|
Post Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
07-03-2014, 07:49 AM | #221 | |
Banned
705
Rep 1,908
Posts |
Quote:
Last edited by 48Laws; 07-03-2014 at 08:22 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-03-2014, 09:20 AM | #222 | |
Advocatus Douchebagus. Sex Marxist.
2415
Rep 3,415
Posts
Drives: Lucy.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2014, 07:37 AM | #223 |
Major General
4449
Rep 7,594
Posts
Drives: '19 M2C
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
|
My two cents.
1) Cant wait for ZCP on the M4, I hope we see a hp bump and perf. exhaust. 2) Most of the bugs are fixed. 3) All the comparisons will have been done lol. In regards to the 911... we are about to see a 991.2 and possibly a 991 GTS. Both of these cars will be significantly faster then the M3/M4. Take the X51 power kit option on the 991s and make it stock on the 991.2
__________________
www.ReTuneTheDeTune.com
2019 M2 Competition (Sunset Orange) |
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2014, 05:03 PM | #224 | ||
.
1232
Rep 1,918
Posts
Drives: 22 M8C Coupe, 21 X5MC
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Atlanta
|
Quote:
__________________
Previous
21 X5M MBB, 20 Evora GT, 20 C63S Coupe,19 X5 50i, 18 Giulia QV, 18 M5, 17 Evora 400, 18 LX570, 17 GT350,18 M4 Comp,17 R8 V10 ,17 M3 Comp,17 GT350,16 Escalade Plat ESV, 16 570S,16 911 GTS,15 M5, 15 LX570, 13 M5,13 Viper,14 Cayman S,13 M3,13 S4,10 RX8,12 A4,10 G37, 04 Mini Cooper S, 08 Scion TC, 06 Altima V6, 05 Altima, 01 Altima, 00 Altima, 94 Explorer, 92 Toyota Pickup, 98 Altima |
||
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2014, 05:04 PM | #225 | |
.
1232
Rep 1,918
Posts
Drives: 22 M8C Coupe, 21 X5MC
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Atlanta
|
Quote:
__________________
Previous
21 X5M MBB, 20 Evora GT, 20 C63S Coupe,19 X5 50i, 18 Giulia QV, 18 M5, 17 Evora 400, 18 LX570, 17 GT350,18 M4 Comp,17 R8 V10 ,17 M3 Comp,17 GT350,16 Escalade Plat ESV, 16 570S,16 911 GTS,15 M5, 15 LX570, 13 M5,13 Viper,14 Cayman S,13 M3,13 S4,10 RX8,12 A4,10 G37, 04 Mini Cooper S, 08 Scion TC, 06 Altima V6, 05 Altima, 01 Altima, 00 Altima, 94 Explorer, 92 Toyota Pickup, 98 Altima |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2014, 09:19 PM | #226 |
Lieutenant
61
Rep 422
Posts |
I am surprised how stupid some people are that read the magazines and fail to realize the following information:
Base 911: Torque: 288 lb-ft @ 5600 RPM Horsepower: 350 HP @ 7400 RPM 0-60 in 4.2 with the 1/4 mile in 12.7 at 113 MPH (Dont forget that this is a 7MT) M4: Torque 406 @1800 or 1900? RPM Horsepower 425 @ 5500 RPM 0-60: 3.9 and 1/4 mile at 12.1 119 (This is with a DCT) Do you really not see the huge gap in torque and Horsepower? The M4 is suppose to be faster in a straight line, and it is suppose to be by a lot, but it is not. Disappointment. Oh yes by the way, you are paying more for the 911 because of the fit and finish, design, technology (driving technology not infotainment tech). So at the end of the day, you really gotta ask yourself, which car promises more... the 911 or the M4? Purely from a driving point of view. I mean that is exactly why people buy either an M4 or a 911? Dont give me the backseat bs line. How many people will really use the backseat of a 911 or an M4. Wait I can answer that since I have a 911 the answer is rarely. By the way, I was a die hard M fan for a long time. Even had a M5 that I did euro delivery on. Less than a year with the car I wanted to run away from it as far as possible. ///M is not what it used to be. Beware!
__________________
--
2004 GT3 (Track and weekend toy) 2016 Cayenne (Daily driver) 2011 Turbo PDK (Retired) 2013 M5 Black Sapphire( Retired ) |
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2014, 09:22 PM | #227 | |
.
1232
Rep 1,918
Posts
Drives: 22 M8C Coupe, 21 X5MC
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Atlanta
|
Quote:
P.s daddy's cars don't count.
