BMW M4 Car and Driver Lightning Lap times are out

[FogCityM3]

I have a feeling the new C63 as the true competitor to the M4, will be a force to be reckoned with on the track.

Originally Posted by cs4444

The E63 is more impressive than the RS7, E63 was 3 seconds quicker.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by Santa34

Interesting to compare to last years results. The GT500 being about the same time is a kick to the nuts but the M4 does beat the M5 & M6 pretty handily.

You spent the time to look up old times. Spend a little time to read through the thread.

VIR was repaved a couple months back. The track is much quicker, previous years times are apples to oranges.

[scrammer]

Originally Posted by MaynardZed

Not really. I think the M4 did amazing considering its 300 utg street tire. The camaro for example comes from factory with a 60 utg r compound tire.

But seriously … the Camaro is still 10 SECONDS faster than the new M3/M4 !!!

[SOM3]

Originally Posted by scrammer

But seriously … the Camaro is still 10 SECONDS faster than the new M3/M4 !!!

So what? You can also say ...the Camaro is 3 SECONDS faster than Corvette.

It's a bad ass track car, there is no denying it. What's your point?

[scrammer]

I remember back in 2004 when i got my first new ///M3!!!

… everyone wants to justify their own car, which I guess is understandable. I'm also pretty passionate about my car but I also like to call spade a spade.

Thats my point … the Red-Neck Camaro kicks ass … doesn't mean i am buying one but …

[Ghostriderf80]

Originally Posted by HBspeed

Attachment 1086608

Attachment 1086609

So essentially the drivers were Professionals? Or just owners? Did GM place professionals in their cars? 918 I am sure that was not a regular Joe.

[Kurt_OH]

Originally Posted by Dalko43

What's with all of this hostility and second guessing???

Agreed. The instant someone has the audacity to acknowledge some positive aspect of any car BMW or otherwise that isn't the exact model favored here, then not only is that other CAR buried in hateful posts, but the poster is personally attacked/ridiculed/harassed. It's juvenile.

The M4 did very well for its class of car. The Corvette Stingray did very well. Who cares if the Stingray is slightly faster and why are so many trying to justify the M4's slower time....they are two very different cars with different goals in mind.

I agree with the sentiment, but I'm unwilling to agree that the difference was "slight". Seven seconds per lap is a big difference. As it should be - more power, less weight, way lower CoG ...

Buy and drive the car you enjoy the most...and don't worry so much about which car has the top ranking or track time.

THIS^

Also, different drivers, in different conditions on different days with different tires = different results.

[s4awd]

Agreed. I see a lot of this with M car owners. They will shut you down. Even if you're comparing to another BMW. I recently experienced this when posting about how strong a loaner 535d felt down low compared to my F10 M5. Don't even try to compare a 550i to the M5 because you will get hanged lol. Anyways, M is performance luxury. Good and bad. I went for numbers cars previously, owned a GTR and still have my GT3RS and GT500. Where manufactures such as GM, Nissan and even Mercedes are going with their cars performance wise are leaving BMW and Audi behind. Kudos to them. I never thought that a Mustang and Camaro would be faster around a course than an M3/4 or M5. Seeing the Camaro top a 911 Turbo and up there with a GTR is nuts. Tires shmires. I'm sure that thing will still top BMW M offerings on Michelins. The Porsche had to throw in the 918 to keep up with the Joneses, though Porsche owners tend to be much more open minded. I honestly think BMW M is doing the right thing because their cars are still much more appealing given they give you everything but more of it. A better compromise than the the others can pull off. That's why their fans are so fiercely loyal

[MaynardZed]

Originally Posted by scrammer

But seriously … the Camaro is still 10 SECONDS faster than the new M3/M4 !!!

Tire compound makes a big difference especially 60 R compound vs 300 street tire. Not saying the M4 would equal the Z28 lap time, but it would be closer. The vette should equal the Z28 if it had that tire too.

I love Camaros, I've owned 4 and still have a trans am. I'm one of the few people that seriously cross shopped the Z28 vs. M4. I would probably own one instead of my M4 if I was able to test drive one and dealers weren't marking them up so much. Love the tried and true LS7 vs. the LT1, but in the end the Camaro is just too heavy. VIR is a fast flowing track which favors the more powerful car. Most of the road course tracks around Phoenix are tighter and more technical and I really don't see Camaros do well on them because of their weight.

M4 still far from proven to me on the track also and sadly my old 248rwhp E36 M3 would be quicker than both cars around a given track for 99.99% of drivers.

