BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > E90/E92 M3 Technical Topics > Engine, Transmission, Exhaust, Drivetrain, ECU Software Modifications
 
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      04-20-2012, 10:45 AM   #23
crabman
Captain
7
Rep
669
Posts

 
Drives: M3
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: WA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by m3alabama View Post
That is why the m3 is decievingly fast. It sure as heck does not "feel" fast to most that drive it, especially coming from an FI car or monster v8, however if you have a chance to do a long redline run and watch your tach to see for example in 2nd or 3rd gear (1sts happens too quickly), you are pulling what seems like forever in the top of the rev band to redline. Compare that to large majority of other cars or an n54 engined car, you will have a very short couple thousands revs near the top to pull in each gear and you do not want to be at the top in those cars as the power drops signifigantly up around redline. Hence you make more torque but for a much shorter time.

I relate it to a runner.

Would you rather sprint for half the race then be drop dead tired for the other half.

Or would you rather have a fast pace for the whole race, which nets you a quicker finish.

Turbos kick you in the butt and have more oomph but its short lived. M3 has less oomph but is long lived and this is what horsepower does a good job at measuring. It accounts for the revs in addition to raw enginen torque to paint the entire picture which is why despite what many say, horsepower is the best measure for any type of race.
All else being equal it is not the power but the application of power that decides the race. No matter the powerband be peaky or broad the car that puts the most power down over time will be further down the track than the car that put down less.

I'm not knocking the M3, obviously I bought in because I prefer it but the numbers as seen out on the track for the 1 pretty much speak for themselves as far as the viability of its powerband when compared to the M3. Whether you or I or anyone likes the way it delivers that power is subjective.
__________________
2012 E92 Space Grey with fox red/black/black, comp, premium, DCT, premium sound, sirius, heated seats.
Appreciate 0
      04-20-2012, 10:52 AM   #24
Singletrack
4th down; 4th quarter? Renegade.
Singletrack's Avatar
United_States
43
Rep
3,820
Posts

 
Drives: 09 SSII E92 M3; 12 AW X5d
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by crabman View Post
All else being equal it is not the power but the application of power that decides the race. No matter the powerband be peaky or broad the car that puts the most power down over time will be further down the track than the car that put down less.

I'm not knocking the M3, obviously I bought in because I prefer it but the numbers as seen out on the track for the 1 pretty much speak for themselves as far as the viability of its powerband when compared to the M3. Whether you or I or anyone likes the way it delivers that power is subjective.
Yup - they are simply different tools to get the same job done. They need to be used differently to achieve the best results.

Surprised this thread hasn't degenerated into a shitstorm yet to be honest. I assumed the initial intention was to simply kick the hornet's nest.
Appreciate 0
      04-20-2012, 11:59 AM   #25
Rshane
M-Flight Member
Rshane's Avatar
United_States
13
Rep
1,087
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 E92 M3
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Antonio, Texas

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Singletrack View Post

Surprised this thread hasn't degenerated into a shitstorm yet to be honest. I assumed the initial intention was to simply kick the hornet's nest.
I was thinking the same thing when this thread started. I think most folks actually like the 1M. I had the chance to drive one and it was a blast. I think it is more fun to drive around town than my M3 however, once I pull onto the Autobahn it is M3 all the way for me. The 1M is just a bit too cramped for me and IMO not as comfortable on the longer trips...the engine/exhaust was also kind of boomy while cruising too. While great for short periods of time, it would get annoying for me over the long haul.
__________________
2011 Le Mans Blue M3// Black extended Novillo w/ Blue Grey Aluminum trim/DCT/ZTP/ZCW/ZPP/ZCP Premium Sound ///Akrapovic Evolution Exhaust

2012 Le Mans Blue 135i M Pkg DCT
2013 Ford F150 FX4 Supercrew
Appreciate 0
      12-09-2013, 03:07 PM   #26
Penguino
Lieutenant
Penguino's Avatar
13
Rep
523
Posts

