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)
 
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      06-13-2007, 07:48 PM   #1
T Bone
Brigadier General
T Bone's Avatar
143
Rep
4,021
Posts

 
Drives: 2008 335xi Coupe
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The land where we kill baby seals

iTrader: (0)

Official BMW Nordschliefe Times

Found on www.bmw.ca

Go to the M3 Flash applet and explore the M3. Under Performance and then Nordscliefe, the official time for the M3 is 8:12 on standard tires.
__________________
"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2007, 07:53 PM   #2
Epacy
Reincarnated
Epacy's Avatar
88
Rep
4,227
Posts

 
Drives: 02 Maxima SE
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: IL

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 M3  [0.00]
With standard tires.
That big list that people put up about all the times, did all the other cars use special tires?
__________________
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2007, 07:58 PM   #3
jpan08
Second Lieutenant
jpan08's Avatar
2
Rep
209
Posts

 
Drives: e36 M3, e92 M3, Ninja 300
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Hartford, CT/ Boston, MA

iTrader: (0)

i don't get it
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2007, 08:02 PM   #4
T Bone
Brigadier General
T Bone's Avatar
143
Rep
4,021
Posts

 
Drives: 2008 335xi Coupe
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The land where we kill baby seals

iTrader: (0)

Hyperlink

Here is the hyperlink

http://www.bmw.com/ca/en/index_highe.../xml/popup.xml

Standard tires just means the tires that come with the car. No R compounds.

I don't know if the RS4's 8:09 was done on R compounds. Don't know if the M3 time was done when the track had grip (i.e. not winter).
__________________
"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2007, 08:04 PM   #5
Epacy
Reincarnated
Epacy's Avatar
88
Rep
4,227
Posts

 
Drives: 02 Maxima SE
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: IL

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 M3  [0.00]
Link to previous discussion HERE

Some times:

