Video on difference between V6 and straight six engines

[PimTac]

Looks like someone got triggered again. This Motor Trend article is telling. https://www.motortrend.com/cars/bmw/x3/2018/2018-bmw-x3-m40i-long-term-update-3-review/

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted by MCompact

Originally Posted by hatt

Everyone I know loves their BMW too. Right before they trade/turn it in. They're kinda like old Harleys. You know they aren't great machines but you still love them.

I guess that explains why I've kept one BMW for 24 years, another for 12, several for over five years. Each time I sold one it was because I wanted something faster and/or more track capable. But keep telling yourself that they aren't great machines if it helps you sleep at night.

Some are just destined to drive milquetoast machines. I've owned a bunch of BMW's too. I never got rid of one because it was a problem, rather I would get an itch for a different model that was compelling. My oldest is now 9 years old, and has an engine that supposedly is a ticking timebomb. It hasn't skipped a beat yet, but if it does, I can fix it. The newest is a ridiculously fast SUV. The wife loves it. Then there's the BMW Sportbike. I have another one of those on order, but I won't be getting rid of the '15 model.

 

[Skippy722]

Originally Posted by edyvw

If they listened Toyota fan boys, Supra would have 2.7 liter 4cyl with 5 speed automatic.

I think you're being a little generous with that 5 speed... that's WWWAAAYYYYY too complicated. 4 speed will do just fine and last 300k no sweat!

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted by edyvw

Quote

Source?

n the same video that is talking about what you said. It is mind boggling what Toyota is doing, and what kind of marketing assault on intelligence this is. Same video that is talking about project leader of Toyota (forgot his name) and his story behind this. In same video there is this story: Toyota could not develop engine and chassis, joins with BMW, BMW develops engine (far before Supra thing came to life) and than Toyota checks did BMW do things OK? So, Toyota cannot develop engine but will check whether BMW did it correctly? In that same video there is portion where it is stated that BMW ALONE, tested Supra without ANY interference from Toyota. That Toyota people did not set a foot in Supra for six months. Emphasis is that BMW "shared" data with them but in such a way that it sounds like Toyota gave opportunity to BMW to "learn" something with testing their car (which BMW developed) and they will check did student do good job by looking at data. Toyota was too busy apparently developing Camry Sport Edition at the same time. As someone who was involved in testing, I know what BMW did. They excluded them from most important part of development. They got pretty much product that BMW wanted them to get.

I heard no such thing in any of the videos I watched about this, nor have I read any such thing in any of the articles I've read. Toyota absolutely could have developed the engine themselves. They made the LFA almost entirely in-house, including a vastly more challenging V10. The reason they didn't do it was to save money, plain and simple. And yes, they absolutely can "check whether BMW did it correctly" -- i.e. make sure it meets their own standards. The fact that BMW did it doesn't mean Toyota couldn't improve it. Perhaps you have a link I could see?

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by d00df00d

Originally Posted by edyvw

Quote

Source?

n the same video that is talking about what you said. It is mind boggling what Toyota is doing, and what kind of marketing assault on intelligence this is. Same video that is talking about project leader of Toyota (forgot his name) and his story behind this. In same video there is this story: Toyota could not develop engine and chassis, joins with BMW, BMW develops engine (far before Supra thing came to life) and than Toyota checks did BMW do things OK? So, Toyota cannot develop engine but will check whether BMW did it correctly? In that same video there is portion where it is stated that BMW ALONE, tested Supra without ANY interference from Toyota. That Toyota people did not set a foot in Supra for six months. Emphasis is that BMW "shared" data with them but in such a way that it sounds like Toyota gave opportunity to BMW to "learn" something with testing their car (which BMW developed) and they will check did student do good job by looking at data. Toyota was too busy apparently developing Camry Sport Edition at the same time. As someone who was involved in testing, I know what BMW did. They excluded them from most important part of development. They got pretty much product that BMW wanted them to get.

I heard no such thing in any of the videos I watched about this, nor have I read any such thing in any of the articles I've read. Toyota absolutely could have developed the engine themselves. They made the LFA almost entirely in-house, including a vastly more challenging V10. The reason they didn't do it was to save money, plain and simple. And yes, they absolutely can "check whether BMW did it correctly" -- i.e. make sure it meets their own standards. The fact that BMW did it doesn't mean Toyota couldn't improve it. Perhaps you have a link I could see?

