|
|
09-21-2011, 03:20 PM | #23 |
Captain
36
Rep 910
Posts |
I did and first.
More curious what the corresponding wheel torque is for the M5 at 3.5K in 1st and in 2nd.
__________________
E90 M3: Some cool stuff...more to come
Ducati 1199 Panigale: Bucket full of mods |
Appreciate
0
|
09-21-2011, 04:40 PM | #24 |
Captain
36
Rep 910
Posts |
I see what you're getting at, which leads me to a question related to not understanding what Tq figure a dyno spits out. Essentially, when we dyno our cars, despite the common understanding that we are getting a power at the wheel representation, what we are actually getting is horsepower at the wheel and torque at the flywheel. Torque at the wheel is closer to 5,500 at 3.5KRPM (first gear). Do I have that right?
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107532
__________________
E90 M3: Some cool stuff...more to come
Ducati 1199 Panigale: Bucket full of mods |
Appreciate
0
|
09-21-2011, 05:02 PM | #25 | |
that's what SHE said!
75
Rep 1,163
Posts |
Quote:
I've said it in the pas and I'll say it again, M3 has gobs of torque, and it has it everywhere. If you disagree, answer me this, if the M3 is both heavier and has less torque than a 335i, how does it out accelerate it (stock for stock)???
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-21-2011, 05:11 PM | #26 | |
Captain
36
Rep 910
Posts |
Quote:
3.99*3.62*260 = 3,755 M5 Crank Tq taken from the dragtimes: http://www.dragtimes.com/2006-BMW-M5...aphs-9623.html Result @ 3.5K in first gear: M3 Wheel Tq = 5,500; M5 Wheel Tq = 3,755 M3 wins!
__________________
E90 M3: Some cool stuff...more to come
Ducati 1199 Panigale: Bucket full of mods Last edited by Dodge2Dub; 09-21-2011 at 05:54 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-21-2011, 05:55 PM | #27 | |
that's what SHE said!
75
Rep 1,163
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-21-2011, 10:52 PM | #28 |
ESS Dreaming
27
Rep 870
Posts |
Ive owned an M6 and am now on my second e92 M3. The M6 was faster 3 gear and above vs my DCT M3. The SMG tranny on the M6 however ruined the whole car for me. I never drove a 6MT with the V10 but imagine thats the ticket though...
Oh and there is no question, the M3 is a million times more fun to drive and I would rather have one any day of the week. ( Again, this is coming from someone who owned both) |
Appreciate
0
|
09-21-2011, 11:09 PM | #29 |
Banned
88
Rep 1,105
Posts |
So my understanding from this thread is that through 1st and 2nd while rippin through the gears the m3 is faster or atleast as fast as the m5. After that 3rd and beyond the m5 pulls hard away.
Also to the above poster regarding comparing wheel torque at 3.5k RPMS. You really cannot compare single points at certain single rpms to one another. You have to do an area under the curve in order to accurately represent things. This is not overly hard to do since the graph of the m3 is actually so linear you can simply use normal math of a square, dividing it by 2 to get a triangle compared to linear regression needed to calculate the m5s wavy curve AUC> Nonetheless what you compare is a real life scenario which is 6k-8400 rpms for the m3 and 5.5-8200 for the m5. These are the useable rpms at full throttle and the rpms do not drop below about 5.5-6 for either of them in full throttle pulls. The only time is for an INSTANT from a standstill but it hits 6k in the blink of an eye. So the AUC of 5.5-8400 is what you would compare to the m5 5.5-8200 AUC. I am willing to bet the 1st gear AUC is likely almost identical giving the shorter gearing in the m3. Gearing has a huge multiplication effect. Which is why some people do not understand that it is almost always more beneficial to take a car to its redline even if its not making as much engine power. Staying in a lower gear longer multplies torque by so much more than the power you lose being out of your "power curve" After 2nd I would think the m5 would really have much larger numbers and then from there on out it would be no contest |
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2011, 07:18 PM | #30 |
Captain
56
Rep 615
Posts
Drives: 08 SG/IR Z4MR | 07 AW/Blk Z4MC
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SOCAL: 626/909/949/323
|
drove a friends m5 for about 15 minutes.
