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)
 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      01-15-2008, 03:34 PM   #23
lucid
Major General
lucid's Avatar
United_States
374
Rep
8,033
Posts

Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Get real. Physics, engineering, simulation sofware and even spreadsheets are what design the cars we drive; they describe the real world. This has nothing to do with who has driven what. I tire so easily from this absurd argument that seat time is "the only thing that matters" or that it is "the only real way to judge a car". This is dark ages thinking quite frankly. Lucids arguments are sound as is his conclusion. You can put an accelerometer in the two cars and verify it. You could also compare some rolling start performance differences.
Yes, this is amazing. That kind of thinking would literally take civilization centuries back, to the pre-renaissance era. As if BMW engineers randomly put together parts to build a car, start driving it around, and then see how it "feels" in terms of acceleration to decide if it is a keeper. They pretty much know exactly how it will accelerate before putting a complete car together. To ignore the facts around an issue where facts explain almost everything, and present baseless opinion to arrive at a conclusion. Pure nonsense...
Appreciate 0
      01-15-2008, 03:59 PM   #24
devo
Colonel
United_States
755
Rep
2,736
Posts

Drives: Bimmers & Porsches
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Atlanta

iTrader: (0)

Lucid,

Have you placed a deposit on the M?
Appreciate 0
      01-15-2008, 04:52 PM   #25
lucid
Major General
lucid's Avatar
United_States
374
Rep
8,033
Posts

Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by devo View Post
Lucid,

Have you placed a deposit on the M?
I've had a deposit down since November (#4 on the list). As you know, 911S will not happen for me this time around. Now, this M-DCT business is confusing me. But one way or another, I am inclined to go with the earliest allocation unless it slips all the way in to June. I'll be gone for a couple of months in the summer, so what's the point of buying and garaging the car. I'm hoping I can get one in April.

Any progress on your order? Is it being built?
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 07:32 AM   #26
hwelvaar
Major
Belgium
112
Rep
1,140
Posts

Drives: BMW M135i MT
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Belgium

iTrader: (0)

@ Lucid:
I have never bought a car based on some graphs, statistics, or some scientific equation. I test drive them first. You apparently have a deposit down without ever having driven the E92 M3. That's entirely your right, but I feel somehow you're defending this car in this discussion based solely on numerical statistics ?

As I said: "the M3 did *feel* slow in low revs, compared to 335i, especially in daily traffic"

No need to argue about that with graphs or science. It's just my personal opinion.

Cheers.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 07:42 AM   #27
footie
Major General
footie's Avatar
No_Country
1072
Rep
8,008
Posts

Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by hwelvaar View Post
@ Lucid:
I have never bought a car based on some graphs, statistics, or some scientific equation. I test drive them first. You apparently have a deposit down without ever having driven the E92 M3. That's entirely you're right, but you're defending this car in this discussion based solely on numerical statistics ?

As I said: "the M3 did *feel* slow in low revs, compared to 335i, especially in daily traffic"

No need to argue about that with graphs or science. It's just my personal opinion.

Cheers.
hwelvaar,

I will defend you, your statement that the M3 feels slower than the 335i is correct and anyone with a bit of common sense would know that. You aren't talking about outright acceleration, you are talking about part throttle at slower engine speeds, the very thing a turbo engine was designed for.

In full on acceleration stock vs stock the M3 will destroy the 335i which I doubt any 335i owner would disagree with.

The reason why I chose the M3 over the 335i was because when conditions do become slippy that lump of torque that the 335i has can become trickier to control unlike the M3 which is a pussy cat at slow speeds.

It's BMW's best car/engine they have ever built.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 07:45 AM   #28
lucid
Major General
lucid's Avatar
United_States
374
Rep
8,033
Posts

Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hwelvaar View Post
@ Lucid:
I have never bought a car based on some graphs, statistics, or some scientific equation. I test drive them first. You apparently have a deposit down without ever having driven the E92 M3. That's entirely your right, but I feel somehow you're defending this car in this discussion based solely on numerical statistics ?

As I said: "the M3 did *feel* slow in low revs, compared to 335i, especially in daily traffic"

No need to argue about that with graphs or science. It's just my personal opinion.

Cheers.
I am presenting the facts. Not defending the car. Nothing wrong with putting a deposit on a car based on facts. Deposits are refundable (almost always).

You are presenting your perceptions. I don't mean to personally attack or offend you. Just pointing out that your reported perceptions do not match the scientific facts and are therefore inaccurate. We are human; our interpretations of perceptions are often inaccurate.

If you were to simply to say I like the way the 335 feels much better than the M3 feels, I would have nothing to say as that is a subjective call. But when you say the 335 has more low-end torque and therefore is faster at low speeds based on how you feel, that is false.

