Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2
It really has little to do with defense of anything, only defense of reason and physics. I'm the first to admit other creamings by cars I'm not particularly fond of such as the C6 Z06 and GT-R over the M3. Just to be clear though by "not fond of" I certainly don't mean that I don't still maintain some serious respect for what those cars are capable of.
If you believe official specs on performance from almost any manufacturer, especially BMW then you are the one that really needs a reality check. What part of my E46 M3 SMG and E92 M3 M-DCT simulations don't match best reported times? Hmmm, they match across the board. What they tell is an even better 0-1000m time for the E46 M3 SMG of 23.8s than BMW has claimed. The E92 M3 M-DCT though comes in at 22.6s. Here is a link that provides a single test data point for the 1000m time by the E92 M3 and they got a mere 0.2 seconds slower than this simulation result. 1.2 seconds does not sound like much but at 1000m is a HUGE beat down. It is better thought of in car lengths which turns out to be that when the E92 M3 reaches 1000m the E46 M3 is 15 car lengths behind.
Lastly, you surely can not believe that one instance of simulation being incorrect or unreliable certainly doesn't cast a huge looming shadow of doubt over all simulation?
How many insecure car owners post videos of themselves and "kill stories" besting an obviously superior car? It may not be the norm but it is common. Those posts and videos typically come across one of two ways, either - sure I am modded and the other driver obviously sucked or the more boastful and insecure ones are "dude I'm such a bass ass in my XXXX car, I wasted that poor sucker in the Lambo". Whether you accept reality or not there is some subset of owners who post about such kills who are very insecure about their own cars and indeed jealous that the could not make the step up to the next car. There is no insecurity here on my part nor is it an immature point of view, it's called the real world.
How many times do I need to repeat this, this "view" is not my opinion, it is the physics. Either the sims I posted match reality quite well and thus will also reflect 0-1000m times and trailing distances reasonably accurately (in a true apples to apples fashion") or they don't. Which is it?
I've not made mention of anything of the sort, not sure your point here. And again, to hell with ANYTHING BMW posts as times - they simply do not reflect what most reasonable drivers can do with the car.
Exactly.
So you can make some other ridiculous claim like these two cars being within 0.1 seconds to 1000m?
Here are some (metric and English) simulations comparing E46 M3 SMG vs. E92 M3 M-DCT vs. F82 M4 M-DCT (assuming 455 hp, 30 hp underrated). As we've all said, yes the margins are decreasing but it doesn't mean that the (and yes my precious  ) E92 M3 won't be beat down substantially and across the board. At 1000m the F82 M4 should typically be ahead of the E92 M3 by about 14 car lengths (I use 15 ft for a car length). Over other metrics the distance ahead margins take a more linear step size among the 3 cars as compared to clearly smaller gains for many of the other common metrics. |
There is a 10km/h difference on the E9x 0-1000m trap speed compared with the "real world" data...
In your simulation you end up at 238km/h where the official trap speed is 228km/h. If that part is wrong, then the 0-150MPH time is quite a bit off as well
And as I said yesterday as well, a 1 sec gap at 150 MPH is a distance of roughly 66 metres. So visually a HUGE gap. My point has been that the decimation between E46-E9x-F8x might be on a fairly equal level, where some seem to make a point of the E46 being much more decimated by the E9x than what the F8x will manage. Just look at E60 vs F10 M5, and that doesn't have the weight advantage the F8x has (but a larger power increase).
BTW, I also respect your input on these forums
