BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > M3 (E90 / E92 / E93) > General M3 Forum (E90 + E92 + E93)
 
Steve Thomas BMW
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      09-13-2007, 09:34 PM   #23
Epacy
Reincarnated
Epacy's Avatar
88
Rep
4,227
Posts

 
Drives: 02 Maxima SE
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: IL

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by devo View Post
Praise the Lord, now we can all sleep!
You can save face by not publicly applauding his post as oozing facts. You can PM me with your concurrence if you like.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      09-13-2007, 09:39 PM   #24
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
215
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Cont.

Quote:
Originally Posted by devo View Post
Sure, it can happen. The tires and the aforementioned tranny will likely improve the times.

Personally, the 8:02 for the 997S is one of the quicker runs. 8:05 seems to be the most popular reference. A 997S w/x51 (381 hp) "only" did an 7:59. I am always a little skeptical when the times are one second beneath the hour. Frankly, I find it amusing that one lap is the standard. Even if the M runs a sub 8:00 min lap, that doesn't mean any "ring" advantage will hold up lap after lap on another course. The M simply is not as focused a sports car as the 911S; and it's not meant to be. But, that is not what this post was initially about.

For the record, it's not that I don't believe that the M COULD run quicker than the 997S, it's that I don't think it will run a sub 8:00 lap. That is what I am responding to. As far as besting the 911, who knows. It will be close. But remember Porsche's hp bump may be all that's needed to keep it competitive in this type of test.

Do you find it fulfilling to argue with anyone who has an opinion that isn't BMW gospel?

At least your not quite as worked up as I thought you'd be, but you're still taking this a little too seriously. And, no I don't care to wager because there are too many variables that affect this kind of thing. Remember, I am very likely buying this car for my summer dd and maybe more fun car. So, I hope it does run fast. With that said, I am not as blindly brand loyal as some here.
Look, despite being a big BMW fan (really of Ms only). I think I remain open, critical, fair and objective. My posts speak for themselves on this point. My seriousness just comes from frustration in this wait as well as my academic focus in science and math. Combine that with a love of cars and speed and I think my "seriousness" is probably fairly normal. Furthermore, I am not blindly brand loyal (not sure if that little jab was directed at me or others here) I am loyal to a brand that has never disappointed in delivering incredible performance and compromise at a fair value. Why wouldn't I be loyal to that?

I do not find it fulfilling to constantly argue with those that do not follow "the BMW gospel". I just like to post based on facts and evidence and dislike posts about concrete issues such as certain performance metrics which are guided by opinion with not much factual basis. Heck if you want to talk about body styles, interior appearance, or any other aesthetic issues you clearly need no data, one's opinion is all that is required.

OK last but not least, "The M simply is not as focused a sports car as the 911S; and it's not meant to be."

I was initially going to agree with you here and do agree to some extent but will also take some issue as well. Just because the car will probably be more comfortable and heavier than a 911S that does not make it intrinsically less of a true sports car. Clearly the new M is getting the label as a GT not a sports coupe. But heck for that matter with the amount of luxury and comfort and everyday driveability present in the 911 is it not also really a GT? What if you had a car identical to a 911 but with 4 seats (I know probably impossible, but just for the sake of argument). If the M3 outperforms the 911S in acceleration, braking and out laps it on most tracks then by what definition is it less of a focused sports car? Is it the number of seats, the trunk volume, the steering feel, etc.? Perhaps only Lotus owners can call a 911 a GT and not really a focused sports coupe? Perhaps this is simply a question of semantics...
Appreciate 0
      09-14-2007, 03:31 AM   #25
southlight
Moderator / European Editor
southlight's Avatar
609
Rep
6,748
Posts

 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

AFAIK the 911 S achieved a 8:05 in Sportauto Supertest. So the rumour has it that the E92 M3 will get about the same time, maybe the identical 8:05. This is for MT and likely with Cup+. I personally doubt that the M-DCT saves another 5 seconds or even more on a single lap. So I tend to agree with Devo that a sub 8min time is not very likely, whereas again I have to say that I don't like the style of calling brand loyalty... We'll see whose times' are right...

