R44 Performance
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 Technical Topics > Engine / Drivetrain / Exhaust / Bolt-ons / Tuning

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      09-16-2013, 01:35 AM   #23
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Robin_NL's Avatar
8680
Rep
7,846
Posts

Drives: HS M2 Competition
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Do you also believe the BMW nonsense that a 50-50 weight distribution is ideal for the "ultimate driving machine"?

Do you also believe BMW M is being honest and consistent when they have always focused on an M cars output (in hp, of course) and now with the switch to turbos they shift the discussion to significantly emphasize torque? This is called marketing, emphasize what you have, this is what turbo engines do, it is their nature. We as consumers should simply understand the details of what we are being sold and how we are being marketed to.

Again there is nothing wrong with more power (albeit even if temporarily) at mid rpms (i.e. not more peak power). It's just that more peak power is substantially more important.
Let's make things straight here.
When F1 had V10 engines more than a few years ago , the E60 M5 came out, marketeered by the F1 world. A V10 just like F1 cars.

Then came the cut off 2 cylinder V8 M3, hapilly F1 turned to V8s at that time. LOL.

BMW came in with some marketing. Now turbo engines are coming in F1 next season , and many manufacturers already have very fast turbo engined cars for the Streets.

All the things you say above I agree with, except for the bold stuff: way too black and white imo. Maybe weight is even more important. There are way too many factors in a car which make a car good/better/best and faster, and peak power at high revs is just one of them. In F1 it's the core of them all maybe(and downforce plus weight) . But in a streetcar it is not! And you know that.

Why do you think I sold my E90 M3 in the first place: No power/hp whatsoever at mid rpms and too heavy.

Put a 2.4 V8 19000 rpm 750BHP F1 engine in a 1400/1500kg streetcar. Won't work.

Peak power is fantastic and screaming beyond 8000 too. But in real life at the end of the day it's the whole package that counts....even MPG!

About overboost: It works in real life . No discussion. Period.

Go out and drive the mother of them all, the E30 M3 with just 7000rpm redline. It's as exciting as my dead parrot.



Cheers
Robin
Appreciate 0
      09-16-2013, 01:43 AM   #24
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Robin_NL's Avatar
8680
Rep
7,846
Posts

Drives: HS M2 Competition
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
albeit even if temporarily...that made me think; isn't all power temporary? I mean whatever number we pick, isn't it at a given rpm, including the peak power?

Questions:

1) How do we benefit from "peak" power frequent enough in real world driving, since it is reached at the top end of the revs in good NA engines like the S65?
2) Why exactly peak power is "substantially more important" unless of course we live around Nurburgring or our daily commute pass to/from unlimited sections of autobahn?...which would be great by the way!
3) How exactly an engine (N54T) which produces not only more torque (around 60% more) but also more hp from idle to around 6250 rpm vs. a magnificiant NA engine, and only after that it starts falling back (vs. the other engine, the S65 of course) for the last 750 rpms left, can be performing less in a variety of situations in real world driving where you are supposed to be driving around different rpms and not at a single rpm, especially not around top of the rev? This even before we also take into consideration weight and power to weight factors.
4) How do you explain the fact that despite being more tricky to launch effectively, a 1M manages to stay (slightly) ahead of a manual M3 untill the end of its third gear (around 180 km/h) and starts falling behind only after around 200+ km/h, according to people who owned or still own both, are these people simply lying or don't know what they talk about? Or, is it maybe one of them is way underrated and/or the other overrated, who knows, and simply taking those BMW advertised hp/tq numbers as a base for sound calculation maybe is the very reason of reaching misleading conclusions?
5) Did you ever drive a 1M or a 335is or a Z435is, I mean long enough and not as a passenger, to understand their driving/delivery characteristics, preferably a 1M, since it also has the parts and bits that makes it more comparable/similar to your car?

I enjoy your posts and strong logic and knowledge behind them, I really do and am not here to contest you, also am a fan of S65 and M3, could be my choice if it would be smaller in size and with less weight. It is plain and simple: the more I read from you the more I started getting curious; how do you answer these questions to yourself, I am very curious to hear. Do you say that what we experience out there all day is an illusion?

Thanks in advance.
Post of the day.

Read it carefully Swamp. Please.

Cheers
Robin
Appreciate 0
      09-16-2013, 04:16 PM   #25
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 ozinaldo View Post
albeit even if temporarily...that made me think; isn't all power temporary? I mean whatever number we pick, isn't it at a given rpm, including the peak power?
For an ICE power is indeed a function of rpm, load and throttle position thus power is a very dynamic concept. However, in choosing a single and simple metric that best informs us about a vehicles performance, peak power reigns supreme (of course peak power divided by weight).

