What does a fully catted/tuned M3 trap? GTR Hmm?

[Alex07M3]

Originally Posted by keikdasneak

Most of the people that drag race there m3's are supercharged. The others are slightly modded. Stock DCT m3s trap 111-112 it will be easy for a fully modded NA M3 to trap 118-119 I will prove it June 8th at famoso raceway.

I even saw stock DCT M3s trapping 114-115, my manual trapped 111 and I was spinning badly on the launch and in second gear so I was loosing distance to carry speed, the wheels even chirped when shifting in 3rd so i'm pretty sure it was'nt the best my car could do!

[Rekrul]

Food for thought. This guy isn't even cat less.

[Verify]

Originally Posted by Alex07M3

A couple of M3s with bolt-ons have done more then 400whp and I don't think an M3 DCT needs more then that to be as fast as a stock 09 GT-R on the highway. I also think that 1/4mile is not really representative of what a M3 will do on the highway because it's missing a bit of torque compared to a GT-R, but on the higher gears,that torque does'nt do much, I think a V8 RWD will keep accelarating more easily then a V6 AWD!

Also I know my car is a lot slower then a DCT with bolt-ons, I have a stock manual, my best trap is only 111mph, but still, a month ago, when I raced my friend with his stock GT-R, it took him a bit of time before pulling on me, and he really wasent pulling as much as I would've tought! Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I was there but on the other hand, a stock DCT will also pull on me so a catless/tuned DCT must be FAST!!

A random 400 HP dyno from a car that does 350+ stock is no faster than one that's currently380 with a 330 baseline.

1-2 mph difference in a 1/4 mile is not a big deal. But 5-10 (in a stock cars case) is rape on the highway.

[Verify]

Originally Posted by Rekrul

LOL? Are you serious? 20whp gain from a full cat less has been verified. Tune should gain 15whp easy. Those are conservative estimates as well. I had the old charcoal filter as well, which I replaced with the AA green filter. Do the math. What do stock M3's dyno? 340-350whp? Add 35whp to that. Thats 375-385whp. 09 GTR dyno around 400whp and weigh 300lb more.

I have nearly the same mods as the car in video 1, minus the pulleys. His X pipe has HFC cats.

Curious. What mods do you have? You really have no idea how much faster this car becomes when simply removing the CATS let alone adding a tune.. the difference is MASSIVE.

Haters going to hate I suppose, the nature of inferior men.

Call it hating if you, but its also known as reality. In the real world, only children and feable minded people can't accept reality.. so which one of us is "inferior"?

I have a catless car, BTW

Also, to the guy claiming he will trap 118+ soon, I hope you do, but reality is against you. I'll be sure to bump your quote when you fail to post your lackluster results.

[Verify]

Originally Posted by Rekrul

Food for thought. This guy isn't even cat less.

So, your argument that a more powerful car (gtr) will lose to a less powerful car (m3) from a roll, is to show that a more powerful car will beat a less powerful car from a stop?
Who's thought process is inferior?

A more realistic scenario:
http://www.youtube..com/watch? v=jmJ4thYVy7I

[Singletrack]

1/4 is ghey; there I said it. Can we go back to arguing about no low end torque now please?

[Rekrul]

Originally Posted by Baggy_M

Call it hating if you, but its also known as reality. In the real world, only children and feable minded people can't accept reality.. so which one of us is "inferior"?

I have a catless car, BTW

Also, to the guy claiming he will trap 118+ soon, I hope you do, but reality is against you. I'll be sure to bump your quote when you fail to post your lackluster results.

You have a catless car huh? What about a tune you daft phuck? What year is your car? You do realize how restrictive the stock charcoal filter is? Unless you have said mods that I have you have no idea how fast my car. Oh wait you have a primary cat delete and that is it... these videos were for your educational purpose. STOCK M3's Dyno 340-350whp ALL DAY LONG... some even hit 360whp. They trap between 112-114 ALL DAY LONG. Anyone with a half decent logical train of thought would realize that is not hard to believe that a car would gain 4-5mph trap speeds with 40whp gained.. it is a commonly accepted notion. STOCK 09 GTRs dyno 400whp.. confirmed multiple sources.