[ssabripo]

Originally Posted by M3guy3

so we are going to praise BMW because they did there jobs ? they are in the direction they should be.

yes, we should, because all early reports suggested it was perhaps a step back...anything else you want to attempt to troll with?

[FTS]

I find this test quite interesting as I can relate to it. In hopes that it helps the discussion, here are some of my personal notes on the track:

• I am mid-pack advance DE driver, not a racer, I have good experience with chassis setup for track use on multiple cars
• I logged a little over 1,000 laps on VIR Full course and about 200 on Grand East course
• Last time I was on GE course was about 6 years ago in a 987.1 Cayman S on Re-11 tires, and my best time was 3:18; I have huge respect for the test drivers for the times they are able to pull in these tests, whom ever they are
• The biggest challenge on any VIR configuration, particularly GE, is that there are so many turns (34 for GE) that putting a perfect lap is extremely difficult, you always give up something somewhere
• I am not sure resurfacing makes that much difference on lap times for street tires as they do not have soft-enough compounds, and the infield of GE course is not repaved
• Hoosier R6 is about 3-4 secs faster on the full course than R888s
• R comps are about 1.5-2 secs faster than ultra high perf summer tires; I think the biggest difference between the two type of tyres are that r comps are more resilient to heat build up than ultimate grip
• On full course using full length of the two straights, 140 hp difference equates to about 4 secs between cars within 50-60 lbs of each other
• Although I don't have personal experience, people using Trofeo R tires (Z/28) state that they are within 1 to 1.5 secs to their R6 lap times

The following diagram is my take on which aspect of a car makes the most difference in various sections of the GE course, open to debate of course.

[Divexxtreme]

Originally Posted by scrammer

I remember back in 2004 when i got my first new ///M3!!!

… everyone wants to justify their own car, which I guess is understandable. I'm also pretty passionate about my car but I also like to call spade a spade.

Thats my point … the Red-Neck Camaro kicks ass … doesn't mean i am buying one but …

I'm honestly not impressed by the Z/28 at all. It's a completely stripped out, focused track car that needs R-Compounds from the factory to be fast. A simple tire swap on the Stingray will make it as fast, or faster, than the Z/28 is, while still having things like full Napa leather, HUD, heated/vented seats, Bose stereo, NAV, etc.

[MaynardZed]

Thanks FTS for detailing VIR.

Divexxtreme:
Agree, the Z28 had a huge tire compound advantage over the other cars. I'd bet money that even a C6 Z06 would beat the Z28 around a track all things being equal (tires, driver). Same drivetrain, about 500 lbs lighter. If I recall correctly I believe it did around the ring.

[Divexxtreme]

Originally Posted by MaynardZed

Thanks FTS for detailing VIR.

Divexxtreme:
Agree, the Z28 had a huge tire compound advantage over the other cars. I'd bet money that even a C6 Z06 would beat the Z28 around a track all things being equal (tires, driver). Same drivetrain, about 500 lbs lighter. IRC I believe it did around the ring.

Agreed, Maynard.

The Z/28 is way too much of a compromise car for me to really be impressed by it. That's probably why no one seems to buying them from dealers, either. Far too many compromises for $75k.

I mean you can get a non-optioned Stingray coupe for $53k, throw a set of R-Compounds on it for another $1k, and beat the Z/28 around any track while still having a lot more interior amenities.

[M3guy3]

Originally Posted by s4awd

Agreed. I see a lot of this with M car owners. They will shut you down. Even if you're comparing to another BMW. I recently experienced this when posting about how strong a loaner 535d felt down low compared to my F10 M5. Don't even try to compare a 550i to the M5 because you will get hanged lol. Anyways, M is performance luxury. Good and bad. I went for numbers cars previously, owned a GTR and still have my GT3RS and GT500. Where manufactures such as GM, Nissan and even Mercedes are going with their cars performance wise are leaving BMW and Audi behind. Kudos to them. I never thought that a Mustang and Camaro would be faster around a course than an M3/4 or M5. Seeing the Camaro top a 911 Turbo and up there with a GTR is nuts. Tires shmires. I'm sure that thing will still top BMW M offerings on Michelins. The Porsche had to throw in the 918 to keep up with the Joneses, though Porsche owners tend to be much more open minded. I honestly think BMW M is doing the right thing because their cars are still much more appealing given they give you everything but more of it. A better compromise than the the others can pull off. That's why their fans are so fiercely loyal

I feel the M cars have gotten less appealing over the years. I understand they offer a good mix of performance and luxury. they also use to always be better performance cars over the muscle cars.

