C&D e92 M3 Test : Full Scans!!! ***56k is a NO NO***

[RI_RS4]

Originally Posted by BOB Nevada

how come this car is doing slower times than the RS4 and 335i 1/4 miles, someone please explain???????

The drivers had limited time with the car on tracks they didn't know. Have faith. It takes some time to learn how to launch a car correctly. The terminal speed of 111 is a good one. It takes a good driver with quite a bit of practice to post a 12.8 quarter mile in the RS4. And the 335i is an underrated sleeper.

[JEllis]

how come this car is doing slower times than the RS4 and 335i 1/4 miles, someone please explain???????

Please tell me who has run 12.9 in a 335i stock?

Jason

[jworms]

Originally Posted by BOB Nevada

I have seen stock RS 12.883 and Procede 335i 12.56

yes, but what do each of those trap? the amount of room for improvement on the e92 M3 is huge with a trap speed of 111mph. 335s just recently breached the 112mph trap mark with procede and full exhaust: http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73285
and i'm pretty sure the highest trap speed i've seen for a stock RS4 is 108mph.


and that's not even taking into consideration that the run they did with the M3 was with crappy conditions as they stated in the article.

[BruceWain]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Since I am obsessed lately comparing the car to the R8 I will note the braking number I could find for 70-0 mph for the R8 was 160 ft, besting the M3 by a mere 3 ft. I did find a number for the Carerra S at 154 feet as well.

Don't forget that just like the acceleration, the braking also was done in "crappy conditions" or "slippery road surface and hurried schedule".

[BruceWain]

Want not "wont".
Say there BOB, when you get some... tell all your friends.

READ the article !
And stop smoking crack.

[esquire]

i've said this before, and now with these scans posted, it's fitting to say it again: i find it very interesting that the most reputable publications have been such zealous advocates of the new M3, publishing commendable reviews.

car and driver also seemed resolutely confident that they could pull better than a 4.4second 0-60, which in my mind means that 4.4 was a number they achieved without much struggle of massaging. of course, this is important because it tells of the car's untapped potential, and speaks to the engines perfomance consistency.

it's exciting to think that a full road test might bring with it a 0-60 in 4.3, or 4.2 seconds..... on a car bmw advertises as 0-60 in 4.8!


- esquire

Originally Posted by esquire

i've said this before, and now with these scans posted, it's fitting to say it again: i find it very interesting that the most reputable publications have been such zealous advocates of the new M3, publishing commendable reviews.

car and driver also seemed resolutely confident that they could pull better than a 4.4second 0-60, which in my mind means that 4.4 was a number they achieved without much struggle of massaging. of course, this is important because it tells of the car's untapped potential, and speaks to the engines perfomance consistency.

it's exciting to think that a full road test might bring with it a 0-60 in 4.3, or 4.2 seconds..... on a car bmw advertises as 0-60 in 4.8!


- esquire

Sorry but I think they mean 4,8sec for 0-62. For sure they mean 4,8sec for 0-100 km/h. In any case it will be better than declared.

[moss]

Not worth replying these days - I put up a full review from Top Gear magazine yesterday and it's only has 3 views and no comments - this forum seems to be dieing - it was a great review as well!

[esquire]

Originally Posted by savage.ulm

Sorry but I think they mean 4,8sec for 0-62. For sure they mean 4,8sec for 0-100 km/h. In any case it will be better than declared.

maybe i'm not understanding you correctly here, but are you trying to say car and driver's 4.4second 0-60 was a misprint?

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by esquire

it's exciting to think that a full road test might bring with it a 0-60 in 4.3, or 4.2 seconds..... on a car bmw advertises as 0-60 in 4.8!

And M-DCT could be good for another .2-.3 per shift or .2-.3 for the 0-60!

[Epacy]

Originally Posted by swamp2

And M-DCT could be good for another .2-.3 per shift or .2-.3 for the 0-60!

There is Swamp working that M-DCT wagon

[RandyB]

Nice article. I'll take one in the non-metallic red like the 'car on the front cover'. Wait, what do you mean it's not available?

:mad:

[Garrett]

Originally Posted by savage.ulm

Sorry but I think they mean 4,8sec for 0-62. For sure they mean 4,8sec for 0-100 km/h. In any case it will be better than declared.

Is that english?

Originally Posted by Garrett

Is that english?

You are right..I am Italian. My apology
I only wanted to say that BMW declares : 0-100km-h (62mph?) in 4,8sec.
Sorry

[Garrett]

Originally Posted by savage.ulm

You are right..I am Italian. My apology
I only wanted to say that BMW declares : 0-100km-h (62mph?) in 4,8sec.
Sorry

OH... now I understand!

[13eastie]

Originally Posted by esquire

i've said this before, and now with these scans posted, it's fitting to say it again: i find it very interesting that the most reputable publications have been such zealous advocates of the new M3, publishing commendable reviews.

car and driver also seemed resolutely confident that they could pull better than a 4.4second 0-60, which in my mind means that 4.4 was a number they achieved without much struggle of massaging. of course, this is important because it tells of the car's untapped potential, and speaks to the engines perfomance consistency.

it's exciting to think that a full road test might bring with it a 0-60 in 4.3, or 4.2 seconds..... on a car bmw advertises as 0-60 in 4.8!


- esquire

I've never read C&D before - it seems to be one of the most objective reviews so far - nicely laid out and plenty of emphasis on hard facts, and notice taken of the condition of the road surface. Strange though that I think this is one of very few articles not to say something bad about the steering.

The picture that seems to be emerging is that BMW could have managed the Spanish tests a lot better since:

a) The road surface seems to have been a poorly understood factor
b) iDrive settings etc. have often not been stated alongside reviewers' comments
c) BMW's sneakiness with the brakes has just muddied the waters IMO

[Epacy]

Originally Posted by 13eastie

c) BMW's sneakiness with the brakes has just muddied the waters IMO

It seems fitting the car with race pads isn't an uncommon practice. Mercedes did the same thing for the C63 AMG in the Motor Trend article.

[devo]

Originally Posted by swamp2

+1. You go BMW work that huge marketing machine, build up the hype, the lust... And then make us wait until March 08...Ugh. I heard a rumor in a car rag that BMW plans to move toward simultaneous EU US launches. I would be nice to treat their largest market a bit better IMO.

Agreed.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by shragon

"e46 convertible... popular with trophy wives and badge-conscious poseurs."

Never a shortage of people to hate on the 'vert. Ah well. Lots of posers and trophies wives in the coupe too (probably more, seeing as how there are many more coupes out there).

[RI_RS4]

Originally Posted by swamp2

+1. You go BMW work that huge marketing machine, build up the hype, the lust... And then make us wait until March 08...Ugh. I heard a rumor in a car rag that BMW plans to move toward simultaneous EU US launches. I would be nice to treat their largest market a bit better IMO.

Swamp, the EU is BMW's largest market. The US is the largest market for a country, but if you look at BMW's numbers the EU market totally dwarfs the US.

[MI6]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Never a shortage of people to hate on the 'vert. Ah well. Lots of posers and trophies wives in the coupe too (probably more, seeing as how there are many more coupes out there).

Never fear Mkoesel, check out the new Vert pics in the photo/media thread posted today. It's so Butch and Bad that I doubt a lot of posers and trophy wives will be buying it. Besides, they have all gone over to the 650i Vert..

[MI6]

Anybody notice how yellow the Bamboo beige looks in the C/D pics?
Probably just the lighting huh?