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)
 
Redline360
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      07-23-2009, 10:16 PM   #23
Finnegan
Dog Listener
Finnegan's Avatar
United_States
445
Rep
7,585
Posts

Drives: Z4M/. Z3M, E36/46 M3
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Teaching the dog to slalom

iTrader: (21)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMWM.D. View Post
Now that I have my AA tune and UUC shifter, I'll have to try it again.
Yeah, I'm 'ing a bit....But since you brought up the UUC....

Any chance you could update us on the UUC shifter over on the SSK thread? A lot of folks seem to be dying to hear your review!

Thanks!
Appreciate 0
      07-23-2009, 10:27 PM   #24
epbrown
Colonel
epbrown's Avatar
United_States
34
Rep
2,131
Posts

Drives: BMW M Coupe, Porsche Boxster S
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, IL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by drft92 View Post
2) BMW tends to always under estimate the achievable times and speeds of their vehicles. Since the e30 M3 and maybe even before they have always under estimated.
From what I've heard, they're conservative about 0-60 times for the same reason the odometers are optimistic: German law. It's considered false advertising if they can't just pull a car off the lot and reproduce the claimed time, so it's easier to fudge the time a bit. There was apparently a problem with demo cars having blueprinted engines and such.
Appreciate 0
      07-23-2009, 10:45 PM   #25
fpblue
Second Lieutenant
fpblue's Avatar
12
Rep
281
Posts

Drives: 2008 Jerez Black E90
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: My Couch

iTrader: (0)

Didn't the E46 M3 have the same stated 0-60 time from BMW? I believe it was 4.8, as is the E9x. I've had both models and the E9x seems much faster. Additionally, I find it hard to believe that BMW would put out the same model without having improved on its performance numbers.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      07-23-2009, 11:22 PM   #26
Serious
1M advocate
Serious's Avatar
United_States
34
Rep
808
Posts

Drives: 2007 RS4. 2012 S1000RR
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by fpblue View Post
Didn't the E46 M3 have the same stated 0-60 time from BMW? I believe it was 4.8, as is the E9x. I've had both models and the E9x seems much faster. Additionally, I find it hard to believe that BMW would put out the same model without having improved on its performance numbers.
(this isn't accurate since the e9x is faster 0-60, just giving an explanation)

difference between 330hp and 420hp isn't much when going just to 60mph. Weight also hurts more at low speed.

Honestly the e90 would normally be faster... but its such a slow speed that the HP advantage really doesn't shine until after 60mph.

Traction and gearing are whats most important 0-60. Imagine the difference if you could get to 60 in first gear in one car but in another it took 2 shifts, going to make a much larger difference then just extra HP.

Which is why 0-60 is a retarded way of analyzing a cars real speed. Even 1/4mile times (or any race that has standing start) are flawed because awd cars have such a huge advantage.

60-130 is a much more accurate assessment of a cars true performance.
__________________
2012 BMW S1000RR
2011 BMW M3
Appreciate 0
      07-23-2009, 11:22 PM   #27
Pimp Star
Captain
Pimp Star's Avatar
34
Rep
627
Posts

Drives: E39 M5
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California

iTrader: (0)

BMW underrates all of their cars so they do not get in a worse horsepower/0-60 war than they are already in. For example, the 335i gets 300 horsepower and 300 lb/ft of torque. How convenient...

Edit: drft92 has the right idea.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenPlease View Post
Frozen grey just says "I'm German, I'm refined, I'm understated, I'm precise, and I'm merciless."
Appreciate 0
      07-23-2009, 11:27 PM   #28
Serious
1M advocate
Serious's Avatar
United_States
34
Rep
808
Posts

Drives: 2007 RS4. 2012 S1000RR
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pimp Star View Post
BMW underrates all of their cars so they do not get in a worse horsepower/0-60 war than they are already in. For example, the 335i gets 300 horsepower and 300 lb/ft of torque. How convenient...

Edit: drft92 has the right idea.
BMW does NOT purposely underrate all their cars. It just happens on some models, usually for marketing purposes on specific cars (ie 135/335).
__________________
2012 BMW S1000RR
2011 BMW M3
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 12:27 AM   #29
epbrown
Colonel
epbrown's Avatar
United_States
34
Rep
2,131
Posts

Drives: BMW M Coupe, Porsche Boxster S
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, IL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by fpblue View Post
Didn't the E46 M3 have the same stated 0-60 time from BMW? I believe it was 4.8, as is the E9x. I've had both models and the E9x seems much faster. Additionally, I find it hard to believe that BMW would put out the same model without having improved on its performance numbers.
Stock time for the E46 was quoted as 5.0s, but magazines consistently got 4.8, so that became the standard over time.
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 12:28 AM   #30
grayshrk
Private
United_States
1
Rep
95
Posts

Drives: 2008 Graphite E92 M3 DCT
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SoCal