SUpra video This video is posted on discussion about Z4. I think video is absolute BS, but it seems that same thing is being told by these wannabe "journalists" around internet. Toyota definitely had its own testing sequence. But, when you are cut out 6 months from testing, that means you are getting car someone else built it for you, and you are getting what that company will let you get. Now, I personally think it is scandalous that Toyota would allow itself to be cut out 6 months from testing. Either that means that Toyota was willing to do anything BMW told them, or they do not have capacity to do it, or sources are lying (I am going with sources are lying). But, people cannot cheery pick these videos and cling on "Toyota check for their quality standards, and returned all parts to BMW not meeting them (can someone come check my car than for that "quality") and than say: that is BS that BMW did all testing etc. Yes, Toyota could develop engine, but probably engine would be be behind BMW. Problem for Toyota that it is risk adverse for a long time, and especially in last 20 years. You cannot abandon anything that is not resembling microwave and than decide to come back. There is a lot of know-how lost since last Supra and 1st gen. IS. If Toyota kept IS with inline 6, manual transmission etc. they probably would be able to do it. However, as I say, once 1st gen. IS dropped average age of Lexus buyer from 115 to 114.9, Toyota got scared and played it safe, putting their mainstream V6 in Lexus, auto slushbox and RWD with tendency to "Audisteer." Now, why BMW? Who else has that kind of I6 knowledge? And Toyota is buying engines from BMW since D-4D fiasco in Europe. Also, BMW gets their hybrid technology, so of course they are natural partners. I have no doubts that if BMW decides to develop minivan, Toyota will lead the project

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by PimTac

Looks like someone got triggered again. This Motor Trend article is telling. https://www.motortrend.com/cars/bmw/x3/2018/2018-bmw-x3-m40i-long-term-update-3-review/

It is not telling., It is brand new vehicle with infant issues. They should come check my car which is updated SIenna. Rattling windows, windows that go down after driving, mirrors that move forward when braking, or back when accelerating. Constant rattles in dash, and, not to forget, it seems that dash will crack due to sun exposure although car is garaged. As for VANOS, 2GR-FE also has issues with VVT-I, except in BMW is easy to replace, in Sienna is $4,000 ticket! Rear subframe? Yeah, some E46 had that tendency (not like he states) but then all Tacoma's subframe simply rust out too. Please.....

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by hatt

Everyone I know loves their BMW too. Right before they trade/turn it in. They're kinda like old Harleys. You know they aren't great machines but you still love them.

My M5 was reasonably expensive to own, but for what it was designed to be, it wasn't a great machine, it was an incredible one. The best driving sedan I've ever driven with a beautiful interior, incredible seats, great sound system and 400HP on tap with a torque curve that was as flat as Saskatchewan. It wasn't anything like an old Harley, it was more like an airplane where things needed to be replaced/maintenance needed to be done on a schedule, and, being an M-car, those things were more expensive than a regular BMW.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by OVERKILL

Originally Posted by hatt

Everyone I know loves their BMW too. Right before they trade/turn it in. They're kinda like old Harleys. You know they aren't great machines but you still love them.

My M5 was reasonably expensive to own, but for what it was designed to be, it wasn't a great machine, it was an incredible one. The best driving sedan I've ever driven with a beautiful interior, incredible seats, great sound system and 400HP on tap with a torque curve that was as flat as Saskatchewan. It wasn't anything like an old Harley, it was more like an airplane where things needed to be replaced/maintenance needed to be done on a schedule, and, being an M-car, those things were more expensive than a regular BMW.

The approach with Toyota, Honda etc. is the one my in-law's hav on their 2009 Honda Pilot. 80k: 3 sets of rotors. Once I was driving and rotors were shaking so badly I though rack and pinion will get shoot. His answer: yeah, I know, not big deal. VCM: yeah, I know, not big deal. Leaking water pump at 70k: yeah, it's ok, luckily it is Honda, not too expensive. They drive Tiguan when they come here. Few weeks ago CEL flashes while they were driving, coils. I got to local dealership, get 4 coils for $170 (did not have time to get from ECSTuning for $26 OE per piece). Changed them in 5 minutes, their answer: those European cars are really expensive. That is literally only thing that went bad in 76k. Best thing is when they explain how failed transmission on their 2001 Lexus ES is something normal at 110k. It has to be mentioned that my almsot 3 year old son's tricycle handles better than that ES.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted by edyvw