Best regards, south
Appreciate 0
      09-14-2007, 04:04 AM   #26
JEllis
Brigadier General
JEllis's Avatar
84
Rep
4,790
Posts

 
Drives: E36 M3, E92 M3
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SD CA/Yuma

iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Look, despite being a big BMW fan (really of Ms only). I think I remain open, critical, fair and objective. My posts speak for themselves on this point. My seriousness just comes from frustration in this wait as well as my academic focus in science and math. Combine that with a love of cars and speed and I think my "seriousness" is probably fairly normal. Furthermore, I am not blindly brand loyal (not sure if that little jab was directed at me or others here) I am loyal to a brand that has never disappointed in delivering incredible performance and compromise at a fair value. Why wouldn't I be loyal to that?

I do not find it fulfilling to constantly argue with those that do not follow "the BMW gospel". I just like to post based on facts and evidence and dislike posts about concrete issues such as certain performance metrics which are guided by opinion with not much factual basis. Heck if you want to talk about body styles, interior appearance, or any other aesthetic issues you clearly need no data, one's opinion is all that is required.

OK last but not least, "The M simply is not as focused a sports car as the 911S; and it's not meant to be."

I was initially going to agree with you here and do agree to some extent but will also take some issue as well. Just because the car will probably be more comfortable and heavier than a 911S that does not make it intrinsically less of a true sports car. Clearly the new M is getting the label as a GT not a sports coupe. But heck for that matter with the amount of luxury and comfort and everyday driveability present in the 911 is it not also really a GT? What if you had a car identical to a 911 but with 4 seats (I know probably impossible, but just for the sake of argument). If the M3 outperforms the 911S in acceleration, braking and out laps it on most tracks then by what definition is it less of a focused sports car? Is it the number of seats, the trunk volume, the steering feel, etc.? Perhaps only Lotus owners can call a 911 a GT and not really a focused sports coupe? Perhaps this is simply a question of semantics...
I would like to piggyback here because he has made a really good point.

I will say it right now, the new M3 is not the same focused racer it was when it debuted in E30 guise. But, that doesnt mean that it isnt a racer either.

With new technology like EDC and Porsche's PSAM, cars have the ability to be both comfortable daily drivers and track terrors.

I think the best example of what I am talking about is the 997 GT3. The 997 GT3 is actually a little softer than the 996 version. However, the 997 is a much more capable and faster car. The same goes for the new M3.

No longer does owning a sports car with race car pedigree mean that you are getting a loud, stiff, and vibrating mode of travel. Now you can go out and buy the new M3 and really get the best of both worlds. So, the new M isnt focused but is it worse because of this? Can only a focused sports car lap the ring in under 8min? Personally I think those days are over and we will see more and more "sports" cars losing their focus in favor a split personalities....

Just me though

Jason
__________________
http://www.m3post.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic14547_7.gif
Appreciate 0
      09-14-2007, 05:40 AM   #27
ILC32
Lieutenant
ILC32's Avatar
18
Rep
580
Posts

 
Drives: 1993 Porsche RSA
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Last but not least we also know that the European verison of the car when ordered with 19" wheels will come STOCK with Michelin Pilot Sport Cup+ tires (appropriate emphasis on the "+").

I am ready to go out on a limb here. Sportauto will achieve a sub 8 minute N-ring time with the M-DCT car with the aforementioned tires.
I hope you ara right, but let me offer a small correction: I beleive the Cup + tires are part of the "M Driver's Package" which is a pack including a raised speed limiter. Simply ordering the 19s even in Germany will not, as far as I know, mean the car will be fitted with Cups.
Appreciate 0
      09-14-2007, 06:50 AM   #28
devo
Lieutenant Colonel
28
Rep
1,942
Posts

 
Drives: .2GT3/335Cpe/991 GT3 coming
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: thinking about cars, girls and money, not necessarily in that order.

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Look, despite being a big BMW fan (really of Ms only). I think I remain open, critical, fair and objective. My posts speak for themselves on this point. My seriousness just comes from frustration in this wait as well as my academic focus in science and math. Combine that with a love of cars and speed and I think my "seriousness" is probably fairly normal. Furthermore, I am not blindly brand loyal (not sure if that little jab was directed at me or others here) I am loyal to a brand that has never disappointed in delivering incredible performance and compromise at a fair value. Why wouldn't I be loyal to that?

I do not find it fulfilling to constantly argue with those that do not follow "the BMW gospel". I just like to post based on facts and evidence and dislike posts about concrete issues such as certain performance metrics which are guided by opinion with not much factual basis. Heck if you want to talk about body styles, interior appearance, or any other aesthetic issues you clearly need no data, one's opinion is all that is required.

OK last but not least, "The M simply is not as focused a sports car as the 911S; and it's not meant to be."

I was initially going to agree with you here and do agree to some extent but will also take some issue as well. Just because the car will probably be more comfortable and heavier than a 911S that does not make it intrinsically less of a true sports car. Clearly the new M is getting the label as a GT not a sports coupe. But heck for that matter with the amount of luxury and comfort and everyday driveability present in the 911 is it not also really a GT? What if you had a car identical to a 911 but with 4 seats (I know probably impossible, but just for the sake of argument). If the M3 outperforms the 911S in acceleration, braking and out laps it on most tracks then by what definition is it less of a focused sports car? Is it the number of seats, the trunk volume, the steering feel, etc.? Perhaps only Lotus owners can call a 911 a GT and not really a focused sports coupe? Perhaps this is simply a question of semantics...

I will say that I think we have found some common ground. I agree with what you say in your last paragraph as I do like to judge cars on their results not the recipe. My point -which I know you understand- is that the M3 has more hurdles to overcome because it has to satisfy a much broader audience. (And, yes I would agree that if the M achieves these goals while being a four seat GT car, then BMW deserves a lot of credit.)

I am just giving my opinion based on what we all know about these cars and cars in general. I do think that the M will be very close to the 997S's lap time. I am also impressed that the M appears to overtake it in most or all straight line speed contests. I mean, I love 911's (997S, turbo and GT3, that's it-what else is there; LOL.), but I also think that for the obscene amount of additional funds that it takes to acquire a new one -relative to a car like the M3- it (997S) should offer more power.
Appreciate 0
      09-14-2007, 10:36 PM   #29
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
215
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Agreed

Quote:
Originally Posted by devo View Post
I will say that I think we have found some common ground. I agree with what you say in your last paragraph as I do like to judge cars on their results not the recipe. My point -which I know you understand- is that the M3 has more hurdles to overcome because it has to satisfy a much broader audience.
Good, some agreement. With enough discussion you can usually find some common ground.

However I do disagree with your point about the audiences. I think the audience for both the E92 M3 and the 911S will be quite similar. You will have the full gamut from brand whores, to rich dudes looking for status, to real enthusiasts. You will have the young and the old, those who can easily afford such cars and those who really have to stretch it. You will have those that appreciate every minute detail of the engineering and those who can not even use a Crescent wrench or change their own tire. The only difference may be a slightly older and slightly more affluent crowd in the 911. What do you think?
Appreciate 0
      09-14-2007, 11:10 PM   #30
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
215
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Number of shifts, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by southlight View Post
I personally doubt that the M-DCT saves another 5 seconds or even more on a single lap.
This can be estimated by estimating the number of on power upshifts during a lap. Then this number multiplied by about .2 s is a reasonable estimate of the time savings. There is probably about 50 on power upshifts in a typical 8 minute lap which equates to 10 seconds. Heck, even if my real "back of the envelope" estimate is off by a factor of 2 we are still looking at a full 5 seconds. The tires should be good for 5-10 s as well! So if we assume 8:05 with std. non cup tires and MT this rough estimate gets us to 7:55.

All of this is very speculative, yet also reasonable and perhaps even conservative. Under 8 minutes is still my bet for Cup+ tires and M-DCT!
Appreciate 0
      09-14-2007, 11:56 PM   #31
rvacha
Captain
rvacha's Avatar
United_States
9
Rep
745
Posts

 
Drives: '08 E92 M3
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cleveland, OH

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Good, some agreement. With enough discussion you can usually find some common ground.

However I do disagree with your point about the audiences. I think the audience for both the E92 M3 and the 911S will be quite similar. You will have the full gamut from brand whores, to rich dudes looking for status, to real enthusiasts. You will have the young and the old, those who can easily afford such cars and those who really have to stretch it. You will have those that appreciate every minute detail of the engineering and those who can not even use a Crescent wrench or change their own tire. The only difference may be a slightly older and slightly more affluent crowd in the 911. What do you think?
I know you weren't asking me, but I think you got this spot on
__________________

'03 X5 4.4i Blue/Tan
'06 E90 330Xi 6MT Sparkling Graphite/Terra
'08 E92 M3 6MT Jerez/Speed Cloth <-- Evil Twin
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 12:01 AM   #32
rvacha
Captain
rvacha's Avatar
United_States
9
Rep
745
Posts

 
Drives: '08 E92 M3
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cleveland, OH

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
This can be estimated by estimating the number of on power upshifts during a lap. Then this number multiplied by about .2 s is a reasonable estimate of the time savings. There is probably about 50 on power upshifts in a typical 8 minute lap which equates to 10 seconds. Heck, even if my real "back of the envelope" estimate is off by a factor of 2 we are still looking at a full 5 seconds. The tires should be good for 5-10 s as well! So if we assume 8:05 with std. non cup tires and MT this rough estimate gets us to 7:55.

All of this is very speculative, yet also reasonable and perhaps even conservative. Under 8 minutes is still my bet for Cup+ tires and M-DCT!
I second your guess minus a few seconds. I think the M-DCT will be heavier, it is possible the diff has a different ratio, and limited grip of the rear tires may give up a little of the potential gain.
__________________

'03 X5 4.4i Blue/Tan
'06 E90 330Xi 6MT Sparkling Graphite/Terra
'08 E92 M3 6MT Jerez/Speed Cloth <-- Evil Twin
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 07:30 AM   #33
devo
Lieutenant Colonel
28
Rep
1,942
Posts

 
Drives: .2GT3/335Cpe/991 GT3 coming
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: thinking about cars, girls and money, not necessarily in that order.

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Good, some agreement. With enough discussion you can usually find some common ground.

However I do disagree with your point about the audiences. I think the audience for both the E92 M3 and the 911S will be quite similar. You will have the full gamut from brand whores, to rich dudes looking for status, to real enthusiasts. You will have the young and the old, those who can easily afford such cars and those who really have to stretch it. You will have those that appreciate every minute detail of the engineering and those who can not even use a Crescent wrench or change their own tire. The only difference may be a slightly older and slightly more affluent crowd in the 911. What do you think?

I would have to agree with this.

I didn't know/realize that I had posted otherwise, but, I just got up and need some serious java!
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 08:41 AM   #34
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
This can be estimated by estimating the number of on power upshifts during a lap. Then this number multiplied by about .2 s is a reasonable estimate of the time savings. There is probably about 50 on power upshifts in a typical 8 minute lap which equates to 10 seconds. Heck, even if my real "back of the envelope" estimate is off by a factor of 2 we are still looking at a full 5 seconds. The tires should be good for 5-10 s as well! So if we assume 8:05 with std. non cup tires and MT this rough estimate gets us to 7:55.

All of this is very speculative, yet also reasonable and perhaps even conservative. Under 8 minutes is still my bet for Cup+ tires and M-DCT!
I don't believe the M3 will post under 8 seconds in any configuration but boy do I hope I am wrong and you are right. I think the C2S will have a slightly better time around the Ring due to it's better brakes. It will be able to drive harder into corners because of them. I believe Cup tires are an unfair way to test any car against it's competition because the vast majority of cars don't come with cup tires. I love the GT3 but it definately has unfair advantage with its cup tires. Without those tires, the Cayman would easily be Porsches best handling car. One of the reasons I respect the Cayman and R8 so much is the way they handle without cup tires. Again, my argument for the handling advantage offered a mid engine design.
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 08:52 AM   #35
southlight
Moderator / European Editor
southlight's Avatar
609
Rep
6,748
Posts

 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
I don't believe the M3 will post under 8 seconds in any configuration but boy do I hope I am wrong and you are right. I think the C2S will have a slightly better time around the Ring due to it's better brakes. It will be able to drive harder into corners because of them. I believe Cup tires are an unfair way to test any car against it's competition because the vast majority of cars don't come with cup tires. I love the GT3 but it definately has unfair advantage with its cup tires. Without those tires, the Cayman would easily be Porsches best handling car. One of the reasons I respect the Cayman and R8 so much is the way they handle without cup tires. Again, my argument for the handling advantage offered a mid engine design.
Yeah, with 62% of the weight on the rear axle (997 S) braking hard into the the corner will be fun. The lap time will be the least of your worries in that situation.

Best regards, south
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 08:57 AM   #36
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by southlight View Post
Yeah, with 62% of the weight on the rear axle (997 S) braking hard into the the corner will be fun. The lap time will be the least of your worries in that situation.

Best regards, south
You are right, the C2S has no business competing on the same track as the M3. You do love your Porsches, Mercedes, and Audis. Since you are the master of technological facts. What are the technological facts regarding the number of pistons in the Porsche's brakes vs the M3's and technical facts regarding the unladen weight of the two cars?
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 09:04 AM   #37
devo
Lieutenant Colonel
28
Rep
1,942
Posts

 
Drives: .2GT3/335Cpe/991 GT3 coming
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: thinking about cars, girls and money, not necessarily in that order.

