0-60 = 4.2 = worst case (IMO, long)

[swamp2]

OK mabe beating a dead horse here but who doesn't want 0-60 "bragging rights"?

IMO The new M3, in real world tests for 0-60 will be 4.2 or better. Here's why:

1. All of you comparing 335i to new M3 for 0-60, DON'T it is known that BMW has significantly underrated its hp and T - to the tune of 50 +/- on both.

2.

Originally Posted by ynotony

Also, I am not an auto engineer, but does anyone else think it is funny that we all assume BMW has the power to precisely engineer a car to have a 0-60 time of 4.6 vs 4.5 vs 4.7, etc. I think once they get it into the mid 4's they will just leave it so. It is not like they have a special knob that can change the acceleration by .1 sec.

BMW can and will "engineer" the 0-60 on the new M fairly precisely. It is all about gearing. Sure they will max out power fairly well given the huge number of design constraints present but once that is done there are many other things to tweak. The E46 M3 has a phenomenal 0-60 based on it's hp/lb. It did it with really low gearing.

3. M3 has traditionally been faster 0-60 than the M5 with real tests and with the brochure numbers. Also BMW brochure numbers (as well as other manufacturer such as Porsche) are often very conservative or just flat out under rated. The new M3 brochure number may be very close to or slightly faster than the M5/M6 brochure but in real life I think it will be just as fast or maybe a tad faster. The cars barely compete at all: BMW does not have to worry about too many folks not getting the 5/6 in place of the 3 just based on 0-60. Real world tests have seen 0-60 at 4.1/4.2 (R&T/C&D). This bodes really well for seeing the new M at similar times.

4. As others have stated, mags have seen RS4 as low as 4.3 and the new M3 almost MUST best that time. Furthermore it will need to compete for years to come and win all the awards we know it can and will ... and there is reasonable competition in the works.

Conclusion: MINUMUM 4.2, real world.

See my post here http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13248 if you want to see similar and even more scientific predictions about other performance predictions for the car.

[enigma]

I could care less about 0-60 times. BMW doesn't engineer them or design cars to achieve a specific time. They could care less. Heck, their own published stats have been as much as a full half second off.

Once you are over the 1:10 ratio of hp/lbs gearing starts to make a lot less difference in 0-60 times unless you plan on using drag slicks to do your testing. Getting all the the E46s power down in 1st isn't trivial to say the least. Its also very surface dependent. It doesn't matter how much power the new car makes, you will lose off the line to an Evo or Sti or RS4. 4wd cars often produce better 1st gear accel numbers simply because they can launch harder.

The 0-40 times won't be much better than the old M3 but the 40-60 numbers will. Your guess is probably close and someone will probably get that number. However, other will probably get between 4.0 and 5.0. Heck, I have even seen a legit 12.7 1/4 mile out of a stock E46. But that was done by a pro drag race driver that knew how to launch the hell out of the car and under ideal conditions (read, vht prepped launch surface and no empathy for the clutch).

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by enigma

I could care less about 0-60 times. BMW doesn't engineer them or design cars to achieve a specific time. They could care less. Heck, their own published stats have been as much as a full half second off.

Once you are over the 1:10 ratio of hp/lbs gearing starts to make a lot less difference in 0-60 times unless you plan on using drag slicks to do your testing. Getting all the the E46s power down in 1st isn't trivial to say the least. Its also very surface dependent. It doesn't matter how much power the new car makes, you will lose off the line to an Evo or Sti or RS4. 4wd cars often produce better 1st gear accel numbers simply because they can launch harder.

The 0-40 times won't be much better than the old M3 but the 40-60 numbers will. Your guess is probably close and someone will probably get that number. However, other will probably get between 4.0 and 5.0. Heck, I have even seen a legit 12.7 1/4 mile out of a stock E46. But that was done by a pro drag race driver that knew how to launch the hell out of the car and under ideal conditions (read, vht prepped launch surface and no empathy for the clutch).

Up late too? Time for me to retire...

