E9x vs F8x race yet?

[enfield]

Originally Posted by ss134

Same debates every time a new M3 comes out...........most of you here will end up buying an F8x sooner or later!!

I ended up buying a Jaguar F-Type V8 S

[JRV]

Anyone know anything about this beast? I am guessing its supercharged with the sound.

[Vic311]

Impressive

[Petros]

Originally Posted by swamp2

The M4 will certainly best the F10 M5 assuming both under rated and at factory specified weight in the 1/4 mi. However, to be the same power to weight ratio as the F10 M5 the M4 would have to be around 3200 lb flat (not counting driver). Here the whooping will get even stronger. Without going through the details (and you reasoning sounds perfectly valid) the basic reason the M5 will get bested is due to the M4 producing more average power.

Counting for wheelspin the S55 should be above 5500 rpm all through 2nd gear. Most shifts after that get down to around 5250, just a hair before peak torque.

The redline is 7500 rpm. Why shift before that?

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Petros

The redline is 7500 rpm. Why shift before that?

Huh?? I never said shift, I was mentioning min rpms immediately post shift. Maybe that wasn't crystal clear but should have been clear given the post I was replying to.

On a loosely related note, unlike the S65 the S55 will need to be short shifted slightly for ultimate performance. However, the penalty for going to the 7600 rpm redline is probably pretty minor (the redline is not 7500...).

[sensi09]

Originally Posted by MRSSIIM3

f80 costs more than e92 did anyways...so if you mod an e92 to reach f80 price, itll be better in all aspects

lol

[FogCityM3]

Hard to believe BMW would allow the M3/4 to be faster in a straight line vs the M5/M6. Talk about cannibalization potential (especially the M3 vs M5). I know the 0-1000 meter times are quoted the same, but for M3/4 to be faster? We'll soon find out.

[LarThaL]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

Hard to believe BMW would allow the M3/4 to be faster in a straight line vs the M5/M6. Talk about cannibalization potential (especially the M3 vs M5). I know the 0-1000 meter times are quoted the same, but for M3/4 to be faster? We'll soon find out.

It's not so hard to believe when you consider that the M5/6 can't really get all it's power/torque to the ground in first and second gear. Even the M3/4's 400 lb-ft is going to be very traction challenged. So you essentially have similar power getting to the ground with a significant weight advantage for the 3/4. This is the primary reason that for my big-ass cruiser, I opted for the AWD Audi S6 over the M5.

[Nordstat]

Originally Posted by JRV

Anyone know anything about this beast? I am guessing its supercharged with the sound.

Kind of off topic, BUT...

With linear extrapolation of a typical dyno curve for ESS M3, ESS VT2-625 Supercharger + ~9300 RPM redline yields ~625-650 peak RWHP and more time at very high HP --> INSANE FAST. Approaching Drew territory!

ON TOPIC: I was with a buddy in an ESS 625 e90 M3 and we came across a development M4 about 4 or 5 months ago (still sporting some camo). The driver was willing to do a quick freeway pull from ~65 - 100 mph. Lets just say it ended EXACTLY as you would expect (see below @ 0:40+ to get an idea of the result). Not surprising, even with the updated torque and (marginally?) lighter weight of the M4... 600+ HP is a SH*T-TON of power!

[Brosef]

Originally Posted by Nordstat

Kind of off topic, BUT...

With linear extrapolation of a typical dyno curve for ESS M3, ESS VT2-625 Supercharger + ~9300 RPM redline yields ~625-650 peak RWHP and more time at very high HP --> INSANE FAST. Approaching Drew territory!

ON TOPIC: I was with a buddy in an ESS 625 e90 M3 and we came across a development M4 about 4 or 5 months ago (still sporting some camo). The driver was willing to do a quick freeway pull from ~65 - 100 mph. Lets just say it ended EXACTLY as you would expect (see below @ 0:40+ to get an idea of the result). Not surprising, even with the updated torque and (marginally?) lighter weight of the M4... 600+ HP is a SH*T-TON of power!

yep, it will be some time before the F8X cars are keeping up with the supercharged E9X cars. given that it's only 3 liters, I suspect there will be extensive mods needed to bump the power up that much.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

The M4 will certainly best the F10 M5 assuming both under rated and at factory specified weight in the 1/4 mi. However, to be the same power to weight ratio as the F10 M5 the M4 would have to be around 3200 lb flat (not counting driver). Here the whooping will get even stronger. Without going through the details (and you reasoning sounds perfectly valid) the basic reason the M5 will get bested is due to the M4 producing more average power.

