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) > M3 vs....
 
GTB Performance
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      05-03-2008, 06:54 PM   #23
OzCarfreak
Private First Class
 
OzCarfreak's Avatar
 
Drives: Merc / BMW /Audi
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sydney

Posts: 132
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTorque View Post
Ahh, you must have missed this thread, maybe you were to busy analizying your M3 insecurities:

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...5&postcount=50

Back on topic, this is the 3rd test i've seen with a 13.0 sec 1/4 mile result. Not impressive for a car that costs 70k. It even got beat by the IS-F.
Traction must be a problem with that car....even with so little torque....oh well... maybe the CSL will do better...
yes yes, some dudes on here swamp included dream of 11 sec , thats a joke.

also the rs4 is doing high 12s lol, yes the isf/m3 has traction problems
OzCarfreak is offline   Australia
0
Reply With Quote
      05-04-2008, 04:43 AM   #24
footie
Major General
 
footie's Avatar
 
Drives: ????????????
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: BMW M3 will get a V6TT

Posts: 7,507
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzCarfreak View Post
From Experience the RS4 entertains more than these cars on a wet skid pan area.
No, what you meant to say is that awd is a lot more entertaining than rwd when conditions turn slippy. That fact that it's an RS4 was irrelevant.
footie is offline   No_Country
0
Reply With Quote
      05-05-2008, 02:14 AM   #25
swamp2
Lieutenant General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 10,059
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by OzCarfreak View Post
yes yes, some dudes on here swamp included dream of 11 sec , thats a joke.
Nope, 100% wrong. I never said it would obtain 11s, with ot without DCT and with or without any non engine mods like tires. You must have me confused for someone else.

That being said I do think a sub 4s 0-60 is possible under extremely ideal conditions becuase in direct opposition to what SteelTorque claims BMWs often outperform where you think or simulate them to be. They do so in part due to an excellent chassis, differentials, suspensions, etc. all of which contribute to hooking the car up and delivering great traction.
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-05-2008, 07:13 AM   #26
footie
Major General
 
footie's Avatar
 
Drives: ????????????
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: BMW M3 will get a V6TT

Posts: 7,507
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Nope, 100% wrong. I never said it would obtain 11s, with ot without DCT and with or without any non engine mods like tires. You must have me confused for someone else.

That being said I do think a sub 4s 0-60 is possible under extremely ideal conditions becuase in direct opposition to what SteelTorque claims BMWs often outperform where you think or simulate them to be. They do so in part due to an excellent chassis, differentials, suspensions, etc. all of which contribute to hooking the car up and delivering great traction.
You are probably right in thinking that with M-DCT a 4 second or possibly below is on the cards in a one-off situation but as a common average which most will be capable of repeating on a regular bases I very much doubt it. I reckon 4.3~4.5s will be a more realistic figure to aim for don't you think.

After all you are limited in options due to only providing power to the rear wheels, I would comfortably say that an RS4 would do 4.3~4.5s all day long, regardless of weather or surface conditions (within reason). I will agree that with M-DCT the chances of repeating these figure are much more likely than with a manual and against an awd car it will win more stop light races than it will lose, unlike the manual.

It takes a more skilled driver to pull the best out of the manual car and one of the reasons why for so many people it's still the driver/enthusiast's choice.
footie is offline   No_Country
0
Reply With Quote
      05-05-2008, 07:12 PM   #27
M3NTAL
Baller, Shot Caller
 
M3NTAL's Avatar
 
Drives: MINI Cooper S, AMG G55 & more
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Bend, IN, USA

Posts: 86
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTorque View Post
Ahh, you must have missed this thread, maybe you were to busy analizying your M3 insecurities:

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...5&postcount=50

Back on topic, this is the 3rd test i've seen with a 13.0 sec 1/4 mile result. Not impressive for a car that costs 70k. It even got beat by the IS-F.
Traction must be a problem with that car....even with so little torque....oh well... maybe the CSL will do better...
I don't have any M3 insecurities, I know it would kick your cheap-ass car's ass anywhere and everywhere especially with me behind the wheel. My Cooper S annihilated my friends 335xi coupe in a straight line and in autocross, and I only paid 28k for it and only put 8k in tuning parts on it. That's pretty sad, a $45k+ twin turbo six cylinder car, getting beat by a 1.6L supercharged 4 banger.