8:05 --- 152.907 km/h -- Porsche 997 Carrera S, 355PS/1461kg (sport auto 05/05),
8:07.76 152.041 km/h -- BMW M6, 507 PS/1761 kg, Prinz Luitpold von Bayern (AutoBild 02/06)
8:09 --- 151.656 km/h – Audi RS4, 420 PS/1728 kg (sport auto 06/06)
8:09 --- 151.656 km/h -- BMW M6, 507 PS/1761 kg (sport auto 12/05)
8:12 --- 150.732 km/h -- Mercedes Benz SL55 AMG, 476 PS/1651 kg (sport auto 04/02)
8:12 --- 150.732 km/h -- Porsche 993 Turbo (sport auto 03/97)
8:12 --- 150.732 km/h -- Porsche 993 Turbo works tuning (sport auto 06/97)
8:33 --- 150.426 km/h – Aston Martin V8 Vantage, 385 PS/1636 kg, Bridgestone Potenza RE 50 (sport auto 10/05)
8:13 --- 150.426 km/h -- BMW M5 (E60), 507 PS/1844 kg (sport auto 12/04)
8:13 --- 150.426 km/h -- Lotus Esprit Sport 350, 354 PS/1324 kg (sport auto 05/99)
8:13 --- 150.426 km/h -- Dodge Viper SRT-10, 506 hp (sport auto, 10/04)
8:14 --- 150.120 km/h -- Mercedes SL 65 AMG, 612 PS/2049 kg (sport auto 01/05), 8:14 --- 150.120 km/h -- Steinmetz Opel Astra OPC, 285 PS/1418 kg (sport auto Tuning 07),
8:14.98 149.824 km/h -- Mitsubishi Carisma Evo VIII GSR MR 8 (Best Motoring video "Carrera Invasion")
8:15 --- 149.818 km/h – BMW Z4 M Roadster, 343 PS/1485 kg,
8:15 --- 149.818 km/h -- Alpina Roadster S, 300 PS/1416 kg (sport auto 6/05),
8:15 --- 149.818 km/h -- Corvette C6, 404 PS/1491 kg (sport auto 08/05), 8:15* -- 149.818 km/h -- Holden GTS (00), *estimated
8:15 --- 149.818 km/h -- Porsche 997 Carrera 2, Walter Roehrl (WHEELS 06/04)
8:15 --- 149.818 km/h -- Ruf 911 CTR 2, 520 hp
8:16 --- 149.516 km/h -- AC-Schnitzer M3 CLS II E36, 350 PS (sport auto 11/97)8:16 --- 149.516 km/h -- AC-Schnitzer V8 Topster, 450 PS/1557kg (sport auto 01/05)
8:16 --- 149.516 km/h -- Aston Martin DB9, 457hp (sport auto 11/04)
8:16.15 149.471 km/h -- Honda NSX (Best Motoring video "Carrera Invasion")
8:17 --- 149.215 km/h -- Aston Martin V12 Vanquish, 515 PS/1775 kg (sport auto 01/03)
8:17 --- 149.215 km/h -- Porsche 911 Carrera, 320 PS/1399 kg (sport auto 06/01)
8:18 --- 149.916 km/h -- BMW Z8, 400PS/1651 kg (sport auto 08/00)8:18 --- 149.916 km/h -- Chevrolet Corvette Z05 Commemorative Edition, 344 PS (sport auto 09/2003)
8:18 --- 149.916 km/h -- Ferrari F355, 380 PS/1350 kg (sport auto 06/97)
8:18 --- 149.916 km/h -- Maserati GranSport, 400 PS/1672 kg (sport auto 09/05)
8:20 --- 148.320 km/h -- Audi RS6, 400 PS/ 1815 kg (sport auto 03/01)
8:20 --- 148.320 km/h -- BMW M3 E36, 321 hp (Autocar magazine 1997)
8:20 --- 148.320 km/h -- Porche 993 GT3, Walter Roehrl (Car magazine 10/99)
8:22 --- 147.749 km/h -- BMW M3 E46, 343 PS/1584 kg (sport auto 12/00)
8:22 --- 147.749 km/h -- BMW M Coupe, 321 PS/1445 kg (sport auto 10/98)
8:22 --- 147.749 km/h -- Mercedes-Benz C55 (sport auto07/2004)8:22.38 147.617 km/h -- Nissan Skyline R32 GTR (Best Motoring video "Carrera Invasion")
8:23 --- 147.435 km/h -- Aston Martin DB7 GT, 442 PS/1833 kg (sport auto 07/03)
8:23 --- 147.435 km/h -- Porsche Boxster S, 280 PS/1426 kg (sport auto 04/06)
8:23 --- 147.435 km/h -- Porsche 996 Carrera 4, 300 PS/1466 kg (sport auto 01/02)
8:24 --- 147.143 km/h -- Mercedes SLK 55 AMG, 360PS/1566kg (sport auto 04/05),
8:24 --- 147.143 km/h -- Subaru Impreza WRX STi (sport auto 05/04)
8:25 --- 146.851 km/h -- Audi RS4, 375 PS/1675 kg (sport auto 10/00)
8:25* -- 146.851 km/h – 2007 BMW M5 Touring, 507 PS (*mfr.)
8:25 --- 146.851 km/h -- Corvette Callaway C12, 400 PS/1564 kg (sport auto 04/99)
8:25 --- 146.851 km/h – Jaguar XKR, 416 PS/1775 kg (sport auto 11/06) 8:25 --- 146.851 km/h – Maybach 57 S, 612 PS/2835 kg
8:25 --- 146.851 km/h -- Mitsubishi Carisma GT Evo VI, 300 PS/1466 kg (sport auto 11/99)
8:25 --- 146.851 km/h -- Mitsubishi Carisma GT Evo VII (sport auto 11/02)
8:25 --- 146.851 km/h – Porsche Cayman S, 295 PS/1412 kg (sport auto 11/06),
8:26 --- 146.561 km/h – BMW 335i Coupé, 306 PS/1610 kg (sport auto 10/06),
__________________
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2007, 08:11 PM   #6
Epacy
Reincarnated
Epacy's Avatar
88
Rep
4,227
Posts

 
Drives: 02 Maxima SE
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: IL

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 M3  [0.00]
8:12 was originally reported months ago as the simulation ran on the M3 motor. Not sure if it is the end-all official time.