1) definitely more torque, not much, but through the rev range 2) more torque, but the cars a pig, so honestly, the speedo looked about the same as an e92 m3. 3) past 80,90mph don't even think about it. At that speed weight simply doesn't matter, displacement / horsepower wins. e60 m5's are ridiculous up top.
__________________
08 Z4MR | Space gray on Imola red, carbon trim
BC racing coilovers | Titan TS7 07 Z4MC | Alpine white on black, aluminum trim KWV3 | CCW LM20 | Eventuri | Rogue Engineering short shifter, mounts and exhaust | BMW Motorsports shift knob | mudflaps | stubby antennas |
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2011, 08:18 PM | #31 |
Major
122
Rep 1,202
Posts |
i know this is stock vs stock discussion.....but this past weekend had a run in with an m5....im the camera car and the M5 is modded (tune, full exhaust, intakes, scoops)......ive beaten stock M5's with my M3 dct.....but this M5 was surprisingly fast stock the M3 will lose everytime, and if its 6MT it stands no chance...but a modded dct will put up a good fight (btw the middle car wasnt racing, just honked it off) |
Appreciate
0
|
09-27-2011, 09:16 PM | #32 |
Private
19
Rep 97
Posts |
From physics:
Power at the wheel = Power at the engine x Gear Ratio; so gear ratio at speed plays important role Acceleration = Power at wheel / Weight ; lower weight has the same effect as higher power Numbers from Car & Driver magazine: 100-150mph time = (0-150) time minus (0-100) time: Z4M : 21.5s, 32.9-11.4 (C&D, June'06), 330HP, 3300lb 2008 M3 6spd: 15.1s, 24.9 - 9.8 (C&D, May 2008), 414HP, 3700lb C6 LS3 Z51 : 14.3s, 23.5 - 9.2 (C&D, Sep'07), 436HP, 3300lb 2011 GT500 :14.5s, 23.6 - 9.1 (C&D, Aug'10), 550HP, 3800lb E63 AMG : 13.9s, 23.4 - 9.5 (C&D, Dec'09), 518HP, 4200lb Jaguar XFR : 13.4s, 22.9 - 9.5 (C&D, Dec'09), 510HP, 4400lb CTS-V : 12.8s, 22.3 -9.5 (C&D, Dec'09), 556HP, 4300lb Panamera Turbo : 12.2s, 20.4 - 8.2 (C&D, Apr'10), 500HP, 4300lb M5 6spd manual : 13.1s, 23.4 - 10.3 (C&D, Feb'07), 500HP, 4200lb M5 SMG : 11.3s, 20.7 - 9.4 (C&D, Jan '06), 500HP, 4200lb 2008 911GT-2 : 9.9s, 18.0 - 8.1 (C&D, Aug'08), 530HP, 3300lb 2008 ACR : 9.8s, 17.5 - 7.7 (C&D, Aug'08), 600HP, 3400lb 2008 C6 Z06 : 9.6s, 17.9 - 8.3 (C&D, Aug' 08), 505HP, 3100lb |
Appreciate
0
|
10-03-2011, 05:22 PM | #33 |
ASE93
18
Rep 80
Posts |
[/QUOTE]
The 'throw' is much greater with power button on... and what's crazy is 3rd
__________________
E93/ 6MT/ Fabspeed Catback/ Fabspeed X-Pipe/ Dinan Intake/ Active Autowerke Tune/ Hamann Rear Diffuser/ Chrome black Kidneys/ K40 with laser Jammer/ 15% tint
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-04-2011, 08:29 AM | #34 |
Banned
314
Rep 8,496
Posts |
i think you're referring to a car who's setup defaults to 400 hp, with the power button, it increases it to 500 hp. I would say 100 hp increase could be felt, lol
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|