S55 vs. S65

[solstice]

Throttle response is definately my main concern as well. I don't really care if it's underrated or overrated by 30 hp or if it's tunable to 3000 hp or maxed out but I do care about throttle response and turbo lag and it is how these two attributes turn out that to me what will determine how good this engine really is.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Boss330

I get that you defend the E9x no matter what official specs from BMW says... See my edited post above with the 24,2 sec time for the std E46 M3, which makes sense compared with the 23,5 sec CSL time.

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

It really has little to do with defense of anything, only defense of reason and physics. I'm the first to admit other creamings by cars I'm not particularly fond of such as the C6 Z06 and GT-R over the M3. Just to be clear though by "not fond of" I certainly don't mean that I don't still maintain some serious respect for what those cars are capable of.

If you believe official specs on performance from almost any manufacturer, especially BMW then you are the one that really needs a reality check. What part of my E46 M3 SMG and E92 M3 M-DCT simulations don't match best reported times? Hmmm, they match across the board. What they tell is an even better 0-1000m time for the E46 M3 SMG of 23.8s than BMW has claimed. The E92 M3 M-DCT though comes in at 22.6s. Here is a link that provides a single test data point for the 1000m time by the E92 M3 and they got a mere 0.2 seconds slower than this simulation result. 1.2 seconds does not sound like much but at 1000m is a HUGE beat down. It is better thought of in car lengths which turns out to be that when the E92 M3 reaches 1000m the E46 M3 is 15 car lengths behind.

Lastly, you surely can not believe that one instance of simulation being incorrect or unreliable certainly doesn't cast a huge looming shadow of doubt over all simulation?

Originally Posted by Boss330

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

How many insecure car owners post videos of themselves and "kill stories" besting an obviously superior car? It may not be the norm but it is common. Those posts and videos typically come across one of two ways, either - sure I am modded and the other driver obviously sucked or the more boastful and insecure ones are "dude I'm such a bass ass in my XXXX car, I wasted that poor sucker in the Lambo". Whether you accept reality or not there is some subset of owners who post about such kills who are very insecure about their own cars and indeed jealous that the could not make the step up to the next car. There is no insecurity here on my part nor is it an immature point of view, it's called the real world.

Originally Posted by Boss330

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.

How many times do I need to repeat this, this "view" is not my opinion, it is the physics. Either the sims I posted match reality quite well and thus will also reflect 0-1000m times and trailing distances reasonably accurately (in a true apples to apples fashion") or they don't. Which is it?

Originally Posted by Boss330

Please show me BMW, or verified, numbers that shows the E9x is indeed faster than the F8x from 0-1000m.

I've not made mention of anything of the sort, not sure your point here. And again, to hell with ANYTHING BMW posts as times - they simply do not reflect what most reasonable drivers can do with the car.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

The 0.1sec quoted in the this post got me worked up

Exactly.

Originally Posted by Boss330

I'm also looking forward to videos of races between the E9x and F8x

So you can make some other ridiculous claim like these two cars being within 0.1 seconds to 1000m?

Here are some (metric and English) simulations comparing E46 M3 SMG vs. E92 M3 M-DCT vs. F82 M4 M-DCT (assuming 455 hp, 30 hp underrated). As we've all said, yes the margins are decreasing but it doesn't mean that the (and yes my precious ) E92 M3 won't be beat down substantially and across the board. At 1000m the F82 M4 should typically be ahead of the E92 M3 by about 14 car lengths (I use 15 ft for a car length). Over other metrics the distance ahead margins take a more linear step size among the 3 cars as compared to clearly smaller gains for many of the other common metrics.

[mPlasticDesign]

^. +1, nice post and great info.

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Three of my track buddies run 1Ms. One of them is an instructor and pushes quite hard. Not one of them ever complained about overheating problems .

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.

i heard F10s M5 having reported problems. on this forum from members. but ya lets hope for the best.

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by KennyPowers

The thing that is annoying about your posts is that you just really don't know what you are talking about. The m5 may have issues but it's over 1000 lbs heavier than the new m3. It's turbo and cooling system is completely different than the s55.