 
Drives: A car.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Here

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rshane View Post
I was thinking the same thing when this thread started. I think most folks actually like the 1M. I had the chance to drive one and it was a blast. I think it is more fun to drive around town than my M3 however, once I pull onto the Autobahn it is M3 all the way for me. The 1M is just a bit too cramped for me and IMO not as comfortable on the longer trips...the engine/exhaust was also kind of boomy while cruising too. While great for short periods of time, it would get annoying for me over the long haul.
My intention was always to offer a clear comparison between both vehicles. It is evident now that the 1M might have been a test mule to the future of the ///M brand.
Appreciate 0
      12-09-2013, 03:20 PM   #27
happos2
Dingleberries
18
Rep
1,182
Posts

 
Drives: Gray E92 M3
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Indiana

iTrader: (3)

Good bump...
Appreciate 0
      12-09-2013, 03:25 PM   #28
Leonardo629
Major
United_States
13
Rep
1,206
Posts

 
Drives: 2013 M3 Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Walnut, CA

iTrader: (9)

so if I'm reading this right, the 1M is a faster car until its HPFP goes out and goes into limp mode......

Does this mean the new M3/M4 will also be WAY underrated from the factory?
Appreciate 0
      12-09-2013, 03:25 PM   #29
biglare
******
United_States
99
Rep
3,141
Posts

 
Drives: ?
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ?

iTrader: (3)

Having had both the M3 and 1M at the same time it really depends what your overall goals and preferences are with the car. If you want to drive everyday and have gobs of power all the time the 1M is the way to go based on it's torque delivery. If you typically do a lot of highway or freeway driving then the M3 is awesome! When it comes to track use, it depends on the type of track, whether you can stretch the legs of the M3 out or not. The 1M is just as fast or faster around the track when compared to the M3. Just my experiences as I have had an ESS tuned 1M and an ESS tuned M3 as well as a ESS S/C M3.

Happy Times!

Appreciate 0
      12-09-2013, 04:13 PM   #30
Penguino
Lieutenant
Penguino's Avatar
13
Rep
523
Posts

 
Drives: A car.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Here

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonardo629 View Post
so if I'm reading this right, the 1M is a faster car until its HPFP goes out and goes into limp mode......

Does this mean the new M3/M4 will also be WAY underrated from the factory?
The 1M rated at 335hp dynos 320-340whp stock. The M5/M6 rated at 560hp dynos 520-550whp. I can see the M3/M4 dynoing 390-410whp.
Appreciate 0
      12-09-2013, 09:00 PM   #31
CanAutM3
Brigadier General
CanAutM3's Avatar
Canada
72
Rep
4,369
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 M4 DCT
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 BMW M4  [4.75]
2006 Audi S4  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by carlitosz View Post
The 1M rated at 335hp dynos 320-340whp stock. The M5/M6 rated at 560hp dynos 520-550whp. I can see the M3/M4 dynoing 390-410whp.
There is something that does not quite add up in those charts. I doubt that the 1M produces more whp than the M3 in stock form...
Appreciate 0
      12-09-2013, 10:24 PM   #32
KennyPowers
Brigadier General
95
Rep
4,637
Posts

 
Drives: .....
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Gulf Coast

iTrader: (13)

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanAutM3 View Post
There is something that does not quite add up in those charts. I doubt that the 1M produces more whp than the M3 in stock form...
From personal experience they are very similar. Especially m3 with older software versions.

The 1m is very quick
Appreciate 0
      12-09-2013, 11:39 PM   #33
CanAutM3
Brigadier General
CanAutM3's Avatar
Canada
72
Rep
4,369
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 M4 DCT
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 BMW M4  [4.75]
2006 Audi S4  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by KennyPowers View Post
From personal experience they are very similar. Especially m3 with older software versions.

The 1m is very quick
Agreed, the 1M is very quick. Three of my track buddies have one and I had the pleasure to drive it. The 1M is one great car.

