|
|
10-09-2009, 11:03 PM | #133 |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
^
We're not all that different - I've never said torque at low rpms and in gear results are totally unimportant. And just like with hp any car will benefit from more of those things. The DCT indeed makes both your and Bruce's arguments about the hassle/difficulty of accessing the true torque multiplication from the M3s high ratios hold much less water. By the way is this the great flat/high rpm torque you are talking about? Compare the stock yellow torque curve for the TT-RS to the M3s. Get real no comparison in shape nor width, the ONLY place the TT-RS is superior is below 4500 rpm and it is only significantly better below 3500. Christ when you are on it at all in an M3 you have 90-100% of its torque to 8000 rpm! So this case is a very typical one to discuss the general principal. You can have one or the other, not really both and I simply prefer the M3s engine characteristics. On a related point what rpm do you think is going to be the ideal shifting rpm based on the TT-RS dynos?
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
Appreciate
0
|
10-09-2009, 11:21 PM | #134 | |
Major General
684
Rep 5,069
Posts
Drives: BMW 230i Msport w/LSD
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Astral Projecting: ∞ 23.516 -122 02.625 0242.101 ĕv'rē-hwâr'
iTrader: (16)
Garage List 2009 Porsche 911 997.2 [10.00]
2019 Hyundai N (Sold) [10.00] 2013 BMW M3 (Sold) [10.00] 2011 1M Coupe (Sold) [8.78] 2008 E90 M3 (Sold) [8.60] 2007 Z4 Mcpe (Sold) [9.50] 2005 BMW M3 (Sold) [10.00] |
Quote:
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-09-2009, 11:59 PM | #135 | |
Banned
121
Rep 2,097
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-10-2009, 01:29 AM | #136 |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Guys, to be fair I am a strong proponent of the belief that you do not have to own a particular vehicle to know a great deal about it. Technical knowledge can be well separated from experiential knowledge and a great engineer does not by any means make a great driver. However, the most insight does come from a combination of these complimentary types of knowledge and experience.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
Appreciate
0
|
10-10-2009, 02:09 AM | #137 | |
Major General
1094
Rep 8,013
Posts
Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast
|
Quote:
Regarding the ideal shift point, that question is constantly varing depending on mood, what type of driving you are doing at the time, whether on the track, etc. Oh, and you are right, having both isn't possible. Or is it. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-10-2009, 09:54 AM | #138 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
I don't see the point of a final drive swap with a DCT for that reason. The car is traction-limited in first gear as delivered, and whatever gear you want is available with essentially zero delay, so no real benny to getting more aggressive with gearing. With a stick, though, I think the M3 will be more fun with a more aggressive final drive. As with any car, you'll actually slow down a bit in traffic with this type of change, but once you're cruising, the car will definitely be more responsive. You should know that in general I'm skeptical of any real benefits of a more aggressive final drive, but in the case of a stick M3, I think it'll work. No, the car won't show much benefit in a classic quarter mile duel, and as mentioned, you'll actually slow down a tad in traffic, but I speculate that the increased punch at cruise will more than make up for that - for me, at least. Bruce |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-10-2009, 01:14 PM | #139 |
Colonel
35
Rep 2,406
Posts |
I think the m3 v8 is perfect for the car. the only enemy of the new m3 is weight. loose some of that weight and it is a rocket (check out the e30 m3 with m3 v8 engine). but loosing weight for a sport saloon like the m3 is not easy and it is only possible with more exotic material. the m3 is already the lightest in its class.
