BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   BMW M3 and BMW M4 Forum > BMW F80 M3 / F82 M4 Forum > BMW M3 (F80) and BMW M4 (F82) General Forum

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      10-05-2012, 03:28 PM   #155
ScarecrowBoat
Zooombie attaaack!!
 
ScarecrowBoat's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 328i
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Iowa

Posts: 854
iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2012 BMW  [0.00]
This is the dumbest argument I have ever seen on these boards. They haven't even released any figures for the car or what it looks like and people have already decided to buy a fucking Nissan!? LOL
__________________
12 BMW 328i
08 Range Rover Sport SC
ScarecrowBoat is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 03:32 PM   #156
hector
Captain
 
Drives: 2007 e92 335i, 2008 128i cpe.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: virgo supercluster bwo Pennsylvania.

Posts: 680
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by grimlock View Post
... what you feel is the turbos coming on boost, which is simply the abrupt increase in power (HP)...(feel of power=change in HP wrt time)

it's not just the abrupt increase in power, but morover, it is the "jerk" as it is known in automotive slang(change in the rate of acceleration) or, if you will, the increase in the rate at which hp is increasing.

(change hp/t)/t
hector is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 03:58 PM   #157
CanAutM3
Colonel
 
CanAutM3's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 E92 M3 SS2 DCT
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal

Posts: 2,671
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 BMW M3  [0.00]
2006 Audi S4  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoosiers View Post
Those look like 911 numbers vice cayman's more 50, which is good to have weight on the rear driving wheels but creates a higher polar momentum inducing oversteer right? Isn't this the flaw with the 911?
Polar moment is not related to axle weight distribution. Polar momemt depends on how far away the weight is distributed from the center of gravity. For instance a car that has a 50/50 weight distribution but with engine hanging over the front axle and a rear mounted transmission would have a high polar moment (think Corvette, Porsche 944/968/928). A car with a central/rear mounted engine will have a rear weight bias but a low polar moment (think Lotus Elise, Ferrari 458).

The 911 has rear weight bias AND high polar moment. It's a wonder of engineering that Porsche is able to make it handle so well .
CanAutM3 is offline   Canada
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 03:59 PM   #158
Remonster
Captain
 
Drives: 2013 M3 6MT
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Diego, CA

Posts: 898
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Interesting.

Let's look at piston speeds. US units, sorry Uli...

N55: 68.6 ft/s
S65: 69.1 ft/s
S63Tu: 70.1 ft/s

Thus non-stroked S55(?) at 7500 rpm: 73.5 ft/s
Stroked S55(?) to 3.2l at 7500 rpm: 78.4 ft/s

Ferrari 458: 79.7 ft/s

I know, I know don't compare BMW and Ferrari. That complaint falls flat though when looking at the S65, it is the closest to a Ferrari engine in any other production car.

From this I think it is fair to say that even a stroked 3.2l S55(?) could support a redline of 7500 rpm.

Of course there is the question of Valvetronic and its rpm limit. I've only heard rumors about that.
Of course it's possible to have a redline that high, but the 458's engine (whatever it's called) and the BMW S65 are naturally aspirated engines. With a turbo motor, increasing the redline means using a larger turbo which would mean increased lag. The principle reason (well, one of them main reasons) the N54 and N55 lose a lot of power above 6,000RPM is the small size of their turbos which was done on purpose to give them very quick spool times. An M motor needs to have very good throttle response so they are not going to want to strap large turbos on it, 7,500RPM is doable but don't be surprised if they keep the redline lower to really focus on responsiveness.

It's not just turbo size that has to increase, either, the intake manifold would also need to grow larger to support the increased airflow which would also negatively impact spool time.
Remonster is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 04:10 PM   #159
m3 guy
Major
 
m3 guy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 X5M
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Hawaii

Posts: 1,144
iTrader: (3)

Sounds good to me, can't wait for this car to come out
__________________

2013 F30 335 Estoril Blue-Black SOLD
2012 E70 X5M Monte Carlo Blue-Silverstone Journal
m3 guy is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 04:11 PM   #160
CanAutM3
Colonel
 
CanAutM3's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 E92 M3 SS2 DCT
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal

Posts: 2,671
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 BMW M3  [0.00]
2006 Audi S4  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by formula M View Post



Swamp,

For years you have heralded the mighty horsepowaah!
But (once again) you prove you do not understand the importance of torque. I am almost certain you cannot abstractly read a dynograph/chart.. as the rate of acceleration in any vehicle, is directly tied to it's tq curve.



Fact^..
You cannot keep dismissing that & constantly remain ignorant of that fact. HP is only a static figure, it alone represent nothing!

Coincidentally, you have been embattled in this argument for 5+ years..(!!) & to constantly keep dismissing torque? Or to say it's nearly meaningless? Torque accounts for more of a cars characteristics, than horspepower does. It is the engine's ability to move mass (laymanistically). I know u can read a book, but HP is derived as a static figure of the actual work done at that moment... not about the ability to move that mass.. (ie: accelerate)


I know you keep your head into your sim software, but until you buy some premium stuff, that accounts for an artifical linear torque curve, then all u have is ur math, but no understanding. Do not dismiss the massive delta in available torque between the 1M & M3.

Around town (small tracks/streets), the 1M simply ownz the M3.!! Ironically, that is what is purpose is, the 1M's focus is handling. But there is a stark constrast in power delivery & performance between the 2. That is.. with 120hp difference.. it is only after 100mph (ubertracks/F1/nurb), that the long winded M3 get it's chance to outshine it's moAr focused sibling.


The deltas in the dynocharts tell the whole story, you can clearly see how much more grunt (ie: acceleration) is available just off idle on the N54, over the s65... lets not forget that the N54 is 1 liter smaller. If u don't understand any of this.. than compare the s54 (E46 M3) to the n54 (1M Coupe) and wrap ur head around torque please!



I shop torque, it tells much moAr of the story than any other engine statistic. Matter of fact, I am buying an M2 and I do not care what the HP figure is, as long as it close to 360ft-lbs of torque..!


MAX HORSPOWAAAHHH!! is marketing
I am sorry my friend, but your post is badly misinformed.

Looking at "static" published numbers, peak horsepower is much more telling of a car's ultimate performance than peak torque.

I've had interesting phylosophical debates with Swamp , but he is bang on in terms of the importance of power over performance.
CanAutM3 is offline   Canada
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 04:17 PM   #161
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,568
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antares View Post
I was interested what a mixture of carbon and lightweight construction could and would bring to bigger cars, like 5er and 7er.
At the end it would be very nice to get a 7er that weights as much as the new F20 3er. Handling in everyday traffic would reach new levels.
However, there is always the price and a very slow progress in auto industry.
The investment in this lightweight would be very intense while the fuel problem at the opposite end (hydrogen cells or artificial oil) remains unsolved.

The fuel prices (heavily taxed here in Europe) are already having a heavy toll on work migration and "freedom" of driving. To manage to get independent from the tax hike would be a real revolution here
There is no doubt that the upcoming M3/4 will have an increased use of aluminum and composites. BMW has invested with SGL with an ultimate goal of bringing the price/lb of CF down. The unfortunate thing is that they have not reached their goal where widespread use of it is cost effective.

You might be interested in the big related discussion in this thread about the cost and weight benefits and barriers to manufacturing. Doesn't get real interesting for a couple of pages.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK |
| Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors |
| Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels |
| XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit |
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 04:20 PM   #162
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,568
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uli_HH View Post
I never said that its impossible, but high piston speeds in combination with high pressure turbos make problems were all this force come together ... at the crankshaft and its bearings ... and an longer crankshaft is in this case much more problematic than an shorter one ... remember the problems of the S54 with this parts. Also tortuosity could become an problem at an longstroke high-pressure turbo inline-6. with its long crankshaft.
Its expensive to reinforce the chrankshaft and the bearings so that they could withstand this forces ... esp. in longer times in use ... and I donīt know if BMW would do this, if cost-reduction is the main issue and they are of the opinion that 420hp are enough to be better as all competitors.
Good points, you did however say that 7500 rpm in an S55 was "impossible"
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK |
| Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors |
| Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels |
| XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit |
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 04:28 PM   #163
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,568
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanAutM3 View Post
Polar moment is not related to axle weight distribution.
Polar moment and weight distribution are different measures but are closely related. Low polar moment is achieved easily in a mid engine. Mid engine also contributes to equal weight front and rear. A large polar moment comes from a large amount (%) of weight (again an engine is a key contributor) far away from the center of mass. Polar moment however also depends on the total weight itself. A scale model version that is exact will have a correspondingly scaled polar moment, however, its weight distribution will remain unchanged.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK |
| Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors |
| Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels |
| XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit |
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 04:32 PM   #164
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,568
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Remonster View Post
Of course it's possible to have a redline that high, but the 458's engine (whatever it's called) and the BMW S65 are naturally aspirated engines. With a turbo motor, increasing the redline means using a larger turbo which would mean increased lag. The principle reason (well, one of them main reasons) the N54 and N55 lose a lot of power above 6,000RPM is the small size of their turbos which was done on purpose to give them very quick spool times. An M motor needs to have very good throttle response so they are not going to want to strap large turbos on it, 7,500RPM is doable but don't be surprised if they keep the redline lower to really focus on responsiveness.

