|
View Poll Results: S65 option or S55 standart ? | |||
YES ... I would choose the S65 if an option at this price would be availiable |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
93 | 45.81% |
NO ... I would choose the standart S55 engine |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
110 | 54.19% |
Voters: 203. You may not vote on this poll |
Post Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
12-22-2013, 09:45 AM | #133 | |
General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 21156
Rep 20,745
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
![]() Not really fare comparing bad E9X times against the best of E46s... For instance in R&T the best E46 0-60mph and 0-100mph are 4.6 and 11.6 while for a 6MT E92, they are 4.1 and 9.4. There is a lot of variability in magazine testing... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 01:19 PM | #134 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 1727
Rep 5,110
Posts |
Quote:
I believe my videos show that the E9x is quicker, but not by a mile and that in the real world it can be quite close... ![]() The F8x DCT does 0-1000m in 21,9 Seconds (MT 6 in 22,2 sec) Performance: M3 E46 0-100 km/h: 5,2 sec 0-1000 m: 23,7 sec @ 222km/h - 139 MPH (24,5 sec with MT 6) Vmax: 250 km/h N-Ring: 8:13 min M3 E92 0-100 km/h: 4,6 sec 0-1000 m: 23,3 sec @ 228km/h - 143 MPH (24,4 sec with MT 6) Vmax: 280 km/h N-Ring: 8:00 min M3 CSL 0-100 km/h: 4,9 sec 0-1000 m: 23,5 sec Vmax: 280 km/h N-Ring: 7:50 min M3 GTS 0-100 km/h: 4,4 sec 0-1000 m: 22,5 sec Vmax: 305 km/h N-Ring: 7:40 min M4 F82 DCT 0-100 km/h: 4,1 sec 0-1000 m: 21,9 sec (22,2 sec with MT 6) Vmax: 250 km/h N-Ring: ??? min E92 was 0,4-0,9 sec quicker than the E46 from 0-1000m E92 was 0,2sec quicker than the E46 CSL from 0-1000m F82 is 1,4-2,2 sec quicker than the E92 from 0-1000m So, to me it seems the F8x will actually deliver a larger difference from it's predecessor than what the E9x did over the E46... ![]() ![]() The E46 CSL is 10 sec quicker than the E92 around the N'ring btw... ![]() http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=415833 http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/360...0-m-times.html http://www.rsiauto.com/bmw/2000-m3-(e46)-253.php http://www.rsiauto.com/bmw/2008-m3-sedan-(e90)-974.php http://forum.roadfly.com/threads/228...M3-GENEVA-2000 Last edited by Boss330; 12-22-2013 at 01:33 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 01:30 PM | #135 | |
General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 21156
Rep 20,745
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
![]() If this is what you want to believe, I will not even try to argue with you ![]() |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 01:32 PM | #136 |
Lieutenant General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 625
Rep 10,407
Posts |
I find your line of reasoning very puzzling here. If you want to talk about CARS no they just are not close. If you want to include the effects of drivers of completely unknown skills, as well as unknown mods, you can find videos showing about anything you want from a full spectrum of results. You can find a Civic besting a Ferrari I bet on youtube.... Although not perfect and unable to match a wide spectrum of results with just a single result, simulation provides the most apples to apples comparison possible. 20 car lengths to 150 mph, as well as any other metric chosen from the simulations shows a serious beat down by the E92 M3, completely consistent with known power to weight ratios.