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
Questions:

1) How do we benefit from "peak" power frequent enough in real world driving, since it is reached at the top end of the revs in good NA engines like the S65?
The average power throughout the rpms (but as a function of time, not rpm!) actually used is indeed more important. However, given that power varies and is generally linear/rolling off to flat or in some cases decreasing with higher rpm (say 1M and Z06 Corvette in particular), the peak value is still the best simple metric to use. In other words the average power across rpms actually used in a WOT performance run will correlate very well and quite linearly with the actual peak power. It is not a perfectly predictive number but a very good one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
2) Why exactly peak power is "substantially more important" unless of course we live around Nurburgring or our daily commute pass to/from unlimited sections of autobahn?...which would be great by the way!
It is important because almost all folks are interested in the maximum possible performance. Peak power simply tells us the most about the maximum performance attainable with a given engine (and again weight). It is certainly all about the rpm range(s) actually used. The power or torque an engine makes (less the effects of drag racing discussed a bit below) outside of the rpms actually used are truly irrelevant. Thus on a track or road course what the S65 in the M3 is doing below about 5000 rpm is truly meaningless. It could literally make 10 ft lb or 10 hp at those rpms and it would not matter - those rpms are never "used". For those unwilling to fully depress the gas pedal or use the rpms near redline then all bets are off. I commonly refer to this as "lazy driving". Folks are generally concerned about the maximum possible performance but some of those don't want to use the car as designed and use the redline. The same comment obviously applies to choosing the right/best gear, it basically the same concept. Not being willing to use the available performance envelope in a sports car just makes very little sense to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
3) How exactly an engine (N54T) which produces not only more torque (around 60% more) but also more hp from idle to around 6250 rpm vs. a magnificiant NA engine, and only after that it starts falling back (vs. the other engine, the S65 of course) for the last 750 rpms left, can be performing less in a variety of situations in real world driving where you are supposed to be driving around different rpms and not at a single rpm, especially not around top of the rev? This even before we also take into consideration weight and power to weight factors.
Yes, for "lazy driving" turbos and specifically the N54/N55 can be great engines. I've mostly covered this question already above. The rpms you use are the relevant rpms. Dynos are a whole other ball of wax... Generally I trust them about as far as I can throw the paper they are printed on. Just too many variables and too much non real world effects (temperature, flow). That being said I don't doubt the 1M (when on overboost) can produce more power in some rpm range than the M3. However, I seriously doubt it does so up to 6750 rpm. Probably closer to 6k than 7k. This along with weight contribute to making the car a solid low speed low rpm performer compared to the M3. The problem with the N54/N55 is its complete lack of ability to breath past about 5250 rpm and you really feel this and it hurts the cars performance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
4) How do you explain the fact that despite being more tricky to launch effectively, a 1M manages to stay (slightly) ahead of a manual M3 untill the end of its third gear (around 180 km/h) and starts falling behind only after around 200+ km/h, according to people who owned or still own both, are these people simply lying or don't know what they talk about? Or, is it maybe one of them is way underrated and/or the other overrated, who knows, and simply taking those BMW advertised hp/tq numbers as a base for sound calculation maybe is the very reason of reaching misleading conclusions?
The 1M is indeed underrated as is the 335i and the new M5 as well. The 1M and E92 M3 are very close in performance because their power to weight ratios are quite close. In a drag race (from stop) the 1M is likely to pull just a hair ahead for a few hundred feet (maybe even 400 or 500 feet). Why, because it produces more power at the wheels for just some time at low speeds and low rpms. Any contests beginning from about 40 mph and up (more typical of a track/road coarse) and the M3 has the advantage. I suppose you could say that the 1M's high torque at low rpm is in part "responsible" for its drag racing capability over the M3. In this case peak power to weight does not quite capture who would best whom for all types on contests. Now that being said by the end of the 1/4 mile the M3 will typically be ahead and trap faster.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
5) Did you ever drive a 1M or a 335is or a Z435is, I mean long enough and not as a passenger, to understand their driving/delivery characteristics, preferably a 1M, since it also has the parts and bits that makes it more comparable/similar to your car?
Yes, I have "beat on" a 1M with enough seat time to understand and extract its maximum performance. It's a nice car for sure, but has massively less character especially in regards to its engine and transmission (M-DCT in particular). The sound is also nowhere close. As much as I sort of wish acoustics wasn't as important to me as it is, there is a real thrill with the M3 near redline, WOT with an aftermarket exhaust. Simply exhilarating. Have you experienced this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
I enjoy your posts and strong logic and knowledge behind them, I really do and am not here to contest you, also am a fan of S65 and M3, could be my choice if it would be smaller in size and with less weight. It is plain and simple: the more I read from you the more I started getting curious; how do you answer these questions to yourself, I am very curious to hear. Do you say that what we experience out there all day is an illusion?

Thanks in advance.
Thank you! Good post and good questions! Saludos.
__________________
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
      09-16-2013, 04:32 PM   #26
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 Robin_NL View Post
Let's make things straight here.
When F1 had V10 engines more than a few years ago , the E60 M5 came out, marketeered by the F1 world. A V10 just like F1 cars.

