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) > M3 vs....
 
Evolve Automotive
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      03-20-2008, 10:06 PM   #1
gbb357
Captain
 
Drives: IS300
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New York

Posts: 707
iTrader: (0)

GTR beats 911TT and Z06: from Road&Track

911 Turbo:
Points: 380.7
Lap Times: 2:02.1
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=6593
Quote:
The 911 Turbo's price tag of $135,470 immediately puts it at a disadvantage in this test...the reality is that's the price one pays to drive, and be seen driving, Zuffenhausen's best. But when it comes to just the numbers, Japan's new super coupe has caught and surpassed the German thunder car, meaning that now, when you say Porsche, there is a substitute.
Z06 Corvette:
Points: 384.2
Lap Times: 2:02.2
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=6592
Quote:
We all agreed that the Corvette is the best-looking of the bunch. Its low, wide stance instantly implies that it means business. And when you consider its price tag of $79,595, the Corvette Z06 is still one of the best deals on the planet...only now, it may have company.
Nissan GTR:
Points: 386.6
Lap Times: 1:56.9
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=6591
Quote:
As for the car's styling, we like it, although there are others who feel that it looks too robot-like. But the bottom line here has little to do with the car's looks and everything to do with how it performed. Simply put, the GT-R is the most potent automobile to ever come from Japan, and will surely have manufacturers in America and Europe rethinking their ways. If it weren't for the car's $69,850 asking price (an estimated $72,880 for our test car) and the fact it wears a Nissan badge the GT-R might well be considered the most exotic car on the planet.
gbb357 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-20-2008, 11:39 PM   #2
chicagobimmerboy
First Lieutenant
 
chicagobimmerboy's Avatar
 
Drives: Un esotico Italiano ;)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago suburbs

Posts: 363
iTrader: (0)

apparently V-Spec, V-Spec II and Nur-Spec models will follow, more power and lighter wieght. Be interesting to see how Porsche reacts in the coming years, this battle after all really is with Porsche and Nissan, these other cars are just in the way.
chicagobimmerboy is offline   Italy
0
Reply With Quote
      03-20-2008, 11:39 PM   #3
swamp2
Lieutenant General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 10,062
iTrader: (1)

Nice review, the accolades keep piling up. The most interesting points to me were (not in any particular order):

1. Worst gearbox rating. Hard to believe they did not nail the gearbox as well as they could have.
2. Worst ride by far. The adjustability of the suspension should have made this not the case.
3. Total dominance on steering, brakes and handling. Nice.
4. Weight as tested, 3960. This sucker is 2 full tons. I guess we have to get used to the idea that engineering can seriously "hide" mass from a handling perspective. Impressive.
5. Explanation of track times. Even the Nissan engineer said "we don't defy physics with the GT-R, we just apply it properly". However, despite this retort directly attacking the skeptics/attackers of the car, it was noted that the ATTESA system as well as the GT-R's "STICKY TIRES" contributed to its lap times. Again my suspicion is here (as it has been all along) that these tires are MPSC sticky or better. We all know how key tires are on a track and this is surely part of the magic here.
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 12:03 AM   #4
BlackJetE90
Colonel
 
Drives: E90
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: e90

Posts: 2,219
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagobimmerboy View Post
this battle after all really is with Porsche and Nissan, these other cars are just in the way.
Not according to the test. Z06 did GREAT.
BlackJetE90 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 01:30 AM   #5
gbb357
Captain
 
Drives: IS300
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New York

Posts: 707
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Nice review, the accolades keep piling up. The most interesting points to me were (not in any particular order):

1. Worst gearbox rating. Hard to believe they did not nail the gearbox as well as they could have.
2. Worst ride by far. The adjustability of the suspension should have made this not the case.
3. Total dominance on steering, brakes and handling. Nice.
4. Weight as tested, 3960. This sucker is 2 full tons. I guess we have to get used to the idea that engineering can seriously "hide" mass from a handling perspective. Impressive.
5. Explanation of track times. Even the Nissan engineer said "we don't defy physics with the GT-R, we just apply it properly". However, despite this retort directly attacking the skeptics/attackers of the car, it was noted that the ATTESA system as well as the GT-R's "STICKY TIRES" contributed to its lap times. Again my suspicion is here (as it has been all along) that these tires are MPSC sticky or better. We all know how key tires are on a track and this is surely part of the magic here.
That weight is just ridiculous. 3960! Don't mean to bring it up again, but i'm almost starting to really have doubts about the 480hp rating.