Surely you don't mean you don't care at all? 0-60 is a measure of so much else about a car. It is inextricably tied to the overall performance of a car: hp, weight, chassis performance, traction, gearing, etc. I think I know what you are getting at though. You are a track purist and don't give a crap about "drag racing" so in that way you don't care if the new M has an actual time of 4.0 or 5.0. It is not any bragging rights for you. Do I get your perspective?

4WD vs. 2WD sure - obvious. 4WD cars do get a serious advantage on 0-60 both because of physics and because they take less skill and are therfore more consistent. SMG should, even with a limited version of launch control, help achieve times closer to the lowest numbers we will see and help achieve those more consistently.

I beg to differ with you on the "engineering" of a 0-60 time though. Since neither of us proabably have direct access to the M engineering folks it may be an academic debate (I do have a friend of a friend at BMW engineering in Germany, but that is as close as I can get). However, I would place money on it that they can and do engineer and control 0-60 times pretty darn well. They have access to amazing drivers, totally controlled circumstances and full SMG launch control. I think their published specs. are obviously more about marketing and subtle understatement than what they themselves can and know their cars can obtain.

Hmmm. Will I be disappointed in any way if the M3 can not out 0-60 the RS4 in its best run or better it in comparing more typical times? Well a bit I guess, but I still will happily buy, own and track the car and am confident it will be a better all around car.

BTW do your R-comps help out with launch as much as they do track cornering? Seems like they should. I guess I shouldn't even ask because you don't care about great launces nor 0-60 right ;-)? I haven't driven on them yet myself. Cheers.

[enigma]

R comps typically have too stiff of sidewall to get a good launch. You really want a drag radial. Soft sidewall and designed for low tire presure.

I was not joking when I said I don't care about 0-60 times. If you do you better find a way to get a manual car because the SMG launch program wll probably be nerfed again here in the US.

1/4 mile trap speed tells you a lot more about hp/lbs than 0-60
1/4 mile ET tells you a lot more about how well the car launches and how good the driver was.
Skidpad gives a decent idea of grip

Lap times and slalom are so skill dependant I would want to know the resume of the driver at the wheel.

0-60 is a lot like the 70-0mph brake distances the magazines talk about. It doesn't mean a thing. It espically doesn't tell you anything about the cars brakes.

Yes I am a track guy but I am also an engineer. I know a junk stat when I see one.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by enigma

I was not joking when I said I don't care about 0-60 times. If you do you better find a way to get a manual car because the SMG launch program wll probably be nerfed again here in the US.

1/4 mile trap speed tells you a lot more about hp/lbs than 0-60
1/4 mile ET tells you a lot more about how well the car launches and how good the driver was.
Skidpad gives a decent idea of grip

Lap times and slalom are so skill dependant I would want to know the resume of the driver at the wheel.

Yes I am a track guy but I am also an engineer. I know a junk stat when I see one.

We did get a limited version of launch control on SMGII didn't we? I agree that the US cars will have a partial launch control at best.

Yes so many stats are driver dependent. That's why I tend to look at the best ones achieved because then you have more of a "probe" into the best the car can offer to a skilled driver.

My background is technical as well, phyiscs and mathematics by education, mechanical engineering by (ex) profession. This disposition keep the skepticism healthy! Cheers.

[JK42]

... Told you so. 4.2s 0-60mph is roughly 4.5s 0-100km/h. That's what it will be (official stats), and real life probably closer to 4s in optimum conditions as BMW always understates these values, as you stated.

Best regards,

Jussi

[Last E92 M3]

hahaha
most people on here will say that if you like those "numbers", you should go somewhere else and get Z06 or whatever.
that's what i learned from here.
it's for the other factors that cause these people to buy, not some numbers.
And, i think i agree with that

[JK42]

The numbers don't tell much, I think that's pretty much established. You can tape a rocket engine into Honda Civic and have it go 1.5s 0-62mph. However, the "other reasons" might well result in the new M3 beating the Z06 on the Nordschleife. That's a better real-life test than any 0-60mph numbers can ever be.

Still I'd rather drive a 5.5s 0-100 BMW than a 3.5s (0-100) Corvette any given day.