Counting for wheelspin the S55 should be above 5500 rpm all through 2nd gear. Most shifts after that get down to around 5250, just a hair before peak torque.

Perhaps I wasn't clear.

My note was mostly about how close the factory estimates are for the 1000m time.

Replying directly to your quoted note above, however, I'm confused. In your first sentence you seem to be saying that a stock M4 will likely beat a stock M5 in a quarter mile drag race, which seems to be a remote possibility at best, from my point of view - because the M5 does better at power-to-weight. Then you say that an M4 will really beat up on an M5 given equal power to weight, but I think the M4 will only be slightly quicker under those conditions, for the reasons stated in my initial note.

Then you agree that the reason the M4 does well is because it makes more average power (as a percentage of max power). This I agree with, as it was my central point - except I don't think the M4 will actually beat the M5, from rest all the way to VMAX. I'm just stating a possible reason why BMW says the M4 will be close at the 1000M point.

Finally, your analysis of the M4 gearing is quite at odds with mine. What I am saying is that, once you reach peak power in third (not long after the shift), you never stray off peak power again. In fact, as you reach higher gears, you're shifting well before the end of the peak power plateau, while still ending up at the beginning - and you shift at a point just high enough to arrive at the beginning of peak power so as to minimize rotating inertia during the run. In fact, the ideal shift point in the higher gears is well down in the 6000s, dropping you down to the beginning of the max power plateau in the next gear. By contrast, the M5 loses power after each shift, pretty much like every car out there except the new M3/M4.

Thus a possible reason for how close the M4 may be to the M5 in a 1000M run.

Bruce

[Nautik]

Originally Posted by Petros

Well they said the same thing about the GTR, that Nissan made the ECU uncrackable. But tuners were able to crack it eventually and get more power out of it. The S55 is already realistically putting out close to 450 hp stock. I believe it's likely with some tuning and bolt ons you can push that to mid to high 500's, which is about as high as you can reliably get out of a supercharged S65 anyway. And even then the S55 will still own the S65 in terms of low end torque. And with less weight to move around, the S55 doesn't even need to match the power output of the S65 to achieve the same acceleration.

As some of the guys already mentioned, the turbos in this car and smaller and already spin pretty fast. There may not be a whole lot left on the table. If you change the boost much you may be robbing from Peter to pay Paul. Meaning you will sacrifice other desirable performance characteristics.

Sure you can change the turbos to something bigger but then you certainly will run into performance issues and lag. This car is built around these turbos.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Replying directly to your quoted note above, however, I'm confused. In your first sentence you seem to be saying that a stock M4 will likely beat a stock M5 in a quarter mile drag race, which seems to be a remote possibility at best, from my point of view - because the M5 does better at power-to-weight.

I think the M4 will either be neck and neck with the M5 in the 1/4 or perhaps even best it. However, that point of view does not follow directly from a power to weight analysis. CarTest shows the M4 getting the jump to 60' and to 60 mph. I can't fully justify this as it appears to be some subtlety of the wheel spin model which is not perfect in CarTest.

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Then you say that an M4 will really beat up on an M5 given equal power to weight, but I think the M4 will only be slightly quicker under those conditions, for the reasons stated in my initial note.

Perhaps not really beat up on but will best. This point is in part dependent on the prior analysis being correct, if it is, this follows if it isn't then it doesn't.

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Then you agree that the reason the M4 does well is because it makes more average power (as a percentage of max power). This I agree with, as it was my central point - except I don't think the M4 will actually beat the M5, from rest all the way to VMAX. I'm just stating a possible reason why BMW says the M4 will be close at the 1000M point.

The M4 and M5 have pretty similar power/torque curves with the plateau being just slightly earlier/wider for the M4. The M4 certainly will not stay aheead of the M5 all the way to Vmax (assuming it gets a jump at the start). Somewhere around 14 seconds (again +/- depending on how well each gets off the line) and beyond the M5 will really begin to pull away.

My current sims for 1000m (with recently updated Cd and area) have the M4 at 21.6 and M5 at 21.4, close but not equal.

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Finally, your analysis of the M4 gearing is quite at odds with mine. What I am saying is that, once you reach peak power in third (not long after the shift), you never stray off peak power again. In fact, as you reach higher gears, you're shifting well before the end of the peak power plateau, while still ending up at the beginning - and you shift at a point just high enough to arrive at the beginning of peak power so as to minimize rotating inertia during the run. In fact, the ideal shift point in the higher gears is well down in the 6000s, dropping you down to the beginning of the max power plateau in the next gear. By contrast, the M5 loses power after each shift, pretty much like every car out there except the new M3/M4.