This was quoted from another forum

FWIW, the RS4's time was done with carbon ceramic brakes, and pirelli near-racing-slick tires
__________________
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2007, 09:43 PM   #7
JEllis
Brigadier General
JEllis's Avatar
84
Rep
4,780
Posts

 
Drives: E36 M3, E92 M3
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SD CA/Yuma

iTrader: (4)

The time of 8:12 has been around for months and at best is a time posted by a mule on a hot run of the ring. I highly doubt this will be the official time to for the production M3.

Jason
__________________
http://www.m3post.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic14547_7.gif
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 01:47 AM   #8
lucid
Major General
lucid's Avatar
United_States
116
Rep
8,034
Posts

 
Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

I don't get these times at all. They imply so much precision (well maybe they don't, but people sure read a lot into them), but there are so many uncontrolled variables. Tires and weather have been mentioned in this thread. Another huge variable is driver; one can easily see a 30+ second difference on the very same car due to that. So, why are people so worked up about all this?
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 02:09 AM   #9
Rob66
Enlisted Member
6
Rep
34
Posts

 
Drives: Audi S5, MB CLK 320,
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Graz, Austria

iTrader: (0)

Ok, but this 8min12sec time for new M3...

...is on the official BMW-page, so we have to believe this.
This time looks a little dissapointing to me,
the (older) RS4 was 3 seconds faster, and in that RS4 sport-auto-test they mentioned, that the Pirellis went well on the wet track also, you canīt compare them with the Michelin Semi-slicks from M3 CSL, which were only made for dry track!


MfG Robert
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 02:50 AM   #10
lucid
Major General
lucid's Avatar
United_States
116
Rep
8,034
Posts

 
Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob66 View Post
...is on the official BMW-page, so we have to believe this.
I don't see how that addresses the issue of uncontrolled variables (again such as weather, tires, driver, etc...)
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 03:11 AM   #11
Rob66
Enlisted Member
6
Rep
34
Posts

 
Drives: Audi S5, MB CLK 320,
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Graz, Austria

iTrader: (0)

Of course you canīt compare exactly the times...

....but I canīt imagine that BMW will advertise a lap-time from a bad driver on a wet, cold or dirty track.

So some seconds up or down are maybe still possible, but it shows in which time-area we have to expect the new M3:
M5 E60: 1 second slower
M6: 3 seconds faster
Carrera 997S: 7 seconds faster
M3 CSL: 22 seconds faster

Greetings Robert
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 03:19 AM   #12
southlight
Moderator / European Editor
southlight's Avatar
605
Rep
6,748
Posts

 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bimmerwithholes View Post
no
at least for official time
RS4's 8:09 is stock tire
no
at least for RS4.
The 8:09 was achieved by german sportauto with Pirelli Zero Corsa tires.

Best regards, south
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 03:32 AM   #13
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

MAJOR disappointment

This is a major disappointment, but I do think there is still a shred of hope. For one this is only the BMW Canada site not BMW Corporate. That does make it less "official". By the way, I'd like more clear instructions on how to get to the exact page - I couldn't find it.

Now all that being said, if the number is "official": There is no reason the M3 shouldn't beat the 8:09 time of the RS4 at least. Way better power to weight ratio, less drivetrain and parasitic power losses, more sorted chassis - should be an easy win. The other sub 8 minute RS4 time (not lised in the post above) was using special brakes and tires, I'm pretty sure. All vehicles are tested under the best conditions and with the best drivers possible. As many variables as possible are eliminated so the time reflects the best potential of the car much more so than any individual driver.