Now even a GT mustang can make a good track car. although mustangs still have shitty interiors, and there cars do not look as pretty as BMW M cars. So its not all the about numbers somethings. when you really look into everything about the car.

but i think what is going on is that we have so many cars like the 302, GT500, GTR, z/28, corvette etc.. that are offering stupidly good performance for the money. It is making people think about if they really need the luxury, and build quality if a German make.

I owned a E46 M3 and a E92 M3. When they both came out, they were really appealing to me. now the game has changed so much. I like the C7 more than the M3. Its really cool looking , its a got high powered N/A engine etc... more appealing. plus these American engines are so cheap to mod, and make great power with. plus they sound sooo goood. now they have great a chassis

[M3guy3]

Originally Posted by ssabripo

yes, we should, because all early reports suggested it was perhaps a step back...anything else you want to attempt to troll with?

Sure i would rather have a high powered, high revving N/A engine like ever other M3 has had in the past. Sure i would rather have hydraulic power steering, and i also think the cars can do without the new european hood laws. just a few things off the top of my head.

But do i really think its a setup backwards? not really. I think BMW is dealt with a different hand in making this F80. They needed to get a more efficient car, while also bring cost down.

They made a pretty solid car for what they were working with. The car looks great, and the performance gap is higher than ever. I can see BMW will do well with this car, sales well.

[vladberca]

BMW will start to really drop some weight with its G generation of models.
Somehow this is a transition period, but they do quite well. With Comp Pack (and maybe more power this time) I guess the M3/4 will be with 2 sec faster on this track.
I'm curious how will do against its main rivals, next C63 and RS5

[eMvy]

Originally Posted by FTS

I find this test quite interesting as I can relate to it. In hopes that it helps the discussion, here are some of my personal notes on the track:

• I am mid-pack advance DE driver, not a racer, I have good experience with chassis setup for track use on multiple cars
• I logged a little over 1,000 laps on VIR Full course and about 200 on Grand East course
• Last time I was on GE course was about 6 years ago in a 987.1 Cayman S on Re-11 tires, and my best time was 3:18; I have huge respect for the test drivers for the times they are able to pull in these tests, whom ever they are
• The biggest challenge on any VIR configuration, particularly GE, is that there are so many turns (34 for GE) that putting a perfect lap is extremely difficult, you always give up something somewhere
• I am not sure resurfacing makes that much difference on lap times for street tires as they do not have soft-enough compounds, and the infield of GE course is not repaved
• Hoosier R6 is about 3-4 secs faster on the full course than R888s
• R comps are about 1.5-2 secs faster than ultra high perf summer tires; I think the biggest difference between the two type of tyres are that r comps are more resilient to heat build up than ultimate grip
• On full course using full length of the two straights, 140 hp difference equates to about 4 secs between cars within 50-60 lbs of each other
• Although I don't have personal experience, people using Trofeo R tires (Z/28) state that they are within 1 to 1.5 secs to their R6 lap times

The following diagram is my take on which aspect of a car makes the most difference in various sections of the GE course, open to debate of course.

Nice contribution!

[pkimM3r]

raise your hand if you posted on this thread and have never been to a track and are just regurgitating technical bullshit.

[pkimM3r]

Originally Posted by 414M3

The amount of buthurt and self-defense on the forum is hilarious. Why can't you guys just accept that GM made a good car and be satisfied with the performance with your M3/M4. No need to nitpick the differences in tires are and how that contributed to the delta.

None of us will never even approach these limits vs. a Corvette on the street and rarely on the track. Bravo to the American manufacturers for finally bringing out sports cars that can handle. Just too bad it'll be harder to win those armchair debates on who's car is faster

Also it's funny how a lot of people hated on American manufactures for not making cars that could turn, but now that they're here, find any way to put them down.

because M4 is king!! (apparently)

some of these guys want big boot space, comfortable rear seats, AND fastest lap times. dont forget the best one i have heard to date - ability to fit snow tires.

[Dalko43]

Originally Posted by SlowSaloonM3

because M4 is king!! (apparently)

some of these guys want big boot space, comfortable rear seats, AND fastest lap times. dont forget the best one i have heard to date - ability to fit snow tires.

Agree with the above...also I recall seeing someone post that exact thing about the snow tires...they claimed that BMW apparently had to make significant compromises on the M4's chassis in order to fit snow tires.....

I thought that was a low point, even for this forum.

[M3 Esq]

Originally Posted by SlowSaloonM3

raise your hand if you posted on this thread and have never been to a track and are just regurgitating technical bullshit.