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
      05-13-2014, 07:33 AM   #221
RPiM5
Major General
RPiM5's Avatar
2857
Rep
7,883
Posts

Drives: Mexico Blue F10 M5(Mika)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sunny San Diego

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 335iRlz View Post
I have one on order granted Rockville is pissing me off that I'm still in order processed status :/
Yikes! I hate when dealers do that or are slow to act. I hope you get you get it all squared away. I'm seriously looking forward to seeing the M4's and M3's in the dealerships.
__________________


Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 08:11 AM   #222
absoluteis350
Captain
absoluteis350's Avatar
409
Rep
977
Posts

Drives: 2016 Singapore Grey M3
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: boston

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnmd View Post
It cannot even take it from a dig how is it going to take it from a 20mph roll? And what do you mean by "appropriate apples to apples".

M5 has significantly more power and the dyno numbers actually dont lie about how massively underrated M5 is.
Obviously its not only about dyno numbers but traction, weight and gearing, especially from 0.. I would think that is obvious.

And apples to apples means same track, same day, side by side. Ideally back to back with the same driver, but similar experienced drivers side by side would work too.

Gustav needs to make more videos.
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 08:29 AM   #223
Johnmd
Banned
1
Rep
61
Posts

Drives: CLS AMG
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by absoluteis350 View Post
Obviously its not only about dyno numbers but traction, weight and gearing, especially from 0.. I would think that is obvious.

And apples to apples means same track, same day, side by side. Ideally back to back with the same driver, but similar experienced drivers side by side would work too.

Gustav needs to make more videos.
Races from a roll is all about power.

My point was, a bit of a rolling start (not as much as 60-70) is enough for the m5 to put in a few bus lengths.
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 08:32 AM   #224
dlbrooks18
Brigadier General
dlbrooks18's Avatar
161
Rep
3,736
Posts

Drives: e90 335i
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Los Angeles

iTrader: (2)

Impressive results, thanks for the testing. What octane rating is the gas you are using?
__________________

2008 E90 335
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 09:52 AM   #225
Suave
Major
Suave's Avatar
United_States
279
Rep
1,449
Posts

Drives: GT4 and M2 in progress
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA

iTrader: (0)

This will be my last post on this subject until we have more testing results than an amateur running on a sandy bended road, 100 pounds of equipment on board, and calling it a valid undisputable comparison. Absolutely the information, data, and videos UAE has provided have been awesome and not intended to take away from his awesome effort but lets keep it in perspective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 335iRlz View Post
http://f10.m5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=978207

Our buddy who got an 11.08 with a BMS m5 posted a 1.706 60ft... Just saying.
Nice result for sure but its a modded car. I've seen honda civics faster than that so this just proves that modded car will get better results..shocking Lets wait to see what a comparable modded F8x does in a track.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RPiM5 View Post
The best I've gotten with F10 M5 on street Michelin PSS 0-60 was 3.8 seconds.

So this thread is saying that a stock F10 M5 without Comp Package is still faster than the new M3/M4 0-60 time of 4.2 seconds?

Just doesn't make sense, since the new M3/M4 is like 900lbs lighter than the M5.

Oh well, I'll just be happy with my 4,400lbs whale.
4.2 secs is not a 0-60 time you are referencing that is a 0-62mph result UAE247 showed on the Vbox with less than optimal conditions. The 3.8 time you got was with Mods or stock?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnmd View Post
M5 does 0-200 in 12.3s vs 13.4 in M3
M5 does 0-250 in 21.3s vs 23 in M3
M5 does 1/4 mile in 11.6s @ 122 mph vs 12.2 and 118 mph in M3.

I have no idea where these M3 is faster comments are coming from. All these numbers I posted are done by amateurs using stock cars with no track radials. Its apples to apples comparison. The OP did all of this in 80F weather, that is nothing really in fact, its the best temperature for the PSS tires.

The thread is not about skidpad, or nurburgring times, or handling. Its about vbox and straightline speed, period. And M3 is not faster than M5, in any of these categories (even the 0-100 based on OP's 4.2s).

Now also remember, these are all from a dig, do some 20-30 mph pulls and you'll see the M5 putting 2-3 bus lengths to the M3 before they reach 100mph.

The comparison conversation is happening because prospective M3 owners kept saying "its faster or as fast" as the M5. There were many posts here made by various people making this claim.

Based on these numbers, M3 is putting 455hp crank whereas M5 CP is putting over 650hp. Thats almost 50% more power between two cars. The results are as expected. M5 is extremely underrated by over 75hp. M3 maybe 30hp.
The F8x will beat the current M5 in a 0-60 and is the track star of all M cars at the moment on any circuit out there. I also believe we will not see any car review by same driver/ same track where the F8x did not beat the M5 on 0-60 or lap time even with the F-10 CP. Now I make no claims to 100 or beyond as the advantage of the monster M5 engine will come to life, catch up and pull away eventually well before limiter. The Quarter Mile will be tight as the M5 will begin to pull close at 80mph and eventually overtake approaching 100mph. The ability to use the performance on everyday driving make the F8x the faster daily driver the majority of the time in real world driving conditions. The comparative times you posted for the midrange pulls will be much improved by others in better controlled stock testing so I will reserve comment until we see more results.


Quote:
I have no idea where these M3 is faster comments are coming from
, well BMW NA M Engineers is where so are they lying to us?


BMW USA right now says this for 2014 M5: "Conquer every road with the M5 Sedan. It's armed with the most powerful engine ever outfitted in an M5. A high-torque, 7-speed M-Double Clutch Transmission makes going 0–60 in 4.3 seconds routine."

For M3: "In the spirit of true M racing, you’ll enjoy a 0-60 mph time of a mere 4.1 seconds, dropping to 3.9 seconds when equipped with 7-speed M Double Clutch Transmission."

The difference is a substantial .4 seconds between the M5 and M3 using DCT by BMW conservative estimates. Actual Magazine testing for M5 have been in 3.7-3.8 range or .6 difference which is also quite substantial. Now with M3 working with 3.9 to begin with as factory metric who can honestly say that it would be impossible to see a 3.6 as CanAutM3 has cited in his data or even lower and shock the car world. Lets wait for proper testing to see what we get.

My bottom line is this: The f8x is faster in 0-60 and on any track, twisties, canyon roads with exception to high speed expressway driving. In everyday driving conditions with the average joe at the wheel it will be easier to extract performance from F8x than and F-10 in 99% of driving scenarios. The M5 would certainly outperform the F8x in speeds approaching 100mph and on midrange pulls that involve speeds over 100mph as it should with the advantage of added HP. The M5 is a lot of fun when playing at these speeds and no argument here The reality is that we would only ever see this on an expressway / Straightline driving situations with room to spare. This is why the last E9X generation was often quoted as the best all around performance daily driver out there. I have no doubt the F8x will follow.
__________________
201X ???? Coming soon
2015 F80 M3 AW/SO - Going Going Gone!
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:03 AM   #226
RPiM5
Major General
RPiM5's Avatar
2857
Rep
7,883
Posts

Drives: Mexico Blue F10 M5(Mika)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sunny San Diego

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suave View Post
The 3.8 time you got was with Mods or stock?
That time I got was when I had my M5 100% bone stock, with Charcoal Filters too. But it was in less than optimal conditions as people might say around here. I did it on top of a mountain back in San Diego at around 6,000ft elevation and there was some dust around so who knows.

With my modded M5 currently around 750hp and 650tq, my 0-60 time is actually slower due to traction issues. That's why Greentrbo95gst had to put DR's on, because no AWD.
__________________


Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:09 AM   #227
Topspeed
fast enough
Topspeed's Avatar
South Africa
68
Rep
149
Posts

Drives: Cayman, GTR, M235, Boxster S,
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: South Africa

iTrader: (0)

The outcome from a roll against the M5 will likely resemble this:


Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:09 AM   #228
Suave
Major
Suave's Avatar
United_States
279
Rep
1,449
Posts

Drives: GT4 and M2 in progress
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by RPiM5 View Post

With my modded M5 currently around 750hp and 650tq, my 0-60 time is actually slower due to traction issues. That's why Greentrbo95gst had to put DR's on, because no AWD.
This is why AWD in next generation is going to happen. The M5 will see huge gains in performance and track and the weight penalty makes it worthwhile when greater power becomes useless. I did not realize you had modded up to that level We definitely will have to do a drive sometime and swap cars to do some comparisons
__________________
201X ???? Coming soon
2015 F80 M3 AW/SO - Going Going Gone!
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:11 AM   #229
RPiM5
Major General
RPiM5's Avatar
2857
Rep
7,883
Posts

Drives: Mexico Blue F10 M5(Mika)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sunny San Diego

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Topspeed View Post
The outcome from a roll against the M5 will likely resemble this:


Train lengths.
__________________


Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:12 AM   #230
Johnmd
Banned
1
Rep
61
Posts

Drives: CLS AMG
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suave View Post
This will be my last post on this subject until we have more testing results than an amateur running on a sandy bended road, 100 pounds of equipment on board, and calling it a valid undisputable comparison. Absolutely the information, data, and videos UAE has provided have been awesome and not intended to take away from his awesome effort but lets keep it in perspective.



Nice result for sure but its a modded car. I've seen honda civics faster than that so this just proves that modded car will get better results..shocking Lets wait to see what a comparable modded F8x does in a track.



4.2 secs is not a 0-60 time you are referencing that is a 0-62mph result UAE247 showed on the Vbox with less than optimal conditions. The 3.8 time you got was with Mods or stock?



The F8x will beat the current M5 in a 0-60 and is the track star of all M cars at the moment on any circuit out there. I also believe we will not see any car review by same driver/ same track where the F8x did not beat the M5 on 0-60 or lap time even with the F-10 CP. Now I make no claims to 100 or beyond as the advantage of the monster M5 engine will come to life, catch up and pull away eventually well before limiter. The Quarter Mile will be tight as the M5 will begin to pull close at 80mph and eventually overtake approaching 100mph. The ability to use the performance on everyday driving make the F8x the faster daily driver the majority of the time in real world driving conditions. The comparative times you posted for the midrange pulls will be much improved by others in better controlled stock testing so I will reserve comment until we see more results.


, well BMW NA M Engineers is where so are they lying to us?

BMW USA right now says this for 2014 M5: "Conquer every road with the M5 Sedan. It's armed with the most powerful engine ever outfitted in an M5. A high-torque, 7-speed M-Double Clutch Transmission makes going 0–60 in 4.3 seconds routine."

For M3: "In the spirit of true M racing, you’ll enjoy a 0-60 mph time of a mere 4.1 seconds, dropping to 3.9 seconds when equipped with 7-speed M Double Clutch Transmission."

The difference is a substantial .4 seconds between the M5 and M3 using DCT by BMW conservative estimates. Actual Magazine testing for M5 have been in 3.7-3.8 range or .6 difference which is also quite substantial. Now with M3 working with 3.9 to begin with as factory metric who can honestly say that it would be impossible to see a 3.6 as CanAutM3 has cited in his data or even lower and shock the car world. Lets wait for proper testing to see what we get.

My bottom line is this: The f8x is faster in 0-60 and on any track, twisties, canyon roads with exception to high speed expressway driving. In everyday driving conditions with the average joe at the wheel it will be easier to extract performance from F8x than and F-10 in 99% of driving scenarios. The M5 would certainly outperform the F8x in speeds approaching 100mph and on midrange pulls that involve speeds over 100mph as it should with the advantage of added HP. The M5 is a lot of fun when playing at these speeds and no argument here The reality is that we would only ever see this on an expressway / Straightline driving situations with room to spare. This is why the last E9X generation was often quoted as the best all around performance daily driver out there. I have no doubt the F8x will follow.
Everyday driving != 0-60 || track. At least for me its more 30-90 range and I dare any M3 driver to go against a stock M5 CP and see what happens.

You also have to realize one will achieve such performance comfortably
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:22 AM   #231
Suave
Major
Suave's Avatar
United_States
279
Rep
1,449
Posts

Drives: GT4 and M2 in progress
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnmd View Post
Everyday driving != 0-60 || track. At least for me its more 30-90 range and I dare any M3 driver to go against a stock M5 CP and see what happens.

You also have to realize one will achieve such performance comfortably
I mentioned much more than 0-60 and track. Everything but expressway cruising/midrange high speed pulls is included in the bucket. I also did not cite a M5 CP but the F8x will have the same results with closer outcome. To be clear do you think that either a M5 whether or not it has CP will beat a F8x in a 0-60 sprint or around a track in a head to head? Think carefully
__________________
201X ???? Coming soon
2015 F80 M3 AW/SO - Going Going Gone!
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:25 AM   #232
RPiM5
Major General
RPiM5's Avatar
2857
Rep
7,883
Posts

Drives: Mexico Blue F10 M5(Mika)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sunny San Diego

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suave View Post
I mentioned much more than 0-60 and track. Everything but expressway cruising/midrange high speed pulls is included in the bucket. I also did not cite a M5 CP but the F8x will have the same results with closer outcome. To be clear do you think that either a M5 whether or not it has CP will beat a F8x in a 0-60 sprint or around a track in a head to head? Think carefully
The M5 won't stand a chance against the M4 on the track unless it's the Nurburgring or some other track with long straights.
__________________


Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:31 AM   #233
M5Rlz
Colonel
249
Rep
2,202
Posts

Drives: R8, f10m59(Rip), m4, GTR
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: MD

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suave View Post

Nice result for sure but its a modded car. I've seen honda civics faster than that so this just proves that modded car will get better results..shocking Lets wait to see what a comparable modded F8x does in a track.
Can you link me to those honda civics that weigh 4400lbs? K thanks

youtube.com/watch?v=UuVeBD4OCNY

^Thats a stock m5 vs. a c5 z06 with FULL bolt ons and a little birdie told me that m5 had 4 passengers who wanted to see...

Quote:
Originally Posted by RPiM5 View Post
That time I got was when I had my M5 100% bone stock, with Charcoal Filters too. But it was in less than optimal conditions as people might say around here. I did it on top of a mountain back in San Diego at around 6,000ft elevation and there was some dust around so who knows.

With my modded M5 currently around 750hp and 650tq, my 0-60 time is actually slower due to traction issues. That's why Greentrbo95gst had to put DR's on, because no AWD.
Can't be true, you're not driving the star of the m division...

Last edited by M5Rlz; 05-13-2014 at 10:37 AM..
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:31 AM   #234
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
609
Rep
10,407
Posts

Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnmd View Post
It cannot even take it from a dig how is it going to take it from a 20mph roll? And what do you mean by "appropriate apples to apples".
Apples to apples I believe it will take both. "Apples to apples" means exactly that, a well controlled, fair test. Specifically cars both well broken in, same or similar skilled drivers, both manual launch or software launched, tires in a similar state of wear, same day, same track, same temperature. Even same fuel wouldn't hurt, but that's a minor point. That should just about cover it. From this list you can get a glimpse of why various tests have conlflicting results and may not actually represent the average nor best a car can deliver. This stuff matter, period. There is no one single test result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnmd View Post
M5 has significantly more power and the dyno numbers actually dont lie about how massively underrated M5 is.
Power (peak) to weight is what matters and the cars are virtually identical. The performance observed for the M5 is consistent with a mild underrating, perhaps 20 hp, not a massive underrating. After accounting for very close power to weight ratios the next observation is that the shape of the power curves matter and in this regard the M4 (even though personally I don't prefer the character of its power band) it is a slightly "better" curve, i.e. making a higher percentage of peak power across a wider rpm range.
__________________
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 |
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:34 AM   #235
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
609
Rep
10,407
Posts

Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnmd View Post
Races from mid to high speeds from a roll is all about power.
No, I have corrected your statement in bold.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnmd View Post
My point was, a bit of a rolling start (not as much as 60-70) is enough for the m5 to put in a few bus lengths.
Again, no, there is nothing about the preliminary data nor the matching simulations that indicate this. Sorry, it just isn't the case. 60-130, yes quite decisive win for the M5, anything similar or above the same.
__________________
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 |
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:38 AM   #236
Suave
Major
Suave's Avatar
United_States
279
Rep
1,449
Posts

Drives: GT4 and M2 in progress
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 335iRlz View Post
Can you link me to those honda civics that weigh 4400lbs? K thanks
You missed the point completely that comparing a modded car into a conversation about stock performance is a mute point. Ok back to my coffee
__________________
201X ???? Coming soon
2015 F80 M3 AW/SO - Going Going Gone!
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 10:41 AM   #237
M5Rlz
Colonel
249
Rep
2,202
Posts

Drives: R8, f10m59(Rip), m4, GTR
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: MD

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suave View Post
You missed the point completely that comparing a modded car into a conversation about stock performance is a mute point. Ok back to my coffee
Nobody was comparing a modded car.. I was talking about a good 60FT roll out

maybe that coffee would benefit from some adderall

I digress though thats what I'm doing to my M4 is modding it as much as possible I'm happy with what this VBOX data showed and hopefully this engine has just as much potential as the 63tu. Hopefully downpipes and quality exhaust systems fix that awful, awful sound.
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 11:07 AM   #238
Johnmd
Banned
1
Rep
61
Posts

Drives: CLS AMG
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suave View Post
I mentioned much more than 0-60 and track. Everything but expressway cruising/midrange high speed pulls is included in the bucket. I also did not cite a M5 CP but the F8x will have the same results with closer outcome. To be clear do you think that either a M5 whether or not it has CP will beat a F8x in a 0-60 sprint or around a track in a head to head? Think carefully
And again, for my case for example that involves NY, long island, NJ, etc, there are no canyons, there are no hard bends with "spirited" driving. People who live in some rural part of the country where they can push the car to its "handling" limits are exception. I drive 99% of the time in freeway and highways, between 30-90mph. Put and M3 right next to me, and lets see which one wins.