No, we pretty much agree here except that again, dips in rpms get slightly below 5500 rpm where peak power is made. Yes ideal shifts are in the 6's perhaps as low ast 6250 from 5th to 6th. However, shifts out of 4th, 5th and 6th in the M5 will not be at redline and yes it will get off of peak power a bit during many shifts.

[ms372]

Originally Posted by JRV

Anyone know anything about this beast? I am guessing its supercharged with the sound.

thats from a video game its fake lol

[JRV]

Originally Posted by ms372

thats from a video game its fake lol

Wow you're right it's all fake. Had me fooled. I should have checked the comments. I was browsing on my phone so didn't see them right away and the rest of his work. Ha!

[ss134]

Originally Posted by enfield

I ended up buying a Jaguar F-Type V8 S

Great car! Would love to test drive one......seen a few videos and it sounds incredible

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

No, we pretty much agree here except that again, dips in rpms get slightly below 5500 rpm where peak power is made. Yes ideal shifts are in the 6's perhaps as low ast 6250 from 5th to 6th. However, shifts out of 4th, 5th and 6th in the M5 will not be at redline and yes it will get off of peak power a bit during many shifts.

If memory serves, shifting at redline in the M4 gets you back under max power only on shifts to second and third gears. In fact, you're at around 5000 in third right after the shift, so it's only a tiny slice of time before you're at 5500 and climbing. From then on, you're short-shifting to arrive at 5500 in the next gear. I show the optimum three-four shift at around 7200, and subsequent optimal shift points even lower.

In any event, it's fun to speculate on just how quick the new car will be.

Did you read George Kacher's review of the M4 in CAR magazine? He was ebullient in his praise. Now, we know that CAR is heavy on hyperbole, but George can generally be relied on for reasonableness.

Bruce

[991brothers]

Originally Posted by dmk08

24, a house in San Diego, a new E92, and no help? What is it you do? I screwed up somewhere lol.

I would say im lucky I invested in the right businesses. Im still no where near my goal in life. So no you didnt screw up

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

.In any event, it's fun to speculate on just how quick the new car will be.

Did you read George Kacher's review of the M4 in CAR magazine? He was ebullient in his praise. Now, we know that CAR is heavy on hyperbole, but George can generally be relied on for reasonableness.

Bruce

Speculate AND calculate! Indeed.

I did read George;s article but like many here realized he hadn't actually driven it and was being borderline dishonest about that...

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Speculate AND calculate! Indeed.

I did read George;s article but like many here realized he hadn't actually driven it and was being borderline dishonest about that...

Didn't get that from my initial read of the article. Just re-read it, and still don't get that, but whatever...

Speaking of calculations, I just did a re-compute on the M4's quarter mile, based on that more-or-less base curb weight recently quoted at 3562 pounds with 6-speed, and 425 HP. I'm now at an 11.98 @ 116.2 mph, assuming 170 pounds of driver and gear. 60 MPH comes up in 3.6 seconds with rollout.

I figure the magazines will tend to run in the 12.1-12.2 range, at 115 plus. Still mighty quick.

Bruce

PS - Speaking of quick, have you read the test in the newest Car & Driver comparing the Vette Convertible with the F-Type Jag V8?

Yeow! That's the quickest C7 Vette I've seen. And it had the GM 6-speed
"traditional" automatic gearbox. That's just one more example of a current automatic (of whatever design) beating its stick counterpart. I'm torn between admiration for the steady engineering improvement demonstrated in today's autos, and being pissed off since I haven't matured enough to buy one.

[flea333]

Originally Posted by Nordstat

Kind of off topic, BUT...

ON TOPIC: I was with a buddy in an ESS 625 e90 M3 and we came across a development M4 about 4 or 5 months ago (still sporting some camo). The driver was willing to do a quick freeway pull from ~65 - 100 mph. Lets just say it ended EXACTLY as you would expect (see below @ 0:40+ to get an idea of the result). Not surprising, even with the updated torque and (marginally?) lighter weight of the M4... 600+ HP is a SH*T-TON of power!

F*ing insane!!! I need to get that on my ride pronto...

[flea333]

Originally Posted by JRV

Wow you're right it's all fake. Had me fooled. I should have checked the comments. I was browsing on my phone so didn't see them right away and the rest of his work. Ha!

notice the redline is wrong anyway... 7300 is sometime when the car is still warming up