Regards,

Jussi

[Smoltz]

Originally Posted by JK42

The numbers don't tell much, I think that's pretty much established. You can tape a rocket engine into Honda Civic and have it go 1.5s 0-62mph. However, the "other reasons" might well result in the new M3 beating the Z06 on the Nordschleife. That's a better real-life test than any 0-60mph numbers can ever be.

Still I'd rather drive a 5.5s 0-100 BMW than a 3.5s (0-100) Corvette any given day.

Regards,

Jussi

There's no way the new M3 will beat the Z06 on the Nordschleife. Keep dreaming.

-Adam

[Mikeobello]

Originally Posted by Smoltz

There's no way the new M3 will beat the Z06 on the Nordschleife. Keep dreaming.

-Adam

Not too sure about that!

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Smoltz

There's no way the new M3 will beat the Z06 on the Nordschleife. Keep dreaming.

-Adam

I'll have to +1 that. Maybe R comps will get it closer maybe even beat it but otherwise no way.

[enigma]

Originally Posted by JK42

However, the "other reasons" might well result in the new M3 beating the Z06 on the Nordschleife.

Unless they cheat with tires like they did on the CSL, not going to happen.

credibility -1

[JK42]

I was about to comment on that but now you're on the ignore-list instead.

Bye,

P.S. For the benefit of others, how is exactly using street legal tyres (any tyres) cheating? And why don't they use those tyres on the Z06 if they're so superior and they feel it would give it the same advantage. Because it wouldn't?

Sometimes the simplest answer is...

Jussi

[enigma]

Originally Posted by JK42

How's using street legal tyres exactly cheating by the way?

Sounds like bitter moaning and poor excuses to me. Why don't they use the same tyres on the Z06 if it would give it the definite advantage? Because it wouldn't?

Retarded +1

If you don't think putting a dedicated track tire on the Z06 would improve its lap times you know even less about cars than I realized.

Have you driven a Z06 on both types of tires? I have

As far as I know BMW is just about the only company to put up their time for a street car using a track tire. Its not the norm or accepted convention. You can make the same argument for the LSS Elise but the Yoko 048 it runs on isn't as grippy as the PSC on the CSL.

Now when you claim that car A beats car B by some number of seconds, lets say 5. Then latter you find out that car A gained 14 seconds just from its special tires what does it tell you about A being faster than B?

I don't know what they do where you live but here we don't put the OEM tires back on the car when they wear out. We put what we want on the car. If you don't like run flats, put something else on the car. If you want a track tire buy a set.

That why I don't care what tire a car comes with. All I care about is how it will perform on a good tire. I am not going to keep it on the OEM crap if they decide to put crap tires on the car.

[enigma]

For those curious why I harp on tires so much. Here is data collected from my E46 M3, stock suspension, from 2 sets of tires run on the same course and same day.

The red was the OEM tire, the black was an aftermarked R comp (Kuhmo V700).



Any comments Jussi?

[Last E92 M3]

just wondering why you are using kumho as an example?
are they good? o_O?

also, how do you read that graph haha;;;
sorry

[enigma]

The Kuhmo Escta V700 was a pretty good autocross tire that was known for having odd wear issues. They were discontinued earlier this year in favor of the V710 which is a much better tire provided you can keep it from overheating.

I ran the PSC on my car but didn't have the data logger back when I did. I would put them very close to the V700 in terms of grip but with much better wear characteristics and a higher operating temp. Good for track, sucky for autocross.

Its a standard G circle from two autocross runs on a concrete lot, so above average grip. The numbers left to right are cornering grip. Up and down are acceleration and braking grip. There were no heavy brake zones that day so you don't really see the limit of the tires in the down axis.

The thing that is very clear from the graph is the R comp tires are good for about 0.15g more cornering force than the street tires. The time diffrence at the event was close to 2 seconds for every 60 seconds of track.

I just wanted to illistrate how much of the CSLs performance comes from its tires and why you cannot compare its laptimes to other cars which ran on normal street tires.

Jussi is under the mistaken impression that better tires wouldn't help the other cars as much as they do the BMW. He is just flat out wrong. 2s in 60 is a generally accepted guideline among the track/autocross crowd. It holds for most car types with only slight variation in result.