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
I don't believe the M3 will post under 8 seconds in any configuration but boy do I hope I am wrong and you are right. I think the C2S will have a slightly better time around the Ring due to it's better brakes. It will be able to drive harder into corners because of them. I believe Cup tires are an unfair way to test any car against it's competition because the vast majority of cars don't come with cup tires. I love the GT3 but it definately has unfair advantage with its cup tires. Without those tires, the Cayman would easily be Porsches best handling car. One of the reasons I respect the Cayman and R8 so much is the way they handle without cup tires. Again, my argument for the handling advantage offered a mid engine design.
Add to the equation, that the 997S has 255mm and 295mm tires, fore and aft, providing much more contact surface. Once the M3 posts it's best time, I'd like to see the facelifted 997S run the same course, on the same day with the same driver and equipped with the same Cup tires. I am confident that the M will not best that scenario.
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 09:16 AM   #38
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by devo View Post
Add to the equation, that the 997S has 255mm and 295mm tires, fore and aft, providing much more contact surface. Once the M3 posts it's best time, I'd like to see the facelifted 997S run the same course, on the same day with the same driver and equipped with the same Cup tires. I am confident that the M will not best that scenario.
Good points. I believe the the facelifted C2S will more than best the M3 in the same scenerio. Are you still looking at the Exige? Best pure sports car on the planet.
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 09:42 AM   #39
devo
Lieutenant Colonel
28
Rep
1,942
Posts

 
Drives: .2GT3/335Cpe/991 GT3 coming
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: thinking about cars, girls and money, not necessarily in that order.

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
Good points. I believe the the facelifted C2S will more than best the M3 in the same scenerio. Are you still looking at the Exige? Best pure sports car on the planet.
My bad on the front tire width; it should have read 235mm; knew I needed more coffee!

As much as I love the idea of the Exige, I think it's a little too anemic in the mid-range for the street (for me). Haven't driven one, but I would have to generally agree with this from what I hear. Definately a nice track toy.

I can't decide wtf to buy. I like the S5 as a dd. But now I'm hearing 14/21 mpg and a hefty gas guzzler tax. I'm leaning back towards the 335xi again. I really want the M3, but don't know that I want two 3 series cars at the same time. That's not really a bad thing though.

If I do go 335xi, then I kept telling myself to get another 911S, but another low mileage used 06/07.

Not to bring up another poor topic...BUT, I recently drove an '08 Z06 and boy does it go. I typically do not like vettes. (I also drove an '08 C6 w/z51 and the hp bump and did not like that car at all.) The z06, on the other hand, that's a whole different game. Granted the car is a little cheesy -with it's low rent interior and somewhat orange peel paint, but it's a super car. I believe part of the "cheese factor" is because of the stigma attached to one here in the states. You just can't deny the performance per dollar. It's looks quite menacing in black w/polished wheels.
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 09:43 AM   #40
southlight
Moderator / European Editor
southlight's Avatar
609
Rep
6,748
Posts

 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
You are right, the C2S has no business competing on the same track as the M3. You do love your Porsches, Mercedes, and Audis. Since you are the master of technological facts. What are the technological facts regarding the number of pistons in the Porsche's brakes vs the M3's and technical facts regarding the unladen weight of the two cars?
It's quite amusing that you're making a resonable point (you're right, better brakes like the PCCB on the Porsche should result in a better time) and then you draw the wrong deduction out of it. So I may explain to you why it's a not so good idea to brake hard into a corner with the C2S. When you're braking the weight shifts towards the front axle with the result that you're having less grip on the rear tires. Doing so with a car that has much weight on the rear axle (like the C2 S with 62 % on rear) will fast result in loosing the rear. This is the reason why the early 911 generations were so tricky to drive. Nowadays the ESP mostly prevents from bad incidents when one doesn't know that, but it's still not a way to get fast times on a track.
Still in the mood of being cynical? I promised not to show you up, but if you want so!?

