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)
 
Lux Angel Eyes
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      07-10-2007, 12:20 PM   #45
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,838
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FifthStreetz View Post
I think he was being sarcastic..
Maybe so, and if that's the case, my post is still useful re: the schhay reply.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 02:45 PM   #46
M3onTwomps
First Lieutenant
Iraq
3
Rep
319
Posts

 
Drives: '02 E46 M3
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Sandbox

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3_2010 View Post
It is not a money issue. You have to consider the environment.
Then you shouldn't be buying performance oriented cars and instead should buy a Prius.
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 03:03 PM   #47
FifthStreetz
O! So Sour!!
FifthStreetz's Avatar
United_States
193
Rep
15,558
Posts

 
Drives: Fast 240z / Slow M3
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Lee, NJ

iTrader: (24)

Garage List
2008 M3  [4.75]
Quote:
Originally Posted by M3onTwomps View Post
Then you shouldn't be buying performance oriented cars and instead should buy a Prius.
O yeaa, funny thing is for Prius owners they think their cars have performance...there was a thread somewhere that linked to a Prius forum talking about beating Mustangs and shit.
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 03:13 PM   #48
CokerRat
Private
CokerRat's Avatar
0
Rep
96
Posts

 
Drives: 2007 E90 335i
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gtb75 View Post
Trust me - you will not see anywhere near 11mpg out of a C6 Z06 on a road course... I'm usually somewhere in the 6-8mpg range with mine.
+1. My NSX got about 13 mpg doing track lapping and that's a 3.0L six. 11 mpg doesn't surprise me (or bother me) at all for a 4L V-8 at the track.
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 03:47 PM   #49
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 ruff View Post
Few talk about American engineering, but I believe the vette engines are the best engineered production engines in the world. They are simple in design, reliable, less parts to break down, such as fancy throttle bodies, vanos etc, etc. Loads of useable horsepower and torque on a commute or the track and the great mileage in relation to its competition.
I agree that the vette engine has been impressive throughout its evolution. However, keep in mind that it is stuck in a car that is currently about 270lbs lighter than the M3, and that really affects mileage.

Last edited by lucid; 07-10-2007 at 04:06 PM.
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 03:58 PM   #50
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 GregW / Oregon View Post
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought high torque is more tied to displacement or forced induction that revs. What example are you using? The F430 has the same hp/torque ratio as the E92 M3 (though more of each).
Pretty close but not the same. See the attached sheet below I posted a few months ago. Also, torque is also associated with cylinder geometry.

Regards,
Attached Images
 
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 04:05 PM   #51
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 M3onTwomps View Post
Then you shouldn't be buying performance oriented cars and instead should buy a Prius.
Not sure that there is anything wrong with demanding more environmental awareness from performance car manufacturers. If that is not the case, they should all remove the emissions equipment and boost hp by 10%-20% on the fly. Would you support that?
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 04:16 PM   #52
M3onTwomps
First Lieutenant
Iraq
3
Rep
319
Posts

 
Drives: '02 E46 M3
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Sandbox

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
Not sure that there is anything wrong with demanding more environmental awareness from performance car manufacturers. If that is not the case, they should all remove the emissions equipment and boost hp by 10%-20% on the fly. Would you support that?
A lot of consumers do after they purchase their cars. Automakers follow the rules. If you're so concerned about the environment, I don't really understand why you're buying a performance car. Just doesn't make sense.

That's like recycling a sheet of paper every year and saying you did your part.
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 04:32 PM   #53
T Bone
Brigadier General
T Bone's Avatar
144
Rep
4,021
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
Pretty close but not the same. See the attached sheet below I posted a few months ago. Also, torque is also associated with cylinder geometry.

Regards,

Torque is heavily dependent on volumetric efficiency, i.e. the ability of a cylinder to suck in air. This in turn is determined by bore / stroke / camshaft / stuff like Vanos or VTEC (yo!).
__________________
"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 05:48 PM   #54
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 M3onTwomps View Post
A lot of consumers do after they purchase their cars. Automakers follow the rules. If you're so concerned about the environment, I don't really understand why you're buying a performance car. Just doesn't make sense.