Nobody is doubting the race track. But as i mentioned before in this thread, this thread is about vbox which is straight line speed. So please stop saying M3 will beat the M5 in a track, sure it will. But this conversation is about straight line speed. And in a regular day to day driving, you never do launch controls, you never floor in traffic in a red light. You do mid range 30-40 mph pulls. Thats it.

If I wanted tracking, I'd get a GTR or a 911 4S. M3 to me is a compromise car it does each (track, dd, etc) 80% of the way whereas M5 does dd 100% (it is the best super sedan in the world, there isnt a better car), and to me I'd much rather get a car that does track duty 100% as well like a porsche or a GTR. Obviously that costs significantly more money
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 11:14 AM   #239
Johnmd
Banned
1
Rep
61
Posts

Drives: CLS AMG
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Apples to apples I believe it will take both. "Apples to apples" means exactly that, a well controlled, fair test. Specifically cars both well broken in, same or similar skilled drivers, both manual launch or software launched, tires in a similar state of wear, same day, same track, same temperature. Even same fuel wouldn't hurt, but that's a minor point. That should just about cover it. From this list you can get a glimpse of why various tests have conlflicting results and may not actually represent the average nor best a car can deliver. This stuff matter, period. There is no one single test result.



Power (peak) to weight is what matters and the cars are virtually identical. The performance observed for the M5 is consistent with a mild underrating, perhaps 20 hp, not a massive underrating. After accounting for very close power to weight ratios the next observation is that the shape of the power curves matter and in this regard the M4 (even though personally I don't prefer the character of its power band) it is a slightly "better" curve, i.e. making a higher percentage of peak power across a wider rpm range.
Swamp, please search the m5post forum here, cp stock makes 660hp crank (with 15% dricetrain loss). I dont mean to disrespect you in anyway as you are a quite knowledgeable guy, but m5 cp is underrated far more than 20hp. If I could find the post, I will link it.
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 11:21 AM   #240
Johnmd
Banned
1
Rep
61
Posts

Drives: CLS AMG
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ

iTrader: (0)

Have a look at post #6 here : http://f10.m5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=962214

This particular member got 563hp on wheels, that is around 662hp on crank. That is over 80hp.
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 11:26 AM   #241
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
609
Rep
10,407
Posts

Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnmd View Post
Swamp, please search the m5post forum here, cp stock makes 660hp crank (with 15% dricetrain loss). I dont mean to disrespect you in anyway as you are a quite knowledgeable guy, but m5 cp is underrated far more than 20hp. If I could find the post, I will link it.
And what about the posted video evidence prior right here in this thread showing it makes right about 580 hp with 12% loss. I do believe that figure is low, but not 80 hp low...

Dynos are like religion, they all can't be right. They are inherently inaccurate, non repeatable and poor at establishing absolute values.

Do M5 CP's trap at 125+ mph? I'd be included to believe something close to your claim about the power if so, if not, no.

Anyway, isn't this side discussion really about the M5 BASE vs. M4. Obviously a more fair competition would be the M4 with similar factor mods, of which I'm highly confident BMW will offer.
__________________
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 |
Appreciate 0
      05-13-2014, 11:29 AM   #242
Johnmd
Banned
1
Rep
61
Posts

Drives: CLS AMG
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
And what about the posted video evidence prior right here in this thread showing it makes right about 580 hp with 12% loss. I do believe that figure is low, but not 80 hp low...

Dynos are like religion, they all can't be right. They are inherently inaccurate, non repeatable and poor at establishing absolute values.

Do M5 CP's trap at 125+ mph? I'd be included to believe something close to your claim about the power if so, if not, no.

Anyway, isn't this side discussion really about the M5 BASE vs. M4. Obviously a more fair competition would be the M4 with similar factor mods, of which I'm highly confident BMW will offer.
I highly doubt BMW will offer ZCP that costs more than 3-3.5k at most. They cant sell a 7.3k ZCP to the M3 market. So i dont expect such drastic changes in that package. Typical 1cm dropped height, new wheels, better mdm, etc.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:49 AM.




f80post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
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