I believe you're the one with insecurities, insecure people, when feel threatened by something they know is clearly better, always lash out and attack the better, more secure person(s), so they can feel better about themselves. Does it work?

Go back to you're forum and circle jerk over your sticker price with the rest of your 335 fanboys.
__________________
M3NTAL is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-05-2008, 07:22 PM   #28
!Xoible
Banned
 
Drives: ....
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: .

Posts: 46,037
iTrader: (4)

Garage List
2008 M3  [3.50]
2007 335i  [4.50]
2008 528i  [4.00]
2006 Infiniti - G35 ...  [4.00]
bottom line is im not deciding what car im driving based on some mag review or comparo. also whether they get better or worse numbers it wont make me feel like i have a bigger or smaller dick at a club or a party. who gives a rat's ass!!!

did u guys forget how much infiniti paid magazines to make G37 *sound* like it's faster than 335?
!Xoible is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-05-2008, 10:10 PM   #29
malter2.0
Banned
 
Drives: em-funf
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SF Bay Area

Posts: 908
iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Maybe incompetent tester, car was maybe not broken in yet...

this is normal. some reviews will have better some worse #s.

mid to high 12s at low to mid 110s is the norm.
malter2.0 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-06-2008, 02:23 PM   #30
sayemthree
Brigadier General
 
sayemthree's Avatar
 
Drives: bmw
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: usa

Posts: 4,844
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ///Mantis View Post
bottom line is im not deciding what car im driving based on some mag review or comparo.

I dont know about you but I think most of us here that ordered an new M3 did so without any test drive.
sayemthree is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      05-07-2008, 09:37 PM   #31
GregW / Oregon
Commander-In-Chief
 
Drives: 2015 M4 Coupe, 2012 ML350
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Lake Oswego, OR

Posts: 7,367
iTrader: (1)

Garage List
Points for economy

Explain why the C63 gets 18.6 points with a EPA/DOE rating of 11/18 while the M3 gets 18.0 points with 14/20? If these were inadvertently reversed, it would mean only 3.0 points separating the two (less than 1%), versus 4.2.
__________________

Greg Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA
2015 M4 Coupe - Silverstone/Sakhir/CF
2012 ML350
GregW / Oregon is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-08-2008, 09:49 AM   #32
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: Legacy GT - 13.704@99.39
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Manheim, PA

Posts: 1,868
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW / Oregon View Post
Explain why the C63 gets 18.6 points with a EPA/DOE rating of 11/18 while the M3 gets 18.0 points with 14/20? If these were inadvertently reversed, it would mean only 3.0 points separating the two (less than 1%), versus 4.2.
Jesus, would you guys stop with this? The intrinsic value of a test like this one is that the reader can not only look at all the good comparative data, but look at the ratings results. The ratings results are of great value not to determine a winner, but because they allow you to rate the cars based on what's important to you.

The M3 beat everybody in the slalom and skidpad, tied with the Merc for best in 60-0 braking, then beat everybody in 80-0 braking, driving excitement, steering and handling.

The Merc whipped all in 0-60 and quarter mile acceleration, tied for best with the M3 in 60-0 braking, then beat all in engine rankings, brakes and luggage space.

So as long as you're not a BMW Kool-Aid drinker, you can look at all these results and learn something. The BMW whips everybody in handling, while the Merc drops everybody in acceleration. The rest is a mixed bag, but again, you can look at the rankings and decide for yourself what's most important and what's of lesser importance.

There are also those supremely objective categories which you can decide on your own very nicely (such as exterior and interior styling, for instance), so you can redo the figures without those items if the points total really is important.

Oh, by the way, the Merc beats the BMW in fuel economy because it got better mileage during their side-by-side, same-venue test.

Bruce

PS - As another example of how these rankings can be of value, the fact that the bimmer beat everybody in steering tells me something about the other cars. When I drove one, I thought the steering was very good (although a bit light), and wondered what all the fuss was about. Then I drove a 1 series and liked the steering better. That tells me I wouldn't be excited about the steering feel in the other three cars, although I didn't think there was any serious deficiency in the RS4's steering when I drove that. Separated by months in time, however, I still thought the M3's steering was better.
bruce.augenstein@comcast. is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      05-08-2008, 10:04 AM   #33
GregW / Oregon
Commander-In-Chief
 
Drives: 2015 M4 Coupe, 2012 ML350
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Lake Oswego, OR

Posts: 7,367
iTrader: (1)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast. View Post
Jesus, would you guys stop with this? The intrinsic value of a test like this one is that the reader can not only look at all the good comparative data, but look at the ratings results. The ratings results are of great value not to determine a winner, but because they allow you to rate the cars based on what's important to you.