SUpra video This video is posted on discussion about Z4. I think video is absolute BS, but it seems that same thing is being told by these wannabe "journalists" around internet. Toyota definitely had its own testing sequence. But, when you are cut out 6 months from testing, that means you are getting car someone else built it for you, and you are getting what that company will let you get. Now, I personally think it is scandalous that Toyota would allow itself to be cut out 6 months from testing. Either that means that Toyota was willing to do anything BMW told them, or they do not have capacity to do it, or sources are lying (I am going with sources are lying). But, people cannot cheery pick these videos and cling on "Toyota check for their quality standards, and returned all parts to BMW not meeting them (can someone come check my car than for that "quality") and than say: that is BS that BMW did all testing etc. Yes, Toyota could develop engine, but probably engine would be be behind BMW. Problem for Toyota that it is risk adverse for a long time, and especially in last 20 years. You cannot abandon anything that is not resembling microwave and than decide to come back. There is a lot of know-how lost since last Supra and 1st gen. IS. If Toyota kept IS with inline 6, manual transmission etc. they probably would be able to do it. However, as I say, once 1st gen. IS dropped average age of Lexus buyer from 115 to 114.9, Toyota got scared and played it safe, putting their mainstream V6 in Lexus, auto slushbox and RWD with tendency to "Audisteer." Now, why BMW? Who else has that kind of I6 knowledge? And Toyota is buying engines from BMW since D-4D fiasco in Europe. Also, BMW gets their hybrid technology, so of course they are natural partners. I have no doubts that if BMW decides to develop minivan, Toyota will lead the project

What's your point, edyvw? Let's try to get down to brass tacks here. Are you saying BMW did most of the important development, and that Toyota didn't fundamentally change anything? If so, that's fine. It's probably true, and I don't think anyone will say otherwise. Are you saying Toyota had no meaningful say in the process, or that they did nothing to make sure the engine met their standards? If so, that's contrary to the info out there, so you'll have to substantiate it. Are you saying Toyota somehow wouldn't have the competence to weigh in? If so, I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. Again, they designed the LFA, including its V10, from the ground up, all in house. Not a lot of complaints about that engine being "behind" anything, including supercar V10s from companies that have been making them a lot longer. And Toyota is well known for having more stringent quality standards than almost any other manufacturer -- standards which, as you know full well, could apply to literally any manufactured item. So yeah, maybe they'd have had a hard time coming up with the B58 on their own. But once it exists, they're perfectly capable of commenting on it. Anecdotes mean little. Every manufacturer has duds and ringers, and with hundreds of thousands of cars in the wild, it stands to reason that some people will have more luck with BMW than others have had with Toyota. In this context, what really counts is the on-average reality. On average, just as BMW has a better record in terms of driving dynamics, Toyota has a better record of making long-lasting engines. As an aside, I have to say I don't understand why people get so exercised over this. An engine with BMW talents and Toyota longevity? Yes please! Why is that so awful?

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by d00df00d

Originally Posted by edyvw

SUpra video This video is posted on discussion about Z4. I think video is absolute BS, but it seems that same thing is being told by these wannabe "journalists" around internet. Toyota definitely had its own testing sequence. But, when you are cut out 6 months from testing, that means you are getting car someone else built it for you, and you are getting what that company will let you get. Now, I personally think it is scandalous that Toyota would allow itself to be cut out 6 months from testing. Either that means that Toyota was willing to do anything BMW told them, or they do not have capacity to do it, or sources are lying (I am going with sources are lying). But, people cannot cheery pick these videos and cling on "Toyota check for their quality standards, and returned all parts to BMW not meeting them (can someone come check my car than for that "quality") and than say: that is BS that BMW did all testing etc. Yes, Toyota could develop engine, but probably engine would be be behind BMW. Problem for Toyota that it is risk adverse for a long time, and especially in last 20 years. You cannot abandon anything that is not resembling microwave and than decide to come back. There is a lot of know-how lost since last Supra and 1st gen. IS. If Toyota kept IS with inline 6, manual transmission etc. they probably would be able to do it. However, as I say, once 1st gen. IS dropped average age of Lexus buyer from 115 to 114.9, Toyota got scared and played it safe, putting their mainstream V6 in Lexus, auto slushbox and RWD with tendency to "Audisteer." Now, why BMW? Who else has that kind of I6 knowledge? And Toyota is buying engines from BMW since D-4D fiasco in Europe. Also, BMW gets their hybrid technology, so of course they are natural partners. I have no doubts that if BMW decides to develop minivan, Toyota will lead the project

