everyone has been turbo charging since it became the thing to do. Some stuck with it and made great cars with great power plants, and some steered clear and came back with great cars and great power plants. I don't blame BMW for waiting. The engine management available off the shelf these days allow the complex maps, unique controls, and split second math all needed to make a turbo car without the lag.

Josh
— d1sinfo (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 3:37:16 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4

You may want to check out the twin turbo supra back in 1995. It accelerate the same or faster then 335i. And that was more than 10 years ago.

Oh did I mention that the supra had an line six engine with twin turbo as well. Interesting.

Twin turbo was thought of before BMW 335i.
— Brembo (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 8:28:40 PM | | Votes: 3

the tt supra dates back to the mk3, 20yrs ago where the turbo supra was made. the 7m-gte. some of the most durable engines to modify nxt to nissans RB26DETT. both can top 1000hp with simple mods. so this dates back further where the last turbo bmw was made.
— Htay7500 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 10:39:55 PM | | Votes: 3

Oh brother, don't start with the whole 1,000hp Supra on stock interals, deal. That's been played out.
— Bmw8ter (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 1:54:07 AM | | Votes: -1

I see you ass hats totally missed the point. The point isn't power, or speed. I know all about the rb, and 7m. Fantastic engines packaged in cool cars. Great low ends, and huge HP can be extracted.... Great stuff.

That being said your mom was hot 20 years ago, shes your mom now, and shes wrinkly, ugly, and overpriced... ohh wait nevermind thats a supra thats overpriced these days. We are not comparing what has been done we are comparing what is being done.

2007 BMW 335 Sedan
Max Horsepower: 5800 rpm
Horsepower: 300 hp
Torque: 300 ft-lbs.
Manual: 19 mpg / 29 mpg
Automatic: : 20 mpg / 29 mpg

Actual as seen by edmunds during test:
"For the record, during a desert freeway assault to Vegas at an average speed we don't care to print, the 335i achieved 25.9 mpg, compared to a 29-mpg EPA highway rating. With a lot of city and freeway stop-and-go thrown in, the overall average drops to 20.3 — just above the 20-mpg EPA city rating. With less lead in the shoes, the EPA figures actually seem attainable."

2007 Infiniti G35
Max Horsepower: 6800 rpm
Horsepower: 306 hp
Torque: 268 ft-lbs.

Actual as seen by edmunds during long term test:
Best Fuel Economy: 22.4 mpg
Worst Fuel Economy: 17.2 mpg

I believe it is safe to say that everyone LOVES the VQ. It has won awards, revived the Z, and replaces the RB at least in Japan. So when I read review after review which praises the BMW's twin turbo in tests where the VQ is tested by its side, my ears perk. I was not pro a twin turbo BMW engine, but now that it is out, and reviews are in, I can't wait to see what the future holds. It sure as hell has proved itself as a contender. Better MPG, better performance. More money, but thats BMW.

Josh
— d1sinfo (View Profile)

Posted on 7/30/2007 3:54:11 PM | | Votes: 1

surprise, surprise
— dwatson (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 5:48:44 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Brembo you mean the Supra from "93" to 97 (MK4),Yes the 2JZ-GTE is still one of the best engines even today with all the technology,many people have got 1000hp reliable horsepower on a stock block,with only bolt on modds...
— 2JZSoarer (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 9:15:08 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

Yeah. I think thats it.

I just wanted to say that twin turbo isn't nothing new. BMW isn't the end all be all car manufacturer. I love the 335i but I wouldn't declared it as the fore front of turbo technology. Turbo charge has not change much other than being more reliable - maybe?
— Brembo (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 9:39:19 PM | | Votes: 2

Seems supra and 335i are in different categories.
— dayday (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 9:26:55 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3

What''s the different in performance number?