The M3 beat everybody in the slalom and skidpad, tied with the Merc for best in 60-0 braking, then beat everybody in 80-0 braking, driving excitement, steering and handling.

The Merc whipped all in 0-60 and quarter mile acceleration, tied for best with the M3 in 60-0 braking, then beat all in engine rankings, brakes and luggage space.

So as long as you're not a BMW Kool-Aid drinker, you can look at all these results and learn something. The BMW whips everybody in handling, while the Merc drops everybody in acceleration. The rest is a mixed bag, but again, you can look at the rankings and decide for yourself what's most important and what's of lesser importance.

There are also those supremely objective categories which you can decide on your own very nicely (such as exterior and interior styling, for instance), so you can redo the figures without those items if the points total really is important.

Oh, by the way, the Merc beats the BMW in fuel economy because it got better mileage during their side-by-side, same-venue test.

Bruce

PS - As another example of how these rankings can be of value, the fact that the bimmer beat everybody in steering tells me something about the other cars. When I drove one, I thought the steering was very good (although a bit light), and wondered what all the fuss was about. Then I drove a 1 series and liked the steering better. That tells me I wouldn't be excited about the steering feel in the other three cars, although I didn't think there was any serious deficiency in the RS4's steering when I drove that. Separated by months in time, however, I still thought the M3's steering was better.
I'm well aware that there is no real "winner" when the numbers are this close. It comes down to personal needs and preferences. My point was the scorecard lists the mileage category as "EPA", not "observed", and the M3 is better per the EPA testing. The mileage rating is a key factor these days in the car buying decision process. What it would suggest, if indeed the observed mileage was less, is that under hard use the M3's numbers drop more than the C63's, but that under "normal" driving it should still return higher mileage. A 14 City rating is around 25% better than 11--that is significant.
__________________

Greg Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA
2015 M4 Coupe - Silverstone/Sakhir/CF
2012 ML350
GregW / Oregon is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      05-08-2008, 12:54 PM   #34
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: Legacy GT - 13.704@99.39
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Manheim, PA

Posts: 1,868
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW / Oregon View Post
I'm well aware that there is no real "winner" when the numbers are this close. It comes down to personal needs and preferences. My point was the scorecard lists the mileage category as "EPA", not "observed", and the M3 is better per the EPA testing. The mileage rating is a key factor these days in the car buying decision process. What it would suggest, if indeed the observed mileage was less, is that under hard use the M3's numbers drop more than the C63's, but that under "normal" driving it should still return higher mileage. A 14 City rating is around 25% better than 11--that is significant.
Agreed. Fuel pricing and supply is an extremely complex issue, but we can all agree that using less is a good thing.

That said, I admit that when I'm in the mood for fun (very often, as it turns out), I moderately beat on my son's 911 (temporarily stored at my place) and the Acura, which has recently undergone the third-gear synchro "fix". This consists of a fluid change to the GM "Synchromesh" synthetic stuff - and the difference is so amazing that I find I am banging gears down my driveway.

Yeah, I can talk the talk, but the fuel economy walk is something I need help with.

Bruce
bruce.augenstein@comcast. is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      05-08-2008, 04:56 PM   #35
OzCarfreak
Private First Class
 
OzCarfreak's Avatar
 
Drives: Merc / BMW /Audi
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sydney

Posts: 132
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Nope, 100% wrong. I never said it would obtain 11s, with ot without DCT and with or without any non engine mods like tires. You must have me confused for someone else.

That being said I do think a sub 4s 0-60 is possible under extremely ideal conditions becuase in direct opposition to what SteelTorque claims BMWs often outperform where you think or simulate them to be. They do so in part due to an excellent chassis, differentials, suspensions, etc. all of which contribute to hooking the car up and delivering great traction.
I will wear womens clothes for a month if the m3 goes sub 4.0secs
OzCarfreak is offline   Australia
0
Reply With Quote
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 12:24 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