What's your point, edyvw? Let's try to get down to brass tacks here. Are you saying BMW did most of the important development, and that Toyota didn't fundamentally change anything? If so, that's fine. It's probably true, and I don't think anyone will say otherwise. Are you saying Toyota had no meaningful say in the process, or that they did nothing to make sure the engine met their standards? If so, that's contrary to the info out there, so you'll have to substantiate it. Are you saying Toyota somehow wouldn't have the competence to weigh in? If so, I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. Again, they designed the LFA, including its V10, from the ground up, all in house. Not a lot of complaints about that engine being "behind" anything, including supercar V10s from companies that have been making them a lot longer. And Toyota is well known for having more stringent quality standards than almost any other manufacturer -- standards which, as you know full well, could apply to literally any manufactured item. So yeah, maybe they'd have had a hard time coming up with the B58 on their own. But once it exists, they're perfectly capable of commenting on it. Anecdotes mean little. Every manufacturer has duds and ringers, and with hundreds of thousands of cars in the wild, it stands to reason that some people will have more luck with BMW than others have had with Toyota. In this context, what really counts is the on-average reality. On average, just as BMW has a better record in terms of driving dynamics, Toyota has a better record of making long-lasting engines. As an aside, I have to say I don't understand why people get so exercised over this. An engine with BMW talents and Toyota longevity? Yes please! Why is that so awful?

No, I am not saying Toyota did not have input in it. It would be ridiculous. But I do disagree with this quality BS. Toyota has in the US very high reliability rate because they are absolutely risk adverse, and that is fine. It caters to certain customer base, and Toyota like every other manufacturer is in business of making money, so they found their way. They offered to US customer simple, practical vehicles, and that is fine. However, when Toyota needs to offer more sophisticated and complex vehicles, they are not anymore reliable than anyone else, but they do offer same experience, catered to those barely alive. In Europe where gallon of gas is $6-8 and they cannot offer in family minivan or other vehicles with their V6 engines running on 20year technology, because, well, it is expensive to run them, they fall short of their reliability status they have here. You cannot talk about quality standards and have issues with rust on so many models. You cannot talk about quality standards and having major diesel engine, catered for biggest diesel market in the world, basically disintegrating at 100k km (issues with rod bearings on BMW M engines are minuscule compared what issues these engines had), or on 1.4 D-4D having fuel pumps capable running basically only on laboratory clean diesel (I was involved in testing fuel quality with Toyota engineers in Southeaster Europe, and it was probably the least reliable engine available in Europe, maybe better than GM/Isuzu 1.6d in Opel's in 80's). So, these information that are provided are contradictory. BMW started to develop far before Supra project was launched their B38/48/58 family of engines. One cannot state that BMW completely excluded Toyota from testing, after saying Toyota was checking every part for their own quality standards. That is not how this works. I personally think that Toyota was far more involved than what sources are saying, but also that Toyota lost know-how long time ago when it comes to these types of cars. They did not want to commit a lot of resources, even developing V6 TT engine for Supra (all thing considered, they would not have an issue selling V6 Supra to Supra fans). But issue why Toyota did not go on their own is IMO, far deeper than just engine. They needed platform that is light (their RC, or whatever, is running on too heavy platform), they needed better transmission than what Aisin can offer (not to mention reliability issues around new Aisin's, which negets all this BS about Toyota quality control, as those transmissions do not have issues in BMW's with transverse mounted engines), etc. and all that in car that is affordable. Toyota could go alone, but it would be less of an product than what BMW could offer. LFA is great car. But, it is far from reliability people associate with Toyota, and that is understandable as it is complex, sophisticated car. That car is product of a F1 when V10's were available. Point is, Toyota was involved more than what certain sources claim, but also that they were far less capable in developing their own product than what people think, at least not product that would cost $150,000 catered for $50,000 market.

 

[KrisZ]

Like I've been saying for a while here, companies collaborate with each other behind the scenes, keeping everything secret besides the fact that they collaborate, while carefully managing their customer base and opinion through smart marketing campaigns. So the fan boys are busy arguing on subjects they have zero idea about, like in this thread. Whatever collaboration BMW and Toyota has, it is all confidential and whatever one can hear or read though various media and automotive sources is a carefully managed message. I've talked to some people that were involved with "leaks" at my current work. Most of what is available/reported though the regular channels is not what you think.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by KrisZ

Like I've been saying for a while here, companies collaborate with each other behind the scenes, keeping everything secret besides the fact that they collaborate, while carefully managing their customer base and opinion through smart marketing campaigns. So the fan boys are busy arguing on subjects they have zero idea about, like in this thread. Whatever collaboration BMW and Toyota has, it is all confidential and whatever one can hear or read though various media and automotive sources is a carefully managed message. I've talked to some people that were involved with "leaks" at my current work. Most of what is available/reported though the regular channels is not what you think.