Cheers.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 07:53 AM   #29
lucid
Major General
lucid's Avatar
United_States
374
Rep
8,033
Posts

Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
The reason why I chose the M3 over the 335i was because when conditions do become slippy that lump of torque that the 335i has can become trickier to control unlike the M3 which is a pussy cat at slow speeds.
There is no torque advantage for the 335 above a certain low rpm (1500rpms for the 1st gear) as the data indicate. What part of that are you not getting? It's all in your head. If you look at the facts, it's as clear as day and night.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 08:29 AM   #30
Epacy
Reincarnated
Epacy's Avatar
245
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 footie View Post

In full on acceleration stock vs stock the M3 will destroy the 335i which I doubt any 335i owner would disagree with.
I wouldn't bet the farm on that...
__________________
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 08:36 AM   #31
southlight
Moderator / European Editor
southlight's Avatar
1487
Rep
6,755
Posts

Drives: X3M
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Epacy View Post
I wouldn't bet the farm on that...
Depends on what's the definition of "destroying"...


Best regards, south
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 08:38 AM   #32
lucid
Major General
lucid's Avatar
United_States
374
Rep
8,033
Posts

Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

The M3 will be faster, but the meaning of "destroying" all depends on how long the race is. If it is a relatively short race, destruction would not apply in my book.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 09:01 AM   #33
Epacy
Reincarnated
Epacy's Avatar
245
Rep
4,227
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 M3  [0.00]
I was talking about 335i owners admitting anything but a F-22 could beat their car.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 09:43 AM   #34
footie
Major General
footie's Avatar
No_Country
1072
Rep
8,008
Posts

Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epacy View Post
I was talking about 335i owners admitting anything but a F-22 could beat their car.
Good one.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 10:00 AM   #35
southlight
Moderator / European Editor
southlight's Avatar
1487
Rep
6,755
Posts

Drives: X3M
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Epacy View Post
I was talking about 335i owners admitting anything but a F-22 could beat their car.

I wouldn't even bet on all 335i owners agreeing with that.


Best regards, south (who can't seem to understand a single post E's makin' today)
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 10:16 AM   #36
footie
Major General
footie's Avatar
No_Country
1072
Rep
8,008
Posts

Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
There is no torque advantage for the 335 above a certain low rpm (1500rpms for the 1st gear) as the data indicate. What part of that are you not getting? It's all in your head. If you look at the facts, it's as clear as day and night.
The lump I meant was that the 335i has all of it happening from around 1500rpm right up to 5000rpm all 300ft/lbs which is trickier to control, one of the faults of turbo engines, it's that all or nothing thing which isn't pleasant when conditions are slippy. Below this 1500rpm the M3 being N/A will still be producing torque where as the 335i will be like a 50cc scooter (joke).

Maybe the 335i is different than every other turbo car I have owned or driven but this is how each of them behave when it's slippy.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 10:54 AM   #37
lucid
Major General
lucid's Avatar
United_States
374
Rep
8,033
Posts

Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by footie View Post
The lump I meant was that the 335i has all of it happening from around 1500rpm right up to 5000rpm all 300ft/lbs which is trickier to control, one of the faults of turbo engines, it's that all or nothing thing which isn't pleasant when conditions are slippy. Below this 1500rpm the M3 being N/A will still be producing torque where as the 335i will be like a 50cc scooter (joke).

Maybe the 335i is different than every other turbo car I have owned or driven but this is how each of them behave when it's slippy.
I think you are referring to the responsiveness of the engine and turbo lag. The charts I referenced and built on should be steady state dyno runs, which would not take that account obviously. But in the end that would not make the instantaneous acceleration any higher. It would just be uneven torque delivery, which can be mistaken for faster instantaneous acceleration I guess. However, if you discount turbo lag, the 335 clearly has the flatter torque curve at low rpms.

As a side note, for dyno runs with acceleration, the Tq output should be lower, and the two engines might respond slightly differently than each other to those conditions, but the output drops should be fairly consistent. I don't have that data.

Finally, let's not forget that others have commented on this claimed low-end torque issue on this forum, and have expressed opinions in the other direction, saying the M3 "feels" plenty fast at low rpms--as an M car should. I believe Steved was one of them, but I might be misremembering.

I just re-read my posts on this thread, and realized that I might have worded my earlier response to you and my initial response to hwelvaar harshly. Sorry about that.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 11:04 AM   #38
lucid
Major General
lucid's Avatar
United_States
374
Rep
8,033
Posts

Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Epacy View Post
I was talking about 335i owners admitting anything but a F-22 could beat their car.
Can it?
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 11:12 AM   #39
devo
Colonel
United_States
755
Rep
2,736
Posts

Drives: Bimmers & Porsches
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Atlanta

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
I've had a deposit down since November (#4 on the list). As you know, 911S will not happen for me this time around. Now, this M-DCT business is confusing me. But one way or another, I am inclined to go with the earliest allocation unless it slips all the way in to June. I'll be gone for a couple of months in the summer, so what's the point of buying and garaging the car. I'm hoping I can get one in April.

Any progress on your order? Is it being built?
As of a couple of days ago, it was still in status 112. It is scheduled to be built the last week in Jan.