All you folks looking for these and other explanations - they are only excuses. If the time is official the car is a major let down, period.
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 03:36 AM   #14
southlight
Moderator / European Editor
southlight's Avatar
605
Rep
6,748
Posts

 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bimmerwithholes View Post
no...
Pirelli Corsa got a 7:58 Frank Stippler,
Sure
Which part of "RS4 did a 8:09 in sportauto supertest with Pirello Zero Corsa" did you not understand?

Best regards, south
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 03:39 AM   #15
southlight
Moderator / European Editor
southlight's Avatar
605
Rep
6,748
Posts

 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
This is a major disappointment, but I do think there is still a shred of hope. For one this is only the BMW Canada site not BMW Corporate. That does make it less "official". By the way, I'd like more clear instructions on how to get to the exact page - I couldn't find it.

Now all that being said, if the number is "official": There is no reason the M3 shouldn't beat the 8:09 time of the RS4 at least. Way better power to weight ratio, less drivetrain and parasitic power losses, more sorted chassis - should be an easy win. The other sub 8 minute RS4 time (not lised in the post above) was using special brakes and tires, I'm pretty sure. All vehicles are tested under the best conditions and with the best drivers possible. As many variables as possible are eliminated so the time reflects the best potential of the car much more so than any individual driver.

All you folks looking for these and other explanations - they are only excuses. If the time is official the car is a major let down, period.
Question left is, what's the time for RS4 on stock tires? Anybody?

Best regards, south
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 04:19 AM   #16
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

References, RS4 times, etc.

Here are the best references I can find:

http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?vie...ID=0&tID=10073

and the attached picture. Some say that the picture (Sport Auto magazine) is the most fair and definitive guide for N-ring times. Looks like some entries in the former are from the latter. It does look like the 8:09 RS4 time was with r-compound tires "mit Sportreifen" (right south?). However the Supercars site also has a 7:58 time for the RS4.

So here they are the RS4 times:
7:58 tires??
8:09 r-comps
8:25 NO r-comps

Even if you say 8:12 is so much better than 8:25 (perhaps the only true stock RS4 time). There are still those pesky Carrera S, Aston Vantage and SL55 AMG times ahead of the M3. I knew it would beat the non S Carrera but suspected it could surpass the S as well.

Maybe I am slightly less disappointed...
Attached Images
 
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 04:37 AM   #17
13eastie
Lieutenant
13eastie's Avatar
United Kingdom
19
Rep
563
Posts

 
Drives: 2007 E92 M3
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
We need objective figures, not "official" ones...

Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2 View Post
This is a major disappointment, but I do think there is still a shred of hope. For one this is only the BMW Canada site not BMW Corporate. That does make it less "official". By the way, I'd like more clear instructions on how to get to the exact page - I couldn't find it.

Now all that being said, if the number is "official": There is no reason the M3 shouldn't beat the 8:09 time of the RS4 at least. Way better power to weight ratio, less drivetrain and parasitic power losses, more sorted chassis - should be an easy win. The other sub 8 minute RS4 time (not lised in the post above) was using special brakes and tires, I'm pretty sure. All vehicles are tested under the best conditions and with the best drivers possible. As many variables as possible are eliminated so the time reflects the best potential of the car much more so than any individual driver.

All you folks looking for these and other explanations - they are only excuses. If the time is official the car is a major let down, period.
Perhaps, but there is, of course, a difference between official and objective. If no-one is able to better this time, then I agree it will be dissappointing.

But before we get downhearted, don't forget that the 8:12 time is hardly objective.

BMW may well have its own reasons for going with this time, for instance, to match the widely quoted 8:09 of the RS4 would also appear to match the Sport Auto time for the M6. (BMW apparently added two and a half minutes to Nick Heidfeld's lap in his F1 car! http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=5293).

Once the car is released to the press, they will be queueing up to post lap times as well as to run head-to-head with the RS4.

Will the speculation finally end? I doubt it
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 05:05 AM   #18
Rob66
Enlisted Member
6
Rep
34
Posts

 
Drives: Audi S5, MB CLK 320,
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Graz, Austria

iTrader: (0)

The problem for me is, that ...

