BMW May Use 4-Cly. Engines To Meet U.S. Fuel Economy Rules

"BMW has experimented with four-cylinder models in the U.S. before with limited success. At the time, Americans didn't buy the idea of a luxury-branded car with such a small engine."

Do you guys do ANY research before you post this nonsense? The 2002 and e30 both had 4 cylinders. The e36 launched in the USA with a 4.

And BMW supported the new cafe standards. Their reps stood beside our president as he announced the changes. Really, stop making up stories that BMW is opposed to higher fuel economy. If they opposed the changes they could be fighting them. But as BMW meets fuel standards in europe it's likely they know they can meet the flaccid US's standards. With efficient dynamics and some of the best 4 cylinder engines in the world it's not like BMW is lacking for cars that can achieve over 30 MPG on the combined cycle.
The 520d will easily break 40 MPG.

I think BMW won't have a problem with 4-cylinders in their cars, at least the 1 and 3 series models, and that's for several reasons. The first is, of course, the changing culture of automotive buyers, which have shifted their sights toward smaller engines and smaller cars. The second is that BMW can do way better than their last 4-cylinder effort, the pitiful 1.9 liter that saw duty in the E36 and the original Z3. Plop a Cooper S turbocharged 1.6 into a 1 or 3 series and it'll get out of its own way as well as get mileage somewhere in the low 30s.

I think the argument here Bluedotcomguy, is that then they had less sales of 4 cyl models (but yeah the current BMW-owned Mini Cooper also comes with a 1.6L 4-banger).

inlinesix,

Fewer sales as compared to what? The 2002 saved BMW. The e30 and e36 both came with 4 cylinder engines.

Maybe total number in 2009 v. 1979? That's not really a number they can compare equally given their product line is several times larger and it's expanded to totally new platform types (X3, X5, X6, 1, Z4, M line). Plus BMW has moved decidedly down-market in terms of buyer demographics as their products have grown cheaper and cheaper relative to income levels.

I dont think its gonna be a problem either. Audi has been using 4 bangers since the 90s and the A4 was a success. Acura uses a NA 4 in its TSX and has proved that a 4 banger, even without forced induction, can be used in a luxury car. So why not BMW? And by 2016, technology should allow companies to make 4-cylinder engine to make 6-cylinder power without sacrificing much fuel econnomy and smoothness.

Limited success? The 4-cylinder 2002 from the late '60s put BMW on map as far as America is concerned.

"BMW can do way better than their last 4-cylinder effort, the pitiful 1.9 liter that saw duty in the E36 and the original Z3."

I have the 1.8 liter M42 in my 116,000 mile 1995 318ti Club Sport. With a Turner/Conforti chip it makes 151 hp- good for a sub eight second 0-60 and a quarter mile in the high fifteens. At 80 mph(4000 rpm) the car averages 31.5 mpg. "Pitiful" indeed- especially considering that the M42/44 engine family was designed in the late '80s.

And don't get me started on the M10 in my 1975 2002 or the S14 found in the E30 M3.
Limited success?
Yeah, right.

BMW can produce a stellar for the U.S. but now the country (world?) will accept a smaller motor or diesel better than ever.

da&@%mit

BMW can/has produced stellar 4 cylinders for the U.S. but I say now the country (world?) will accept a smaller motor or diesel better than ever.

Just look at the 316d!
Bring it!
http://www.bmw.co.uk/bmwuk/models/316d/0,,1156___bs-Mw%3D%3D%40bb-TEkwOA%3D%3D%40sit-bmwuk,00.html

The German automakers need to get together and lobby for diesel engines. It's absurd what diesels have to emit and that has reduced their efficiency in a big way. If we could run diesels without all the extra crap, the Germans could meet those standards easily. Now, who wants a 530d turbodiesel?

BMW makes some of the most powerful and refined diesels that rival gasoline engines, and I'd love to see more of them offered here. And although I'm sure that their fours that they offered here until the mid '90s were pretty good, I'd rather have the inherent balance and smoothness of an inline six, which I think overshadowed the fours.

120d, 320d, 325d, 330d, 335d, 525d, 530d, 535d--with cars like this ready to go, who the heck needs a 4cyl gasser?

roadburner: if you needed a chip to get those numbers, then that is why it wasn't popular... too slow stock. even with the chip its not anything to talk about... it might be a match for a base model civic, lol.

with 4 cylinders making over 300hp these days... it just depends on what they want to do. high mileage examples are the GTI and Cobalt SS turning in something like 30 mpg with a healthy dose of power.

the engine in the mini is great for the mini, but extra weight might negate that and it'll be much slower. as it is, its only 34mpg on the S... and we're talking at least 500lbs extra weight and the BMW's are RWD which is gonna hurt mpg's and the added driveline loss means less power gets to the ground.

im interested to see what they come up with... in reality, it'll probably be weak and get great mpg's... the non turbo I6 already gets 28mpg and i doubt a substantial improvement in mpg will be accompanied by substantial power.

"if you needed a chip to get those numbers, then that is why it wasn't popular... too slow stock. even with the chip its not anything to talk about... it might be a match for a base model civic, lol."

My point was that the M42/44 was a very good engine for its time- nearly fifteen ago. And at the time those numbers made the car just as quick as a 944, RX-7, or 300ZX. The only "problem" that the engine had was that you had to keep the RPM between 3,500-7,000 rpm to make good time. If you don't enjoy keeping an engine "on the boil" as the Brits put it, you won't like the M42- or the S14 for that matter.