Then came the cut off 2 cylinder V8 M3, hapilly F1 turned to V8s at that time. LOL.

BMW came in with some marketing. Now turbo engines are coming in F1 next season , and many manufacturers already have very fast turbo engined cars for the Streets.
BMW is going FI in the M3/4/5 for a real simple reason. Cost (i.e. profit). Period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin_NL View Post
All the things you say above I agree with, except for the bold stuff: way too black and white imo. Maybe weight is even more important. There are way too many factors in a car which make a car good/better/best and faster, and peak power at high revs is just one of them. In F1 it's the core of them all maybe(and downforce plus weight) . But in a streetcar it is not! And you know that.
Yes of course, we are only talking about street cars here . Again the point is this - there is no single, simple metric as powerful (i.e. predictive) in predicting the performance of a car across a broad range of metrics (contests such as 0-60, 0-100, 60-130, quarter mile, road course times, etc.) as peak power (and of course divided by weight). I've probably had this debate with a good dozen folks here and haven't lost yet. Dig up some of the old threads, tons of good discussion.

Imagine an M3 with the same roughly 400 peak hp it has and double its crank torque to say 600 ft lb. Guess what, it will perform almost identically! Unless you truly understand and admit this you do not understand power, torque, gearing and performance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin_NL View Post
Why do you think I sold my E90 M3 in the first place: No power/hp whatsoever at mid rpms and too heavy.
I seriously think you have lazy driver syndrome. The imagined lack of torque in the M3 has been EXTENSIVELY discussed and debated here on the form. Again please note you simply CANNOT feel engine crank torque, only power and power AT THE WHEELS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin_NL View Post
About overboost: It works in real life . No discussion. Period.
No debate here other than pointing out that more peak power is more important for real (i.e. non lazy) performance driving than additional low rpm or midrange torque.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin_NL View Post
Go out and drive the mother of them all, the E30 M3 with just 7000rpm redline. It's as exciting as my dead parrot.
It is the only M3 I haven't owned nor driven but according to a massive quorum you couldn't be more wrong about how exciting the E30 M3 is. Seems pretty obvious you must be a lazy driver. That's fine, just don't talk about maximum performance. Stick to 30-60 rolls in 6th gear
__________________
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
      09-16-2013, 08:18 PM   #27
ozinaldo
Brigadier General
ozinaldo's Avatar
Portugal
115
Rep
3,070
Posts

Drives: 1M
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post

.....That being said I don't doubt the 1M (when on overboost) can produce more power in some rpm range than the M3. However, I seriously doubt it does so up to 6750 rpm. Probably closer to 6k than 7k. This along with weight contribute to making the car a solid low speed low rpm performer compared to the M3. The problem with the N54/N55 is its complete lack of ability to breath past about 5250 rpm and you really feel this and it hurts the cars performance.....



The 1M is indeed underrated as is the 335i and the new M5 as well. The 1M and E92 M3 are very close in performance because their power to weight ratios are quite close. In a drag race (from stop) the 1M is likely to pull just a hair ahead for a few hundred feet (maybe even 400 or 500 feet). Why, because it produces more power at the wheels for just some time at low speeds and low rpms. Any contests beginning from about 40 mph and up (more typical of a track/road coarse) and the M3 has the advantage. I suppose you could say that the 1M's high torque at low rpm is in part "responsible" for its drag racing capability over the M3. In this case peak power to weight does not quite capture who would best whom for all types on contests. Now that being said by the end of the 1/4 mile the M3 will typically be ahead and trap faster.



Yes, I have "beat on" a 1M with enough seat time to understand and extract its maximum performance. It's a nice car for sure, but has massively less character especially in regards to its engine and transmission (M-DCT in particular). The sound is also nowhere close. As much as I sort of wish acoustics wasn't as important to me as it is, there is a real thrill with the M3 near redline, WOT with an aftermarket exhaust. Simply exhilarating. Have you experienced this?



Thank you! Good post and good questions! Saludos.
Thanks for your time, was cool to clear up how some basic stuff makes sense to you. A few small things:

I said 6250 where M3 engine catches the 1M engine, not 6750, so did you when you bet it was close to 6000. I have seen enough back to back dyno numbers between two on the same dyno, same time frame and conditions. Mine came up 30 whp short of a 2012 E92 M3 (also new like my 1M) while torque figures were 60-65% more than the M3.

Unlike what you claim somewhere in your posts, 1M's version of N54 does not fall back after 5250 rpms (I know regular N54 does this, that's why most N54s are tuned and my 1M is not), it in fact produces the peak power close to 6000 rpm while holding the big chunk of torque well after 6000. In real world, it zings to redline at least in the first 3 gears pretty easily and not bad at all in 4th too...good thing is it also doesn't need to, not all the time There is pretty big liberty for the driver to change gears wherever he wishes to do so without nasty consequences.