Last edited by gbb357; 03-21-2008 at 02:10 AM.
gbb357 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 01:38 AM   #6
gbb357
Captain
 
Drives: IS300
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New York

Posts: 707
iTrader: (0)

It is amazing how the GTR beat both cars by 6 seconds, especially the 911TT. BTW, regardless of the results, it's still a Porsche. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE!

Last edited by gbb357; 03-21-2008 at 02:27 AM.
gbb357 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 02:01 PM   #7
swamp2
Lieutenant General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 10,062
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gbb357 View Post
That weight is just ridiculous. 3960! Don't mean to bring it up again, but i'm almost starting to really have doubts about the 480hp rating.
Good. That means we are getting closer and closer to agreement; each sort of moving toward the middle ground. Because I am having more confidence and being more and more impressed with the chassis, ATTESA-ETS, VDC-R, etc.
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 02:06 PM   #8
!Xoible
Banned
 
Drives: ....
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: .

Posts: 46,037
iTrader: (4)

Garage List
2008 M3  [3.50]
2007 335i  [4.50]
2008 528i  [4.00]
2006 Infiniti - G35 ...  [4.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbb357 View Post
That weight is just ridiculous. 3960! Don't mean to bring it up again, but i'm almost starting to really have doubts about the 480hp rating.
means its chassis/drivetrain overs very minimal power loss, engine very responsive, and im sure turbo lag is minimized (actually havent read any turbo reviews on the car)

OMG!!! i wish that car came with 6MT
!Xoible is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 04:09 PM   #9
gbb357
Captain
 
Drives: IS300
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New York

Posts: 707
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Good. That means we are getting closer and closer to agreement; each sort of moving toward the middle ground. Because I am having more confidence and being more and more impressed with the chassis, ATTESA-ETS, VDC-R, etc.
Just almost Swamp. I still prefer and believe that it is not under-rated. But with the 6 seconds advantage and 500lbs heavier against the 911TT, it almost seems impossible not to be.
gbb357 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 05:26 PM   #10
rai
Captain
 
rai's Avatar
 
Drives: M3 coupe with DCT
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: maryland

Posts: 634
iTrader: (0)

just to point out the 'curb weight' is 38xx as they list. the test weight includes the driver and equipment etc..

Interesting to note the 911 turbo curb weight was 3550 which is about the same as the M3 (curb weight from various magazines)

Last edited by rai; 03-21-2008 at 05:46 PM.
rai is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 05:26 PM   #11
spearfisher
Lieutenant
 
spearfisher's Avatar
 
Drives: C6 ZO6
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: FL

Posts: 409
iTrader: (0)

for what the GTR weighs, very impressive
spearfisher is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 05:40 PM   #12
devo
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: .2GT3/335Cpe/991 GT3 coming
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: thinking about cars, girls and money, not necessarily in that order.

Posts: 1,942
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by rai View Post
just to point out the 'curb weight' is 38xx as they list. the test weight includes the driver and equipment etc..

Interesting to note the 911 turbo curb weight was 3550 which is about the same as the M3
You wish the M3's curb weight was 3550.
devo is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 06:13 PM   #13
lucid
Major General
 
lucid's Avatar
 
Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

Posts: 8,034
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Good. That means we are getting closer and closer to agreement; each sort of moving toward the middle ground. Because I am having more confidence and being more and more impressed with the chassis, ATTESA-ETS, VDC-R, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbb357 View Post
Just almost Swamp. I still prefer and believe that it is not under-rated. But with the 6 seconds advantage and 500lbs heavier against the 911TT, it almost seems impossible not to be.
Gbb & Swamp, I am speechless. So you can kind of agree and get along after all!
__________________
lucid is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 07:45 PM   #14
gbb357
Captain
 
Drives: IS300
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New York

Posts: 707
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by rai View Post
just to point out the 'curb weight' is 38xx as they list. the test weight includes the driver and equipment etc..