I had a chance to drive a Z06 and still am ordering the E92. Its not because the BMW is faster, its not. Jussi needs to accept that fact and stop spewing crap about its superior handling. Its just not possible given the weight, tire, and suspension geometry limitations of the car. However, I want a comfortable 4 seat car that practicle to go along with my track toy (the lotus). The E92 will be a better street car even if it would lose a performance contest to the Z06. The Lotus is more fun at the track than the Z06 was/is. But I rarely take it out on the street because its just not practical or fun plodding around at 55mph (or less).

[Smoltz]

Originally Posted by Mikeobello

Not too sure about that!

If it's faster than the Z06, it would be also faster than these cars:

McLaren F1 (est)
996 GT3 RS
996 GT2
Lambo Murcielago

So, I'll restate my opinion: Not going to happen.

-Adam

[replicat]

Hmm...I agree with alot of the info here. Enigma has had very good points, so I side with him here. Tires make an outstanding difference, at all times. Wet, dry, snow, sand, you name it.

Conclusion is...CSL with the Pilot Sport Cups is a great combo and a great car. And isn't cheating as they are street legal tires. But a C6 Z06 with the same tire setup, will obliterate most cars in the world around the Nordschliefe.

[Mikeobello]

Originally Posted by Smoltz

If it's faster than the Z06, it would be also faster than these cars:

McLaren F1 (est)
996 GT3 RS
996 GT2
Lambo Murcielago

So, I'll restate my opinion: Not going to happen.

-Adam

Are you now talking bout acceleration or Nordschleife?
Acceleration-wise you are definitely right. I agreed about the Nordschleife-time, where the new m3 will hit some marks, i am sure! if its gonna beat a Z06, cannot tell, but i couldt say it definitely won't!

I'll put down some numbers for you for the cars on your list i found (laptime on nordschleife):
- Prosche 996 GT3: 7.47 min
- Porsche 996 GT2: 7.46 min
- Lamborghini Murcielago: 7.50 min
- BMW e46 M3: 8.22 min
- BMW e46 M3 CSL: 7.50 min
- Z06: 7.43 min

I'd say, the new e92 m3 will be in the region of the e46 m3 csl or faster. the lap they did on the corvette z06 was on special wheels as well as on a special setup for Nordschleife. so if they adjust a special setup for the nordschleife and special wheels ....
dont know, but i wouldnt bet!

[Smoltz]

Originally Posted by Mikeobello

Are you now talking bout acceleration or Nordschleife?
Acceleration-wise you are definitely right. I agreed about the Nordschleife-time, where the new m3 will hit some marks, i am sure! if its gonna beat a Z06, cannot tell, but i couldt say it definitely won't!

I'll put down some numbers for you for the cars on your list i found (laptime on nordschleife):
- Prosche 996 GT3: 7.47 min
- Porsche 996 GT2: 7.46 min
- Lamborghini Murcielago: 7.50 min
- BMW e46 M3: 8.22 min
- BMW e46 M3 CSL: 7.50 min
- Z06: 7.43 min

I'd say, the new e92 m3 will be in the region of the e46 m3 csl or faster. the lap they did on the corvette z06 was on special wheels as well as on a special setup for Nordschleife. so if they adjust a special setup for the nordschleife and special wheels ....
dont know, but i wouldnt bet!

Maybe this is just a translation problem. We're talking about Nordshleife times, no one said anything about acceleration. Also, you never agreed with me, only disagreed.

The Z06 was not tested on special wheels or tires. Look in this link...
http://janmagnussen.com/gallery.asp?...yID=1124467865

With that being said the Z06 review was not done independantly so maybe it isn't the best benchmark.

The M3 CSL was tested on R-Comps. If the Z06 was put on R-Comps it would have gone even faster than 7.43.

With all that being said, I will repeat, there is NO WAY the E92 M3 will go round faster than 7.43 (I'm assuming no R-Comps).

-Adam

[M3]

If the beast gets anything better than the SMGIII we might be getting 4 flats w/np