OK, I'll finally weigh in here (archive)

The complete automotive resource for buyers, sellers, and owners like you.

Back from a business trip to find this thread, so I'll jump in albeit tardily so.

Mr. "SU" recently noted: I do know that the V12 had a displacement of 5.0 liters all the way to 1994 (inclusive), and in 1995 it reached 5.4
liters . . .

I'll own that mistake. I should have made it clear that during the first year of production (1993) the 850Ci continued to use the same M70B50 engine as used in the 1991-1992 850i. (As a digression, I note that there were also a very few examples of the 850Ci fitted with the six-speed transmission a la the 850i.) All I can say in my defense is that I spend a huge amount of time writing E31-related stuff for consumption via e-mail, newsgroups and web sites. When I dashed off the response to the inquiry, I was focused on the gist of the inquiry (what do the numbers and letters mean?) so I unfortunately had a brain fade and oversimplified the phased-in differences between the 850i and 850Ci powerplants.

[Re the fact that some V-8s displaced 4.0 liters and some displaced 4.4 liters] . . . Did you by chance hear about the Alusil vs. Nikalsil problems with the V8?

The difference between 4.0 liters and 4.4 is only 10 percent, so I don't think it's misleading to say that V-8s in the 840s displaced "about 4 liters." Given that the original query focused on the significance of the numbers and letters in the model designations (as opposed to which engine displaced precisely how much) I chose to paint with a broad brush in order to explain why BMW called the V-8 examples of the E31 840s. And yes, I'm aware of the high-sulphur gas problem in certain V-8s. But a discourse on that topic was SO far afield from the original inquiry that I didn't get into it.

This thread is a perfect example of the old Usenet adage that a simple question will be ignored while an incorrect answer will start a two-week thread.

Finally, I note that Mr. SU is certainly free to correct every last nitpicking detail in anything that anybody posts here. Such conduct is in the finest Net tradition of vigorous debate. Indeed, it's the raison d'etre of a special-interest forum like this one. That said, I will opine that the use of intemperate or strident language during the course of our discourse serves only to reduce a signal-to-noise that is already far too low these days. Most people seem to know instinctively what is polite and what is not. But there will always be some who either wittingly or unwittingly choose to make liberal use of the second person, employ phrases like "grossly incorrect," and conclude their helpful corrections with unhelpful attacks on the author. I suppose that's the price we pay in return for the miracle that is the Net.

Questions, comments, or problems, please visit the Roadfly help desk.