Of course, all this is pure marketing. The amount f videos that is popped out in the last few months is ridiculous, and all have uniform message.

 

[Railrust]

There was just something about the way those BMW straight six's felt, so smooth, nice power. I really liked them. But are we really comparing them to a Toyota V6? In terms of what? A Toyota V6 will keep buzzing along till 500,000 miles with nothing but oil changes and spark plugs. Meanwhile the BMW 6 will have wiped out heads, water pumps, rings and all your hopes and dreams...leaking every fluid known to man on your driveway and exhaust. Just go to a BMW forum - your eyes will blead reading the comments of repair bills, break downs, engine rebuilds and oil consumption. It really is excellent reading. And I like BMW's, I really do...like the way they drive, look, feel. But don't compare them to a company (Toyota) who builds cars to last as long as humanly possible, as cheaply as humanly possible. They're two totally different animals. Last year I stood under a BMW...thing was leaking coolant everywhere. Finally located it to the water pump. It was an electric water pump. This thing was so buried in there that I just couldn't believe my eyes. It was a friends car, being a BMW owner he had already run out of money from car repairs...thought I would help him. Sorry. I'm not doi a water pump that you can barley even see, buried on the bottom of a car. He took it to a BMW specialist...cost him $1,200...for a WATER PUMP.

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted by Railrust

There was just something about the way those BMW straight six's felt, so smooth, nice power. I really liked them. But are we really comparing them to a Toyota V6? In terms of what? A Toyota V6 will keep buzzing along till 500,000 miles with nothing but oil changes and spark plugs. Meanwhile the BMW 6 will have wiped out heads, water pumps, rings and all your hopes and dreams...leaking every fluid known to man on your driveway and exhaust. Just go to a BMW forum - your eyes will blead reading the comments of repair bills, break downs, engine rebuilds and oil consumption. It really is excellent reading. And I like BMW's, I really do...like the way they drive, look, feel. But don't compare them to a company (Toyota) who builds cars to last as long as humanly possible, as cheaply as humanly possible. They're two totally different animals. Last year I stood under a BMW...thing was leaking coolant everywhere. Finally located it to the water pump. It was an electric water pump. This thing was so buried in there that I just couldn't believe my eyes. It was a friends car, being a BMW owner he had already run out of money from car repairs...thought I would help him. Sorry. I'm not doi a water pump that you can barley even see, buried on the bottom of a car. He took it to a BMW specialist...cost him $1,200...for a WATER PUMP.

As I've said many times before, once my Chapter 13 is finished I'm buying a couple of 10 year old Camrys with at least 250,000 miles on each.

 

[KrisZ]

MCompact, make sure to get a V6 version, it will satisfy all your sporting needs and then some...

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted by KrisZ

MCompact, make sure to get a V6 version, it will satisfy all your sporting needs and then some...

I can only dream at this point...

 

[d00df00d]

I was in the middle of writing a big response, but I think my response to this part is the only part that really matters:

Originally Posted by edyvw

So, these information that are provided are contradictory. BMW started to develop far before Supra project was launched their B38/48/58 family of engines. One cannot state that BMW completely excluded Toyota from testing, after saying Toyota was checking every part for their own quality standards. That is not how this works.

I don't see a contradiction at all. Yes, BMW fully developed and validated the engine to its own standards, likely with zero input from Toyota. Then they handed it over to Toyota, which basically re-validated it to their own standards with minor tweaks. Maybe BMW was 80% responsible for the end result, or maybe 90%, or 99.999%. Whatever the case, the fact remains that Toyota went over it top-to-bottom and made sure they could put their name on it and their warranty behind it, and decided they could. That's the story, and I don't see why it's implausible. Do you? This whole argument started when hatt was insinuating that this engine wasn't going to live up to Toyota's standards because BMW made it. That seems completely untrue because, according to publicly available information, Toyota made sure it met their standards. How much they actually improved on what BMW gave them is irrelevant. They're putting their stamp on it, so they think it's as good as any Toyota engine regardless of how much they contributed to the development process. That's where it should end, IMO -- until these engines start racking up some miles and we see how good they really are. That didn't work out so well for the 86 twins, so hopefully they learned their lesson...