It's not just turbo size that has to increase, either, the intake manifold would also need to grow larger to support the increased airflow which would also negatively impact spool time.
Good points for sure. The piston speed of the 8500 rpm redline McLaren MP4-12C drops to 65 feet/s due to its fairly short stroke. It seems the electric turbo might be the answer to a large enough turbo to support high rpms and maintaining good throttle response.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK |
| Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors |
| Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels |
| XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit |
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 05:30 PM   #165
ozinaldo
Colonel
 
ozinaldo's Avatar
 
Drives: 1M
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chile, Santiago

Posts: 2,831
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
The only way the 1M owns the M3 is when the M3 is driven improperly in the wrong gear. At the "wrong" rpm the M3 makes little torque which translates into little power. The 1M is kind of opposite. The 1Ms ability to produce good low rpm power does help is get off the line very quick, every bit as quick as the M3. Of course its lighter weight is very advantageous for handling and gives it an advantage on smaller tighter courses.
This is not the whole truth and it is misleading. You obviously have no real idea of what 1M is capable of. At least, if you check reliable dyno charts of both cars and listen to people who actually own both you will see that from idle to around 6200 rpm a stock 1M not only produces more torque but also more hp than a stock E9X M3. This fact combined with its lower weight results in a noticeably quicker car in every condition other than a drag race on a very long straight, where the M3 will catch and pass but only after 1Ms third gear ends which is around 180 km/h, not before. After that point M3 pulls away slowly due to higher top end power and better aeordynamics.

So in order to own a 1M the M3 has to be in a very high rpm point while the 1M should be either very low down or too high up. Only a moron would drive the 1M like that.

And we are not even talking about in-gear acceleration which is imo more important than any other performance category unless you reside around Autobahn. There, we can't even make a comparison, whole different level.

I would say it is the opposite of what you say; the 1M has to be in a wrong gear, a very wrong one to stay behind a M3 (which in turn has to stay over 6500, even 7000 rpm all the time in order to have some advantage), I mean anywhere but on a track with long straights and German highways.

And before you flame me, I love the M3, E46 more than E92 yes but E92 too. And the engine is wonderful as long as you know what it is and what it is not.

The new M3 will not be following solely the high revving NA tradition of past and actual M3s, it will also further what some new cars like the 1M brought on the sports car scene and that is not a bad thing...as long as they do it right, if they keep the sports car feel, for this I would be more suspicious about the size and luxury of next M3 than its turbo engine. I can even speculate that the limited edition short lived and controversial 1M story is all about giving us a pre-production test case for the following M cars. An experiment if I could call it like that. If next M3 will be a better 1M in essence it will be a very good car indeed.

Last edited by ozinaldo; 10-05-2012 at 05:42 PM.
ozinaldo is offline   Chile
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 05:31 PM   #166
grimlock
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: F10 N52B30@255PS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Hong Kong

Posts: 1,707
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Good points, you did however say that 7500 rpm in an S55 was "impossible"
Perhaps 'meaningless' is a better word - there are fundamental characteristic of turbocharging they cannot change with mapping, as in the F10 M5 the last 1500rpm is just there get better times and for redline boast and achieved by articificially hacking the performance earlier in the curve
As in the N20, why even venture over 5500 if it feels so bad
grimlock is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 05:50 PM   #167
FogCityM3
Major
 
FogCityM3's Avatar
 
Drives: M3 (E90)
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: San Francisco

Posts: 1,085
iTrader: (0)

