HRE Wheels
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 Forum > BMW M3 (F80) and BMW M4 (F82) General Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      11-22-2013, 10:46 AM   #23
absoluteis350
Captain
absoluteis350's Avatar
382
Rep
977
Posts

Drives: 2016 Singapore Grey M3
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: boston

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by aajami View Post
What were the quoted times for the E9XM from BMW before launch, though? BMW always provides conservative HP estimates, so it's probably to be expected that they also provide conservative performance estimates.
The times published by the german manufacturers are ALWAYS conservative. RS4 was quoted at 4.8 when its more like 4.2. The e92 was published at 4.8 for the manual, which is a joke (meaning it was much faster).

Likewise, I *HOPE* they publish a time of 4.3 because in reality that should translate to 3.8 roughly
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 10:56 AM   #24
GregW / Oregon
Commander-In-Chief
United_States
480
Rep
7,975
Posts

Drives: 2015 M4 Coupe, 2020 GLE 450
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Lake Oswego, OR

iTrader: (3)

Garage List
Pre production published acceleration times

Quote:
Originally Posted by absoluteis350 View Post
The times published by the german manufacturers are ALWAYS conservative. RS4 was quoted at 4.8 when its more like 4.2. The e92 was published at 4.8 for the manual, which is a joke (meaning it was much faster).
Yes indeed, this is from 4/07:
Attached Images
File Type: pdf Pages from M3 selling points 0407.pdf (192.0 KB, 159 views)
__________________

Greg Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA
2015 M4 Coupe - Silverstone/Sakhir/CF
2020 MB GLE 450
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 11:22 AM   #25
JoeFromPA
Colonel
1450
Rep
2,854
Posts

Drives: '15 AW M3 6MT Stripper
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: SE PA

iTrader: (0)

It wasn't a joke. Those 0-60 times are normal, non-roll-out, non-totally abusive 0-60 times achievable by a reasonable driver on normal conditions. Consistently...

Now, if you want a 0-60 time by an exceptional driver, in the most ideal traction environment, with a 1 foot roll-out and total mechanical abuse....and that might have taken 10 tries to accomplish...

Sure, you can say the Germans are conservative.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 01:43 PM   #26
absoluteis350
Captain
absoluteis350's Avatar
382
Rep
977
Posts

Drives: 2016 Singapore Grey M3
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: boston

iTrader: (0)

Joe, I agree with you, your points are obvious. However, it is assumed by most that the 0-60 times are the maximum achievable, when we know that its a conservative figure published by the company. So it -is- a joke if you think that the published or official car manufacturer times are representative of peak times, which is what people are taking them to be. People are comparing two different figures. They are taking an m4 time quoted by a company rep, and comparing that to a 'best of' time pulled by a magazine on an e92. The assumption is that the rep is quoting the conservative time, so it will be under that.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 01:56 PM   #27
xlover
Major
No_Country
596
Rep
1,180
Posts

Drives: 2018 440 xdrive MPPSK
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Boston

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2018 440 xdrive  [0.00]
For the US i think if the vehicle exceeds 18mpg combine no guzzler tax... case in point the 420 hp 5.0 in the mustang gets 15/26 in manual with no guzzler tax and the 662HP gt500 gets 15/24.. no guzzler tax. i think BMW should be able to meet or beat those numbers with a twin turbo 3.0.

moral of the story is: highly unlikely there will be a guzzler tax on the M3/M4
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 01:57 PM   #28
CanAutM3
Lieutenant General
CanAutM3's Avatar
Canada
10389
Rep
16,412
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2019 BMW M4cs  [0.00]
2018 Audi RS3  [0.00]
I am curious on the mathematical formula you used to calculate 0-60mph from a 0-100km/h number
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 02:08 PM   #29
GregW / Oregon
Commander-In-Chief
United_States
480
Rep
7,975
Posts

Drives: 2015 M4 Coupe, 2020 GLE 450
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Lake Oswego, OR

iTrader: (3)