__________________
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
|
12-22-2013, 03:26 PM | #137 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 1727
Rep 5,110
Posts |
Quote:
And how many races are won on the PC with software simulation? Do you really tell people after a close race that "on my simulation programme my car beat yours by a much larger margin". I agree that races have variables such as driver etc. But just a quick search on YouTube came up with the videos I posted. Strange that in every video the driver "problems" was in the E9x cars??? Yes, the E9x is faster, we all agree on that. But by how much? Last edited by Boss330; 12-22-2013 at 03:48 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 03:47 PM | #138 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 1727
Rep 5,110
Posts |
Quote:
Please let's keep this on a fact based level and no personal insults. I have posted times available from reliable sources, please post substantiated numbers not just your personal opinion on my beliefs ![]() |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 03:57 PM | #139 | ||
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 1727
Rep 5,110
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
http://m3forum.com/pressrelease/2003/csl.pdf In this Autocar review the std E46 M3 is listed as having a 24,2 sec 0-1000m time: http://www.bmw-driver.net/forum/showthread.php?t=8754 Please show me that the E9x is substantially quicker than what I have posted previously and that the difference between the E9x vs E46 was substantially larger than the difference between F8x vs E9x is. Last edited by Boss330; 12-22-2013 at 04:17 PM.. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 04:04 PM | #140 | |
Lieutenant General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 625
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Again, one can find nearly any results they like. How many GT-R besting the Veyron videos can you find? What do those mean (answers should be painfully obvious)? Also would it make sense that many E92 vs. E46 M3 videos are posted by big E46 fans who either didn't like or couldn't afford the updated E92 model? Perhaps they just want to brag about besting an obviously faster car. How many E92 owners would like to brag on youtube about taking down a mean nasty (stock!) E46 M3? Is the only way one should believe that car X is faster than car Y be by the presence of youtube or magazine results demonstrating it? I think you know darn well that is nonsense. Physics either works and is predictive or it isn't... It is easy to minimize and poke fun at simulations, but don't forget their key intrinsic strength. They provide perfectly controlled experiments under absolutely identical conditions and remove an absolute plethora of uncontrolled, random and systematic variables from a performance comparison. Furthermore they do absolutely compare (when care is taken) with a wide variety of the top results from various journalists testing. Like it or not, in many ways simulation is a more true measure of the actual CARS than the "real world" is. I know that statement will likely draw immense skepticism, perhap even ridicule, but for those that understand basic statistics and anything about cars will realize it is in fact true. And again, simulation shows us the margin between the new and current model is definitely narrowing compared to that between the current and prior model. I can't wait until the videos start showing up "proving" that an E92 M3 is as fast or faster than an F82 M4... It's time to step back and not miss the forest for the trees here.
__________________
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
|
12-22-2013, 04:35 PM | #141 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 1727
Rep 5,110
Posts |
Quote:
Are you saying that BMW isn't telling the truth, and that we should rather believe some simulations done by a E9x owner??? ![]() I follow F1 and there have been multiple times where the teams simulations on performance doesn't match up with real world data... Those teams include Ferrari and McLaren. If their simulations aren't allways spot on, then I choose to have some reservations on amateur simulations as well ![]() Not sure I follow you on the "videos posted by E46 owners who couldn't afford the E9x" comment. Surely that was a low blow and shows insecurity and immaturity on your part ![]() GTBoard isn't a "poor E46 owner" and where is the evidence that the videos I posted was made by the group you mention? Comments like that just show how biased you are, rationalizing every evidence not falling in line with your own view... It's really hard to take comments like that seriously. Please show me BMW, or verified, numbers that shows the E9x is indeed faster than the F8x from 0-1000m. I'm also looking forward to videos of races between the E9x and F8x ![]() |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 04:38 PM | #142 |
Major General
![]() ![]() 3544
Rep 5,001
Posts |
I think he's saying that the gap between the F8X/E9X will be smaller than that of the E9X/E46. Looking at the numbers here and in other posts, it seems we're measuring by hairs here. The F8X is definitely going to be faster though no matter how you shape the argument.
Where the F8X is really going to shine even more is on the track. Looking forward to some Ring times. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 04:44 PM | #143 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 1727
Rep 5,110
Posts |
Quote:
But my point is that the E46 has a 23,5 sec (CSL) and 24,2 sec (std M3) time from 0-1000m. The E9x has a best 0-1000m time of 23,3 sec. That means a 0,9 sec improvement over the E46. The F8x has a 21,9 sec (22,2 sec MT6) 0-1000m time. Which means a 1,1-1,4 sec improvement over the E9x. Yes, it's measuring hairs. But so far it seems the difference between the F8x and E9x will be larger than it was between the E9x and E46 on that distance... But so far it doesn't seem that the E46 BMW times are to be believed... ![]() Last edited by Boss330; 12-22-2013 at 04:49 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 04:50 PM | #144 |
Major General
![]() ![]() 5494
Rep 7,060
Posts |
0-60 times is where the F8X should bury the E9X and it's also where the E46 can run closer to the E9X but at high speeds where power to wind resistance rules instead of power to weight the E9X creams the E46 and here the difference between the E9X and the F8X should be rather marginal due to similar peak power and wind resistance.