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by seriousm3 View Post
60-130 is a much more accurate assessment of a cars true performance.
+1
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 01:02 AM   #31
mvagusta
Lieutenant
9
Rep
475
Posts

Drives: 2008 m3 coup
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: michigan

iTrader: (1)

Yea if you can shift to second without missing it or grinding it. If you speed shift i bet you get a 4.0 to 4.3. With a 3500 rpm launch with a burn out before the launch..
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 01:41 AM   #32
spyderco10
Colonel
spyderco10's Avatar
United_States
52
Rep
2,429
Posts

Drives: AW E92 M3 6MT
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Honolulu, HI

iTrader: (0)

I pretty sure car and driver tested it as fast as 4.3-4.4
__________________
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”
- John 3:16
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 01:43 AM   #33
fpblue
Second Lieutenant
fpblue's Avatar
12
Rep
281
Posts

Drives: 2008 Jerez Black E90
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: My Couch

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by epbrown View Post
Stock time for the E46 was quoted as 5.0s, but magazines consistently got 4.8, so that became the standard over time.
Not true. I remember 4.8 on the BMW website.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 01:45 AM   #34
fpblue
Second Lieutenant
fpblue's Avatar
12
Rep
281
Posts

Drives: 2008 Jerez Black E90
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: My Couch

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by seriousm3 View Post
(this isn't accurate since the e9x is faster 0-60, just giving an explanation)

difference between 330hp and 420hp isn't much when going just to 60mph. Weight also hurts more at low speed.

Honestly the e90 would normally be faster... but its such a slow speed that the HP advantage really doesn't shine until after 60mph.

Traction and gearing are whats most important 0-60. Imagine the difference if you could get to 60 in first gear in one car but in another it took 2 shifts, going to make a much larger difference then just extra HP.

Which is why 0-60 is a retarded way of analyzing a cars real speed. Even 1/4mile times (or any race that has standing start) are flawed because awd cars have such a huge advantage.

60-130 is a much more accurate assessment of a cars true performance.

0-60 is probably only used to show how fast the car gets off of the line. In the real world you don't get many chances to go 1/4 full throttle. 0-60 is more of a street light to street light number.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 02:00 AM   #35
Serious
1M advocate
Serious's Avatar
United_States
34
Rep
808
Posts

Drives: 2007 RS4. 2012 S1000RR
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by fpblue View Post
0-60 is probably only used to show how fast the car gets off of the line. In the real world you don't get many chances to go 1/4 full throttle. 0-60 is more of a street light to street light number.
Ya but who cares... how much grunt the car has going down a back straight matters alot more then how fast it can accelerate from a standstill.

Hell I bet 7 out of 10 tries I could get a bone stock 335xi 6mt to 60mph faster then an 6mt e92 m3... but there is no way a 335xi would be anywhere close to an m3 in any real world race.
__________________
2012 BMW S1000RR
2011 BMW M3
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 02:54 AM   #36
gr8000
Major
gr8000's Avatar
Greece
44
Rep
1,172
Posts

Drives: E92 M3 - DCT
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Athens, Greece

iTrader: (0)

Send a message via AIM to gr8000
Are the best DCT times reported in this thread based on the assumption that LC is used or not necessarily?
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 10:18 AM   #37
RDM3
Private
RDM3's Avatar
United_States
9
Rep
83
Posts

Drives: 2013 X1 x28i M & 2011 ActiveE
Join Date: May 2008
Location: East Windsor, NJ

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2013 BMW X1  [4.50]
2011 BMW ActiveE  [0.00]
Wouldn’t the 0-60 numbers be off for all cars these car magazines do road tests on?
__________________
2013 X1 XDrive28i M Sport, 2011 ActiveE Alpine White Electric
2008 E90 M3 Retired.
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 10:36 AM   #38
Hyperspaced
Private
11
Rep
66
Posts

Drives: BMW 330i
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Washington, DC

iTrader: (0)

330CIZHP: Thanks, that's interesting. I just noticed that Edmunds gives the M3 0-60 in 4.3.
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 12:04 PM   #39
arr0gant
Lieutenant
arr0gant's Avatar
-36
Rep
517
Posts

Drives: 1996 911 Carrera Cab
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: St. Louis

iTrader: (0)

My best run (in colder weather)
Attached Images
 
__________________

1996 911 Carrera Cabriolet

2006 Porsche Cayman S, 2004 M3 Vert, 2008 BMW M3 Sedan, 2001 911 Turbo, 2002 Porsche 911 C4S, 2004 Cadillac CTS-V, Porsche Boxster S
Appreciate 0
      07-24-2009, 12:41 PM   #40
graider
Colonel
graider's Avatar
28
Rep
2,406
Posts

Drives: py/kiwi e46 m3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: toronto

iTrader: (0)

i think the extra 200 lbs killed it. if the new m is he same weight as the e46 m3, it will do 4.4 0-60 easily.
Appreciate 0
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


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:49 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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