RC F teaser Brochure
05-12-14, 01:35 PM
#16
they already showed the M3/M4 torque curve and it drops off pretty hard after 5500. Turbo cant make power everywhere have to balance lag and high end power. Another reason I dont like turbos. This new 5.0 should scream. Some reviews of the new M complain that it doesnt sound exciting anymore, it even have speakers to generate sound. This torque curve is good for daily driving but not optimal for the track
Last edited by 4TehNguyen; 05-12-14 at 01:41 PM.
05-12-14, 01:47 PM
#17
Lexus Test Driver
I wonder why it shows 8000 rpm when the M4 engine rev cut off is at 7600 rpm?
At 7500 rpm, the M4 engine is producing only 70% of its peak torque so this engine must be unexciting to rev past 6500 rpm since it is completely out of puff and out for lunch after 6000 rpm. Who would call this a proper high-revving engine?
This is just BMW trying to make it high-revving just for the sake of putting a high redline. It is completely pointless. I don't know why they even bothered to make the engine rev past 6500 rpm since it is plummeting hard after 6500 rpm (loses almost 100 ft-lbs in a matter of 1500 rpm only).
At 7500 rpm, the M4 engine is producing only 70% of its peak torque so this engine must be unexciting to rev past 6500 rpm since it is completely out of puff and out for lunch after 6000 rpm. Who would call this a proper high-revving engine?
This is just BMW trying to make it high-revving just for the sake of putting a high redline. It is completely pointless. I don't know why they even bothered to make the engine rev past 6500 rpm since it is plummeting hard after 6500 rpm (loses almost 100 ft-lbs in a matter of 1500 rpm only).
they already showed the M3/M4 torque curve and it drops off pretty hard after 5500. Turbo cant make power everywhere have to balance lag and high end power. Another reason I dont like turbos. This new 5.0 should scream. Some reviews of the new M complain that it doesnt sound exciting anymore, it even have speakers to generate sound. This torque curve is good for daily driving but not optimal for the track
05-12-14, 01:54 PM
#19
Lexus Test Driver
High-revving engines are all about producing the maximum amount of torque at the highest revs. It simply goes against the simplest paradigm of a high-revving engine because it isn't.
There were similar complaints by journalists that the BMW 1M is losing steam after 6000 rpm so they questioned why they needed to put a 7000 rpm redline on it?
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; 05-12-14 at 02:00 PM.
05-12-14, 02:18 PM
#21
Lexus Test Driver
05-12-14, 03:19 PM
#22
2UR-GSE?
From what I remember from Toyota engine naming convention ie wikipedia,
2=2nd generation
UR= engine series, V8
G=performance head with wide-angle valves as opposed to F=economy head with narrow -angle valves( 2GR-FSE)
SE= gasoline D4 direct injection
Compared to the UR V8 in the LS460 : 1UR-FSE
Strangely enough, the 1st generation IS-F engine is also designated 2UR-GSE but the RC-F and IS-F engine are obviously different in terms of hp,torque and fuel economy. Could there be a printing mistake in this preliminary literature?
From what I remember from Toyota engine naming convention ie wikipedia,
2=2nd generation
UR= engine series, V8
G=performance head with wide-angle valves as opposed to F=economy head with narrow -angle valves( 2GR-FSE)
SE= gasoline D4 direct injection
Compared to the UR V8 in the LS460 : 1UR-FSE
Strangely enough, the 1st generation IS-F engine is also designated 2UR-GSE but the RC-F and IS-F engine are obviously different in terms of hp,torque and fuel economy. Could there be a printing mistake in this preliminary literature?
As to the engine, we know everything about it except for specs... it is new series of engines with atkinson cycle.
05-12-14, 03:25 PM
#23
05-12-14, 05:16 PM
#24
I wonder why it shows 8000 rpm when the M4 engine rev cut off is at 7600 rpm?
At 7500 rpm, the M4 engine is producing only 70% of its peak torque so this engine must be unexciting to rev past 6500 rpm since it is completely out of puff and out for lunch after 6000 rpm. Who would call this a proper high-revving engine?