...after the dream-time of M3 CSL (7min50sec) with almost slick-similiar tires, Sport Auto magazin started to meassure the cars also on a wet handling-track.
So it should be possible, to get a picture, if a car (and the tire)is only performed for dry conditions.

The times are:

911 GT3: 1 min 27,2 sec
911 GT3RS: 1 min 27,4 sec
Audi RS4: 1 min 27,5 sec
911 Carrera S: 1 min 28,4 sec
Cayman S: 1 min 29,1 sec
Murc. LP640: 1 min 29,2 sec
Maserati Gransp. 1 min 29,6 sec
Corvette C6 1 min 30,3 sec
BMW M6: 1 min 31,0 sec
Koenigsegg CCR: 1 min 33,5 sec
MB SL65 AMG: 1 min 35,6 sec
BMW 335i: 1 min 35,7 sec
BMW M5: 1 min 35,8 sec
MB CLK DTM AMG: 1 min 36,2 sec
M6 AC Schnitzer 1 min 36,5 sec
SLK 55 AMG: 1 Min 37,6 sec
Ferrari F430: 1 min 38,2 sec

So you can easy see, that RS4 and Porsche had a great performance on the wet handling track, but others like the F430 or the DTM AMG canīt follow a BMW 335i.

Also the Schnitzer M6, which is 12 seconds faster on Nordschleife as standard M6,is more then 5 sec slower on the wet-handling-track.

So there is no question for me, that the RS4 tires are a very good compromise for dry and wet conditions!


Greetings Robert
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 05:05 AM   #19
hks786
Major General
United Kingdom
478
Rep
5,352
Posts

 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

I wouldn't get too worked up about the figures yet, but I have to say they are quite dissapointing....

Anyway, comparing the E92 M3 to the RS4 is not the true comparison. The RS5 is the true M3 competitor so we'll really have to wait and see. The RS4 is the E90 M3 competitor...
__________________
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 05:11 AM   #20
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Indeed

Quote:
Originally Posted by 13eastie View Post
BMW may well have its own reasons for going with this time, for instance, to match the widely quoted 8:09 of the RS4 would also appear to match the Sport Auto time for the M6.
A fine point, just like BMW quoting 4.8 for 0-100. Conservative, perhaps, purposeful understimation, perhaps!
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 05:13 AM   #21
Rob66
Enlisted Member
6
Rep
34
Posts

 
Drives: Audi S5, MB CLK 320,
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Graz, Austria

iTrader: (0)

@swamp2

The 8 min 25 sec time from RS4 is from the year 2000,and of course this is not the actually RS4 V8.
This 8 min 25 sec should be the time of a normal S4 Sedan, because a heavier S4 Avant did it in 8 min 29 sec!

Greetings Robert
Appreciate 0
      06-14-2007, 05:43 AM   #22
ILC32
Lieutenant
ILC32's Avatar
18
Rep
580
Posts

 
Drives: 1993 Porsche RSA
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere

iTrader: (0)

To me the time is disappointing. One second better than the Z4M Roadster, and I would not be surprised if the Z M coupe equals or beats 8:12. The RS4 was -- or should have been -- the target for M. They knew it, but still failed to meet it. That is quite startling to me.

The big factor I am sure is the use of sport-tires to test the RS4. But that is not to say the RS4 was not "stock". Sport-tires are an option in Europe. If the M3 needs sport-tires to compete with the time, why are they not an option at least in Europe? Perhaps the answer is that sport-tires will be available on a future CSL to further differentiate the car fromthe standard M3.

I think the M6 time is irrelevant. It is a big GT. Also, it was tested with sport-tires.

The M3 is a little quicker than the base 997, but well off the time of the 997S. Neither of these Porsches was tested with sport-tires.

Of course 8:12 is not official in the sense that it is not a Sport-Auto time. But I do not see Von Surma beating the factory time by a significant margin, if any.

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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:33 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