Going to the fastestlaps.com website (where on several short tracks) and looking at a few tests in the US (in particular the Streets of Willow put on by MT), M3 on average was faster than 1M, but not by much. At the M School, while several instructors loved the 1M and preferred it in terms of fun-to-drive factor, on average they said the M3s were faster around their short track (1M more nimble in turns, but any part that required power, M3 has a better suited engine for the track and is easier to control throttle for most drivers). Also having seen nearly every instrumented test in US and Europe, 0-60, 0-100 (M and kph), 1/8 mile and 1/4 mile times on average favor the M3 (both MT and DCT) vs the 1M (think there's 1-2 tests total that has the 1M faster to 60). All of this taken together (and the track info still suffers from a small sample size on the short tracks) actually led me to the opposite conclusion a while back - the M3 if driven properly (applies to MT vs MT) is the faster car and not just over 100mph.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
This is not the whole truth and it is misleading. You obviously have no real idea of what 1M is capable of. At least, if you check reliable dyno charts of both cars and listen to people who actually own both you will see that from idle to around 6200 rpm a stock 1M not only produces more torque but also more hp than a stock E9X M3. This fact combined with its lower weight results in a noticeably quicker car in every condition other than a drag race on a very long straight, where the M3 will catch and pass but only after 1Ms third gear ends which is around 180 km/h, not before. After that point M3 pulls away slowly due to higher top end power and better aeordynamics.

So in order to own a 1M the M3 has to be in a very high rpm point while the 1M should be either very low down or too high up. Only a moron would drive the 1M like that.

And we are not even talking about in-gear acceleration which is imo more important than any other performance category unless you reside around Autobahn. There, we can't even make a comparison, whole different level.

I would say it is the opposite of what you say; the 1M has to be in a wrong gear, a very wrong one to stay behind a M3 (which has to stay over 6500, even 7000 rpm all the time in order to have some advantage), I mean anywhere but on a track with long straights and German highways.

And before you flame me, I love the M3, E46 more than E92 yes but E92 too. And the engine is wonderful as long as you know what it is and what it is not.

The new M3 will not be following solely the high revving NA tradition of past and actual M3s, it will also further what some new cars like the 1M brought on the sports car scene and that is not a bad thing...as long as they do it right, if they keep the sports car feel. I can even speculate that the limited edition short lived and controversial 1M story is all about giving us a pre-production test case for the following M cars. An experiment if I could call it like that. If next M3 will be a better 1M in essence it will be a very good car indeed.
FogCityM3 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 05:58 PM   #168
malter2.0
Banned
 
Drives: em-funf
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SF Bay Area

Posts: 908
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
This is not the whole truth and it is misleading. You obviously have no real idea of what 1M is capable of. At least, if you check reliable dyno charts of both cars and listen to people who actually own both you will see that from idle to around 6200 rpm a stock 1M not only produces more torque but also more hp than a stock E9X M3. This fact combined with its lower weight results in a noticeably quicker car in every condition other than a drag race on a very long straight, where the M3 will catch and pass but only after 1Ms third gear ends which is around 180 km/h, not before. After that point M3 pulls away slowly due to higher top end power and better aeordynamics.

So in order to own a 1M the M3 has to be in a very high rpm point while the 1M should be either very low down or too high up. Only a moron would drive the 1M like that.

And we are not even talking about in-gear acceleration which is imo more important than any other performance category unless you reside around Autobahn. There, we can't even make a comparison, whole different level.

I would say it is the opposite of what you say; the 1M has to be in a wrong gear, a very wrong one to stay behind a M3 (which in turn has to stay over 6500, even 7000 rpm all the time in order to have some advantage), I mean anywhere but on a track with long straights and German highways.

And before you flame me, I love the M3, E46 more than E92 yes but E92 too. And the engine is wonderful as long as you know what it is and what it is not.

The new M3 will not be following solely the high revving NA tradition of past and actual M3s, it will also further what some new cars like the 1M brought on the sports car scene and that is not a bad thing...as long as they do it right, if they keep the sports car feel, for this I would be more suspicious about the size and luxury of next M3 than its turbo engine. I can even speculate that the limited edition short lived and controversial 1M story is all about giving us a pre-production test case for the following M cars. An experiment if I could call it like that. If next M3 will be a better 1M in essence it will be a very good car indeed.
Yes, I agree with you that 1M is faster in all those situations than M3, mostly because it is 300lb lighter and because engine is underrated.

If the engine was truly rated at its advertised number it DOES NOT make more torque than M3. In reality 1m is 380hp stock. Calculate the total area under the torque curve. Despite having higher peak than M3, it is not as flat and overal torque is higher on M3. 335i people tend to repeat themselves how there is 300ft.lb from 1400-5000. Well, my question how much is there from 5000-8400rpm? Oh, wait N54 doesn't go that far. RPM range is the same, one is just down low and one is up high. On N54 Torque falls on it's nose from 5-7k and turbo is blowing hot air. I drive one everyday...and even though I am critical of my car it certainly makes a pleasant and economica daily driver. M3 is overkill for daily driver and 6mpg differene on the highway is A LOT.