I do suspect though that in hands of professionals the F8X will cream the E9X as much as the E9X cream the E46 around the ring with ~20s difference. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 05:02 PM | #145 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 1727
Rep 5,110
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 05:15 PM | #146 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() 3544
Rep 5,001
Posts |
Quote:
Wait, are we all in agreement? ![]() |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 05:19 PM | #147 |
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 1727
Rep 5,110
Posts |
I think swamp2 and CanAutM3 don't believe the 0-1000m times of the E46 being as close to the E9x times...
I think that the 0-1000m times stated by BMW for the E46 backs up what my videos show. The E9x is faster, but not by a mile ![]() In fact it seems like the distance in the GTBoard video represents allmost exactly the 1sec distance between the two cars. The other videos also show a fairly similar distance as indicated by official BMW numbers (but apparently not by simulation). Last edited by Boss330; 12-22-2013 at 05:27 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 05:22 PM | #148 |
Major General
![]() ![]() 3544
Rep 5,001
Posts |
Well, that's because it's all part of larger conspiracy by BMW.
Did you know BMW bases some of their technology from the UFO crash at Roswell? True story. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 05:35 PM | #149 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 1727
Rep 5,110
Posts |
Quote:
And remember that going 150 MPH you are travelling at roughly 66 m/s. So a 1 sec distance at 150 MPH is 66 meters! |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 08:04 PM | #150 | |
General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 21156
Rep 20,745
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
![]() It is just that this thread has derailed a bit trying to compare the E46 to the E92 when the starting point was to compare the S55 and the S65. By trying to prove a point, it was hinted that the E92 barely improved on the performance of the E46. Which is simply not the case. I could dig out plenty of track videos where I pass E46 like they are standing still. Further, I did post R&T best numbers for 6MT E46 and E92. But this is beside the point. I see what you are trying to demonstrate though. It is the relative improvement in performance of the F8X over the E9X. The thing is, from the advertised power to weight, the F8X does not have that much going for it: +10hp and 132lb less for DCT cars (best performing option). Looking at it from this perspective only, one could conclude that the F8X does not provide an as great leap forward. IMO, there are important counterpoints though. As I and others have stated many times in other threads, the F8X advantage resides in the fact that it is most likely underated by 30+ hp. Another important advantage is the broad power plateau, where the F8X will be putting down much more average power during an acceleration run compared to the E9X. Looking at BMW advertised acceleartion numbers, it is clear that they do expect a significant leap forward. Hopefully it isn't only marketing hype and the performance will be there. I can't wait to see independent test results. I am personnaly convinced the F8X will be quite the performer ![]() For me, the most important uncertainty regarding the S55 is the throttle response. Since I do track my cars a fair bit, this has been one of my favorite characteristic of ///M engines. Hopefully, all the anti-lag tech will be working its magic. I can't wait to test drive one ![]() Last edited by CanAutM3; 12-22-2013 at 08:26 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 08:18 PM | #151 | |
General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 21156
Rep 20,745
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
![]() The 0.1sec quoted in the this post got me worked up ![]() |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 08:56 PM | #152 | |
Brigadier General
![]() ![]() 387
Rep 3,932
Posts |
Quote:
if you track your car often i wouldn't dream of getting a any M car on the market today ( new models). i have heard of F10 M guys having heating problems at the track. IMO its simply the nature of the beast to be more prone to heating issues over a N/A engine. i am sure BMW will put some nice tec into the engine to help with this. but there is only so much you can do. time will tell. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 09:10 PM | #153 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() 599
Rep 5,396
Posts |
Quote:
Not to mention plenty of other turbo cars that are beasts on the track -McLaren mp4-c -Nissan gtr -evo -sti -Porsche turbo -Porsche gt2 Do you even track your car? |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-22-2013, 09:11 PM | #154 | |
General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 21156
Rep 20,745
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
![]() What they do mention is heat soak though. On hot days they complain they don't have all the power they usually have. Reading about the F8X, it seems considerable effort has been invested in heat management and turbo "margin" to avoid power loss on hot days and at altitude. Hopefully it will be paying off. Only time will tell. What I do dislike about the 1M, is the lag in throttle response. Again here, BMW promised they worked some magic to fix this. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|