__________________
Previous
21 X5M MBB, 20 Evora GT, 20 C63S Coupe,19 X5 50i, 18 Giulia QV, 18 M5, 17 Evora 400, 18 LX570, 17 GT350,18 M4 Comp,17 R8 V10 ,17 M3 Comp,17 GT350,16 Escalade Plat ESV, 16 570S,16 911 GTS,15 M5, 15 LX570, 13 M5,13 Viper,14 Cayman S,13 M3,13 S4,10 RX8,12 A4,10 G37, 04 Mini Cooper S, 08 Scion TC, 06 Altima V6, 05 Altima, 01 Altima, 00 Altima, 94 Explorer, 92 Toyota Pickup, 98 Altima |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-07-2014, 01:45 PM | #228 | |
Brigadier General
876
Rep 3,450
Posts |
Quote:
also, the straight line performance difference is immense. forget the 0-60 times (they're irrelevant anyway... a measurement invented to help non enthusiasts debate performance while drinking beers). look at the difference in trap speed. 6mph is huge. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 09:50 AM | #230 |
Lieutenant
209
Rep 568
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 12:25 PM | #231 | |
Captain
172
Rep 894
Posts
Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY
|
Quote:
Motortrend acknowledges the 12.2 for the 1/4 mile, but I think that can be misleading when you compare it to the M4 which is some 30 hp and 60lb-ft short of the C7. Last edited by Dalko43; 07-08-2014 at 12:31 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 01:03 PM | #232 | |
Brigadier General
126
Rep 4,144
Posts |
Quote:
Cheers.
__________________
2017 F80 YMB.
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 01:13 PM | #233 | |
Captain
172
Rep 894
Posts
Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY
|
Quote:
2) It's 3.0 Liter engine with forced induction. It may very well be underrated, but not to the magnitude of 30hp and 60lb-ft. 3) It's okay to acknowledge that the C7 is slightly faster than the M4. The world will not implode. The sky will stay blue. Both cars are awesome in their own right and have their distinct advantages. So no need to chime in with a fanboy defense every time you feel that your holier than holy M car is being 'disparaged.' |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 08:30 PM | #235 | |
Brigadier General
3663
Rep 3,422
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
M4 GTS, GT3, C63 S | E90 M3s, E39 M5
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 08:46 PM | #236 |
Captain
172
Rep 894
Posts
Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY
|
So they are saying that the new M4 gets 414HP at the wheels? With a 10-15% powertrain loss, that puts the engine output at anywhere from 460-487HP. I have a very hard time believing that BMW under rated their engine by that much.
Did they tune the car? Did they blow cold air into an open hood? I would give much more credibility to this test if it had been done by neutral auto journalist. But European Auto Sports is a BMW aftermarket shop. |
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 08:53 PM | #237 | |
Brigadier General
3663
Rep 3,422
Posts |
Quote:
Anyways, you asked for anything other than hearsay so thought I'd post the most definitive proof I've seen that the car is massively underrated.
__________________
M4 GTS, GT3, C63 S | E90 M3s, E39 M5
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 09:05 PM | #238 | |
Captain
172
Rep 894
Posts
Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY
|
Quote:
Do you understand what European Auto Source is claiming? 414HP at the wheels would mean BMW under rated the S55 by a massive margin...that's certainly something I would expect auto reviewers and journalists to pick up on, but no one has so far. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 09:20 PM | #239 | |
Brigadier General
3663
Rep 3,422
Posts |
Quote:
Reviewers and journalists do seem to be reporting the car is seriously quick. E9X owners (including those with power mods) who have driven F8X say it's clearly notably faster. 11 hp wouldn't be notably faster. EAS data would match the trend -- current gen M's do seem to be underrated. MT dyno'd the F10 M5, results: Either way, the M5 Competition sits 10mm lower than the regular car. There's a revised exhaust, too. As for power, we also subjected the big orange sedan to K&N's dyno, and we saw 508 hp and 452 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. Using 15 percent as our driveline loss correction (the M5 remains RWD only, for now), that's 598 hp and 531 lb-ft of torque. That's a lot of boost. Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz36vviGHjW
__________________
M4 GTS, GT3, C63 S | E90 M3s, E39 M5
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 09:46 PM | #240 | |||
Captain
172
Rep 894
Posts
Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY
|
Quote:
Quote:
That's why I consider EAS' claim of 414HP dubious...I would expect a lot more journalists to comment on how much faster than 425HP the car feels. Quote:
I know the math supports both dyno tests, but we are talking about a 62HP disparity here! I don't know which is considered a more accurate power loss factor, 15% or 10%. What I do know is that I have never heard of a car company under rating their engines by that much. I'm sure when we get some actual reviews, in addition to these aftermarket shop tests, we'll get some resolution on this. Until then, I'll remain skeptical of EAS' claim. Last edited by Dalko43; 07-08-2014 at 09:51 PM.. |
|||
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 09:54 PM | #241 |
Captain
172
Rep 894
Posts
Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY
|
Also, the new M4 easily has +100lb-ft over its predecessor. That would help explain why it feels so quick in relation to the E9X M3.
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-08-2014, 10:49 PM | #242 | |
Brigadier General
3663
Rep 3,422
Posts |
Quote:
But anyways, this discussion is a waste of time. Was not and am not trying to argue with you. You seemed to be looking for information/data, I posted information/data, you don't accept information/data. Wait for more results before you reach a conclusion. The acceleration data available now + the dyno results indicate to me that there is much > a 11 hp advantage for the F8X over the E9X. http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=984354 Believe the forthcoming "official" and unofficial dyno and real world test results will support that idea, but we shall see. edit: you did see page 1 of this thread with the acceleration results, right? 12.1 @ 119 mph. I see this started with you suggesting the C7 is faster in a straight line (due to hp advantage) with a 12.2 @ 117 mph.
__________________
M4 GTS, GT3, C63 S | E90 M3s, E39 M5
Last edited by FormulaMMM; 07-08-2014 at 11:06 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|