Up Close BMW F82 M4 Exhaust Sound Clips

[/// M sa]

Originally Posted by Koldun

The car is a monster, for sure, but I can get that robotic feel from a good simulator (where I don't have to fret about sidechecking competitors into the wall at 140mph haha). The exterior is good for a Nissan, the interior is gaudy and awful. Again, mucho respect for performance, just didn't appeal to me from an aesthetic, comfort and driving dynamics point of view enough to want to own one.

The car is not for everyone, if you are a track guy then it will serve its purpose. I am done with it though, it will be sold soon to make room for the new M3. The interior of the GTR is really a joke, the exterior needs a few face lifts here and there to make it look appealing. I am glad I have one but I will be more glad when its sold

[Koldun]

Originally Posted by //M sa

The car is not for everyone, if you are a track guy then it will serve its purpose. I am done with it though, it will be sold soon to make room for the new M3. The interior of the GTR is really a joke, the exterior needs a few face lifts here and there to make it look appealing. I am glad I have one but I will be more glad when its sold

Good choice. The F80 is a much nicer looking car than the coupe. If BMW can at least duplicate the GTR's relative lack of turbo lag, it should be a winning daily driver. The big ? for me now is that and the EPS.

[bosz]

Originally Posted by cjg

vs

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

[BMW_F25_X3]

Originally Posted by elitex

It will sound much better in person. I remember thinking the same thing about F10 M5 watching videos until I heard one in person. Ok it's no V10 but it still sounds good.

it wont sound much better in person, you listen to sounds of the e92 M3 in videos and it sounds great, same thing in person. this thing sounds like crap and it wont be much different in person. but to each its own.

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by cjg

I like it, sounds so Euro.

[elitex]

Originally Posted by E92Alpine328i

it wont sound much better in person, you listen to sounds of the e92 M3 in videos and it sounds great, same thing in person. this thing sounds like crap and it wont be much different in person. but to each its own.

I guess we'll agree to disagree.

[mikymu]

stock exhaust note is just terrible as expected from a turbo engine. For my friends that like to hear some naturally aspirated exhaust note - here is what's serving tonight at my cafe

couple fast rev with my GT3 cup starting 4:30 mark

[RealStig]

You know what, I was concerned about the whole turbo thing until I drove the new M5 and the new M3 is even faster than that. That thing was extremely nice to drive, it's very different. Granted it sounded so much better (and I'd say even better than my M3), I'd still be happy with it if it sounded like the new M3.

[elitex]

Originally Posted by RealStig

You know what, I was concerned about the whole turbo thing until I drove the new M5 and the new M3 is even faster than that. That thing was extremely nice to drive, it's very different. Granted it sounded so much better (and I'd say even better than my M3), I'd still be happy with it if it sounded like the new M3.

New M3 faster then the F10 M5? I know they're quoting 3.9 vs 4.1 but I think M5 will start walking after 60-100 MPH. We're all speculating until we see some hard data.

Now if the new M3 is as fast as the M5 then WOW!!!

[RealStig]

Originally Posted by elitex

New M3 faster then the F10 M5? I know they're quoting 3.9 vs 4.1 but I think M5 will start walking after 60-100 MPH. We're all speculating until we see some hard data.

Now if the new M3 is as fast as the M5 then WOW!!!

I think the new M3 will be faster than M5. I don't see a reason why not.

[elitex]

Originally Posted by RealStig

I think the new M3 will be faster than M5. I don't see a reason why not.

Correct me if I am wrong but historically M3 has never been faster than an M5. At least in a straight line. Like I said, it's all speculation for now.

[RealStig]

Originally Posted by elitex

Correct me if I am wrong but historically M3 has never been faster than an M5. At least in a straight line. Like I said, it's all speculation for now.

M5 per BMW does 0-60 in 4.2 seconds. M3 again per BMW does 0-60 in 3.9 seconds (both DCT). There is no speculation about it. M3 this time around is faster than the M5. M3 has lost 200 lbs whereas M5 gained like 500. I don't think BMW engineers sit and a room and worry about things like "oh because 5 is a bigger number than 3 and it costs more, we need to find ways to make 3 inferior than 5" I'm pretty sure past a certain point such as 150 mph, the M5 might pull ahead, but in terms of 0-60, 1/4 mile, and 0-100, I think M3 will win hands down with all that torque and E46 weight.

[elitex]

Originally Posted by RealStig

M5 per BMW does 0-60 in 4.2 seconds. M3 again per BMW does 0-60 in 3.9 seconds (both DCT). There is no speculation about it. M3 this time around is faster than the M5. M3 has lost 200 lbs whereas M5 gained like 500. I don't think BMW engineers sit and a room and worry about things like "oh because 5 is a bigger number than 3 and it costs more, we need to find ways to make 3 inferior than 5"

You do realize that I have both cars and am planning on purchasing the new M4. Not trying to make M3/M4 inferior. 0-60 doesn't mean much, it sells cars. M5 is faster than the new E63s 0-200 KPH. E63s is rated at 3.4s 0-60. Explain that.

http://fastestlaps.com/cars/bmw_m5_f10.html

http://fastestlaps.com/cars/mercedes...g_s-model.html

[dlbrooks18]

Originally Posted by cjg

vs

Haha so what if it sounds a bit like that, trust me nothing bad sounding about a chainsaw sounding engine carving up the comp at the track, just like the legendary Buick GN turbo'd V6 epic chainsaw rip!