I did not own a E9X M3 but have driven one and been in various, kind of like your experience with 1M. It is indeed tastes and nuances, because while I thought it is a nice car, like you did with the 1M..funny..I also thought it is too big, feeling bigger than my ex E90 sedan even, and feeling heavy in most roads as well.

I loved these in the E92 M3:

1) sound of the engine up..up!
2) Being able to deliver motorbike engine/race engine thrills..up up
3) Amazing throttle response
4) The flat torque of the engine when you just have enough space to push it...all around right gear right rpm...torque is so flat which makes the driving kind of easy, because it is natural and predictable
5) Very impressive high speed stability

But I loved the 1M more still, despite the fact that it can't match a M3 in those stuff above, finally I decided that other stuff are even more important to me, fits my tastes better, which were:

1) Smaller size, better overall visibility and being able to place the car wherever you want easier
2) Lighter and while driving it feels lighter than it actually is, an illusion of torque, yes it is
3) The engine in fact fits the stubby, explosive character of the car imho, it makes 1M some other beast and not just a smaller M3
4) The gear box is better than the manual in M3 and I will take a proper manual over any automated marvel till I can drive myself and if they offer one
5) The brakes are performing better from very high speed because car is lighter
6) The steering feels better as well, slightly but still, must be the short(er) wheel base
7) The looks, it is aggressive and different while M3 retains its typical 3 series look more, despite add ups like a bump on the hood and real CF roof
8) The fact that it feels special every where at all speeds all the time, driving a 1M is always full of surprises and car can bite you if you don't pay attention and respect it...I love that
9) Shortcomings of 1M like exhaust are very easy and relatively cheap to fix and there are many alternatives in all categories, for me fixing the tiny errors of this car was just pure pleasure and making it as close as possible to what factory should do if they had the budget and time, nothing more than that.

So I chose the 1M, never doubted the choice because it fits what I value in cars very well. It also feels very special not only because it is rare but also it will be rarer still in the future since it might be the last of its kind being offered exclusively with a manual gear box and analog/oldschool details like that rather than being first of a new species, in this sense like the V8 M3, it will also be a classic. But I know it was also a project for testing the waters for next M3/M4, an early prototype of future turbo M cars.

If I would have a different life I would love to have both and daily drive the 1M and sometimes on a tight track, while I would take the M3 (sedan I prefer) to track and (fast) highway/family type of business.

I don't have that life and am pretty happy that I got the 1M.

Cheers,
__________________
"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.
BMW 1M-SOLD-: TECH: Evolve Race+N55mids, Evolve IC, Michelin PSS, ER cp, aFe filter, CDVx, Vorshlag camber plates, BMS OCC EXTERIOR: trunk spoiler, blacklines, black grills, IND goodies INTERIOR: Alcantara steering wheel, steel pedals, custom mats, MPower e-brake.

Last edited by ozinaldo; 09-16-2013 at 08:46 PM..
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 12:43 AM   #28
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Robin_NL's Avatar
8680
Rep
7,846
Posts

Drives: HS M2 Competition
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands

iTrader: (0)

Swamp thanks for explaining you are a real man of theory and don't see anyting from a driver's point of view.

And thanks for calling me a lazy driver. I'm doing track and driftdays etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
It is the only M3 I haven't owned nor driven but according to a massive quorum you couldn't be more wrong about how exciting the E30 M3 is. Seems pretty obvious you must be a lazy driver. That's fine, just don't talk about maximum performance. Stick to 30-60 rolls in 6th gear

Just drive a damn E30 M3 and come back with conclusions. 'Couldn't be more wrong' you say.

I will defend by saying: Couldn't you be more of a Sheldon?

Come on man.


The real world is so much different than your theories.

Cheers
Robin

Last edited by Robin_NL; 09-17-2013 at 01:39 AM..
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 12:52 AM   #29
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Robin_NL's Avatar
8680
Rep
7,846
Posts

Drives: HS M2 Competition
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands

iTrader: (0)

And talking about accellerations/speeds 1M vs E9x M3. From 40mph on the M3 will win you say. Maybe in theory it will, irl it won't. We did that last sunday on a trackday lol.

Like ozinaldo states. The 1M goes way beyond 600rpm. Mine goes 'full power' to 7000 redline.
But as already stated , torque can't be felt, so it's hp(?)

Take a bicycle and put it in 4th going up a slope. A strong guy can keep it at /go to lets say from5 to 10 mph. Others put it back in 2nd to get that to that same 10 mph from 5 mph . I Always thought that's called torque?

Calling a 1M something like a car with less character than an M3 is just the way an E9x M3 owner would act/react on the internet. It's just like that.
In real life the M3 owner at the track was very pleasant to talk to. And HE admitted the 1M being much more a track car (if BMW makes track cars that is) than the E9x M3 he has. He owned a 1M a year ago but got rid of it because of the 4 kids he has...Fair enough.




On topic: Coming out of a bend(a track has bends) the overboost comes in very handy.