But when it comes to power, the M3 has the upper hand. Up to about 80mph, it is pretty even (similar power to weights) after that though, it is a different story. My buddies say it is just frustrating to see my M3 pull away on the straights...

To me, it does not make sense that a stock 1M puts more power to the wheels than an stock M3, something is at odd...
Appreciate 0
      12-10-2013, 12:13 AM   #34
<-3VOM
Banned
0
Rep
47
Posts

 
Drives: Not a BMW.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Above you.

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhillyNate View Post
I've always been impressed with the 1M but damn the S65 is amazing in it's power delivery as well. The torque is certainly not neck snapping but it's ALL there for 5,000 rpm. While every bit of torque is there, horsepower is actually steadily climbing off idle all the way to redline. WHAT OTHER MOTOR DOES THAT? Please educate me.
Just about any free breathing n/a motor.
Most B,F,K series Hondas, the coyote 5.0 etc etc etc
Appreciate 0
      12-10-2013, 02:04 AM   #35
///mawana
First Lieutenant
///mawana's Avatar
No_Country
3
Rep
318
Posts

 
Drives: M
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: TX

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by KennyPowers View Post
From personal experience they are very similar. Especially m3 with older software versions.

The 1m is very quick
Great, so once I update my software, it's game over!
Appreciate 0
      12-10-2013, 02:59 PM   #36
Penguino
Lieutenant
Penguino's Avatar
13
Rep
523
Posts

 
Drives: A car.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Here

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanAutM3 View Post
There is something that does not quite add up in those charts. I doubt that the 1M produces more whp than the M3 in stock form...
The cars were dyno on the same day, back to back. M3 had heavier wheels by about 5lbs, not sure if that made the difference.
Appreciate 0
      12-10-2013, 04:16 PM   #37
<-3VOM
Banned
0
Rep
47
Posts

 
Drives: Not a BMW.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Above you.

iTrader: (0)

5lbs at the wheel is substantial.
Appreciate 0
      12-10-2013, 04:47 PM   #38
bdaddylo
Major
bdaddylo's Avatar
United_States
17
Rep
1,134
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 E90 M3 ZCP
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Houston, TX

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokay444 View Post
5lbs at the wheel is substantial.
Define substantial? 1HP or 2HP? It's definitely not 10HP.
__________________
_______________________
2011 E90 M3 ZCP/AW/Ohlins R&T
Appreciate 0
      12-10-2013, 07:18 PM   #39
<-3VOM
Banned
0
Rep
47
Posts

 
Drives: Not a BMW.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Above you.

iTrader: (0)

Conventional wisdom says that conservatively, 1lb worth of rotating mass lost is roughly equivalent to a 4lb sprung mass lost. This being said, I don't think there's any way to get an exact measurement. Even where the rotating mass is lost will make a difference. 1lb lost at the tire tread will make a bigger difference than 1 lb lost near wheel bolts.

In terms of converting that to horsepower, it depends on the power to weight ratio before the weight loss.

For instance, let's just assume we agree with the 4/1 ratio for rotating vs spring.

Let's further assume we're talking about a 4000lb vehicle with 500hp (ie. much like an E60 M5). We're starting off with a 8 lbs per hp ratio.

Let's take 50 lbs off of the rotating mass. Given our 4/1 assumption above, that is equivalent to losing 200 lbs. We're now at 3800lbs and 500hp, giving us 7.6 lbs per hp.

If we wanted to do this by increasing horsepower instead of losing weight:

4000 / 7.6 = 526hp

In other words, we could gain 26hp and we'd be at the "same place."

How much weight would we need to lose to be equal to a 100hp gain in this example?

4000 / 600 = 6.67 lbs per hp

6.67 * 500 = 3333.3 lbs

4000 - 3333.3 = 666.67 lbs sprung weight lost

666.67 / 4 = 166.67 lbs rotating weight lost

166.67 lbs is a LOT of rotating weight to lose.
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 08:55 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