[elitex]

Originally Posted by RealStig

M5 per BMW does 0-60 in 4.2 seconds. M3 again per BMW does 0-60 in 3.9 seconds (both DCT). There is no speculation about it. M3 this time around is faster than the M5. M3 has lost 200 lbs whereas M5 gained like 500. I don't think BMW engineers sit and a room and worry about things like "oh because 5 is a bigger number than 3 and it costs more, we need to find ways to make 3 inferior than 5" I'm pretty sure past a certain point such as 150 mph, the M5 might pull ahead, but in terms of 0-60, 1/4 mile, and 0-100, I think M3 will win hands down with all that torque and E46 weight.

Actually, they kinda do.

[/// M sa]

M5 will take over the M3 at high speeds.... But for the beltway warriors, not worry mad maxes, you will spank that ass lol.

[RealStig]

Originally Posted by elitex

Actually, they kinda do.

Well they didn't this time around, I don't know what to tell you

What I can tell you is going from 4.2 seconds in M5 to 3.9 seconds in M3 is going to feel a lot faster than 0.3 seconds in real life. The decrease in times requires far better traction and handling which will result in a strong kickback in your seat that resembles an exponential graph. So comparing a 4.2s car to 3.9s car is not like comparing a 4.5s car to 4.2s car. M3 is going to feel a lot more torquey and fast in addition to being actually fast on paper, even though the M5 has more than 100 lb/ft torque advantage.

I drove an M5 so I know exactly how it rides and I cannot begin to think how this thing is going to feel like. Don't let the 410 lb/ft torque figure mislead you. In fact, I think it may be too fast to the point of being uncomfortable for the others in the car when used in sport+ mode (M5 almost felt that way, but I'd say it was right on the limit of being scary vs comfortable fast).

[elitex]

Originally Posted by RealStig

Well they didn't this time around, I don't know what to tell you

What I can tell you is going from 4.2 seconds in M5 to 3.9 seconds in M3 is going to feel a lot faster than 0.3 seconds in real life. The decrease in times requires far better traction and handling which will result in a strong kickback in your seat that resembles an exponential graph. So comparing a 4.2s car to 3.9s car is not like comparing a 4.5s car to 4.2s car. M3 is going to feel a lot more torquey and fast in addition to being actually fast on paper, even though the M5 has more than 100 lb/ft torque advantage.

I drove an M5 so I know exactly how it rides and I cannot begin to think how this thing is going to feel like. Don't let the 410 lb/ft torque figure mislead you. In fact, I think it may be too fast to the point of being uncomfortable for the others in the car when used in sport+ mode (M5 almost felt that way, but I'd say it was right on the limit of being scary vs comfortable fast).

You're still stuck on 0-60 times. see my links above. Again, M5 is faster than E63S. E63S is rated at 3.4s 0-60.

[RealStig]

Originally Posted by elitex

You're still stuck on 0-60 times. see my links above. Again, M5 is faster than E63S. E63S is rated at 3.4s 0-60.

I see what you are saying.

I have been driving M cars for a long time, and I don't remember ever driving faster than 90 mph. You can't drive like that in public roads in the US. I honestly don't care how a car drives beyond 80 mph. I'm pretty sure with its 575 hp engine, M5 is going to pull hard past 60 mph.

[elitex]

Originally Posted by RealStig

I see what you are saying.

I have been driving M cars for a long time, and I don't remember ever driving faster than 90 mph. You can't drive like that in public roads in the US. I honestly don't care how a car drives beyond 80 mph. I'm pretty sure with its 575 hp engine, M5 is going to pull hard past 60 mph.

Well, you're definitely missing out. That incredible feeling when you go past 120 MPH and the car just keeps on pulling.

When you get your M4, take it to a track and experience the awesomeness of M cars.

Are you sure that you're the real stig?? hmmm

[Alessandro]

Originally Posted by elitex

Well, you're definitely missing out. That incredible feeling when you go past 120 MPH and the car just keeps on pulling.

When you get your M4, take it to a track and experience the awesomeness of M cars.

Are you sure that you're the real stig?? hmmm

Lol

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Boss330

If you can't hear the distinct difference between a cross plane vs flat plane V8 through the rev range there is really no point debating this. And not sure what you mean by that I want to have my cake and eat it?

Sure I can but it is more prominent at idle and I simply contend that the state of tune and exhaust have more to do with the sound than the crank arrangement. Round and round we go...

Have and eat: You claim that cross plane vs. flat plane is so radically different in sound but then at the same time a twin turbo inline 6 can sound very similar to a NA flat plane V8. I agree on the latter (at least during cold start and definitely not under load). Why can this happen - again the importance on the exhaust and state of tune.

The lengthy lesson on all of the other details wasn't necessary at all. Your statement read to me that the crank angle between firings was non uniform which is isn't.