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-10-2009, 01:52 PM | #140 | |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
By the way have you been able to find the gear ratios for the TT-RS. I can't find them anywhere.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-10-2009, 02:05 PM | #141 | |
Major General
1094
Rep 8,013
Posts
Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast
|
Quote:
I do agree that gearing should help the M3 but this will only happen close to the limits of the TT's rev range. I bet that when we actually see a race between the two (hopefully both manuals) that it will show a bungee effect, where the TT showing an advantage at the start of each gear and the M3 coming strong towards the end of the gear. Would you concur with that opinion. P.S. Hopefully you are starting to see why I posted the original thread and this one after the data proved what I earlier thought would happen. The TT-RS is a potential rival to the M3, if only from a performance perspective. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2009, 02:33 AM | #142 |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
^
I'm still willing to bet the M3 will in general (and by general I mean under most rpms in its torque power band) put more torque to its wheels than the TT-RS. Recall that hp is generally a decent approximation of torque to the wheels. Even if the TT-RS does some fancy torque splitting its AWD system will still causes more losses and all losses hurt. Perhaps the loss will be less painful than with older technology but it is still there. I'm not really willing to speculate on a gear by gear blow of a comparison between these cars. Once launch effects are negated you may be able to see some of this "bouncing" like effect. As always this is best captured with relative video from one car to the other which highlights differences in acceleration and even jerk.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2009, 02:51 AM | #143 | ||
Major General
1094
Rep 8,013
Posts
Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast
|
Quote:
You can believe what you will, but I am telling you that the lose is no more and probably less in normal conditions than a rwd setup. I'm not going to get into a debate on how much drivetrain lose quattro or any other awd system has because it's something none of us all will agree on because some are convinced that the data supplied by dyno is accurate. Wheel torque is all related to what revs are produced at a certain speed, the more revs required the probability that more torque will be present. So I conclude that chances are on some of the TT-RS rev range the M3 will indeed produce more wheel torque. Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2009, 05:33 AM | #144 |
Captain
50
Rep 783
Posts |
The advantage the M3 has is its high redline - if you geared the TT-RS and M3 identically such that they both made the same speed in each gear (i.e. TT-RS speed in any gear @ 6600RPM = M3 speed in same gear @ 8400RPM), the M3 makes ~27% more torque to the wheels because it will need 27% higher ratios than the TT-RS to make the same speed (assuming same wheel size).
So in equivalent terms, where the Audi TT-RS makes 450NM from 1600RPM to 5300RPM, the M3 would start making effectively the same 450NM (350NM real torque + 27%) around 2250RPM (at this M3 engine speed, the TT-RS engine would be spinning @ 1750RPM), peaking to 510NM (400NM peak torque + 27%) @ 4000RPM (~3200RPM in the TT-RS) and maintaining that torque all the way to near redline where it tails back to 450NM (350NM real torque @ redline + 27%).... It's easier to understand the above if you talk in absolute wheel torque terms, but if you look at it this way, you can see that the M3 is easily the much quicker car, even with its slight weight disadvantage... The Audi TT-RS gearing is located here - http://www.audi.ee/file.php?ID=8415 |
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2009, 11:09 AM | #145 | |
Major General
1094
Rep 8,013
Posts
Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast
|
Quote:
Of the two gear I can sort of recall roughly their shift point I think this is approximately the gear speeds per 1000rpm for each (it will be near enough). TT-RS (M3) 2nd : 9.7mph (8.43mph) Roughly 15% difference 3rd : 14.7mph (12.65mph) Roughly 16% difference. Not quite your 27% so how much does that affect your estimates. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2009, 05:36 PM | #146 |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Couple of things.