Interesting to note the 911 turbo curb weight was 3550 which is about the same as the M3 (curb weight from various magazines)
You're right. I did'nt realize that 3960 is test weight and i forgot that the curb weight for the GTR is 3800lbs or just above it. Still, the 6 seconds over the 911TT is still mind boggling.
gbb357 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 07:48 PM   #15
gbb357
Captain
 
Drives: IS300
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New York

Posts: 707
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
Gbb & Swamp, I am speechless. So you can kind of agree and get along after all!
I know right, shocking. We can get along when we want to. And i genuinely would prefer and like to get along with everyone as much as possible.
gbb357 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 09:09 PM   #16
rai
Captain
 
rai's Avatar
 
Drives: M3 coupe with DCT
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: maryland

Posts: 634
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by devo View Post
You wish the M3's curb weight was 3550.
reading is a gift, I said the M3 is about the same as the 911 turbo. I didn't say I wish it weighed 3550, I said that is what has been reported (numerous) magazines have weighed the M3 and it has been under 3600 lbs which is indeed colse to the listed weight of the 911 turbo (from this test).

BMW lists M3 3700 with driver (that's not curb weight) btw.

Quote:
At 3571 pounds, the M3 is the lightest car here (243 fewer pounds than the RS 4 and, as noted, a whopping 463 pounds lighter than the C63

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...st+page-4.html

Maybe the sedan with 19" etc weighs 36xx lbs but from several magazines R&T, C&D etc.. which are weighing the cars (list curb weight with full gas)
rai is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 09:22 PM   #17
rai
Captain
 
rai's Avatar
 
Drives: M3 coupe with DCT
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: maryland

Posts: 634
iTrader: (0)

MT magazine lists the M3 sedan here as 3652 lbs (the sedan is slightly heaver than the coupe).

If the magazines are to be believed the M3 coupe is somewhere around 3600 lbs (some list less than that) which I did say is close to the listed 911 turbo 3550 lbs

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...fications.html
rai is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      03-21-2008, 09:51 PM   #18
rai
Captain
 
rai's Avatar
 
Drives: M3 coupe with DCT
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: maryland

Posts: 634
iTrader: (0)

interesting, I have thought of getting a GTR myself but seems to hard to get one at this time, may revisit it in a year or two. But the GTR is actually 3" longer than the M3 sedan and 3" wider yet it's rear seats are (about) the same size as the much smaller 911 turbo. It seems to have 7" less rear seat headroom as the M3 coupe (from the listed measurements) and the legroom is just an inch more than the 911 turbos.

Not that I think that's what the gtr is about just it's a massive car and yet very little or no room in the rear seat may as well be a 2-seater.

I think the M3 coupe while a lot different than Z06 or GTR etc. does have a big advantage with it's rear seats. I'm 6'2" and sat in the rear of the M3 coupe. didn't have a ton of room but the fact is I sat in the back so a small adult should have no problem. if there was 7" less headroom I'd have to lay down across the seat cos I would not fit a second in that.

In fact the cubic feet measurements the M3 is not a lot smaller than the M5. I know it's some smaller but it's not like one of those cars where even toddlers can not fit in the back.
rai is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      03-22-2008, 09:34 AM   #19
devo
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: .2GT3/335Cpe/991 GT3 coming
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: thinking about cars, girls and money, not necessarily in that order.

Posts: 1,942
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by rai View Post
reading is a gift, I said the M3 is about the same as the 911 turbo. I didn't say I wish it weighed 3550, I said that is what has been reported (numerous) magazines have weighed the M3 and it has been under 3600 lbs which is indeed colse to the listed weight of the 911 turbo (from this test).

BMW lists M3 3700 with driver (that's not curb weight) btw.




http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...st+page-4.html

Maybe the sedan with 19" etc weighs 36xx lbs but from several magazines R&T, C&D etc.. which are weighing the cars (list curb weight with full gas)
Well, maybe you are not a gifted as you might think. So, try not to get your panties in a bunch.

Although, true, my statement was made in jest. Maybe, I should have said we rather than I, as I am quite confident that all of us wish the M did weigh about 3550.

What you did say was: "Interesting to note the 911 turbo curb weight was 3550 which is about the same as the M3". (Of course, that was until you edited it.) The turbo is listed at 3495 on Porsche's website and the M3 at 3704 on BMW's website. What I find interesting is that Porsche can add two turbos, AWD, a sunroof, bigger brake calipers, wheels and tires and still come in lighter than the M; the disparity differs depending on the source. (Porsche and BMW may or may not manipulate their weights)

On a side note, I believe that much of the 5+ second advantage to the GT-R was due to the much stickier tires. The Bridgestones used on that car have more stick than Porsche's PS2s.

Last edited by devo; 03-22-2008 at 02:53 PM.
devo is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-22-2008, 09:44 AM   #20
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: Legacy GT - 13.704@99.39
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Manheim, PA

Posts: 1,868
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
Good. That means we are getting closer and closer to agreement; each sort of moving toward the middle ground. Because I am having more confidence and being more and more impressed with the chassis, ATTESA-ETS, VDC-R, etc.
I'm happy myself.

Doing the old tried and true analysis of trap speeds on these cars (tested together under the same weather conditions) shows that they tend toward accurate ratings.

Using the more than 50 year old (and basic) formula of trap speed divided by the constant 234, result cubed, times the tested weight gives the following:

Z06 - 495 HP
GT-R - 489 HP
Porsche Turbo - 516 HP

The Z06 loses a little based on tire slip in first and second gears - and if you've ever driven one, you know exactly what I'm talking about. The GT-R gains a bit based on a killer launch (see the acceleration graph in the R & T data panel) and killer shifts from its gearbox. The Porsche gains its advantage via the Sport Chrono package that gives you just over 500 pound feet of torque for most or all of the run, instead of its 457 ft/lb rating.

In short, no harm, no foul. Everybody's being pretty straight up on the power ratings. Not surprising, given SAE (and I assume DIN) rules.

Looking further at that graph from the data panel, it's clear that if you're crusing along at 80 or so and a Z06 pulls alongside, better start screwing with the radio rather than getting exhaust blown in your face if you're in either of the other cars. Likewise, if you're at a light in either of the other cars and a GT-R pulls up, better start looking for that hard-to-find jazz station until the Nissan is safely away and the folks behind you start to honk.

On a related topic and based on these results, it looks as if footie was right and I was wrong in regard to Nissan hobbling the GT-R's launch control for the U.S.

I am very pleased about that, and glad I didn't wager something on the outcome.

Bruce

Last edited by bruce.augenstein@comcast.; 03-22-2008 at 09:53 AM. Reason: Grammar
bruce.augenstein@comcast. is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      03-22-2008, 02:24 PM   #21
swamp2
Lieutenant General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 10,062
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast. View Post
...
The Porsche gains its advantage via the Sport Chrono package that gives you just over 500 pound feet of torque for most or all of the run, instead of its 457 ft/lb rating.
...
If the SC package delivers more torque over that broad of an rpm range the hp must increase in about the same ratio. Have you seen a dyno run for the SC package. Could it be that the torque is onlydelivered so low in rpm that the peak hp is not affected much?
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      03-22-2008, 02:39 PM   #22
devo
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: .2GT3/335Cpe/991 GT3 coming
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: thinking about cars, girls and money, not necessarily in that order.

Posts: 1,942
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
If the SC package delivers more torque over that broad of an rpm range the hp must increase in about the same ratio. Have you seen a dyno run for the SC package. Could it be that the torque is onlydelivered so low in rpm that the peak hp is not affected much?
With SC engaged low to mid-range hp is increased, however peak hp of 480 is not exceeded. I have seen dyno sheets which validate this. The gains are modest, but worthy nonetheless. (Torque increases from 457 to 505.) Over-boost is achieved between 2100 and 4000 rpms. After 4000 rpms, boost tapers off until 5000 rpms where boost returns to the normal output. The only way to activate over-boost is by fully depressing the throttle (between 2100 and 4000). The car must be equipped with the OPTIONAL Sport Chrono package.

In most races, SC is relatively moot, as the revs never dip below 4000 rpms except from the dig. Although, SC is active while tapering down between 4000-5000 rpms, it can not be activated by merely dipping below 5000. The extra boost is only available for 10 second bursts, which is far more than what is needed.

The power of the turbo is so linear that you do not realize the extra torque/hp of SC. It justs feel like any time warp machine when you pin the go pedal.

Last edited by devo; 03-22-2008 at 02:54 PM.
devo is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:24 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, 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