Did you not watch the whole video? There are several rolls from 40mph. The difference is massive and the car isn't even as modded as mine. Do you now understand you illogical twit?

I am well aware a STOCK 09 GTR from a STOP will RAPE the M3. Now from a roll it is clearly apparent with said MODS it is not hard to believe that I stayed with a stock 2009 GTR. Would the difference been different if it was 2012, absolutely. IS the GTR the superior performance car? Absolutely. How your such a moron is beyond me..

Let me further break it down for you imbecile

AKRA slip on (+3-5whp), Dinan X pipe(20-25whp), ESS catless 93 tune with 231E(20whp), AA Green filter(3-5whp on 08/09). What does that add up to? 55whp in absolute ideal conditions, 46whp absolute minimum. Lets assume that my m3 dynos at the lowest possible point of 330whp? That is still around 376whp in a car that is 300lbs lighter... and at maximum 390-400whp against a car which dynos ideally at 400whp stock and weighs 300lbs more.

[GIdriver]

Originally Posted by Rekrul

Food for thought. This guy isn't even cat less.

HFC/catless definitely makes a difference.

[DLSJ5]

Originally Posted by Baggy_M

Thanks for proving my point for me.
Video #1, does OP have all those mods? Has any other non supercharged M ran faster than 116mph?

The car in the vid is mine, FWIW it made roughly 370whp on a DJ, others have made near 400, based on what we've seen lately the OP is probably making more power than I was then, 2 years ago. That day at Sacramento the DA was negative which certainly helps a lot, my best trap that day was 119.8. A bone stock GTR 2009, trapped 118 at Sacramento. In positive DA I hit 116MPH. Erm324 trapped 116 in positive DA as well, in negative DA or near sea level FBO DCT's can go higher but I'm not sure how many have actually gone, or if they ran on proper tires, etc. Before you start to question DA and how big of a factor it is, take a look at a stock C6 Z06 times, which have gone 128+ bone stock in good air, and 130 with DR's only, and as low as 117MPH in poor DA, a 10+MPH trap difference.

Originally Posted by Baggy_M

NO.. which is funny, because that's the same answer to this question-can a N/A m3 beat a gtr in a roll, if the gtr is trying?

Yes an NA M3 with FBO's can and has pulled on a 485HP Stock GTR from a roll and they have ran faster or similar 60-130's. I think it's very fair to say with certainty and it has been proven that a FBO DCT and a stock 485HP GTR are close and it could probably go either way, that is all we are talking about here.

[Rekrul]

Originally Posted by DLSJ5

The car in the vid is mine, FWIW it made roughly 370whp on a DJ, others have made near 400, based on what we've seen lately the OP is probably making more power than I was then, 2 years ago. That day at Sacramento the DA was negative which certainly helps a lot, my best trap that day was 119.8. A bone stock GTR 2009, trapped 118 at Sacramento. In positive DA I hit 116MPH. Erm324 trapped 116 in positive DA as well, in negative DA or near sea level FBO DCT's can go higher but I'm not sure how many have actually gone, or if they ran on proper tires, etc. Before you start to question DA and how big of a factor it is, take a look at a stock C6 Z06 times, which have gone 128+ bone stock in good air, and 130 with DR's only, and as low as 117MPH in poor DA, a 10+MPH trap difference.



Yes an NA M3 with FBO's can and has pulled on a 485HP Stock GTR from a roll and they have ran faster or similar 60-130's. I think it's very fair to say with certainty and it has been proven that a FBO DCT and a stock 485HP GTR are close and it could probably go either way, that is all we are talking about here.

Thanks for chiming in brother. Baggy M, just got a teabag of epic proportions .

[KROD]

I have owned both an 09 GTR and two 08 e92 m3's.....the GTR is faster than almost anything on the street off the line. If from a roll, especially in third gear onward or if cruising at freeway speeds, the GTR is not very fast. Ive been beaten by a ton of v8's including a dodge challenger on the freeway. The TT V6 just cannot hang from a roll with most of the larger displacement motors. Now with an xpipe and Cobb tune it puts a stock 09 well over the 2012/2013 GTR power numbers. Its just a different type of car. I didnt like the way it shifted or how slow it was up top but I loved the awd grip and backseat tq when accelerating and the looks. The m3 is just a better DD and in my opinion feels/handles better on the road.

[swamp2]

I can see why there is controversy here. However, the name calling is also getting pretty out of control. No reason to get the mods here shutting down an otherwise good thread. Let's keep the ego's and ad hominem in check.

Originally Posted by Rekrul

You are aware that I am probably at 470+hp at the moment? The GTR is at 480? has more drive train loss as well.

Originally Posted by Rekrul

AKRA slip on (+3-5whp), Dinan X pipe(20-25whp), ESS catless 93 tune with 231E(20whp), AA Green filter(3-5whp on 08/09). What does that add up to? 55whp in absolute ideal conditions, 46whp absolute minimum.

Originally Posted by Rekrul

LOL? Are you serious? 20whp gain from a full cat less has been verified. Tune should gain 15whp easy. Those are conservative estimates as well. I had the old charcoal filter as well, which I replaced with the AA green filter. Do the math. What do stock M3's dyno? 340-350whp? Add 35whp to that. Thats 375-385whp.

Which is it, do you have 470 crank hp or 375-385 whp? They are not at all the same. My best estimates of the M3 drivetrain loss (and accessories) is 12%. That is consistent with the measurements from RRI.se (very respected and accurate hub dyno).

You're also certainly aware that stated manufacturer hp gains do not tend to be fully additive when used in combination? I'd also almost guarantee you don't get 10 crank hp from a filter and cat back. I'd guess you are at maybe 460 whp but with only 12% loss that is 405 whp.

Other relevant points:

We've discussed in great deal here on the forums how DCT is very equivalent to quite a bit of hp. Estimates have been from 20 all the way to 50, but something in that range is realistic. However, in this case both cars have DCT so that is a wash.

The GT-R except from a dig has a smart enough drive train to act/perform nearly identically to a RWD from a roll, thus the point about AWD being high loss is mostly irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Alex07M3

Then maybe you're not aware the M3 is DCT and has FBO.

I think stated elsewhere but not it DOES NOT, no pulley.

Originally Posted by Rekrul

Given the math that 10whp = 1 mph increase in trap.

Very approximate. Your +45 hp probably will buy you about 4 mph rather than 4.5. Perhaps splitting hairs, but also over a 10% difference.

Originally Posted by Baggy_M

Stock m3's trap 112 ish. Stock 09 gtrs are at 118-120
You do not have 40 HP over stock with primary cats and a tune. I would be pleasantly surprised if you even trap 115. Or dyno above 365.
You may have "won" that race due to driver error., but don't expect to ever win again if the gtr is driven correctly

I think he'll could trap around 117. Would certainly depend on weather, tires and skill. Dyno's suck pretty bad so I won't comment on that directly, but as mentioned above he could be as high as 460 crank hp.

Originally Posted by Alex07M3

A couple of M3s with bolt-ons have done more then 400whp and I don't think an M3 DCT needs more then that to be as fast as a stock 09 GT-R on the highway. I also think that 1/4mile is not really representative of what a M3 will do on the highway because it's missing a bit of torque compared to a GT-R, but on the higher gears,that torque does'nt do much, I think a V8 RWD will keep accelarating more easily then a V6 AWD!

Agree with the first part, however, the reason the GT-R gets the jump in any drag race is mainly due to AWD and its traction. Torque is rather meaningless with regards to vehicle performance but that is another topic and one that has been debated here somewhat endlessly in the past... Of course performance has nothing to do with engine configuration.... Ugh.

Originally Posted by pbonsalb

GTR has torque also. The best a naturally aspirated modded M3 does is about the worst a GTR does. But turbo cars can sometimes be down on power for heat related issues. I won't say it is not impossible for a modded M3 to beat a stock GTR, but it is uncommon and I will guess the GTR was not performing perfectly.

I agree with this basic statement above. My detailed argument for it follows just a bit later.

One thing being left out is the M3 ALSO HAD A PASSENGER. So much for the full weight difference between stock cars...

Below are some simulations from CarTest. It has proven to be quite accurate by multiple board members. It is based on fundamental physics and engineering; actual weight, power (vs rpm), gearing, wheelspin, AWD effects, shift speeds, aero loads, tire losses, etc. From left to right are:

• Stock M3 M-DCT
• M3 M-DCT, 460 crank hp
• M3 M-DCT with 160 lb passenger (that costs about 1/2 second in 60-130 and 1.5 sec in 1/4 mi)
• Stock GT-R

Let's judge the overall accuracy of the simulations for all cars less the one with extra passenger just on 0-60, 0-100, 1/4 mile time and trap. They all look very reasonable with correspondence to many stated times/traps here in this thread.

Let's say this was more or less a 60-130 race. Recreating this race as best as possible we find:

Modded 460hp M3 M-DCT with passenger: 11.4 s
Stock GT-R, no passenger: 10.7 s

It appears that:

• The M3 in question has much more than 460 hp (very unlikely)
• GT-R had a really heavy passenger (very unlikely)
• M3 got a good jump (reasonable)
• GT-R was not driven well (reasonable)
• GT-R was not performing well

[Rekrul]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I can see why there is controversy here. However, the name calling is also getting pretty out of control. No reason to get the mods here shutting down an otherwise good thread. Let's keep the ego's and ad hominem in check.







Which is it, do you have 470 crank hp or 375-385 whp? They are not at all the same. My best estimates of the M3 drivetrain loss (and accessories) is 12%. That is consistent with the measurements from RRI.se (very respected and accurate hub dyno).

You're also certainly aware that stated manufacturer hp gains do not tend to be fully additive when used in combination? I'd also almost guarantee you don't get 10 crank hp from a filter and cat back. I'd guess you are at maybe 460 whp but with only 12% loss that is 405 whp.

Other relevant points:

We've discussed in great deal here on the forums how DCT is very equivalent to quite a bit of hp. Estimates have been from 20 all the way to 50, but something in that range is realistic. However, in this case both cars have DCT so that is a wash.

The GT-R except from a dig has a smart enough drive train to act/perform nearly identically to a RWD from a roll, thus the point about AWD being high loss is mostly irrelevant.



I think stated elsewhere but not it DOES NOT, no pulley.



Very approximate. Your +45 hp probably will buy you about 4 mph rather than 4.5. Perhaps splitting hairs, but also over a 10% difference.



I think he'll could trap around 117. Would certainly depend on weather, tires and skill. Dyno's suck pretty bad so I won't comment on that directly, but as mentioned above he could be as high as 460 crank hp.



Agree with the first part, however, the reason the GT-R gets the jump in any drag race is mainly due to AWD and its traction. Torque is rather meaningless with regards to vehicle performance but that is another topic and one that has been debated here somewhat endlessly in the past... Of course performance has nothing to do with engine configuration.... Ugh.



I agree with this basic statement above. My detailed argument for it follows just a bit later.

One thing being left out is the M3 ALSO HAD A PASSENGER. So much for the full weight difference between stock cars...

Below are some simulations from CarTest. It has proven to be quite accurate by multiple board members. It is based on fundamental physics and engineering; actual weight, power (vs rpm), gearing, wheelspin, AWD effects, shift speeds, aero loads, tire losses, etc. From left to right are:

• Stock M3 M-DCT
• M3 M-DCT, 460 crank hp
• M3 M-DCT with 160 lb passenger (that costs about 1/2 second in 60-130 and 1.5 sec in 1/4 mi)
• Stock GT-R

Let's judge the overall accuracy of the simulations for all cars less the one with extra passenger just on 0-60, 0-100, 1/4 mile time and trap. They all look very reasonable with correspondence to many stated times/traps here in this thread.

Let's say this was more or less a 60-130 race. Recreating this race as best as possible we find:

Modded 460hp M3 M-DCT with passenger: 11.4 s
Stock GT-R, no passenger: 10.7 s

It appears that:

• The M3 in question has much more than 460 hp (very unlikely)
• GT-R had a really heavy passenger (very unlikely)
• M3 got a good jump (reasonable)
• GT-R was not driven well (reasonable)
• GT-R was not performing well

Very nice post. Your simulated times indicate that it would be a dead heat with no passenger. Which is essentially what I have been saying. Is is possible the driver was a bit of a moron? Or he was experiencing heat soak? Yes. Above car had a pulley but was catted as well, cat less should make up the differential in the pulleys. I will get a dyno in the next month for sure.

[tibra1]

Originally Posted by Singletrack

this thread is ghey; there I said it. Can we go back to arguing about no low end torque now please?

Fixed

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Rekrul

Very nice post. Your simulated times indicate that it would be a dead heat with no passenger. Which is essentially what I have been saying.

Thanks.

Not quite though, you have been saying your win is completely justified "by the numbers" which I and others are skeptical of.

Originally Posted by Rekrul

Above car had a pulley but was catted as well, cat less should make up the differential in the pulleys. I will get a dyno in the next month for sure.

Which car had a pulley? I have only been referencing your car. Don't get too excited about a dyno. I think real work performance metrics mean much more. Dynos can be made to do anything one wants and always have a somewhat arbitrary loss correction. If you can find a dyno accurate and repeatable enough to help you tune though, then surely those RELATIVE numbers are useful.

[Verify]

Rekrul. Talk all you want, because you will not trap 118+, go hit a dyno and post results, go race a stock 09 gtr. You will be heartbroken. Hell, where exactly is purgatory. I would love to show how not fast your car really is.

If your feable mind can process that BTW.
Oh, and teabagged? Yup, you sir are a gentleman and a scholar. I'm pretty sure your last car had a "vtec inside" logo on it.

[Rekrul]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Thanks.

Not quite though, you have been saying your win is completely justified "by the numbers" which I and others are skeptical of.



Which car had a pulley? I have only been referencing your car. Don't get too excited about a dyno. I think real work performance metrics mean much more. Dynos can be made to do anything one wants and always have a somewhat arbitrary loss correction. If you can find a dyno accurate and repeatable enough to help you tune though, then surely those RELATIVE numbers are useful.

What I've essentially been saying is this race is very close and isn't a blow out as the genius Baggy M seems to think. 1-2mph trap difference can be negated by a number of things. As the other chap who chimed in made 370ish whp and he was catted trapped at 119. Your simulation is nice, but it certainly could be off by 1-2mph... a stock 09 GTR doesn't trap above 120. We are talking a difference in milliseconds..so I don't think anyone here can say that it is a fluke of a win, it is very plausible.

[Rekrul]

Originally Posted by Baggy_M

Rekrul. Talk all you want, because you will not trap 118+, go hit a dyno and post results, go race a stock 09 gtr. You will be heartbroken. Hell, where exactly is purgatory. I would love to show how not fast your car really is.

If your feable mind can process that BTW.
Oh, and teabagged? Yup, you sir are a gentleman and a scholar. I'm pretty sure your last car had a "vtec inside" logo on it.

Actually my second car did have Vtec in it, was my 2nd favorite car... 97 prelude type SH. So what mods do you have again big boy? IF I'm feeble minded, what does that make you? You can't process simple logic, videos, and numbers... you're a simian.

For your safety it's probably better than neither one of us knows where I live LOL... you're an annoying little one. Let me guess you're a manlet?

[CanAutM3]

Just savor your win over the GTR

[Alex07M3]

Originally Posted by Baggy_M

Rekrul. Talk all you want, because you will not trap 118+, go hit a dyno and post results, go race a stock 09 gtr. You will be heartbroken. Hell, where exactly is purgatory. I would love to show how not fast your car really is.

If your feable mind can process that BTW.
Oh, and teabagged? Yup, you sir are a gentleman and a scholar. I'm pretty sure your last car had a "vtec inside" logo on it.

I think he already did, not like you!

[M3PO]

I'm with swamp on this one. I'm very skeptical that this is "very plausible". I think it was a fluke instead.

[Alex07M3]

Originally Posted by M3PO

I'm with swamp on this one. I'm very skeptical that this is "very plausible". I think it was a fluke instead.

With all due respect, have you at least run against a GT-R on the highway or seen one flooring, pretty sure not cause you would've probably been surprised how slower then its reputation it is??!

Also I hope you understand that Rekrulls M3 is a lot faster then a stock M3. Personnally, as soon as I've raced my friends GT-R I started to think that a cathless/tuned DCT would probably be as fast as him and now a couple of weeks later, Rekrul arrives with this story, that's why I believe him.