Cheers
Robin

Last edited by Robin_NL; 09-17-2013 at 12:57 AM..
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 01:00 AM   #30
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Robin_NL's Avatar
8680
Rep
7,846
Posts

Drives: HS M2 Competition
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands

iTrader: (0)

Thanks ozinaldo for summing it up why you chose your car.

Number 7 I do like, but number 8 made me buy it.

Nr 8 in motion. Overboost in 3rd gear. >75mph.



Talking about not having character

Cheers
Robin, the lazy driver

Last edited by Robin_NL; 09-17-2013 at 01:19 AM..
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 02:26 AM   #31
jtvr4
Private
United_States
3
Rep
69
Posts

Drives: 2008 M3
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Kansas City

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin_NL View Post
And talking about accellerations/speeds 1M vs E9x M3. From 40mph on the M3 will win you say. Maybe in theory it will, irl it won't. We did that last sunday on a trackday lol.

While you sound like an expert on the subject of engine and chassis design. You do understand that the 1M traps lower than an M3. I'm sure you can explain what that means. Also can you explain why the Z4 race car uses an S65 in place of an N54/55? What about the N54/55 in the GS series?

I do hope you can explain these things to me as I have no knowledge of racing or engine design. Also I have never raced, seen, been inside of, or lapped in an fun little 1M.


http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html
__________________
2008 M3 Sedan - SOLD
1993 3000GT VR4 - AEM EMS 506awhp 511awtq
C5 Z06- T1 Setup
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 03:22 AM   #32
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Robin_NL's Avatar
8680
Rep
7,846
Posts

Drives: HS M2 Competition
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtvr4 View Post
While you sound like an expert on the subject of engine and chassis design. You do understand that the 1M traps lower than an M3. I'm sure you can explain what that means. Also can you explain why the Z4 race car uses an S65 in place of an N54/55? What about the N54/55 in the GS series?

I do hope you can explain these things to me as I have no knowledge of racing or engine design. Also I have never raced, seen, been inside of, or lapped in an fun little 1M.


http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html
The only expert is Swamp

Take a look at this and use google translation.


http://www.driving-fun.com/2117/home...s-en-Z4-M.aspx



And welcome here btw! I also see you have/had some turbo-ed cars. Good for you!

And while you sound like a person who want's to be right all the time and pick me: We're talking about streetcars here. Be aware of that lol. And don't be a db because you drive a car which is going to be replaced by a turbo-ed car

The N54 was also tested @ 400BHP at first but they downgraded it because it was too powerful vs the upcoming S65 M3 V8.....



I guess you know fellow member Advevo? He's been a friend of mine for >30 years now. If you don't see any vids of me that doesn't mean I don't do stuff like him



The fastest car ever on the Nordschleife had 2 turbos on it.

Cheers
Robin, lazy driver

Last edited by Robin_NL; 09-17-2013 at 03:28 AM..
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 03:32 AM   #33
Robin_NL
S0THPAW
Robin_NL's Avatar
8680
Rep
7,846
Posts

Drives: HS M2 Competition
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Netherlands

iTrader: (0)

Anyway, I have to go and make some money.

Nice thread, and also for the non believers and don't get me wrong : My favourite car atm is a 458. Simple as that.

But I find the 1M way sportier as a whole package than the E9x M3. Sorry.
Overboost or not it's a blast. Power to weight(important for a sporty car) , steering, swb.




See you.

Cheers
Robin
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 07:09 AM   #34
RMB
Captain
RMB's Avatar
United_States
97
Rep
635
Posts

Drives: 2018 Audi TTRS
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Virginia

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
I am very excited about the M4 going FI. I really love the feeling of a torque filled engine with a nice mid range punch. I think this with keeping weight under control as best as possible (I realize it is not going to be a GT3) and having a more up to date design are the things that really have me excited about the M4. Now if we can just get some engine and technical specifics in the next week or so, that would be great.
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 07:12 AM   #35
RMB
Captain
RMB's Avatar
United_States
97
Rep
635
Posts

Drives: 2018 Audi TTRS
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Virginia

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Love that picture. The 1M has always looked great to me. Love the fenders and front of it so much.
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 09:52 AM   #36
Brosef
Brigadier General
Brosef's Avatar
United_States
872
Rep
3,446
Posts

Drives: F90 M5
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Chicago

iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin_NL View Post
The only expert is Swamp

Take a look at this and use google translation.


http://www.driving-fun.com/2117/home...s-en-Z4-M.aspx



And welcome here btw! I also see you have/had some turbo-ed cars. Good for you!

And while you sound like a person who want's to be right all the time and pick me: We're talking about streetcars here. Be aware of that lol. And don't be a db because you drive a car which is going to be replaced by a turbo-ed car

The N54 was also tested @ 400BHP at first but they downgraded it because it was too powerful vs the upcoming S65 M3 V8.....



I guess you know fellow member Advevo? He's been a friend of mine for >30 years now. If you don't see any vids of me that doesn't mean I don't do stuff like him



The fastest car ever on the Nordschleife had 2 turbos on it.