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?

where did i say anything about turbo cars not being beasts on the track ?

all i said is that heating COULD be a problem. and matter of fact i am totally right. is it likely that M4 could suffer from heating problems ? maybe not.... but its never 100% certain until we see the car in action.

on another subject. everything i say in the past post are 100% opinion based statements. so there is not really a right answer. it just not fair to say i don't know what i am talking about.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

If we are talking 1.0sec, we are in agreement .

The 0.1sec quoted in the this post got me worked up

Yes, that's probably correct. 1 sec is the gap. And 1 second @ 150 MPH is roughly a gap of 66 metres, so it visually is a HUGE gap.

BTW I also respect your input on these forums

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by swamp2

It really has little to do with defense of anything, only defense of reason and physics. I'm the first to admit other creamings by cars I'm not particularly fond of such as the C6 Z06 and GT-R over the M3. Just to be clear though by "not fond of" I certainly don't mean that I don't still maintain some serious respect for what those cars are capable of.

If you believe official specs on performance from almost any manufacturer, especially BMW then you are the one that really needs a reality check. What part of my E46 M3 SMG and E92 M3 M-DCT simulations don't match best reported times? Hmmm, they match across the board. What they tell is an even better 0-1000m time for the E46 M3 SMG of 23.8s than BMW has claimed. The E92 M3 M-DCT though comes in at 22.6s. Here is a link that provides a single test data point for the 1000m time by the E92 M3 and they got a mere 0.2 seconds slower than this simulation result. 1.2 seconds does not sound like much but at 1000m is a HUGE beat down. It is better thought of in car lengths which turns out to be that when the E92 M3 reaches 1000m the E46 M3 is 15 car lengths behind.

Lastly, you surely can not believe that one instance of simulation being incorrect or unreliable certainly doesn't cast a huge looming shadow of doubt over all simulation?



How many insecure car owners post videos of themselves and "kill stories" besting an obviously superior car? It may not be the norm but it is common. Those posts and videos typically come across one of two ways, either - sure I am modded and the other driver obviously sucked or the more boastful and insecure ones are "dude I'm such a bass ass in my XXXX car, I wasted that poor sucker in the Lambo". Whether you accept reality or not there is some subset of owners who post about such kills who are very insecure about their own cars and indeed jealous that the could not make the step up to the next car. There is no insecurity here on my part nor is it an immature point of view, it's called the real world.



How many times do I need to repeat this, this "view" is not my opinion, it is the physics. Either the sims I posted match reality quite well and thus will also reflect 0-1000m times and trailing distances reasonably accurately (in a true apples to apples fashion") or they don't. Which is it?



I've not made mention of anything of the sort, not sure your point here. And again, to hell with ANYTHING BMW posts as times - they simply do not reflect what most reasonable drivers can do with the car.



Exactly.



So you can make some other ridiculous claim like these two cars being within 0.1 seconds to 1000m?

Here are some (metric and English) simulations comparing E46 M3 SMG vs. E92 M3 M-DCT vs. F82 M4 M-DCT (assuming 455 hp, 30 hp underrated). As we've all said, yes the margins are decreasing but it doesn't mean that the (and yes my precious ) E92 M3 won't be beat down substantially and across the board. At 1000m the F82 M4 should typically be ahead of the E92 M3 by about 14 car lengths (I use 15 ft for a car length). Over other metrics the distance ahead margins take a more linear step size among the 3 cars as compared to clearly smaller gains for many of the other common metrics.

There is a 10km/h difference on the E9x 0-1000m trap speed compared with the "real world" data...

In your simulation you end up at 238km/h where the official trap speed is 228km/h. If that part is wrong, then the 0-150MPH time is quite a bit off as well

And as I said yesterday as well, a 1 sec gap at 150 MPH is a distance of roughly 66 metres. So visually a HUGE gap. My point has been that the decimation between E46-E9x-F8x might be on a fairly equal level, where some seem to make a point of the E46 being much more decimated by the E9x than what the F8x will manage. Just look at E60 vs F10 M5, and that doesn't have the weight advantage the F8x has (but a larger power increase).

BTW, I also respect your input on these forums

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Ezio

everything M is doing to me seems better for daily driving over the track. making a better MPG engine with more low end power.

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.