Last edited by malter2.0; 10-05-2012 at 06:18 PM.
malter2.0 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 06:00 PM   #169
US///M3
Banned
 
Drives: 1973 Jensen Interceptor
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Shanghai, People's Republic of China

Posts: 1,266
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
This is not the whole truth and it is misleading. You obviously have no real idea of what 1M is capable of. At least, if you check reliable dyno charts of both cars and listen to people who actually own both you will see that from idle to around 6200 rpm a stock 1M not only produces more torque but also more hp than a stock E9X M3. This fact combined with its lower weight results in a noticeably quicker car in every condition other than a drag race on a very long straight, where the M3 will catch and pass but only after 1Ms third gear ends which is around 180 km/h, not before. After that point M3 pulls away slowly due to higher top end power and better aeordynamics.

So in order to own a 1M the M3 has to be in a very high rpm point while the 1M should be either very low down or too high up. Only a moron would drive the 1M like that.

And we are not even talking about in-gear acceleration which is imo more important than any other performance category unless you reside around Autobahn. There, we can't even make a comparison, whole different level.

I would say it is the opposite of what you say; the 1M has to be in a wrong gear, a very wrong one to stay behind a M3 (which in turn has to stay over 6500, even 7000 rpm all the time in order to have some advantage), I mean anywhere but on a track with long straights and German highways.

And before you flame me, I love the M3, E46 more than E92 yes but E92 too. And the engine is wonderful as long as you know what it is and what it is not.

The new M3 will not be following solely the high revving NA tradition of past and actual M3s, it will also further what some new cars like the 1M brought on the sports car scene and that is not a bad thing...as long as they do it right, if they keep the sports car feel, for this I would be more suspicious about the size and luxury of next M3 than its turbo engine. I can even speculate that the limited edition short lived and controversial 1M story is all about giving us a pre-production test case for the following M cars. An experiment if I could call it like that. If next M3 will be a better 1M in essence it will be a very good car indeed.
You mean what the 335i brought on the sports car scene with the N54. I think people who are into Evos, STI's,135's dont understand what the fuss is all about. Hahaha
People who like the intake growl of a NA with individual throttle bodies,high revving V8,instant and quick throttle response dont want your 135i reworked engine.
I bet you the majority of the new engine proponent never owned a high revvin NA V8,they think their 135i engine is the nec plus ultra.
US///M3 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 06:10 PM   #170
ozinaldo
Colonel
 
ozinaldo's Avatar
 
Drives: 1M
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chile, Santiago

Posts: 2,831
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhabs View Post
Going to the fastestlaps.com website (where on several short tracks) and looking at a few tests in the US (in particular the Streets of Willow put on by MT), M3 on average was faster than 1M, but not by much. At the M School, while several instructors loved the 1M and preferred it in terms of fun-to-drive factor, on average they said the M3s were faster around their short track (1M more nimble in turns, but any part that required power, M3 has a better suited engine for the track and is easier to control throttle for most drivers). Also having seen nearly every instrumented test in US and Europe, 0-60, 0-100 (M and kph), 1/8 mile and 1/4 mile times on average favor the M3 (both MT and DCT) vs the 1M (think there's 1-2 tests total that has the 1M faster to 60). All of this taken together (and the track info still suffers from a small sample size on the short tracks) actually led me to the opposite conclusion a while back - the M3 if driven properly (applies to MT vs MT) is the faster car and not just over 100mph.
They sure are very close most of the time but there are tons of mostly Euro tests that say basically what I say plus owners of both cars etc. No need to do this and distract from the heart of the arguement. The difference is little anyway, that is without any doubt. What I was arguing was the logic behind the statement that a M3 has to be in a very wrong gear otherwise it will never loose against the 1M. This myth already got too old, dead and buried even. There is not that much hp difference between the two cars, less than what BMW says (in fact it is around 360 against 410 or so), but there actually is an even bigger gap of torque (around 400 nm to around 550 nm or more) than official numbers say and it just works with the 1M.

And fastest.laps or M driving school! Please, we both can do better than that.