Best regards, south
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 10:42 AM   #41
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
215
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Various

Quote:
Originally Posted by rvacha View Post
I second your guess minus a few seconds. I think the M-DCT will be heavier, it is possible the diff has a different ratio, and limited grip of the rear tires may give up a little of the potential gain.
The DCT should be in the neighborhood of 40 lb heavier than the 6MT. I posted this estimate some time ago. The closer ratios and extra gear should HELP acceleration, certainly not hinder it. Either way the tim/distance gained on the shift will be the biggest effect, the closer gears second and the weight penalty third.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruff View Post
I believe Cup tires are an unfair way to test any car against it's competition because the vast majority of cars don't come with cup tires.
Pretty much agee with that. At least we have learned that BMW will deliver cars in EU from the factory on Cup+ tires. That makes the comparo a bit more legitimate. As long as we have times from cars tired both ways and keep the two numbers in perspective it is all good IMO.
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 10:58 AM   #42
southlight
Moderator / European Editor
southlight's Avatar
609
Rep
6,748
Posts

 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
This can be estimated by estimating the number of on power upshifts during a lap. Then this number multiplied by about .2 s is a reasonable estimate of the time savings. There is probably about 50 on power upshifts in a typical 8 minute lap which equates to 10 seconds. Heck, even if my real "back of the envelope" estimate is off by a factor of 2 we are still looking at a full 5 seconds. The tires should be good for 5-10 s as well! So if we assume 8:05 with std. non cup tires and MT this rough estimate gets us to 7:55.

All of this is very speculative, yet also reasonable and perhaps even conservative. Under 8 minutes is still my bet for Cup+ tires and M-DCT!
If we assume 8:05 on std. tires, then I'm on your side, a sub 8min time with Cups and DCT is possible. But I'm afraid Cups are already needed for the 8:05. We'll see...

Best regards, south

Last edited by southlight; 09-16-2007 at 12:47 PM. Reason: spelling
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 12:13 PM   #43
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
215
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by southlight View Post
If we assume 8:05 on std. tires, them I'm on your side, a sub 8min time with Cups and DCT is possible. But I'm afraid Cups are already needed for the 8:05. We'll see...

Best regards, south
Holy thread hi-jack... Oh well I will continue.

I am not so sure. On paper, and according to the previous information I posted (notably the RS4 and 911S times) it does not seem that Cup+ tires should be required to get into the sub 8:10 range. If the car requires Cup+ tires to break 8:10 I will not be so impressed. That would mean that "apples to apples" (i.e. on "regular tires") vs. the E46 M3 you get less than 13 s improvement from the power, chassis, improved CG, etc., etc. Either way I will stick to my basic prediction, which you concur with - less than 8 minutes with Cup+ and M-DCT!
Appreciate 0
      09-15-2007, 11:35 PM   #44
ruff
Conspicuous consumption
ruff's Avatar
37
Rep
1,184
Posts

 
Drives: 987 S .2, Lemond Zurich
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The mountains of Utah

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by southlight View Post
It's quite amusing that you're making a resonable point (you're right, better brakes like the PCCB on the Porsche should result in a better time) and then you draw the wrong deduction out of it. So I may explain to you why it's a not so good idea to brake hard into a corner with the C2S. When you're braking the weight shifts towards the front axle with the result that you're having less grip on the rear tires. Doing so with a car that has much weight on the rear axle (like the C2 S with 62 % on rear) will fast result in loosing the rear. This is the reason why the early 911 generations were so tricky to drive. Nowadays the ESP mostly prevents from bad incidents when one doesn't know that, but it's still not a way to get fast times on a track.
Still in the mood of being cynical? I promised not to show you up, but if you want so!?

Best regards, south
First off South, I really do like you, and you have my blessing with showing me up all you want. It's a good learning experience. I hope you feel the same. I just returned from watching the Koni and Rolex series completed at Miller Motor Sports Park today. What seemed evident, though it is a stereotype, that the M3's in general would make gains on the straitaways and the 997's would make up the difference in the turns, as I said previously, they could drive harder or in other words carry more speed in to the corners than the M3s. I "hypothosized" from my observation of this that 997's tend to have better brakes and M3's tend to have a stronger engine. I was pleased to see the Turner M3 #97 win the Koni race yesterday. South, why do I have to repeat myself, I did not say the 997 could brake harder into a corner as you said I did. This is the second time you have misquoted me then tried to make your "technological" argument with your misquote. Your first misquote of mine was your little rip on me about sharing my opinion with another poster about awd. You said, where is my technological evidence the Audi is any better then Xdrive?...Well I provided obvious facts and repeated them twice yet you never provided an ounce of your own technological genius as to why the Xdrive is as good or better than Audi Quattro. You then again gave it to me saying I didn't use technological proof....ya, ok. What is this thing with you and BMW this, and BMW that, and BMW everything. Are you BMW's #1 marketing department head volunteer? If so, you deserve better compensation.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:37 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, 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