Cheers
Robin, lazy driver
when the facts aren't on your side, make personal attacks.... you sound like a democrat, though that shouldn't surprise me as you're European.
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 11:35 AM   #37
jtvr4
Private
United_States
3
Rep
69
Posts

Drives: 2008 M3
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Kansas City

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin_NL View Post
The only expert is Swamp

Take a look at this and use google translation.


http://www.driving-fun.com/2117/home...s-en-Z4-M.aspx



And welcome here btw! I also see you have/had some turbo-ed cars. Good for you!

And while you sound like a person who want's to be right all the time and pick me: We're talking about streetcars here. Be aware of that lol. And don't be a db because you drive a car which is going to be replaced by a turbo-ed car

The N54 was also tested @ 400BHP at first but they downgraded it because it was too powerful vs the upcoming S65 M3 V8.....



I guess you know fellow member Advevo? He's been a friend of mine for >30 years now. If you don't see any vids of me that doesn't mean I don't do stuff like him



The fastest car ever on the Nordschleife had 2 turbos on it.

Cheers
Robin, lazy driver

You sound like an intellectual. Thank you for answering my questions with questions and anecdotal facts. I learned a lot today. When will you be giving a symposium on turbochargers? You are an obvious expert in this field and I think we could all stand to learn more on these magical devices.


__________________
2008 M3 Sedan - SOLD
1993 3000GT VR4 - AEM EMS 506awhp 511awtq
C5 Z06- T1 Setup
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 03:09 PM   #38
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 ozinaldo View Post
I said 6250 where M3 engine catches the 1M engine, not 6750, so did you when you bet it was close to 6000. I have seen enough back to back dyno numbers between two on the same dyno, same time frame and conditions.
Sorry completely misread that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
Unlike what you claim somewhere in your posts, 1M's version of N54 does not fall back after 5250 rpms (I know regular N54 does this, that's why most N54s are tuned and my 1M is not), it in fact produces the peak power close to 6000 rpm while holding the big chunk of torque well after 6000.
This is not consistent with most dyno's I have seen, for example this one:



And this qualitatively matches the engine feel in the car I drove.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
But I loved the 1M more still, despite the fact that it can't match a M3 in those stuff above, finally I decided that other stuff are even more important to me, fits my tastes better, which were:

1) Smaller size, better overall visibility and being able to place the car wherever you want easier
2) Lighter and while driving it feels lighter than it actually is, an illusion of torque, yes it is
3) The engine in fact fits the stubby, explosive character of the car imho, it makes 1M some other beast and not just a smaller M3
4) The gear box is better than the manual in M3 and I will take a proper manual over any automated marvel till I can drive myself and if they offer one
5) The brakes are performing better from very high speed because car is lighter
6) The steering feels better as well, slightly but still, must be the short(er) wheel base
7) The looks, it is aggressive and different while M3 retains its typical 3 series look more, despite add ups like a bump on the hood and real CF roof
8) The fact that it feels special every where at all speeds all the time, driving a 1M is always full of surprises and car can bite you if you don't pay attention and respect it...I love that
9) Shortcomings of 1M like exhaust are very easy and relatively cheap to fix and there are many alternatives in all categories, for me fixing the tiny errors of this car was just pure pleasure and making it as close as possible to what factory should do if they had the budget and time, nothing more than that.
I can't argue much with or fault these points, however, I think the braking point in bold is just a loose hunch. Without some corroborating data I don't believe they are absolutely true/correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozinaldo View Post
...the 1M...was also a project for testing the waters for next M3/M4, an early prototype of future turbo M cars.
Not so sure I see this the same way. Quite frankly I think it was more of a way to test out additional M models and to make a very profitable "M car" on a budget with a "parts bin" type of approach. Don't get me wrong, it is a very solid car and there are plenty of reasons to choose one, perhaps as you noted even choosing it over an M3. That doesn't also mean it is quite a bit less special in regards to it "part bin" nature.
__________________
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
      09-17-2013, 03:21 PM   #39
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 Robin_NL View Post
Swamp thanks for explaining you are a real man of theory and don't see anyting from a driver's point of view.
False, unsubstantiated, period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin_NL View Post
And thanks for calling me a lazy driver. I'm doing track and driftdays etc.
If you prefer a car that doesn't need to be aggressively shifted and drive a car that does using the wrong gear and rpm for the key task of going fast that is all I can conclude.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin_NL View Post
Just drive a damn E30 M3 and come back with conclusions. 'Couldn't be more wrong' you say.

I will defend by saying: Couldn't you be more of a Sheldon?

Come on man.


The real world is so much different than your theories.
Sorry, no, not really.