That's like recycling a sheet of paper every year and saying you did your part.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with expecting better efficiency from a performance car. Performance has higher priority but that does not mean efficiency does not matter at all. All design is a balancing act. When one designs an engine one considers many competing goals, and it is natural to prioritize, but that doesn't mean that some of those goals are simply ignored. One simply finds a balanced position in meeting those goals, which is appropiate for the application. Same is true for power vs. durability, power vs. cost, etc. In those lines, if BMW's sole goal was performance, they could get much more power out of the M3 engine...However, if I wanted to buy a race car, I would think differently, but the M3 is not a race car. Like it or not, it is not an exotic car either with only 2000 units sold, which will only be driven on weekends. They will sell 100,000+ of these things. For me, it is something I will drive to work every day, and track once a month for fun. Finally, efficiency and performance are not always competing goals: in certain respects, if the combustion is more complete, the cleaner the exhaust, the higher the thermal efficiency, the higher the power extraction, and the higher the power output. That's the main reason why auto manufacturers have been able to make huge leaps in power output and efficiency at the same time in the past few decades. There are many more examples: a lighter the car will not only handle better, but also be more efficient; a better designed transmission will not only rob you of less power through friction but also be more efficient (have you tried to design a series of meshing gears?)...

Last edited by lucid; 07-10-2007 at 06:47 PM.
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 07:52 PM   #55
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)

Guess

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
Pretty close but not the same. See the attached sheet below I posted a few months ago. Also, torque is also associated with cylinder geometry.

Regards,
I think he meant exactly what he typed hp/tq ratio which match to within 2% between the F430 and E92 M3. Ferarri does get some amazing tq/l numbers and that is an accomplishment.
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 07:53 PM   #56
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)

+1

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
There is absolutely nothing wrong with expecting better efficiency from a performance car. Performance has higher priority but that does not mean efficiency does not matter at all. All design is a balancing act. When one designs an engine one considers many competing goals, and it is natural to prioritize, but that doesn't mean that some of those goals are simply ignored. One simply finds a balanced position in meeting those goals, which is appropiate for the application. Same is true for power vs. durability, power vs. cost, etc. In those lines, if BMW's sole goal was performance, they could get much more power out of the M3 engine...However, if I wanted to buy a race car, I would think differently, but the M3 is not a race car. Like it or not, it is not an exotic car either with only 2000 units sold, which will only be driven on weekends. They will sell 100,000+ of these things. For me, it is something I will drive to work every day, and track once a month for fun. Finally, efficiency and performance are not always competing goals: in certain respects, if the combustion is more complete, the cleaner the exhaust, the higher the thermal efficiency, the higher the power extraction, and the higher the power output. That's the main reason why auto manufacturers have been able to make huge leaps in power output and efficiency at the same time in the past few decades. There are many more examples: a lighter the car will not only handle better, but also be more efficient; a better designed transmission will not only rob you of less power through friction but also be more efficient (have you tried to design a series of meshing gears?)...
Absolutely in line with my thoughts on the efficiency of a sports car! Nice post.
Appreciate 0
      07-10-2007, 08:52 PM   #57
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 swamp2 View Post
I think he meant exactly what he typed hp/tq ratio which match to within 2% between the F430 and E92 M3. Ferarri does get some amazing tq/l numbers and that is an accomplishment.
Ah, okay I misread Greg's post. Sorry Greg. Thanks for correcting Swamp.
Appreciate 0
      07-11-2007, 06:02 AM   #58
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,838
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

I have $100 that says the new M3 will equal or better the real-world mileage of the current car. That means 25mpg+ on a highway road-trip, and 20 MPG in a typical everyday driving situation with some spirited driving thrown in.

That should be good enough for anyone buying a performance car. That's better than any SUV, any supercar and many sports cars. It's also around the same gas mileage as a BMW 5 series which most people here would buy as a family car never thinking twice about fuel efficiency.

Finally, my wife's old E46 325xi got no better gas mileage than my M3 if both were driven hard, and also her current 335i gets about the same mileage as my M3.

IMHO this thread will prove to be much ado about nothing once more real world experience is had with the new M3.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
      07-11-2007, 06:44 AM   #59
TheRealDC
Private
TheRealDC's Avatar
Scotland
3
Rep
69
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Scotland

iTrader: (0)

Real world mpg

Hi

During the course of 2006 I did around 30,000 miles travelling just over 120 miles round trip of mostly slow-moving motorway commute, mixed with town driving and back lane thrashing in my E46 M3. Started the year with 50,000 mile on the clock and ended with just over 80,000 miles showing. My average over the whole year was 30.1 mpg per my trip computer. Even allowing for the (in)accuracy of the trip computer that has to be regarded as fantastic in a car of this performance. If the new car is even close to this I'll be more than happy.