Garage List
GGT

Quote:
Originally Posted by xlover View Post
For the US i think if the vehicle exceeds 18mpg combine no guzzler tax... case in point the 420 hp 5.0 in the mustang gets 15/26 in manual with no guzzler tax and the 662HP gt500 gets 15/24.. no guzzler tax. i think BMW should be able to meet or beat those numbers with a twin turbo 3.0.

moral of the story is: highly unlikely there will be a guzzler tax on the M3/M4
You are a bit off. Takes 20.5 mpg (55% City/45% Highway) to avoid the tax.
Attached Images
File Type: pdf Gas Guzzler Tax.pdf (175.8 KB, 407 views)
__________________

Greg Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA
2015 M4 Coupe - Silverstone/Sakhir/CF
2020 MB GLE 450
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 02:49 PM   #30
Powaup
Brigadier General
Powaup's Avatar
United_States
1094
Rep
3,648
Posts

Drives: M235i
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 BMW M4  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ersin View Post
Here's one from Car and Driver: http://media.caranddriver.com/ez/ori...af8a28559a.pdf

Some other rag did the same 3.9 sec for a DCT M3 too. I just can't find it right now.


Cheers.
Just curious, do those times include a 1-foot rollout? and would it really be better than using launch control?
__________________
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 03:01 PM   #31
basscadet
Lieutenant
basscadet's Avatar
148
Rep
434
Posts

Drives: '17 Giula Quadrifoglio
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Overland Park, KS

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapper_M3 View Post
I don't think anyone is disputing that; his point seemed to be that the F8X M3/4 will definitely be sub-4 seconds from 0-60, given that reviewers have timed the E9X M3 at sub-4 seconds
4 seconds flat is what a Corvette Stingray runs 0-60. No chance, no way that a M3 is going to be as fast as that car. I don't give a hoot what some car magazine got with a previous generation M3.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 05:18 PM   #32
Boss330
Brigadier General
Boss330's Avatar
Norway
991
Rep
4,832
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by basscadet View Post
4 seconds flat is what a Corvette Stingray runs 0-60. No chance, no way that a M3 is going to be as fast as that car. I don't give a hoot what some car magazine got with a previous generation M3.
I also believe it will have a hard time beating a car like that, but on the other hand the power to weight ratio of the Stingray and the M3/M4 is nearly identical (in favour of the Stingray).

The Stingray has 460hp and weighs 1565kg
The M3/M4 has 430hp and weighs under 1500kg (in base version)

The Stingray has more torque though (630Nm vs 560Nm).
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 05:32 PM   #33
Sapper_M3
Captain
Sapper_M3's Avatar
United_States
46
Rep
612
Posts

Drives: 2012 E92 M3, ZCP
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Missouri

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by basscadet
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapper_M3 View Post
I don't think anyone is disputing that; his point seemed to be that the F8X M3/4 will definitely be sub-4 seconds from 0-60, given that reviewers have timed the E9X M3 at sub-4 seconds
4 seconds flat is what a Corvette Stingray runs 0-60. No chance, no way that a M3 is going to be as fast as that car. I don't give a hoot what some car magazine got with a previous generation M3.


Let me get this straight: You're having difficulty understanding how a 3450 lb RWD car with 460 hp and 285 section rear tires could be matched by a 3300 lb RWD car with 430 hp and 275 section rear tires?

The new corvette has a slight power advantage, but from 0-60 the M4's weight (depending on whether they deliver on the still reported "sub-3307 lb" figure) makes up for this to an extent (although over 1/4 mile, it will not).

More importantly, these cars each put enough torque to the ground to be traction limited here--making that 30 hp bump even less relevant from a dig.

I don't believe the new M4 will be faster from 0-60 than the new corvette (although when comparing the M4 DCT to rhe corvette's MT, it may be interesting), but it certainly isn't "unbelievable" to think the numbers will be close.

In fact, based on the specs we know, it would be fairly unbelievable if the new M4 ISN'T close to the corvette in 0-60 acceleration--and remember, the new 'vette is posting better than 4.0 seconds with some reviewers.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 05:44 PM   #34
jbockrd
Lieutenant
jbockrd's Avatar
United_States
19
Rep
550
Posts

Drives: e92 Alpine White/Carbon M3
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Yardley, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ixse View Post
26mpg wow..i get 28mpg combined in 328 right now.. thats impressive
The 328 that I owned w/ xdrive was a tank and I barely got 26
__________________
On the list for an M4!!
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 05:56 PM   #35
solstice
Brigadier General
1358
Rep
4,424
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

I bet the M4's M differential, DCT and Launch control working together will easily make up for the power to weight deficiency to the Vette making it a close race.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 06:21 PM   #36
Black Gold
Major General
538
Rep
5,422
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas

iTrader: (15)

Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice View Post
I bet the M4's M differential, DCT and Launch control working together will easily make up for the power to weight deficiency to the Vette making it a close race.
The vette also has a good launch control ssytem but I agree, should be close

Typically turbo motors are quicker than their specs suggest.

I'm very anxiously awaiting the full unveiling of the car. Too much hearsay and rumors around. I want to see the real deal
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 07:09 PM   #37
basscadet
Lieutenant
basscadet's Avatar
148
Rep
434
Posts

Drives: '17 Giula Quadrifoglio
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Overland Park, KS

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330 View Post
I also believe it will have a hard time beating a car like that, but on the other hand the power to weight ratio of the Stingray and the M3/M4 is nearly identical (in favour of the Stingray).

The Stingray has 460hp and weighs 1565kg
The M3/M4 has 430hp and weighs under 1500kg (in base version)

The Stingray has more torque though (630Nm vs 560Nm).
I have strong doubts of a an F80 M4 weighing less than a C7 Corvette.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 07:27 PM   #38
basscadet
Lieutenant
basscadet's Avatar
148
Rep
434
Posts

Drives: '17 Giula Quadrifoglio
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Overland Park, KS

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapper_M3 View Post


Let me get this straight: You're having difficulty understanding how a 3450 lb RWD car with 460 hp and 285 section rear tires could be matched by a 3300 lb RWD car with 430 hp and 275 section rear tires?
No, I am having difficulty believing that the M3/M4 will be anywhere close to 3300lbs. I would wager a large sum of money that it will weigh no less than 3550lbs as commonly optioned in the US market.

If you have ever seen a C7 up close you will realize it is a much smaller car than a BMW 3 series car. It's not Lotus-small but almost.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 07:33 PM   #39
solstice
Brigadier General
1358
Rep
4,424
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by basscadet View Post
No, I am having difficulty believing that the M3/M4 will be anywhere close to 3300lbs. I would wager a large sum of money that it will weigh no less than 3550lbs as commonly optioned in the US market.

If you have ever seen a C7 up close you will realize it is a much smaller car than a BMW 3 series car. It's not Lotus-small but almost.
Remember, 1500kg for the M4 is EU Kerb weight without a driver. It will as you say very likely be +3500 lbs US Curb weight including driver. I think the Vette has a sub 3300 lbs US Curb weight.

Last edited by solstice; 11-22-2013 at 07:38 PM..
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 07:35 PM   #40
swanson
Convicted Felon
swanson's Avatar
355
Rep
2,064
Posts

Drives: chariot
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NY

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by basscadet View Post
I have strong doubts of a an F80 M4 weighing less than a C7 Corvette.


BMW quotes dry weight, meaning no fluids. I bet the M3/M4 weighs more like 34XXlbs
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 07:40 PM   #41
Black Gold
Major General
538
Rep
5,422
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas

iTrader: (15)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swanson View Post


BMW quotes dry weight, meaning no fluids. I bet the M3/M4 weighs more like 34XXlbs
I'll also jump on the bandwagon here

Personally I'll be thrilled of it weighs 3450 or less with all fluids as weighed by us car magazines.

The e9x usually weighed between 3550-3650
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 08:14 PM   #42
ersin
Brigadier General
ersin's Avatar
United_States
110
Rep
4,147
Posts

Drives: 08 IB E92 M3
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Powaup View Post
Just curious, do those times include a 1-foot rollout? and would it really be better than using launch control?
All American mags use the 1-foot rollout, unless they state they don't (which they sometimes do). When the Europeans talk about 0 - 60 they probably are not using a 1-foot rollout. But you'll have to read carefully to find out and sometimes cannot find out for sure.

Launch control should make the times better. However, some drivers are good enough to be able to best this, but likely not routinely. A DCT transmission also gets to 60 faster just because it can shift faster than most humans. LC + faster shifting - weight penalty = faster 0 - 60.


Cheers.
__________________

I've been assimilated. 6MT/ZPP/18"/PS extended.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 08:15 PM   #43
xlover
Major
No_Country
596
Rep
1,180
Posts

Drives: 2018 440 xdrive MPPSK
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Boston

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2018 440 xdrive  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW / Oregon
Quote:
Originally Posted by xlover View Post
For the US i think if the vehicle exceeds 18mpg combine no guzzler tax... case in point the 420 hp 5.0 in the mustang gets 15/26 in manual with no guzzler tax and the 662HP gt500 gets 15/24.. no guzzler tax. i think BMW should be able to meet or beat those numbers with a twin turbo 3.0.

moral of the story is: highly unlikely there will be a guzzler tax on the M3/M4
You are a bit off. Takes 20.5 mpg (55% City/45% Highway) to avoid the tax.
Interesting.... In that case both of the aforementioned vehicles would be subject to the tax, but are not. I wonder if there is a different calculation for the tax.
Appreciate 0
      11-22-2013, 08:23 PM   #44
ersin
Brigadier General
ersin's Avatar
United_States
110
Rep
4,147
Posts

Drives: 08 IB E92 M3
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330 View Post
The Stingray has more torque though (630Nm vs 560Nm).
Engine torque means nothing for performance. The number that completely trumps peak engine torque is hp to weight ratio. If you want to bring torque into the equation it has to be wheel torque where you take into consideration gearing.

Also note that the single engine torque figure is the peak torque number only at the engine speed (rpm) that gives this figure. At all other rpms the torque is lower depending on the torque curve. For performance you want the engine torque to keep this peak for as wide a range as possible, that is the torque times the range of rpm that it works over, or as they put it, the area under the torque curve. All torque curves are different for different engines and you would need calculus or a computer to figure out the real engine potential. And this can be done if you get the torque figures for the whole rpm range. However, as it turns out, the maximum horsepower IS the area under the torque curve. And this is why horsepower is the more meaningful number.

So, let me repeat this: a single, maximum torque number for an engine in a specific car alone is meaningless as an indication of performance. Horsepower has more meaning in this context and horsepower per weight happens to be one of the best single number indicators of acceleration and speed.


Cheers.
__________________

I've been assimilated. 6MT/ZPP/18"/PS extended.
Appreciate 0
Closed Thread

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 m4, 2015 m3, 2015 m3 engine, 2015 m3 specs, 2015 m4, 2015 m4 engine, 2015 m4 hp, 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, bmw f82 m3 coupe, bmw f82 m3 forum, 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 carbon fiber roof, bmw m3 forum, bmw m3 forums, bmw m3 s55, bmw m3 s55 engine, bmw m3 yas marina blue, bmw m4, bmw m4 concept, bmw m4 concept coupe, bmw m4 coupe, bmw m4 coupe concept, bmw m4 curb weight, bmw m4 weight, f80 m3 specs, f80 m3 weight, f82 m4 specs, f82 m4 weight, m4 weight

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 02:40 AM.




f80post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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