According to BMW the F8x is the most track ready standard M3 of all generations. So I'm not sure what you mean BMW has done here that isn't aimed at tracking

Turbo engines generate more heat, hence the extensive cooling system! Turbo cars have been racing in endurance racing for years. How the S55 will cope with heat remains to be seen, but I'm pretty sure BMW has done hot climate tracking on the N'ring (or elsewhere) with these cars...

BTW the 'Ring taxi are M5's

[Sedan_Clan]

It sounds like some people want the F8X to fail just for the sake of it.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by KennyPowers

The thing that is annoying about your posts is that you just really don't know what you are talking about. The m5 may have issues but it's over 1000 lbs heavier than the new m3. It's turbo and cooling system is completely different than the s55.

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?

Cooling system on F10 M5 and F8x looks very similar... What are the major differences in cooling design between the two in your opinion since they are "completely different"?

To me the design looks very similar, but cooling capacity might be relatively better on the F8x setup.

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by Boss330

According to BMW the F8x is the most track ready standard M3 of all generations. So I'm not sure what you mean BMW has done here that isn't aimed at tracking

Turbo engines generate more heat, hence the extensive cooling system! Turbo cars have been racing in endurance racing for years. How the S55 will cope with heat remains to be seen, but I'm pretty sure BMW has done hot climate tracking on the N'ring (or elsewhere) with these cars...

BTW the 'Ring taxi are M5's

well according to BMW. and what really goes on in the real world are two things.

all i gotta say is that we cant say anything for sure, until its for sure.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Ezio

well according to BMW. and what really goes on in the real world are two things.

all i gotta say is that we cant say anything for sure, until its for sure.

Since the engine is an "unknown" when it comes to tracking, let's put that aside for the moment (it can be a great engine for track duty or it might not be).

The weight is lower, extensive use of CFRP, improved suspension, solid mounting of subframes, better brakes etc. All of those factors are major track improvements over the E9x gen. The engine being the unknown quantity so far (but with new tech also aimed at improving response and hence better for tracking).

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by Boss330

Since the engine is an "unknown" when it comes to tracking, let's put that aside for the moment (it can be a great engine for track duty or it might not be).

The weight is lower, extensive use of CFRP, improved suspension, solid mounting of subframes, better brakes etc. All of those factors are major track improvements over the E9x gen. The engine being the unknown quantity so far (but with new tech also aimed at improving response and hence better for tracking).

IMO major improvements should be a given in todays world. with a next gen car. i know the F80 will smoke the E92 in every single performance test. if it doesn't then its a bust.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Ezio

well according to BMW. and what really goes on in the real world are two things.

all i gotta say is that we cant say anything for sure, until its for sure.

That should also apply to all of your conjecture as well. Let's set all of the speculation aside and wait until the car is on the streets/tracks.

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by Boss330

According to BMW the F8x is the most track ready standard M3 of all generations.

That's called //Marketing

I think it was the M3 CSL btw .

Anyway E46 vs E90 M3, I had them both. I prefer the first. Sound, playability, less heavy, less gasguzzling lol.

Boss, great job, but about the Nùrburgring laptimes, here are the real numbers fwiw.

M3 E46
N-Ring: 8: 22min

M3 E92
N-Ring: 8:05 min

M3 CSL
N-Ring: 7:50 min

M3 GTS
N-Ring: 7:48 min

Tyres will do a great job in NS laptimes....


In a straight line the E9x M3 will ´eat´ a E46 M3 but only beyond 100/110mph from experience...

On a track a E9x M3 is a tad out of place too stock, heated up frontbrakes and fronttyres after 3 laps at Assen Moto GP track. Very nice thanks BMW M...

Cheers
Robin

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

It sounds like some people want the F8X to fail just for the sake of it.

This....

Cheers
Robin

[Chill72]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

It sounds like some people want the F8X to fail just for the sake of it.

Specifically Ezio, to further justify purchasing his 2013 M3. NEXT!

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by Chill72

Specifically Ezio, to further justify purchasing his 2013 M3. NEXT!

not really.

my M3 is a 3 year lease, with just about 2 years left on it. There is a lot of new cars coming out in two years. i think i made the right move with my M3. right now i got 38k invested in this M3. (one time lease payment). and have no problem walking away into a new car when the time comes.

i think i am in a pretty good position. even if i wanted a M4, i would want to wait little until the dust settles with pricing and reviews on the car.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Ezio

IMO major improvements should be a given in todays world. with a next gen car. i know the F80 will smoke the E92 in every single performance test. if it doesn't then its a bust.

You're avoiding the issue... The E9x became heavier than the E46, now we have a new gen that is lighter and has improved suspension with torque vectoring diff etc. To me those parts are E46 CSL like, the engine is a question mark as regards trackability. Which parts of the F8x is it that makes it a worse track car than the E9x?

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Robin_NL

That's called //Marketing

I think it was the M3 CSL btw .

Anyway E46 vs E90 M3, I had them both. I prefer the first. Sound, playability, less heavy, less gasguzzling lol.

Boss, great job, but about the Nùrburgring laptimes, here are the real numbers fwiw.

M3 E46
N-Ring: 8: 22min

M3 E92
N-Ring: 8:05 min

M3 CSL
N-Ring: 7:50 min

M3 GTS
N-Ring: 7:48 min

Tyres will do a great job in NS laptimes....


In a straight line the E9x M3 will ´eat´ a E46 M3 but only beyond 100/110mph from experience...

On a track a E9x M3 is a tad out of place too stock, heated up frontbrakes and fronttyres after 3 laps at Assen Moto GP track. Very nice thanks BMW M...

Cheers
Robin

I think the CSL doesn't count as a "std" M3, hence why they say the F8x is the most track ready standard M3 version. CSL is a special version which is even more track ready.

At least someone agrees with what the numbers say and what has been my point all along

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by Boss330

You're avoiding the issue... The E9x became heavier than the E46, now we have a new gen that is lighter and has improved suspension with torque vectoring diff etc. To me those parts are E46 CSL like, the engine is a question mark as regards trackability. Which parts of the F8x is it that makes it a worse track car than the E9x?

first off. i just wanna make something clear between you and me. i do not think the overall car of the E92 m3 is the best M car of all time or do i think its some track king. i just really really love the engine (s65). and i feel the F80 is a move in the right direction for most people.

now back to your question. the only thing i think that would make the F80 worse track car is this.

-engine wise would be a turbo engine. having lag, or overheating. like you said its the question mark.

-everything else, i think everything is a upgrade in terms of getting better track times. i think what some might not like is FEEL. does the new car have a new steering setup? maybe to much computer aids like the GTR. stuff like that. things that will get you better track times, BUT at the rate of being a soul less car.


the E92 also might be more fun. just like how there are people who to this day feel the E46 is more fun over the E92. not faster, but more fun. it seems that has time goes on each new car gets less raw feeling. although they go faster around a track.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Ezio

first off. i just wanna make something clear between you and me. i do not think the overall car of the E92 m3 is the best M car of all time or do i think its some track king. i just really really love the engine (s65). and i feel the F80 is a move in the right direction for most people.

now back to your question. the only thing i think that would make the F80 worse track car is this.

-engine wise would be a turbo engine. having lag, or overheating. like you said its the question mark.

-everything else, i think everything is a upgrade in terms of getting better track times. i think what some might not like is FEEL. does the new car have a new steering setup? maybe to much computer aids like the GTR. stuff like that. things that will get you better track times, BUT at the rate of being a soul less car.


the E92 also might be more fun. just like how there are people who to this day feel the E46 is more fun over the E92. not faster, but more fun. it seems that has time goes on each new car gets less raw feeling. although they go faster around a track.

I agree, esp. on the feel part. Each generation of car makes the driver feel more remote from the experience. One thing that happened between E60 and F10 (on every model in the range). And as you say, some still feel the E46 (esp. CSL) is a more rewarding car to drive. Hopefully they have made the F8x fun to drive and not just surgically quick

I get your love of the S65 engine, and no one can take that away from you! If that's the way you feel about it, then that is your perogative. Others might not agree, but that doesn't make your feelings wrong! The S55 will have to be a remarkable turbo engine to follow the S65 in how it feels and thrills. The S55 will be faster, there is no doubt about that. But will it be emotional and evocative while doing it?