Autotalent
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
      01-27-2014, 01:34 AM   #23
Fun of it
Private
Fun of it's Avatar
0
Rep
89
Posts

Drives: 1995 M3 Dakar Yellow
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Kansas

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
1995 BMW M3  [0.00]
Great insight, thanks for posting. Of course, the real issue will be testing cars at dealers, and then navigating the crazy dealer mark ups to actually own one. I am hoping that the frenzy starts to diminish next year, and I can negotiate a reasonable price for ED.

Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 01:35 AM   #24
roadmax
Private First Class
4
Rep
138
Posts

Drives: M3 Coupe
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA

iTrader: (3)

I get scared when engine is faster than chassis, always like when chassis is faster than the engine.
Appreciate 1
      01-27-2014, 01:43 AM   #25
Sedan_Clan
Olympic Lifting Junkie
Sedan_Clan's Avatar
Brazil
1717
Rep
13,636
Posts

Drives: '17 Nardo Grey M4
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: On 2 wheels clipping an apex!

iTrader: (26)

Quote:
Originally Posted by roadmax
I get scared when engine is faster than chassis, always like when chassis is faster than the engine.
What are you insinuating?
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 02:13 AM   #26
khanyam4
Major
khanyam4's Avatar
Cambodia
392
Rep
1,260
Posts

Drives: 04 e46 m3,13 535i
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 33.7743 N, 117.9380 W

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by roadmax View Post
I get scared when engine is faster than chassis, always like when chassis is faster than the engine.
Are you referring to something along the line of the subframe issue on the e46 m3. I hope these f m have none of that issue.
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 02:38 AM   #27
roadmax
Private First Class
4
Rep
138
Posts

Drives: M3 Coupe
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA

iTrader: (3)

We are talking here a 4 second 0-60 performance, this is Porsche, Ferrari and other "2 seat" exotic car territory.
Will this 4 seat chassis be durable and stable in a long term in combination with the engine, it all sounds like the engine will be faster than chassis, let's wait and see after some time how will this unfold.
As many are saying let's hope there will be no issues.
At the moment it all appears to me that this race is all about numbers on paper.
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 09:44 AM   #28
Real Deal
Second Lieutenant
15
Rep
290
Posts

Drives: E90
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: DC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fun of it View Post
Great insight, thanks for posting. Of course, the real issue will be testing cars at dealers, and then navigating the crazy dealer mark ups to actually own one. I am hoping that the frenzy starts to diminish next year, and I can negotiate a reasonable price for ED.

No mark ups at my dealer, he already told me MSRP.
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 09:47 AM   #29
Real Deal
Second Lieutenant
15
Rep
290
Posts

Drives: E90
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: DC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by roadmax View Post
We are talking here a 4 second 0-60 performance, this is Porsche, Ferrari and other "2 seat" exotic car territory.
Will this 4 seat chassis be durable and stable in a long term in combination with the engine, it all sounds like the engine will be faster than chassis, let's wait and see after some time how will this unfold.
As many are saying let's hope there will be no issues.
At the moment it all appears to me that this race is all about numbers on paper.
It's actually 3.9 seconds which will lead me to believe it's faster. Now tweak the car and perhaps In a year or so get tune and we will be looking at perhaps 3.4 to 3.5 seconds. Ferrari? Sure speed wise but a Ferrari is a Ferrari and just can't insult a great car by comparing it to BMW. I hand been saying this all along that a turbo engines capabilities are endless, I just can't wait for this car to get in to my garage.
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 10:35 AM   #30
Needsdecaf
Everything's Bigger in Texas!
United_States
762
Rep
3,333
Posts

Drives: Porsche Tractor
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The Woodlands, TX

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by roadmax View Post
We are talking here a 4 second 0-60 performance, this is Porsche, Ferrari and other "2 seat" exotic car territory.
Will this 4 seat chassis be durable and stable in a long term in combination with the engine, it all sounds like the engine will be faster than chassis, let's wait and see after some time how will this unfold.
As many are saying let's hope there will be no issues.
At the moment it all appears to me that this race is all about numbers on paper.
Every one of the dozen videos we have seen from the car on the 'Ring has indicated it's VERY stable and in control. Put that in context with the comments made by the DTM drivers about the car and I'm not worried.
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 10:45 AM   #31
RMB
Captain
RMB's Avatar
United_States
84
Rep
634
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
This sounds great and I can't wait (like everyone else) to get in this car and drive it. I saw it in DC this weekend in person and loved it!
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 10:50 AM   #32
Boss330
Brigadier General
Boss330's Avatar
Norway
947
Rep
4,824
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Norway, Scandinavia

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
I suppose 50-50 weight balance still delivers ultimate handling to (it's well known that closer to 60-40 is significantly better...).
While 60/40 might be significantly better, do we have some independent confirmation of that?


A car like the Ferrari F12 (front engine RWD) has a weight distribution of 46/54, and is regarded as a good handling car...

Ferrari F12 is 46/54

Ferrari FF is 47/53

Ferrari California is 47/53

Merc SLS AMG is 53/47

Aston Martin DBS is 51,3/48,7

BMW F10 M5 is 52,5/47,5

All of the above are front engined cars with RWD and are considered good handling cars. None is at 50/50, but Ferrari are rear biased and the others are front biased.

And as far as I know, a race car like the Audi R18 TDI Le Mans Prototype runs a even weight distribution front and rear. The R8 etron has a 48/52 distribution ( http://www.worldcarfans.com/11006142...urs-of-le-mans )

Last edited by Boss330; 01-27-2014 at 03:35 PM.
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 02:24 PM   #33
MaC-N54-E82
N54 Lover
MaC-N54-E82's Avatar
United_States
36
Rep
198
Posts

Drives: 2008 135i
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: OR

iTrader: (0)

I have a raging hard-on to drive this car!
__________________
MAC
2008 N54 E82|AW over CR
Sport|Premium|Cold Weather|Comfort Access
BMW PE|COBB Tuned|M3 FSB|Michelin PSS|
B12 Pro-Kit|M3 Rear Subframe Bushings|Black Line Taillights
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 02:29 PM   #34
cotmfk
Brigadier General
cotmfk's Avatar
433
Rep
4,600
Posts

Drives: M4
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DC, MD, VA

iTrader: (11)

With the N54 getting over 700 whp on stock internals, this motor should be amazing. It would be a disappointment if it wasn't.
__________________
Appreciate 1
      01-27-2014, 02:31 PM   #35
stefan
Brigadier General
stefan's Avatar
No_Country
1151
Rep
3,557
Posts

Drives: M2 LCI
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2018 BMW M2  [5.00]
2016 BMW X1  [0.00]
I am really not sure of what advantage is gained from a 50/50 weight, after factoring suspension into the equation. I suppose your car balance will be easier to predict initially at a track particularly during minor weight transfers. But it's nothing you wouldn't just adapt to if it weren't perfectly split.
__________________
///M Power
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 02:32 PM   #36
dlbrooks18
Brigadier General
dlbrooks18's Avatar
125
Rep
3,739
Posts

Drives: e90 335i
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Los Angeles

iTrader: (2)

Nice!
__________________

2008 E90 335
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 02:36 PM   #37
wilstave
Legend
Canada
28
Rep
217
Posts

Drives: 2017 M3
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Toronto

iTrader: (0)

just need to fix that exhaust note to compliment this so called "animal"
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 02:41 PM   #38
Real Deal
Second Lieutenant
15
Rep
290
Posts

Drives: E90
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: DC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by wilstave View Post
just need to fix that exhaust note to compliment this so called "animal"
I think after market will be the option to go, catless dp's and it will roar.
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 03:17 PM   #39
Year's_End
RWD only.
Year's_End's Avatar
United_States
577
Rep
12,435
Posts

Drives: 2015 S550 GT
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St. Pete, FL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330
Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
I suppose 50-50 weight balance still delivers ultimate handling to (it's well known that closer to 60-40 is significantly better...).
While 60/40 might be significantly better, do we have some independent confirmation of that?

This article explains some of the physics involved:

http://<a href="http://www.autospies...nts-50856/</a>

A car like the Ferrari F12 (front engine RWD) has a weight distribution of 46/54, and is regarded as a good handling car...

Ferrari F12 is 46/54

Ferrari FF is 47/53

Ferrari California is 47/53

Merc SLS AMG is 53/47

Aston Martin DBS is 51,3/48,7

BMW F10 M5 is 52,5/47,5

All of the above are front engined cars with RWD and are considered good handling cars. None is at 50/50, but Ferrari are rear biased and the others are front biased.

And as far as I know, a race car like the Audi R18 TDI Le Mans Prototype runs a even weight distribution front and rear. The R8 etron has a 48/52 distribution ( http://<a href="http://www.worldcarf...of-le-mans</a> )
I was going to tackle his post myself, as I was led to believe that a slight rear-bias was the optimal weight ratio (around 47/53 like some of the cars you listed...although I was nearly positive that the SLS was definitely rear biased around 47/53, not 53/47, due to its front-mid setup). This creates a lighter nose with sharper turn-in, aids rear wheel traction during acceleration, and creates a more even load distribution under braking. I'm pretty sure this is why MR/FMR setups are the supposed ideal.

50/50 distributions and slight nose-heavy distributions are supposed to be a contributing factor towards more accessible handling in RWD applications, if I recall correctly.
__________________
Past:'08 E92 335i|ZPP|ZSP|6AT|four (4) HPFPs

Present:'15 Mustang GT|401A|PP|6MT|Recaros
Sig pic unrelated. I like to go sideways and stuff.
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 03:22 PM   #40
CanAutM3
Lieutenant General
CanAutM3's Avatar
Canada
8529
Rep
14,977
Posts

Drives: 2019 M4cs
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2019 BMW M4cs  [0.00]
2018 Audi RS3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330 View Post
This article explains some of the physics involved:

http://www.autospies.com/news/The-Ef...Moments-50856/
Quote:
Originally Posted by stefan View Post
I am really not sure of what advantage is gained from a 50/50 weight, after factoring suspension into the equation. I suppose your car balance will be easier to predict initially at a track particularly during minor weight transfers. But it's nothing you wouldn't just adapt to if it weren't perfectly split.
This article is full of flaws. It assumes that the path the car travels is linked to the mid point between the front and rear axles; since only the front wheels are steered, this simply isn't true (even on cars that have rear wheel steer, the fronts still do most of the steering). On rear weight biased car, the article concludes that the rear wheels need to cary more lateral load. This is correct, but since they also carry more normal (vertical) load, it becomes a moot point.

A car, as it travels through a bend, also needs to pivot on itself to keep the proper heading. The car does not pivot around its CG nor does it pivot around its "middle". The car pivots around the mid point between the two rear wheels (assuming zero slip angles). Imagine the front wheels steered at 90deg and this becomes very obvious.

To calculate the moment of inertia of an object pivoting around a point, the natural moment of inertia of the object needs to be added to the mass of the object times the square of the distance of its CG relative to the pivot point.

So the closer the CG is to the rear axle, the easier it is to pivot a vehicle. Hence the benefit of a rear weight bias.

The counter point is that when the rear tires start to slip more than the fronts (oversteer), the pivot point progressively moves away from the rear axle towards the front axle. So once you loose the back end on a rear weight biased car, it becomes much more difficult to bring it back.

Last edited by CanAutM3; 01-27-2014 at 03:45 PM.
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 03:22 PM   #41
Randy M
First Lieutenant
Randy M's Avatar
25
Rep
358
Posts

Drives: 2013 B302 LS
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 'Merika

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by stefan View Post
I am really not sure of what advantage is gained from a 50/50 weight, after factoring suspension into the equation. I suppose your car balance will be easier to predict initially at a track particularly during minor weight transfers. But it's nothing you wouldn't just adapt to if it weren't perfectly split.
Let's compare two extremes of chassis weight location. Audi's are typically somewhere around 58% front bias. There may not be another car brand that understeers more than Audi's. They've tried to cure this with rear diff torque vectoring but that weight hanging over the front axles is still there. Quattro is great in the rain but after having a B5 S4 and a RS4, Audi's handling is mediocre.

Porsche's are extremely rear weight biased with the engine hanging back behind the rear axle. If you're trail braking too hard you will feel the 911's weight wanting to come around on you and get out of line a bit. It's just one reason why the rear tires are so wide. This is also the reason for the 'never lift' saying that many Porsche owners pride themselves in when you are mid corner starting to drive out. 911's are great cars but they can be tricky and demand respect for that weight in the rear. If they would put some of the higher output engines in the Cayman you would have a much better balanced car but Porsche is plagued with it's history.

In the way BMW builds their cars with the ideal 50/50 in mind they are much more approachable than the 911 and more rewarding than Audi's. 50/50 weight maintains inertia equally on both ends of the car and is ideal for handling overall.

Someone had posted concerns about the chassis not being capable of harnessing the power of the new engine. Given BMW's history, the chassis has always been the priority. It is why they are known for great handling. The new M3/4 are not going to be like GT500's.
__________________
'11 Porsche GT3 (Sold)
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 03:25 PM   #42
US///M3
Banned
64
Rep
1,276
Posts

Drives: 1973 Jensen Interceptor
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Shanghai, People's Republic of China

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
More and more M stands for marketing. Look, the new engine indeed shows some great promise. The car WILL be 911 Carrera S type fast, certainly faster than the base model 911 (newest 991 of course). But this along with the prior "inexperienced drivers need to apply" (or whatever BS that was). I suppose 50-50 weight balance still delivers ultimate handling to (it's well known that closer to 60-40 is significantly better...).
How's the F80/82 different than the E36 M3 as far as M standing for marketing?
I thought 40-60 weight distribution in a RWD car is better.
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 03:32 PM   #43
Doctor///M
Brigadier General
Doctor///M's Avatar
1285
Rep
3,975
Posts

Drives: 2013 E70 X5M
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA

iTrader: (14)

Garage List
2013 BMW X5M  [0.00]
2009 BMW 335i  [0.00]
2015 M3  [4.76]
Can't wait!!
__________________
2013 E70 X5M /l\ Space Grey /i\ Full Silverstone Leather /l\ LED Headlights /i\ Comfort Access /l\ HUD /i\ Ventilated Seats /l\ 22" BBS SV
BMW CCA Member
Appreciate 0
      01-27-2014, 03:38 PM   #44
Race_Doc11
Major
Race_Doc11's Avatar
United_States
190
Rep
1,440
Posts

Drives: 2013 Audi RS5 & 08 M3 E93
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
I'm expecting a quite few of these cars to be totaled when they first come.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Real Deal View Post
I don't feel like I'm at risk of over promising when I tell you that no one is ready for this engine. I wasn't prepared. The engine is an animal. The engine has shocking capabilities.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
2014 bmw m3, 2014 bmw m3 horsepower, 2014 bmw m3 specs, 2014 bmw m4 horsepower, 2014 bmw m4 specs, 2014 m3, 2014 m3 engine, 2014 m3 forum, 2014 m3 horsepower, 2014 m3 hp, 2014 m3 specs, 2014 m3 weight, 2014 m4 engine, 2014 m4 horsepower, 2014 m4 hp, 2014 m4 specs, 2014 m4 weight, 2015 bmw m3, 2015 bmw m3 specs, 2015 bmw m4, 2015 bmw m4 specs, 2015 m3, 2015 m3 engine, 2015 m3 specs, 2015 m4, 2015 m4 engine, 2015 m4 hp, 2015 m4 specs, 2015 m4 weight, bmw f80, bmw f80 forum, bmw f80 forums, bmw f80 m3, bmw f80 m3 s55, bmw f80 m3 sedan, bmw f82, bmw f82 forum, bmw f82 forums, bmw f82 m3 coupe, bmw f82 m4, bmw f82 m4 coupe, bmw f82 m4 s55, bmw f82 m4 video, bmw f83, bmw f83 m3, bmw f83 m4, bmw m forum, bmw m forums, bmw m3 forum, bmw m3 forums, bmw m3 s55, bmw m3 s55 engine, bmw m4, bmw m4 coupe, bmw m4 coupe forum, bmw m4 forum, bmw m4 weight, bmw s55, bmw s55 engine, f80 m3, f82 m4, m3 s55, m3 s55 engine, m4 s55, m4 s55 engine

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 -4. The time now is 10:26 PM.




f80post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
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