DC
Appreciate 0
      07-11-2007, 10:11 AM   #60
T Bone
Brigadier General
T Bone's Avatar
144
Rep
4,021
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
I have $100 that says the new M3 will equal or better the real-world mileage of the current car. That means 25mpg+ on a highway road-trip, and 20 MPG in a typical everyday driving situation with some spirited driving thrown in.

That should be good enough for anyone buying a performance car. That's better than any SUV, any supercar and many sports cars. It's also around the same gas mileage as a BMW 5 series which most people here would buy as a family car never thinking twice about fuel efficiency.

Finally, my wife's old E46 325xi got no better gas mileage than my M3 if both were driven hard, and also her current 335i gets about the same mileage as my M3.

IMHO this thread will prove to be much ado about nothing once more real world experience is had with the new M3.

I will take your bet...... You can decide the wager, $100 is fine but not really fun. How about the the loser must put a Honda VTEC Sticker on their car and take a high-rez photo and post it?

How do we make the determination? I.e. whose numbers are we going to use?
__________________
"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari
Appreciate 0
      07-11-2007, 10:14 AM   #61
GregW / Oregon
Commander-In-Chief
United_States
136
Rep
7,644
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 M4 Coupe, 2012 ML350
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Lake Oswego, OR

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
Mileage numbers

Quote:
Originally Posted by T Bone View Post
I.e. whose numbers are we going to use?
Good question since the EPA testing is changed for 2008. New test will yeld lower results than previous ones.
__________________

Greg Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA
2015 M4 Coupe - Silverstone/Sakhir/CF
2012 ML350
Appreciate 0
      07-11-2007, 10:17 AM   #62
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,838
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by T Bone View Post
I will take your bet...... You can decide the wager, $100 is fine but not really fun. How about the the loser must put a Honda VTEC Sticker on their car and take a high-rez photo and post it?
Way too high of stakes for me, sorry. I'd sooner up the bet to $200 than do that.

Quote:
How do we make the determination? I.e. whose numbers are we going to use?
Mine of course. You'll have to weight til I actually get the car though. It won't likely be until MY2009.

Actually we can use anyone's numbers who currently drives an E46 and plans to buy an E92 and use it in the same capacity.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
      07-11-2007, 10:19 AM   #63
T Bone
Brigadier General
T Bone's Avatar
144
Rep
4,021
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
Way too high of stakes for me, sorry. I'd sooner up the bet to $200 than do that.



Mine of course. You'll have to weight til I actually get the car though. It won't likely be until MY2009.

Actually we can use anyone's numbers who currently drives an E46 and plans to buy an E92 and use it in the same capacity.

OK, we will take the numbers of a person who owned an E46 m3 and then the E92 M3.

What is the wager??
__________________
"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari
Appreciate 0
      07-11-2007, 10:27 AM   #64
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,838
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by T Bone View Post
OK, we will take the numbers of a person who owned an E46 m3 and then the E92 M3.

What is the wager??
How bout pinks? My M3, your M6?

I said $100 originally, so I'm inclinded to stick to that.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
Appreciate 0
      07-11-2007, 10:36 AM   #65
T Bone
Brigadier General
T Bone's Avatar
144
Rep
4,021
Posts

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

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
How bout pinks? My M3, your M6?

I said $100 originally, so I'm inclinded to stick to that.

OK, no probs.... $100 USD....

I was hoping for a more creative bet. Money is so boring but no probs.

We next need to identify the person who is going to provide the data. I guess when someone here posts they bought a new M3, we will peg them.

Just to be clear, you are betting the new M3 will have better fuel economy than the E46 M3 and I am betting the other way.
__________________
"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari
Appreciate 0
      07-11-2007, 10:56 AM   #66
mkoesel
Moderator
United_States
183
Rep
13,838
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 SO/CSAT F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canton, MI

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by T Bone View Post
OK, no probs.... $100 USD....

I was hoping for a more creative bet. Money is so boring but no probs.

We next need to identify the person who is going to provide the data. I guess when someone here posts they bought a new M3, we will peg them.

Just to be clear, you are betting the new M3 will have better fuel economy than the E46 M3 and I am betting the other way.
Close. Actually I said "the same or better".

Of course, if it ends up being fairly close in the real world, then its totally possible that someone could see better mileage, while someone else could see worse mileage. Doesn't really matter much to me, I'll honor the bet either way. I just wanted to point out that it could come down to dumb luck whether we happen pick the right person. IOW, its just like betting on a horse race. Cool w/me.
__________________
A gen-u-ine BMW eff-eight-zero with them tandem clutches in the transmission and that dad gum sun roof on the top-a da cawr.
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 11:50 AM.




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