[BigEvan1923]

Ive seen a bunch of threads asking for this but I did a launch last night (car has 1500 miles now) with 1/4 tank of gas and managed a 4.4 to 60.

I'm sure theres a +/- .1 second margin of error here. I just recorded it on my phone and looked at the footage length time when the car's speedo read 0 and then 60. Nevertheless, the "butt test" told me it was a 4.5 second car and this basically confirmed it.

Not that any of this matters in an SUV but its impressive that the base engine is so capable when driving gets a little more "spirited"

[roamio]

You shaved 0.9 seconds off official BMW specs (it's 5.3s for x40i). Very impressive.

[mattsrs]

very impressive! Thanks for trying it and reporting back

[tooloud10]

Originally Posted by roamio

You shaved 0.9 seconds off official BMW specs (it's 5.3s for x40i). Very impressive.

Yeah, but not all that surprising--seems like BMW keeps getting more conservative on the advertised acceleration.

[cobramite]

Originally Posted by BigEvan1923

Ive seen a bunch of threads asking for this but I did a launch last night (car has 1500 miles now) with 1/4 tank of gas and managed a 4.4 to 60.

I'm sure theres a +/- .1 second margin of error here. I just recorded it on my phone and looked at the footage length time when the car's speedo read 0 and then 60. Nevertheless, the "butt test" told me it was a 4.5 second car and this basically confirmed it.

Not that any of this matters in an SUV but its impressive that the base engine is so capable when driving gets a little more "spirited"

Yeah, it really seems to matter more now and a point of interest with these SUVs since they have gotten so much faster. Your LCI 40i I believe has around 40 more HP and the help of a mild hybrid. BMW metrics are near meaningless as are many of their power ratings which can be grossly understated.
4.4 seconds with your 40i is very strong and could even better on a 40* day.
I see an X7 M50i in your sig. Car and Driver got a 3.8 second 0-60 in their test of that vehicle which is bonkers for a near 6,000 lb. faily hauler.
I'm looking forward to some published auto press professional tests for the the M60i which feels to me like mid 3s capable vehicle.
I doubt if many guys will be drag racing any of these but is cool to know just what they are capable of. These are fun times for sure.

[biterror]

Originally Posted by BigEvan1923

I'm sure theres a +/- .1 second margin of error here. I just recorded it on my phone and looked at the footage length time when the car's speedo read 0 and then 60.

How accurate is your speedometer? Mine is too optimistic (real speed is 5 km/h lower).

[BigEvan1923]

Originally Posted by biterror

How accurate is your speedometer? Mine is too optimistic (real speed is 5 km/h lower).

Hard to say - take it all with a grain of salt, I’m not running a GPS based setup or as Mat Watson would say “specialist timing gear”

I know my x7 M50i does it in the low 4s and this doesn’t feel far off. The surge of power after 60mph in the x7 is definitely different but up to 60 mph the 40i LCI has got the goods.

[Gene Horr]

Originally Posted by biterror

How accurate is your speedometer? Mine is too optimistic (real speed is 5 km/h lower).

Remember this when reading about fuel mileage claims too. I have yet to see a vehicle from the factory that did not overstate the speed. Usually in the 5% - 10% range.

My suspicion is this way it avoids arguments about their vehicle vs EPA mileage claims.

[cobramite]

Originally Posted by BigEvan1923

Hard to say - take it all with a grain of salt, I’m not running a GPS based setup or as Mat Watson would say “specialist timing gear”

I know my x7 M50i does it in the low 4s and this doesn’t feel far off. The surge of power after 60mph in the x7 is definitely different but up to 60 mph the 40i LCI has got the goods.

Yeah, sorry, 4.2 for the X7 M50i, 3.8 for the X7 M60i.
2023 BMW X7 M60i
Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 6-passenger, 4-door wagon








DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 122.2 in
Length: 203.6 in
Width: 78.7 in
Height: 72.2 in
Passenger Volume, F/M/R: 58/50/34 ft3
Cargo Volume: 12 ft3
Curb Weight: 5838 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 3.8 sec
100 mph: 9.8 sec
1/4-Mile: 12.3 sec @ 111 mph
120 mph: 14.6 sec
Results above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.2 sec.
Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 4.9 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.8 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 3.1 sec

[tooloud10]

Originally Posted by biterror

How accurate is your speedometer? Mine is too optimistic (real speed is 5 km/h lower).

I've "verified" my 45e speedometer to read 1mph faster than indicated at 60mph--using GPS and those construction radar signs.