That is the amazing predictive power of science. Indeed nothing can fully substitute for one on one enjoyment and experience of a vehicle. There are subtleties abound with each and every car. That being said when you understand in gory detail, from the physics/math/engineering, what a car is doing and why, one can tell an enormous amount about a car from nothing other than its specifications. This is why test drivers (test engineers are far from the fastest drivers around but they are better in communicating subtleties in the language of engineers back to the engineering team...). One personal example of this is noting the subtle feeling of the M-DCT upshift "surge" (jerk or time derivative of acceleration is the technical term...) when doing so aggressively in modes 4,5 or 6. Keeping in mind the science that humans are more sensitive to the rate of change of acceleration than the acceleration level itself, combined with the principle of conservation of rotational inertia (in the engine, drive train and flywheel), one can "construct" the feel of such "power shifts" without actually driving the car. It is a different kind of knowledge but it is every bit as useful and valuable as the experience itself. Of course to a non-scientist this point will likely have little to no appeal and that is only to be expected. Another example is knowing a great deal about how a car will feel, it's acceleration profile specifically, simply by looking at its power and torque curves.
__________________
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
      09-17-2013, 03:24 PM   #40
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)

My friendly, non admin advice here is for all to watch the name calling. It will just get the thread shut down or edited...
__________________
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
      09-17-2013, 04:39 PM   #41
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)

I think the following conceptual diagram will help some folks on the general power vs. torque and closely related overboost topic.



Here we are comparing the following engines; normally aspirated engine (green) vs. a turbo charged (or turbo charged with overboost but without peak power gains) (red) vs. one with the same redline but higher peak power (rather than same power and more torque like red) (purple) and finally a higher power and higher redline engine (blue). Yes, certainly not all engines are at all capable of such a nice linear response as the green baseline curve so it already represents a fairly high performance engine (very E9X S65-ish). Nonetheless, even with other qualitative shapes of power curves such as the somewhat typical humped shaped curve (think most Corvettes) the principles here still apply. Of course the shape of the turbo curve here is also not qualitatively like all turbo engines, it is more typical of modern BMW M turbo engines. Again, concepts still generally apply.

The point is that red certainly is better (i.e. offers more performance) than blue. However, in choosing between possible options and comparing to the baseline (green) to a more torque same (peak) power option (red) or more peak power (purple) generally the higher peak power option (purple) will deliver more broad spectrum performance improvements. Yes, you will have to drive it at high rpm and if its rpms drop often and well below the plateau level of power from the turbo engine, it will make for a much closer contest. If it is indeed kept in the high rpm range, it will on average consistently produce more power and that is better for performance than making more torque. Of course the highest performer of this bunch will be the blue engine that makes the most peak power at the highest rpm.

If BMW is indeed making the new M4 "S55" at the same power level as the current car this would be a bit like current M3 = green and new M4 = red. Yes red is better, better because of the increased POWER available at lower rpms. However, in almost all contests, something like the purple car would produce better performance. This is the classic "torque vs. power debate". The blue curve is then something like a Ferrari 458, not much of a fair comparison with both more power and a higher redline.

These curves tie right back to my previous comments also about an engines feel. Unfortunately, one can REALLY feel the flat table top part of the red curve, it just feels like the engine hits a bit of a performance wall (technically a "breathing wall"). The acceleration tapers off and then stays constant rather than increasing all the way to redline like the other cars/curves. This provides a much less exciting and race car/superbike like experience. Most of the normal aspiration M "purists" are obviously greatly disappointed about this particular qualitative and quantitative change to the engines character and thus the cars feel. This does not even touch the concept of turbo lag....

Of course if one is to simply reject the proper use of gears and rpms, again a "lazy" driving style, the turbo car will be more more suitable for them as it makes more midrange power. I guess this is just the fairly common but loose claim that torque is basically midrange power. Certainly a boost in torque in the midrange, along with an inability to produce more torque at high rpms does exactly this - boost midrange power without improving peak power.
__________________
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
      09-17-2013, 06:05 PM   #42
ozinaldo
Brigadier General
ozinaldo's Avatar
Portugal
115
Rep
3,070
Posts

Drives: 1M
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Sorry completely misread that.



This is not consistent with most dyno's I have seen, for example this one:



And this qualitatively matches the engine feel in the car I drove.

Insideline's notorious 1M vs. regular N54 dyno chart seems fine at first but that is not in conformity with I and many others seen from our own cars. It is slightly off, kind of edited for publication, or just the type of dyno. I had mine always on very conservative Mustang dyno and never felt lack of power after low 5000s or so. But I can't argue about what you felt while driving it.




I can't argue much with or fault these points, however, I think the braking point in bold is just a loose hunch. Without some corroborating data I don't believe they are absolutely true/correct.

Sport Auto supertest for 1M and before that M3, as well as Auto Bild and other German magazines usually include this data and all confirmed that from 200 km/h 1M has clearly shorter stopping distance. And isn't it in conformity with common sense? Those tests are kept in the 1M Forum section in the Sticky for tests and data. I have printed version of some as well.