M3 lovers (not you, don't get me wrong, merely the M3 fundamentalists) need to drop their superiority reflexes as soon as possible if they want to continue buying M cars because BMW wants the next M3 a la 1M. There is no other way of putting it and this is the bottomline for everyone who will be in the market. You are free to not like it as much as you want but it is already happening.
__________________
"The mark of a great car is one whose overall competence exceeds what you should expect from its individual components and the 1M does just that", Chris Harris.
2012 BMW 1M: TECH: Evolve Race+N55mids, Evolve IC, Michelin PSS, ER cp, aFe filter, CDVx, Vorshlag camber plates, P3Cars, OCC EXTERIOR: trunk spoiler, blacklines, black grills, IND goodies INTERIOR: Alcantara steering wheel, steel pedals, custom mats, MPower e-brake.
ozinaldo is offline   Chile
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 06:19 PM   #171
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,568
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
This is not the whole truth and it is misleading. You obviously have no real idea of what 1M is capable of. At least, if you check reliable dyno charts of both cars and listen to people who actually own both you will see that from idle to around 6200 rpm a stock 1M not only produces more torque but also more hp than a stock E9X M3. This fact combined with its lower weight results in a noticeably quicker car in every condition other than a drag race on a very long straight, where the M3 will catch and pass but only after 1Ms third gear ends which is around 180 km/h, not before. After that point M3 pulls away slowly due to higher top end power and better aeordynamics.

So in order to own a 1M the M3 has to be in a very high rpm point while the 1M should be either very low down or too high up. Only a moron would drive the 1M like that.

And we are not even talking about in-gear acceleration which is imo more important than any other performance category unless you reside around Autobahn. There, we can't even make a comparison, whole different level.

I would say it is the opposite of what you say; the 1M has to be in a wrong gear, a very wrong one to stay behind a M3 (which in turn has to stay over 6500, even 7000 rpm all the time in order to have some advantage), I mean anywhere but on a track with long straights and German highways.
Well the whole truth is still absolutely that crank torque is utterly meaningless and that (peak) power to weight is the single best predictor of vehicle performance.

Comparable testing (say Motortrend) shows the cars very close to 60 and after that the M3 will win any contest. To 100 the M3 bests the 1M by about 0.7 seconds. That's big. That appears to be entirely inconsistent with your claims. By the way yes I have driven and driven hard the 1M, but no I don't own one. Not that one has to drive or own a car to understand its performance...

Official dynos from BMW show the 1M making the same power up to about 2000 rpm then the M3 leads all the way from there out. Although BMW has been known to under rate... Generally speaking I trust dynos about as far as I can throw one. I trust RRI.se for "real" dyno testing... and unfortunately they have not tested the 1M.

Could this be a case of the overboost making the differences vs. official dynos?

If by "real world" you mean accelerating the cars in improper gears then yes the 1M will have an advantage. I think you misunderstood that about my last post. "Daily driving" to some inherently means lugging the engine in the wrong gear for actually getting the best performance. With DCT especially there is no need to do so (heck there is not a really a reason to do this with a 6MT either). Get the revs way up in the M3, the power goes way up and it out accelerates the 1M due to its better power to weight ratio, simple. Regardless of which gear the 1M uses, if both cars use the best gear for each one the M3 will win. If both cars use the wrong gear (or the M3 uses the wrong gear and the 1M uses the right gear) at low rpm and/or stay in that single gear, yes the 1M can win such a contest. It does so because it can make more power at low rpms than the M3!
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK |
| Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors |
| Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels |
| XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit |
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 06:29 PM   #172
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,568
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
There is not that much hp difference between the two cars, less than what BMW says (in fact it is around 360 against 410 or so), but there actually is an even bigger gap of torque (around 400 nm to around 550 nm or more) than official numbers say and it just works with the 1M.
Well if you call 50+ hp "not that much" then yes, not that much... 360 hp sounds reasonable and that makes the 1M about 5% lower in power to weight than the M3 and that is ENTIRELY consistent with the way the cars perform. The light weight of the 1M can give it a win on slower/tighter tracks. As I've stated many times lower weight is preferable to me rather than more power as a way to improve power to weight ratio.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
And fastest.laps or M driving school! Please, we both can do better than that.
What are your better sources? "A bunch of European tests" or whatever you said?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
M3 lovers (not you, don't get me wrong, merely the M3 fundamentalists) need to drop their superiority reflexes as soon as possible if they want to continue buying M cars because BMW wants the next M3 a la 1M. There is no other way of putting it and this is the bottomline for everyone who will be in the market. You are free to not like it as much as you want but it is already happening.
Why do you think there is so much discussion on both 1M vs. M3 and the new M3/4? BMW is dropping their hallmark, long term, pervasive engine philosophy in favor of the cheapest approach. Is that something to be proud of? Does it mean the 1M's N55 is a better engine than the S65? I still think the M3/4 is likely to be a class leader, but competitors are absolutely catching or exceeding BMW (even with solid rear axles!). Competitors are drastically improving handling and continuing the hp war. The M5 really is not the hands down class leader any longer and that is unfortunate. Let's hope the M3/4 can do better.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK |
| Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors |
| Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels |
| XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit |

Last edited by swamp2; 10-05-2012 at 06:36 PM.
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 06:41 PM   #173
ozinaldo
Colonel
 
ozinaldo's Avatar
 
Drives: 1M
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chile, Santiago

Posts: 2,831
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
360 hp sounds reasonable and that makes the 1M about 5% lower power to weight than the M3 and that is ENTIRELY consistent with the way the cars perform. The light weight of the 1M can give it a win on slower/tighter tracks.



What is your better sources? "A bunch of European tests" or whatever you said?



Why do you think there is so much discussion on both 1M vs. M3 and the new M3/4. BMW is dropping their hallmark, long term, pervasive engine philosophy in favor of the cheapest approach. Is that something to be proud of? I still think the M3/4 is likely to be a class leader, but competitors are absolutely catching or exceeding BMW (even with solid rear axles!). They are drastically improving handling and continuing the hp war. The M5 really is not the hands down class leader any longer and that is unfortunately. Let's hope the M3/4 can do better.
In a perfect world I would like to have every kind of option; powerful NA cars, torquey turbo cars and even efficient diesels. There is a reason for all of them. But there is also a reason why BMW is dropping its trademark as you put it because BMW and M thinks that real good M cars are about the chassis not about the engine. Engines follow the global patterns, trends in economy, in politics, in everything and they change because of that. I am not saying and will never say that turbo is superior to NA, or N54 superior to S65, never. Facts are facts and people need to just get used to certain facts better before than after.

Not many people seem to understand that the competition is catching up on BMW because of the chassis, weight, size and feel not because they all have better engines now.

One point I need to say that it is not only BMW every brand is going with the FI engines. Don't be surprised if Formula 1 allows the turbos again one day and this time with different rules, why not? People associate NA and high rev engines with being sporty and racecar like but this is just a point in history, it can and will change.

Your arguements are well educated but you keep on taking the official numbers about the two cars which cloud your results. The delta between 1M and M3 in hp is much smaller than it looks on factory provided papers and the torque delta is even bigger, combine this with less weight you have extremely close performing cars, not one dominating the other. But this is the least of my points anyway.

And a small note; 1M has a N54T engine not an N55.

Last edited by ozinaldo; 10-05-2012 at 06:51 PM.
ozinaldo is offline   Chile
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 07:00 PM   #174
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,568
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
In a perfect world I would like to have every kind of option; powerful NA cars, torquey turbo cars and even efficient diesels. There is a reason for all of them. But there is also a reason why BMW is dropping its trademark as you put it because BMW and M thinks that real good M cars are about the chassis not about the engine. Engines follow the global patterns, trends in economy, in politics, in everything and they change because of that. I am not saying and will never say that turbo is superior to NA, or N54 superior to S65, never. Facts are facts and people need to just get used to certain facts better before than after.
There is just a change in emphasis, BMW M traditionally focused strongly on both engine and chassis - the complete package. They have now decided for the future, being driven almost entirely by cost, that less special engines along with lighter weight can deliver their goal. It's not a terrible curse and as I've stated many times prior the car will very likely be a class leader. If the Mustang Boss 302 (or perhaps its successor) had a nicer interior I'd probably not even consider another M3. It's bang for the buck is decreasing relative to competitors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
Not many people seem to understand that the competition is catching up on BMW because of the chassis, weight, size and feel not because they all have better engines now.
I would say different competitors are each catching up in different ways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
Your arguements are well educated but you keep on taking the official numbers about the two cars which cloud your results. The delta between 1M and M3 in hp is much smaller than it looks on factory provided papers and the torque delta is even bigger, combine this with less weight you have extremely close performing cars, not one dominating the other. But this is the least of my points anyway.
I readily admit that the 1M makes probably at least 360 hp. I am all for non official numbers when they are not valid. That is still over 50 hp less and you can call this "not much" all you like - it's a lot.