I have become very interested in the M-DCT transmission. I am not obligated to buy my current build, although the car is promised to me. Now with BMW holding cars in port until the end of March, I'll have more time to consider a clutchless trans.

Great choices, but nonetheless, stressful.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 11:15 AM   #40
footie
Major General
footie's Avatar
No_Country
1072
Rep
8,008
Posts

Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
lucid,

No problem (I seem to be saying this a lot today).

I can only speak of my brief spell in the new M3 and compared to the S5 it does feel weak below 4500rpm, this might be down to throttle response which is something the S5 feel very sharp with. In fact out of the two the M3 is the easier to drive smoothly around town, like I say it's a plus to me.

On a different note, compared again to the S5 the M3 at low to medium revs sounds like a much smaller engine than the S5 which really sounds meaty, but all of this changes when you hit the higher revs, the M3 sounds incredible.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 11:28 AM   #41
sdiver68
Expert Road Racer
59
Rep
1,329
Posts

Drives: 07 335i e90, 09 335i e93
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: St. Louis, MO

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Epacy View Post
I was talking about 335i owners admitting anything but a F-22 could beat their car.
Can an F-22 do the 1/4th mile in 11.2@121? Can an M3?

I agree destruction is the word...just not sure you have the <> sign right.

I know you mean stock-for-stock, but for much less than the price of M-DCT, enhanced audio, and even comfort access, the 335i can easily hang with and yes even beat the M3 in a test of straight line speed.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 11:29 AM   #42
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Colonel
99
Rep
2,000
Posts

Drives: 2017 C63
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Manheim, PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
Yes, this is amazing. That kind of thinking would literally take civilization centuries back, to the pre-renaissance era. As if BMW engineers randomly put together parts to build a car, start driving it around, and then see how it "feels" in terms of acceleration to decide if it is a keeper. They pretty much know exactly how it will accelerate before putting a complete car together. To ignore the facts around an issue where facts explain almost everything, and present baseless opinion to arrive at a conclusion. Pure nonsense...
Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Get real. Physics, engineering, simulation sofware and even spreadsheets are what design the cars we drive; they describe the real world. This has nothing to do with who has driven what. I tire so easily from this absurd argument that seat time is "the only thing that matters" or that it is "the only real way to judge a car". This is dark ages thinking quite frankly. Lucids arguments are sound as is his conclusion. You can put an accelerometer in the two cars and verify it. You could also compare some rolling start performance differences.
OK, this is getting close to outright arrogance, and you guys don't even know what you don't know.

You don't know what the part-throttle characteristics of each engine are, and possibly even more important, you don't know what the rotational inertia effects are. Your quaint belief that a spreadsheet showing full-throttle torque at the drive wheels is hardly meaningful in this context, and your dismissal of the experiences of two (and possibly three) drivers in favor of a non-applicable spreadsheet really is arrogance.

I haven't driven a new M3, but my experiences with a couple of 335s shows that they are typical of today's street turbo engines in that they deliver a non-linear boost map when driven at part throttle. That is to say, half throttle, for instance, delivers more than half the allowable boost, so the car feels very responsive because it''s putting out a larger percentage of its max torque under those conditions.

There's also minor evidence that suggests the M3 is a little lazy at part throttle. I've read in a couple of comparison tests (in Car, and at least one other mag, the name of which escapes me), that the M3 is a little bit soft at low revs on the street compared to the RS4, yet in full-throttle roll-ons from low revs, the M3 is the quicker car, according to the acceleration results.

As far as rotational inertia is concerned, the first point is that it goes up as the square of the gearing, and the second is that in a given gear, 100% of the rotational inertia is right there with you, whether you're at part thottle or at full throttle. Therefore, at part throttle, the effects of rotational inertia are more apparant than when you're seriously legging it.

I'm willing to bet that because of gearing, the M3 has significantly more rotational inertia in first gear than the 335 does, and it's obviously more apparent at part throttle than at full throttle. It's also a bit heavier than the 335, which is another factor that's with you at 100%, all the time.

I'm with hwelvaar, footie and termigni on this one. Lucid and Swamp, you need to reconsider your position.

Bruce
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 11:58 AM   #43
Epacy
Reincarnated
Epacy's Avatar
245
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 sdiver68 View Post

I know you mean stock-for-stock, but for much less than the price of M-DCT, enhanced audio, and even comfort access, the 335i can easily hang with and yes even beat the M3 in a test of straight line speed.
Ohh shit, hasn't this line gotten old by now.

It's always "if my car had this and this and this and this and this, then I would beat an M3. M3 is not worth the money suckas!!"

That routine is getting old.
Leave it to a 335 owner to turn a harmless joke into another M3 v 335 pissing contest.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2008, 12:00 PM   #44
Epacy
Reincarnated
Epacy's Avatar
245
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 bruce.augenstein@comcast. View Post
OK, this is getting close to outright arrogance, and you guys don't even know what you don't know.
I thought all this bickering was supposed to stop when we finally had something to talk about like pricing.
__________________
Appreciate 0
Closed Thread

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:02 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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