[Giggler]

I have Racebox timing equipment that will give me accurate results but haven’t had the right conditions to test. I did try a 0 to 60 run about a week ago but it was 97° outside and slightly upwards slope… just stomping on it from a green light yielded a 5.6 second 0 to 60 (5.3 corrected for upwards slope) which is slower than spec. In my experience, temperature near or over 100° will greatly impact acceleration on the B58.

Also, comparing to the B58 in my M340i, there is a noticeable turbo lag when throttling it from a stop… the engines feel very similar in most situations but throttle response is more delayed in the B58TU2 which obviously impacts 0-60. So obviously you would want to brake boost or use launch control to get the best time… maybe if I cools off I can test again this weekend and report back.

[eelnoraa]

Originally Posted by Giggler

I have Racebox timing equipment that will give me accurate results but haven’t had the right conditions to test. I did try a 0 to 60 run about a week ago but it was 97° outside and slightly upwards slope… just stomping on it from a green light yielded a 5.6 second 0 to 60 (5.3 corrected for upwards slope) which is slower than spec. In my experience, temperature near or over 100° will greatly impact acceleration on the B58.

Also, comparing to the B58 in my M340i, there is a noticeable turbo lag when throttling it from a stop… the engines feel very similar in most situations but throttle response is more delayed in the B58TU2 which obviously impacts 0-60. So obviously you would want to brake boost or use launch control to get the best time… maybe if I cools off I can test again this weekend and report back.

wow, that is a very interesting observation. There is one majory difference between B58 and 340 vs B58 in X5 (even for pre LCI), so both with TU1. M340 has 6 port exhaust manifold and a separate, I believe equal length header from each cylinder into the turbo. X5 version, both Pre LCI and LCI, has integrated header, effectively a 2 port manifold directly bolt to turbo. So the flow is more restricted, and definitely not equal length. I wonder this is what the difference for turbo spool up.

B58 in 340 also makes more power than B58 in Pre LCI 40i. If BMW make s TU2 with M340 exhaust configuration, I bet thing will be even better.

[thereef510]

Originally Posted by roamio

You shaved 0.9 seconds off official BMW specs (it's 5.3s for x40i). Very impressive.

BMW is notorious for underrating their power and performance numbers so that, presumably, automotive journalists and reviewers are wowed by the independent testing that beats the manufacturers quoted numbers.

[Giggler]

Originally Posted by eelnoraa

wow, that is a very interesting observation. There is one majory difference between B58 and 340 vs B58 in X5 (even for pre LCI), so both with TU1. M340 has 6 port exhaust manifold and a separate, I believe equal length header from each cylinder into the turbo. X5 version, both Pre LCI and LCI, has integrated header, effectively a 2 port manifold directly bolt to turbo. So the flow is more restricted, and definitely not equal length. I wonder this is what the difference for turbo spool up.

B58 in 340 also makes more power than B58 in Pre LCI 40i. If BMW make s TU2 with M340 exhaust configuration, I bet thing will be even better.

The 2-port vs 6-port exhaust manifold design definitely plays a part in the turbo response, specifically that the turbo charger is directly integrated into the 6-port exhaust manifold.

Based on just my perception (which might be flawed but no way to actually time it), I would say the turbo lag on my LCI B58TU2 is at least .5 second but could even be closer to 1 second. I mean, there's definitely an observable pause before the turbo spools and the power rushes in. The turbo lag on the M340i B58B30O1 is nearly non-existent. Maybe .10 to .25 seconds, but it basically goes full power the instant you stab the throttle.

I had read the reason BMW keeps with the 2-port manifold design in the non-performance version of the B58 is because of efficiency... the engine gets up to operating temperature much faster with this restricted flow, which I can confirm. In my experience so far, the TU2 warms up in just a minute with slight feathering of the throttle as I exit my neighborhood. Sometimes it reaches temperature in the few minutes I am idling in the garage before I leave! The M340i (B58B30O1) takes way longer to warm up... you have to get out there and drive it for at least a mile.

[eelnoraa]

Originally Posted by Giggler

The 2-port vs 6-port exhaust manifold design definitely plays a part in the turbo response, specifically that the turbo charger is directly integrated into the 6-port exhaust manifold.

Based on just my perception (which might be flawed but no way to actually time it), I would say the turbo lag on my LCI B58TU2 is at least .5 second but could even be closer to 1 second. I mean, there's definitely an observable pause before the turbo spools and the power rushes in. The turbo lag on the M340i B58B30O1 is nearly non-existent. Maybe .10 to .25 seconds, but it basically goes full power the instant you stab the throttle.

I had read the reason BMW keeps with the 2-port manifold design in the non-performance version of the B58 is because of efficiency... the engine gets up to operating temperature much faster with this restricted flow, which I can confirm. In my experience so far, the TU2 warms up in just a minute with slight feathering of the throttle as I exit my neighborhood. Sometimes it reaches temperature in the few minutes I am idling in the garage before I leave! The M340i (B58B30O1) takes way longer to warm up... you have to get out there and drive it for at least a mile.

But that is coolant temp. It is very easy to warm up coolant because thermostat is close. The closure control typically is mechanical, so response is more linear. If thermostat become electronics, it will just fully close until the target is reach. It is never a good measure by looking at coolant temp IMO. How about Oil temp?

[BigEvan1923]

Originally Posted by Giggler

I have Racebox timing equipment that will give me accurate results but haven’t had the right conditions to test. I did try a 0 to 60 run about a week ago but it was 97° outside and slightly upwards slope… just stomping on it from a green light yielded a 5.6 second 0 to 60 (5.3 corrected for upwards slope) which is slower than spec. In my experience, temperature near or over 100° will greatly impact acceleration on the B58.

Also, comparing to the B58 in my M340i, there is a noticeable turbo lag when throttling it from a stop… the engines feel very similar in most situations but throttle response is more delayed in the B58TU2 which obviously impacts 0-60. So obviously you would want to brake boost or use launch control to get the best time… maybe if I cools off I can test again this weekend and report back.

Do you feel the sport plus engine setting mitigates some of that? - when in that mode it does feel more eager from stop. I had an X3 M40i and agree that the character of the engine is quite different from the jump...unless in sport plus.

[Giggler]

Originally Posted by eelnoraa

But that is coolant temp. It is very easy to warm up coolant because thermostat is close. The closure control typically is mechanical, so response is more linear. If thermostat become electronics, it will just fully close until the target is reach. It is never a good measure by looking at coolant temp IMO. How about Oil temp?

I don't know how to compare warm up oil temp between two different cars like this. The X5 uses a 0W-12 and is under different loads because of its curb weight. All I know is I had read somewhere, can't remember where, that the 2-port manifold design is meant to warm up the engine faster from a cold-start, which makes it more efficient during drive-off. I wish I could be more scientific; this really is only my perception of the way the car drives and my observation of the coolant temperature gauge.

[Giggler]

Originally Posted by BigEvan1923

Do you feel the sport plus engine setting mitigates some of that? - when in that mode it does feel more eager from stop. I had an X3 M40i and agree that the character of the engine is quite different from the jump...unless in sport plus.

Yes, in sport mode or sport transmission, it seems to be responsive enough for spirited/aggressive driving... but it still doesn't react as rapidly, probably because it's 1000lbs heavier.

Because I'm so acclimated to the throttle response of the M340i, just the other day I accidentally ran a red light in the X5 in comfort mode thinking the throttle/turbo would react fast enough to clear the intersection before it turned red... but the turbo delay was real and when the full power did kick in, there's just too much weight to push it forward at the same rapid pace.

So now I don't even try to drive fast in comfort mode.... doesn't seem to be the point of this car anyways. I think the sport modes are more for when you need to get through a pocket of slow traffic, or you're a few miles from home and your wife is yelling at you because she has to take a leak.

[BMthusiast]

Honestly if the kick-down puts a smile on your face that's all that really matters.

[cobramite]

Originally Posted by Giggler

Yes, in sport mode or sport transmission, it seems to be responsive enough for spirited/aggressive driving... but it still doesn't react as rapidly, probably because it's 1000lbs heavier.

Because I'm so acclimated to the throttle response of the M340i, just the other day I accidentally ran a red light in the X5 in comfort mode thinking the throttle/turbo would react fast enough to clear the intersection before it turned red... but the turbo delay was real and when the full power did kick in, there's just too much weight to push it forward at the same rapid pace.

So now I don't even try to drive fast in comfort mode.... doesn't seem to be the point of this car anyways. I think the sport modes are more for when you need to get through a pocket of slow traffic, or you're a few miles from home and your wife is yelling at you because she has to take a leak.

An S68 under the hood eliminates all those issues.

[BigEvan1923]

Originally Posted by cobramite

An S68 under the hood eliminates all those issues.

I am curious how it would feel vs my x7. Would be interesting to drive back to back. I would have done it but couldn’t get air suspension and DHP and that combo is pretty phenomenal for playing dual personality roles.

[cobramite]

Originally Posted by BigEvan1923

I am curious how it would feel vs my x7. Would be interesting to drive back to back. I would have done it but couldn’t get air suspension and DHP and that combo is pretty phenomenal for playing dual personality roles.

I'm just out of an X5 M50i and can tell you that the X6 M60i is stronger.
Probably for 2 reasons, more HP and the mild hybrid which throws in 147 lb ft of torque when the computer feels it is needed.
M50i and M60i are both very strong players indeed and really nice to drive.