Not so sure I see this the same way. Quite frankly I think it was more of a way to test out additional M models and to make a very profitable "M car" on a budget with a "parts bin" type of approach. Don't get me wrong, it is a very solid car and there are plenty of reasons to choose one, perhaps as you noted even choosing it over an M3. That doesn't also mean it is quite a bit less special in regards to it "part bin" nature.

It all depends on what parts we are talking about; thankfully we had perfect donors like the M3 and I always thought that if BMW would develop bespoke parts for such a risky project, they would go for cheap and technologically less advanced parts while they decided to go "cheap" by not inventing what they already have in excellence...I am good with that, like I am very good with having the suspension, brakes, wheels and tires of a way bigger and heavier car
My replies in bold above. Let's leave people continue discussing the overboost function mostly from now on instead of "1M not so special...parts bin" etc. topics, we left them behind more than a year ago.

It's not like they invented the wheel for M3 either, everything is a modified version of something which was already there, this very much includes the S65 as well. We are not talking about Lancia Stratos or McLaren F1 here.
__________________
"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.
BMW 1M-SOLD-: TECH: Evolve Race+N55mids, Evolve IC, Michelin PSS, ER cp, aFe filter, CDVx, Vorshlag camber plates, BMS OCC EXTERIOR: trunk spoiler, blacklines, black grills, IND goodies INTERIOR: Alcantara steering wheel, steel pedals, custom mats, MPower e-brake.

Last edited by ozinaldo; 09-17-2013 at 06:21 PM..
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 06:51 PM   #43
ozinaldo
Brigadier General
ozinaldo's Avatar
Portugal
115
Rep
3,070
Posts

Drives: 1M
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

iTrader: (0)

My 1M stock dyno chart

I think I should re-post (as I did in the past in 1M forum on a different subject) my first dyno in September? 2012 last year, when the car had nothing but a black grill, pedals and stuff like that, so absolutely bone stock technically speaking, with low mileage (I think was around 3350 km. or 2000 something miles only), Mustang dyno of a very reputable shop here, notorious for being ultra conservative at the wheel numbers, mild ambient temperature like 20 Celsius, DSC off, M button pressed, regular gas which should be equal or a bit better than US 91, altitude 530-550 meters. These are 4th gear pulls (3 times) that dyno operator took the car up to 6700 rpm each time did not go up to limiter. I wanted to have a baseline before installing a rear exhaust and mid pipe. If you go GIAC web site or google it you can see that their numbers are awfully similar (almost identical) regarding their 1M test car before they start tuning it. I know there are many others but that should be good enough.

Peak hp was 294.2 hp and torque was 342.9; all three runs were with similar results and best hp number was attained at the last run. I saw the chart of a new stock 2012 M3 there (the car was there for a supercharger install) and it was 323 hp, merely 29-30 whp more and later I learned that it was pretty much what M3 was making on a Mustang dyno.

Just with that half exhaust mod I later passed 301 whp, it's there at the link too. I was remembering that second dyno after exhaust when I claimed that power is reached closer to 6000, it is not for the bone stock car, but I think that still looks different than Insideline's chart (don't know what kind of dyno or chart is that), just pay attention to power after 5000s, it is pretty flat, isn't it? Not at all falling from a cliff and there is still a lot of power up untill the end of chart at 6700 rpm, that is the M division's tune for the N54T!

And just with that rear muffler and a catless (but resonated) BMW mid pipe, and nothing else it got better even right at top while peak hp was reached closer to 6000.

For some reason the site is not letting me directly re-attach the chart here but I give the link of thread where I posted it before, check posts 14, 15 and 16 with attachments:

http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=745649
__________________
"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.
BMW 1M-SOLD-: TECH: Evolve Race+N55mids, Evolve IC, Michelin PSS, ER cp, aFe filter, CDVx, Vorshlag camber plates, BMS OCC EXTERIOR: trunk spoiler, blacklines, black grills, IND goodies INTERIOR: Alcantara steering wheel, steel pedals, custom mats, MPower e-brake.

Last edited by ozinaldo; 09-17-2013 at 07:01 PM..
Appreciate 0
      09-17-2013, 07:06 PM   #44
ozinaldo
Brigadier General
ozinaldo's Avatar
Portugal
115
Rep
3,070
Posts

Drives: 1M
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

iTrader: (0)

This is the screen photo of the bone stock 1M as above post, 3rd and last run with 294 hp and 340 tq:

Name:  DSCN1581.jpg
Views: 758
Size:  132.8 KB
__________________
"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.
BMW 1M-SOLD-: TECH: Evolve Race+N55mids, Evolve IC, Michelin PSS, ER cp, aFe filter, CDVx, Vorshlag camber plates, BMS OCC EXTERIOR: trunk spoiler, blacklines, black grills, IND goodies INTERIOR: Alcantara steering wheel, steel pedals, custom mats, MPower e-brake.

Last edited by ozinaldo; 09-17-2013 at 07:11 PM..
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 09:41 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