1. The dyno charts I showed is not consistent with the peak figures quoted by Audi. So a few things could be in play, bad dyno corrections, poor assumptions on DT loss or an under rating situation. Just look at peak torque Audi claims 450 Nm, the chart clearly shows 490+ Nm (for the unmodded car). The hp curve looks OK though. 2. The torque multiplication advantage the M3 has over the TT-RS on a gear by gear basis is: E9X 6 MT / TT-RS, E9X M-DCT / TT-RS 1.16 1.12 1.12 1.14 0.86 0.95 0.85 0.98 1.14 1.30 1.19 1.34 There is not a constant advantage, nor even an advantage in all gears, just as there is not a constant torque advantage from the engine - that is rpm dependent. However, giving the benefit of the doubt to the Audi it PEAK torqu advantage over the M3 (ratio actually...) is 1.12. 3rd and 4th are going to be strong in the TT-RS. Interesting gearing choice, 3. What you really need to look at is torque to the wheels vs. rpm (or speed). Mixja: Doesn't your software do that? Note the TT-RS does use a dual final drive ratio! CarTest does produce this type of output chart but it has some bugs getting an accurate interpolated power curve and the standard fit is generally poor for a turbo.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
Appreciate
0
|
10-14-2009, 03:41 AM | #147 | |
Major General
1094
Rep 8,013
Posts
Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-14-2009, 04:51 AM | #148 | |
Major General
1094
Rep 8,013
Posts
Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast
|
Quote:
IN-GEAR TIMES (3RD) M3 -----TT-RS 20-40 3.3 - 2.8 30-50 3.1 - 2.4 40-60 3.0 - 2.4 50-70 3.0 - 2.5 60-80 3.0 - 2.6 70-90 3.1 - 2.8 IN-GEAR TIMES (4TH) 20-40 4.2 - 4.3 30-50 4.2 - 3.3 40-60 4.1 - 3.1 50-70 3.9 - 3.3 60-80 4.0 - 3.4 70-90 4.2 - 3.5 80-100 4.3 - 3.7 90-110 4.5 - 4.0 But on looking at your data 5th / 6th gears, it should throw to advantage firmly back towards to M3 but doesn't in fact it really takes 6th to match the TT yet by all accounts the opposite should be true as this is firmly below the levels where the M3 is producing anything like the same amount of torque per rpm as the TT would. I wonder why this is? IN-GEAR TIMES (5TH) 20-40 4.8 - 6.3 30-50 4.8 - 4.7 40-60 4.9 - 4.1 50-70 4.8 - 4.1 60-80 4.5 - 4.3 70-90 4.9 - 4.5 80-100 5.3 - 4.6 IN-GEAR TIMES (6TH) 30-50 6.2 - 8.3 40-60 6.2 - 6.9 50-70 5.9 - 5.8 60-80 5.8 - 5.5 70-90 5.9 - 5.9 80-100 6.2 - 6.2 I imagine the only reason for the M3 to be better on the areas I highlighted red is all due to a slight lag on pick up from the turbo. Would you agree? P.S. I would very comfortably say that the TT-RS feels and probably is much stronger in-gear than ever the RS4 would have been. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-14-2009, 05:13 AM | #149 |
Captain
50
Rep 783
Posts |
The gearing on the TT-RS seems really strange - just a 12.5% drop from 2nd to 3rd, but a 24% drop from 3rd to 4th...
The in-gear acceleration times on the TT-RS are fairly close to the C63 times EVO recorded - M3 DCT is pretty close to the C63 in-gear times so I think the DCT and TT-RS will be pretty close for in-gear acceleration... |
Appreciate
0
|
10-14-2009, 09:32 AM | #150 | |
Major General
1094
Rep 8,013
Posts
Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast
|
Quote:
Audi TT-RS 6sp vs C63 7sp IN-GEAR TIMES (3RD) 20-40 2.8 2.7 30-50 2.4 2.6 40-60 2.4 2.5 50-70 2.5 2.4 60-80 2.6 2.5 70-90 2.8 2.8 Between 30mph and 90 mph there is very little to choose either way. IN-GEAR TIMES (4TH) 20-40 4.3 4.7 30-50 3.3 3.9 40-60 3.1 3.7 50-70 3.3 3.5 60-80 3.4 3.5 70-90 3.5 3.5 80-100 3.7 3.5 90-110 4.0 3.8 Between 30mph and 90mph the TT is the quicker of the two. IN-GEAR TIMES (5TH) 20-40 6.3 5.3 30-50 4.7 4.2 40-60 4.1 4.4 50-70 4.1 4.4 60-80 4.3 4.3 70-90 4.5 4.3 80-100 4.6 4.4 Between 40mph and 80mph again the TT is the quicker. IN-GEAR TIMES (6TH) 30-50 8.3 5.0 40-60 6.9 5.2 50-70 5.8 5.2 60-80 5.5 5.1 70-90 5.9 5.1 80-100 6.2 5.1 Only in 6th gear does the bigger capacity Merc win out and remember it's the one with 7 gears and not 6. Just imagine what BMW could do with their know how and a little bit bigger capacity in the next M3. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|