This is just BMW trying to make it high-revving just for the sake of putting a high redline. It is completely pointless. I don't know why they even bothered to make the engine rev past 6500 rpm since it is plummeting hard after 6500 rpm (loses almost 100 ft-lbs in a matter of 1500 rpm only).
At 7500 rpm, the M4 engine is producing only 70% of its peak torque so this engine must be unexciting to rev past 6500 rpm since it is completely out of puff and out for lunch after 6000 rpm. Who would call this a proper high-revving engine?
This is just BMW trying to make it high-revving just for the sake of putting a high redline. It is completely pointless. I don't know why they even bothered to make the engine rev past 6500 rpm since it is plummeting hard after 6500 rpm (loses almost 100 ft-lbs in a matter of 1500 rpm only).
05-12-14, 05:53 PM
#25
Pole Position
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, but the torque is falling hard. After 6500 rpm, the engine will feel like it is completely out of steam and out for lunch (similar to the F10 M5). The powerband of that engine resides from 4500 - 6500 rpm. After that, it is a complete waste.
High-revving engines are all about producing the maximum amount of torque at the highest revs. It simply goes against the simplest paradigm of a high-revving engine because it isn't.
There were similar complaints by journalists that the BMW 1M is losing steam after 6000 rpm so they questioned why they needed to put a 7000 rpm redline on it?
High-revving engines are all about producing the maximum amount of torque at the highest revs. It simply goes against the simplest paradigm of a high-revving engine because it isn't.
There were similar complaints by journalists that the BMW 1M is losing steam after 6000 rpm so they questioned why they needed to put a 7000 rpm redline on it?
And to think that 'M' engineer talked about how it's a "racecar/racing" engine.
05-12-14, 06:04 PM
#26
Lexus Test Driver
Yeah, that is what I was concluding from the dyno. The meat of the power band is between 4500 rpm and 6500 rpm. Based on how quick the torque curve is plummeting, it is actually wiser to shift at around 6000 - 6400 rpm and fall back to 5000 rpm than to shift at 7000 rpm where these is far less torque. It would actually be slower if the driver shifts at 7000 - 7500 rpm
05-12-14, 06:34 PM
#27
Well, there are a couple of shortfalls. It might be spectacularly powerful, but the new engine lacks engagement and sounds disappointingly flat at certain points in the rev range. For owners of the fourth-generation M3 Coupe, this will blunt its charm, but only until they discover the gains in driveability and stunning in-gear qualities brought on by its strapping torque. What it lacks in overall excitement, it more than makes up for in everyday driving appeal. Darn right, you want it . . .
Last edited by 4TehNguyen; 05-12-14 at 06:37 PM.
05-13-14, 02:00 AM
#28
Pole Position
So basically the RC-F engine is more of a track engine than the M4's?
Yeah, so much for BMW's engineers' hyperbole.
Yeah, so much for BMW's engineers' hyperbole.
05-13-14, 06:18 AM
#29
Lexus Test Driver
RC-F fulfills that very nicely. The M4 engine is just a normal turbo engine that makes the major chunk of all its torque in the midrange and completely runs out of steam after 6000 rpm. That is why the "in-gear" (low speed, tall gear) acceleration of M4 would be good and also part-throttle it will feel very peppy in the midrange.
However, BMW marketing was defiant and wanted to really use the mantra of "race bred" so they gave it a completely unnecessary 7600 rpm redline when it should have been no more than 7000 rpm. They wanted to market it as "high-revving" so they made pistons that can handle the engine speed, but not designed to flow well at high rpms for usable power (being a turbo engine).
I hope all magazines shift M4 at 7600 rpm in RC-F comparisons so that the M4 turns in much slower numbers.
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; 05-13-14 at 07:33 AM.
05-13-14, 07:18 AM
#30
Lexus Champion
Wow! 477 PS is 471 HP and happening a t 7100 rpm , which means 349 ft-lbs @7100 rpm or 90% of its peak torque maintained till redline 
That means, the RC-F has a very long torque curve that keeps surging upwards till the redline. That is awesome
p.s. Did Lexus not say the peak torque would be over 393 ft-lbs?
That means, the RC-F has a very long torque curve that keeps surging upwards till the redline. That is awesome
p.s. Did Lexus not say the peak torque would be over 393 ft-lbs?