So one is label luxury and the other is a sport car. Which one?
— Brembo (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 9:34:34 PM | | Votes: 2

For Infiniti to develop this twin turbo technology to match BMW shouldn't be that difficult at all. They are almost done developing the imminent high performance 2008 Nissan GT-R which will be using twin turbos on (most likely) the 3.7L engine from the G37 coupe. The performance is supposed to rival the Porsche 911 Turbo's. All they would have to do is tone it down somewhat for the Infiniti cars.
— Dave (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 10:04:52 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3

BMW makes new gen. turbo engines = big success

Nissan follows = big bust!
— ThierryHenry14 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 10:30:42 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

are you saying nissan made the 335s turbo?
— Htay7500 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/27/2007 10:56:03 PM | | Votes: 1

what sense do you make? I suppose you don't see sales figures for 335?
— ThierryHenry14 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 11:30:04 PM | | Votes: -1

BMW started as the first manufactur in the beginning og the 70s by making the 2002 turbo, later i think in 1979 they maked the 745 i turbo. In the 80s and after they started with diesel turbos.
— MPowerDK (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 3:50:40 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

530 to be exact.
— Htay7500 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 8:18:18 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

I really don't think the term "arch-rival" really applies to Infinity. Mercedes Benz is an arch-rival to BMW. Infinity is more of an annoying upstart thats recently been doing well for itself.
— komododave (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 2:15:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

So here I am posting my second comment on this web site, this is very exciting. Agent 001, i do not know who you are but your title is very misleading. if you refer to turbo alone, you are just trying to start a flame war and what is the point?
Now if you refer to turbo lag free technology, this is different, but than your title is completely wrong.
let me explain, besides Mitsubishi back in the 90's who tried direct injection, nobody made the turbo and the direct injection work together but Audi, first with R8 racing car in the late 90's and then in a passenger vehicle in 2005 with the Audi A4 2.0. when that car came out, the press was raving about the absence of lag. So it seems to me that BMW followed and copied Audi, so did Mazda with the speed6 and so did GM with their ecotec engine. However rare are the engines pushing more torque than hps like the A4 does, even BMW, that you seem to like so much, was not able to do it with 2 turbos on the 335. great car nonetheless.

I can see that there are very passionate people on this web site and this is great, but ignorance seems to be also running wild.

So let's all be very civilized and polite and let's try to state facts rather than dreams and nonsenses.
— 1evlaudi (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 3:07:18 PM | | Votes: 0

BMW had europe's first turbocharged production car in the form of the 2002 turbo in 1973, so they're not hoping on the turbo bandwagon like some people on here are making out.
— Kinger (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2007 4:15:20 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

What's the word on maintenance costs associated with turbo's these days? It seems turbos have always added a layer of complexity, and are costly to replace. Are turbos really a good investment for the long term?
— kdawg (View Profile)

Posted on 7/29/2007 2:40:41 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

1. No turbos are "lagless" no matter how much BMW will attempt you brainwash you.
2. BMW is certainly not the leader in turbo technology
— MeanVulcan (View Profile)

Posted on 7/30/2007 12:38:47 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

1. BMW isn't trying to convince anyone. Apparently the motoring journalist are conspiring to convince the world that BMW's turbo setup is close to lagless.

2. I would say that BMW's latest entry into the turbo petrol category is certainly leading in many aspects. If not that engine then which engine is leading?

— d1sinfo (View Profile)

Posted on 7/30/2007 3:58:03 PM | | Votes: 0

1. BMW advertises this on car magazines, so, yes, BMW is trying to convince the public that their turbo is different.

2. "leading in many aspects"??? They took an existing technology and made a slight adjustment. This is hardly a technological leader. Toyota does this everyday. They take existing, proven technology, they market it and call it their own. This can hardly be called a LEADER, no matter how you look at it. Please list these MANY aspects, as I'm curious.
— MeanVulcan (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2007 12:30:07 PM | | Votes: 1

I'm wondering why is it taking Infiniti so long to respond. Three years is a long time in this industry. I'm predicting BMW will use a little Alpina magic to reset the bar once everyone jumps on the TT bandwagon. Can anyone say supercharge 335i in 2010.
— BM3W (View Profile)

Posted on 7/30/2007 5:41:45 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

Add your Comments

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters): [img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent001.myautospies.com/images/sample.jpg[/img]

Email Me When Someone Replies To My Message

Who is next to follow BMW's lead into turbo technology?

About the Author

User Comments

Add your Comments

Submit an article

Photo Galleries

Cars

Autoshows

Latest Articles