Again, the cars perform closely because they have very close power to weight ratio, period.

BMW simply can not distract me from the importance of power with huge torque numbers. Anyone who claims to care about pure performance should also not be distracted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
And a small point 1M has a N54T engine not an N55.
Thanks, I think I have made this mistake before.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK |
| Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors |
| Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels |
| XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit |
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 07:01 PM   #175
Hoosiers
Private
 
Drives: 2008 M3 Coupe White
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NC

Posts: 97
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanAutM3 View Post
Polar moment is not related to axle weight distribution. Polar momemt depends on how far away the weight is distributed from the center of gravity. For instance a car that has a 50/50 weight distribution but with engine hanging over the front axle and a rear mounted transmission would have a high polar moment (think Corvette, Porsche 944/968/928). A car with a central/rear mounted engine will have a rear weight bias but a low polar moment (think Lotus Elise, Ferrari 458).

The 911 has rear weight bias AND high polar moment. It's a wonder of engineering that Porsche is able to make it handle so well .
Ahhh...true...
"Polar moment is not related to axle weight distribution. Polar momemt depends on how far away the weight is distributed from the center of gravity."
Hoosiers is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      10-05-2012, 08:21 PM   #176
FogCityM3
Major
 
FogCityM3's Avatar
 
Drives: M3 (E90)
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: San Francisco

Posts: 1,085
iTrader: (0)

Fastest laps or what BMW instructors say (which btw, are credible and don't do the marketing schtick given none of them own BMWs, trust me), while a very small sample size, is information that is corroborative. Incremental small sample size information when is corroborate directionally to an appropriate larger sample size (instrumented tests), will likely yield the right conclusion. Interestingly, in the head-to-head tests performed by a few guys in the US (best isolates ambient conditions), M3 wins to 60, 1/8 and quarter. Also any dyno operator will tell you these engines/ECUs are so tough to dyno as the ECUs adapt to ambient conditions, its probably less accurate than doing 10 1/4 mile runs with two cars and averaging the result to really see which car is faster. Some of the dyno racers/aftermarket guys are claiming that the 2010+ M3s because of new software and minor engine improvements and faster later model times, are actually producing more like 430 hp (btw, I don't believe this personally, there are a lot of dyno games going on) Also, the M3's weight/power ratio is superior, so at least in theory, it should be the faster car..(even assuming 370 hp for the 1M) again corroborative. I just haven't found much dissenting information in a large enough sample size that would lead me to your conclusion (except for the threads full of 'war stories').

Don't get me wrong, the 1M is a great car (drove one at the M school) and MT vs MT, I think it's entirely plausible, for the average driver in most conditions, the 1M will be faster as getting the gearing exactly right for the M3 is tough for the average driver..you have to work that engine optimally.

Would be interesting to do the torque multiplication math through the gears/diff/wheels to really see which car is producing more torque to the wheels.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post

And fastest.laps or M driving school! Please, we both can do better than that.
FogCityM3 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
2013 bmw m3, 2013 bmw m4, 2013 m3, 2013 m4, 2014 bmw m3, 2014 m3, 2014 m3 forum, 2014 m3 torque, 2014 m3 weight, 2014 m4 torque, 2014 m4 weight, 2015 m4 torque, 2015 m4 weight, bmw f80, bmw f80 forum, bmw f80 forums, bmw f80 m3, bmw f80 m3 sedan, bmw f82, bmw f82 forum, bmw f82 forums, bmw f82 m3, bmw f82 m3 coupe, bmw f82 m3 forum, bmw f82 m4, bmw f82 m4 coupe, bmw f83, bmw f83 m3, bmw f83 m4, bmw m forum, bmw m forums, bmw m4, bmw m4 coupe, bmw m4 coupe forum, bmw m4 forum, bmw m4 forums, f80, f80 forum, f80 forums, f80 m3, f80 m3 forum, f80 m3 forums, f80 m3 sedan, f80 m3 torque, f80 m3 weight, f80 m4 weight, f82, f82 coupe, f82 forum, f82 forums, f82 m3, f82 m3 coupe, f82 m3 forum, f82 m4, f82 m4 coupe, f82 m4 forum, f82 m4 forums, f82 m4 torque, f83 m3, f83 m4

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:23 AM.




f80post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST