View Single Post
      08-19-2008, 08:06 PM   #71
swamp2
Lieutenant General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 10,200
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
No need to show my hand, the evidence is there in these pages.

0 ~ 60mph time:
BMW E92 M3 M-DCT: 4.1s (MT)
BMW E92 M3: 4.1s (R&T)
BMW E90 M3: 4.1s (C&D)
Lexus IS-F: 4.2s (R&T)
BMW E92 M3: 4.3s (C&D)
BMW E92 M3 M-DCT: 4.3s (C&D)
BMW E90 M3: 4.3s(MT)
Audi RS4: 4.3s (R&T)
BMW E92 M3: 4.4s (C&D)
Audi RS4: 4.5s (Autocar)
BMW E92 M3: 4.7s (AutoCar)
0 ~ 100 km/h time:
BMW E92 M3: 4.5s (AUTO-Italian Mag)
BMW E92 M3 M-DCT: 4.6s (Auto Bild)
BMW E92 M3: 4.6s (AMS)
Audi RS4: 4.6s (Automobil A)
BMW E90 M3: 4.7s (AMS)
BMW E92 M3: 4.8s (BMW)
BMW E92 M3: 4.8s (Sportauto)
BMW E92 M3: 4.8s (Powercar Germany)
BMW E92 M3: 4.8s (Dutch Mag - BMW Fanatics Magazine)
BMW E92 M3: 4.8s (Auto Bild)
BMW E93 M3 M-DCT: 4.9s (Sportscars)
BMW E92 M3: 4.9s (AM&S)
BMW E92 M3: 4.9s (AM&S)
BMW E90 M3: 4.9s (Sportauto)
BMW E90 M3: 5.0s (Autozeitung)
BMW E93 M3 M-DCT: 5.1s (Autozeitung)
BMW E92 M3: 5.1s (Automobil A (noted traction problems))
BMW E92 M3: 5.1s (18" - Powercar Germany)
Audi RS4: 5.1s (Dutch Mag - BMW Fanatics Magazine)
BMW E90 M3: 5.2s (18" - Powercar Germany)
0 ~ 100 mph time:
BMW E92 M3: 9.4s (R&T)
BMW E92 M3 M-DCT: 9.7 (MT)
BMW E92 M3: 9.8s (C&D)
BMW E90 M3: 9.8s (C&D)
BMW E90 M3: 10.1s (MT)
BMW E92 M3: 10.2s (AMS) (160km/h?)
BMW E92 M3: 10.2s (Autocar)
Audi RS4: 10.5s (Autocar)
BMW E92 M3: 10.6s (AM&S)
BMW E93 M3 M-DCT: 11.0s (Sportscars)
BMW E93 M3 M-DCT: 11.2s (Autozeitung)
0 ~ 150 mph time:
BMW E90 M3: 24.9s (C&D)
BMW E92 M3: 25.5s
Audi RS4: 25.6s
BMW M3 M-DCT: 26s (C&D)
0 ~ 200 km/h time:
BMW E92 M3 M-DCT: 15.2s (Auto Bild)
BMW E92 M3: 15.2s (Powercar Germany)
BMW E92 M3: 15.4s (AMS)
BMW E92 M3: 15.7s (Autobild&Sportauto)
BMW E92 M3: 15.8s (Supertest)
BMW E92 M3: 15.8s (BMW)
Audi RS4: 15.8s (Automobil A)
BMW E90 M3: 15.9s (Sportauto)
BMW E90 M3: 15.9s (Autozeitung)
BMW E90 M3: 16.0s (AMS)
BMW E92 M3: 16.0s (Dutch Mag - BMW Fanatics Magazine)
BMW E92 M3: 16.1s (18" - Powercar Germany)
BMW E92 M3: 16.3s (Auto Bild)
BMW E90 M3: 16.4s (18" - Powercar Germany)
BMW E92 M3: 16.7s (AM&S)
BMW E92 M3: 16.7s (Automobil A (noted traction problems))
Audi RS4: 17.2s (Dutch Mag - BMW Fanatics Magazine)
BMW E93 M3 M-DCT: 17.3s (Autozeitung)
BMW E93 M3 M-DCT: 17.6s (Sportscars)
1/4 mile time and speed:
BMW E92 M3: 12.5s @ 114.8 mph (R&T)
BMW E92 M3 M-DCT: 12.6 @ 113.2 mph (MT)
BMW E90 M3: 12.6 @ 113mph (C&D)
BMW E90 M3: 12.7s @ 111.3mph (MT)
BMW M3 M-DCT: 12.7 @ 113 mph
Audi RS4: 12.8 @ 109 mph (R&T)
BMW E92 M3: 12.9 @ 111 mph (C&D)
Audi RS4: 13.1 @ 111.5 mph (AutoCar)
BMW E93 M3 M-DCT: 13.4s @ ?112mph? (Sportscars)
BMW E92 M3: 13.3 @ 112 mph (AutoCar)
Some fair points here foot, right from the database I helped compile. My forgetfulness of these very figures is a bit embarassing. Do look and think a bit deeper though. No one is saying the M3 hands the RS4 a beating. Most reasonable folks know and accept them to be pretty darn close rivals in most areas that matter. However, in thinking this whole loss thing through consider:
  1. Ignore the 0-60 mph, 100km/h, you know better. Those times are traction limited and even the power sapping quattro can do as good or better than an equivalent power to weight ratio car.
  2. The Audi RS4 weighs more than the M3. There seems to be massive diagreement between US specs and European ones for the RS4 weight and no real quorum anywhere. However, it seems to me the car is very close to 4,000 lbs.
  3. The distribution of times and particularly its best times are more indicative of a cars ultimate potential than its average times.
  4. In this list, obviously focused around the M3, there are way more M3 data points. If you had an equally large sample, from an equally wide range of sources, I guarantee you would find the the average values for M3 figures that most heavily depend on power to weight like trap speed and 0-100mph/200kph will be better for the M3.
  5. Each bearing and gear set in a hub or case provides losses, as does the lubrication process, pure, simple, undeniable. The Quattro has way more of these so it will produce higher losses. The wheel dynos and opening post in this thread demonstrate this common sense/well accepted fact perfectly well.
  6. Audi should, eventually, provide a system that mitigates losses better with 100% power transfer to the rear end under normal non traction limited hard acceleration. Then you would only have the weight penalty to deal with.
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote