New 1/4 mile world record trap speed for E92 M3 @ 140.11 MPH

[DLSJ5]

Originally Posted by roastbeef

it blows my mind that people are scoffing this... not only can this car do well in a straight line, but in the hands of a track driver, would put down some serious lap times- its still and m3!

Exactly.

Here's a short list of cars that Sergei's M3 is comparable with 1/4 mile and trap speed -

Bugatti Veron - 10.4 @139 MPH
McLaren MP4-12C ECU TUNE - 10.15 @ 138 MPH
Porsche 911 Turbo EVOMS GT800 10.37 @ 139 MPH
Lamborghini Huracan LP610 Nitrous 100 shot 10.25 @ 136 MPH

Pretty much says it all.

Also, not a chance that "stock" 2015+ 5.0 Mustang that runs High 12's @ ~112-114MPH on stock tires, with just adding slicks, will beat a Bugatti Veron, or run a mid 10 ET.

[filinm3]

Originally Posted by DLSJ5

Exactly.

Here's a short list of cars that Sergei's M3 is comparable with 1/4 mile and trap speed -

Bugatti Veron - 10.4 @139 MPH
McLaren MP4-12C ECU TUNE - 10.15 @ 138 MPH
Porsche 911 Turbo EVOMS GT800 10.37 @ 139 MPH
Lamborghini Huracan LP610 Nitrous 100 shot 10.25 @ 136 MPH

Pretty much says it all.

Also, not a chance that "stock" 2015+ 5.0 Mustang that runs High 12's @ ~112-114MPH on stock tires, with just adding slicks, will beat a Bugatti Veron, or run a mid 10 ET.

Drew,

I am quite happy that my car could compare with the above mentioned cars in 1/4 mile disciplines and even beat easily their trap speeds.... Never think about that possibility

Moreover, I would easily destroy them all (even Veyron) in 30-200 mph roll

Would prepare a bit my car for next 1/4 mile competition (which could probably happen in 3 weeks):

1) Change front 275/35/18 Nitto's to my old 245/40/18 Michelin's;
2) Install new set of Hoosier's Drag Radials 2.
3) Delete front passenger seat and rear section.
4) Fill the tank with 15L max.

That should help a bit if the dragstrip is perfect...

Hope, the engine and transmission would overcome all my races)))) Too much stress for them: the soft on that last event was very-very aggressive (around 840-860 whp, I think)...

[Dave07997S]

Also, not a chance that "stock" 2015+ 5.0 Mustang that runs High 12's @ ~112-114MPH on stock tires, with just adding slicks, will beat a Bugatti Veron, or run a mid 10 ET.

Agreed, the best I have seen was a mid 11 sec. car near 119mph with a full bolt on and slicks. I don't know what he is talking about, the only 10 second car I saw on Mustang6g are all forced induction except for one, but the car pretty much was a all out track car.

Dave

[OM VT3]

Originally Posted by filinm3

Drew,

I am quite happy that my car could compare with the above mentioned cars in 1/4 mile disciplines and even beat easily their trap speeds.... Never think about that possibility

Moreover, I would easily destroy them all (even Veyron) in 30-200 mph roll

Would prepare a bit my car for next 1/4 mile competition (which could probably happen in 3 weeks):

1) Change front 275/35/18 Nitto's to my old 245/40/18 Michelin's;
2) Install new set of Hoosier's Drag Radials 2.
3) Delete front passenger seat and rear section.
4) Fill the tank with 15L max.

That should help a bit if the dragstrip is perfect...

Hope, the engine and transmission would overcome all my races)))) Too much stress for them: the soft on that last event was very-very aggressive (around 840-860 whp, I think)...

Have you had it on the dyno yet?

[filinm3]

Originally Posted by OM VT3

Have you had it on the dyno yet?

No. Do not like at all that procedure (from car's health perspective) and simply did not have a chance to dyno.

I prefer to "dyno" it on the road and to beat there all the "dyno queens"

[OM VT3]

Originally Posted by filinm3

No. Do not like at all that procedure (from car's health perspective) and simply did not have a chance to dyno.

I prefer to "dyno" it on the road and to beat there all the "dyno queens"

What you think to much stress, was it road tuned?

[filinm3]

Originally Posted by OM VT3

What you think to much stress, was it road tuned?

Sure, it was road tuned initially. And during this summer the files were updated after logs being sent from runs on competitions....

As for the stress, in Russia there is no culture at all to dyno properly the cars. And very few places to do this. I just did not have a chance to do this and do not want having my tuner in a pocket

[Weyne Masters]

Any updates?

[eatsleepboost]

It took till 2017 to get a e9x m3 to trap 140 mph. Surprising to me. I know these cars are not built for the 1/4 mile but that seems very low. I came from evos and I trapped 130 and I never even had the head off the engine. Stock engine other than cams. 130 was considered fairly low mph for evos. I wasn't even close to any "world record". On the Evo forums unless u trap over 140mph most people consider your car on the slow side.

Also I saw a thread about camshafts on here. Seems like it's very rare to change the cams as well. I was also surprised by this as damn near every tuner car I have had and friends have had we changed the cams. I am fairly new to the German cars but so far it seems nobody really messes with the factory engine other than bolting on a supercharger. I just figured after some time being on these forums I would find tons of 550+ hp m3s but it's not the case. Still a great car but low hp compared to many modified cars.

[Richbot]

4G63's are what $2k all day long for a decent long block to start with? I think it's all economics with the engines as expensive as they are and the easy-power turbo engines BMW sells in the exact same chassis. Why bang your head against the wall squeezing the last 10 mph out of a car that could help you spend so much money if you put a hole in the block? A good fresh motor for these is nearly as expensive as a metzger and there's no 911 to put it in when you're done, just a 3-series with fender flares. And you can go down the street to the Chevy dealer and buy 10 second (with slicks) cars off the lot that can go around corners too. Or build you 335 or 135 and spend one less zero per engine you screw up. I think fast M3's are amazing, because who wouldn't want an extra 250hp, but I get why only truly crazy people go even this far with them

[eatsleepboost]

Yea that makes sense. That's why I made my statement to hear the other side of the story. Not bashing the m3 just more so curious why I have not seen high hp ones.

[Green-Eggs]

Originally Posted by eatsleepboost

It took till 2017 to get a e9x m3 to trap 140 mph. Surprising to me. I know these cars are not built for the 1/4 mile but that seems very low. I came from evos and I trapped 130 and I never even had the head off the engine. Stock engine other than cams. 130 was considered fairly low mph for evos. I wasn't even close to any "world record". On the Evo forums unless u trap over 140mph most people consider your car on the slow side.

Also I saw a thread about camshafts on here. Seems like it's very rare to change the cams as well. I was also surprised by this as damn near every tuner car I have had and friends have had we changed the cams. I am fairly new to the German cars but so far it seems nobody really messes with the factory engine other than bolting on a supercharger. I just figured after some time being on these forums I would find tons of 550+ hp m3s but it's not the case. Still a great car but low hp compared to many modified cars.

Here's why you don't see cams: 103 hp/liter NA is already very aggressive cams from the factory. Cams will do very little. So you may get 20 hp out of cams if you're lucky, but you'll spend $4000 doing it. So it's not practical. Factory heads are already CNC ported from the factory, so head work will do very little either.

Lots of people have built motor M3's. You just need to look up old threads to find them. Don't expect anything earth shattering because 103 hp/liter is the baseline and adding 15% more displacement is only going to add 15% more power. The cost of that 15% can be $20k or more. So it's not really practical even though it adds a lot more torque and is a lot more fun to drive. My company, Auto Talent was involved with stroker engine builds from the very beginning in 2008 when the car was first released. We've probably built 20 stroker engines for the M3.

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by Green-Eggs

Here's why you don't see cams: 103 hp/liter NA is already very aggressive cams from the factory. Cams will do very little. So you may get 20 hp out of cams if you're lucky, but you'll spend $4000 doing it. So it's not practical. Factory heads are already CNC ported from the factory, so head work will do very little either.
.

Thank you for GreenEggs for the insight, it's always appreciated

I've heard that it has really aggressive cams before, but when I look at the torque curve I really wonder if they're that aggressive.

The GT3 torque curve looks completely lopsided vs the S65's flat one, so I take it the GT3 has way more aggressive cams allowing it to get a higher specific output.

Shouldn't it be possible to get a cam for the E92 that really lets it breathe at the top end, sacrificing low and midrange power?

[eatsleepboost]

Originally Posted by Green-Eggs

Here's why you don't see cams: 103 hp/liter NA is already very aggressive cams from the factory. Cams will do very little. So you may get 20 hp out of cams if you're lucky, but you'll spend $4000 doing it. So it's not practical. Factory heads are already CNC ported from the factory, so head work will do very little either.

Lots of people have built motor M3's. You just need to look up old threads to find them. Don't expect anything earth shattering because 103 hp/liter is the baseline and adding 15% more displacement is only going to add 15% more power. The cost of that 15% can be $20k or more. So it's not really practical even though it adds a lot more torque and is a lot more fun to drive. My company, Auto Talent was involved with stroker engine builds from the very beginning in 2008 when the car was first released. We've probably built 20 stroker engines for the M3.

Good insight. Thanks

[crawlin]

Is it just me or should there be a lower quarter mile time with that speed? sorry didnt read entire thread if it was said. more like 10.2-10.5?

[OM VT3]

Originally Posted by Green-Eggs

Here's why you don't see cams: 103 hp/liter NA is already very aggressive cams from the factory. Cams will do very little. So you may get 20 hp out of cams if you're lucky, but you'll spend $4000 doing it. So it's not practical. Factory heads are already CNC ported from the factory, so head work will do very little either.

Lots of people have built motor M3's. You just need to look up old threads to find them. Don't expect anything earth shattering because 103 hp/liter is the baseline and adding 15% more displacement is only going to add 15% more power. The cost of that 15% can be $20k or more. So it's not really practical even though it adds a lot more torque and is a lot more fun to drive. My company, Auto Talent was involved with stroker engine builds from the very beginning in 2008 when the car was first released. We've probably built 20 stroker engines for the M3.

Guy that did my head's think there's probably a bit or power to be made on the exhaust side of the heads when you're starting to run a fair bit of boost

[Green-Eggs]

Originally Posted by crawlin

Is it just me or should there be a lower quarter mile time with that speed? sorry didnt read entire thread if it was said. more like 10.2-10.5?

Check this thread:
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=630463

By ET:
10.24 @ 140.24 MPH - 1.75 60' - filinm3/E92 M3 DCT/ Built Motor / ESS VT4 / 96 octane / Hoosier DR
10.46 @ 135.13 MPH - 1.70 60' - binh513 / E92 M3 DCT / ESS VT 625 @ 10psi/ Water/Ice Tank / 93 / Weight Reduction /

By Trap Speed:
10.29 @ 140.64 MPH - 1.70 60' - filinm3/E92 M3 DCT/ Built Motor / ESS VT4 / 96 octane / Hoosier DR
10.46 @ 135.13 MPH - 1.70 60' - binh513 / E92 M3 DCT / ESS VT 625 @ 10psi/ Water/Ice Tank / 93 / Weight Reduction /

So, no, there isn't.

[Patrón]

Originally Posted by Green-Eggs

Check this thread:
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=630463

By ET:
10.24 @ 140.24 MPH - 1.75 60' - filinm3/E92 M3 DCT/ Built Motor / ESS VT4 / 96 octane / Hoosier DR
10.46 @ 135.13 MPH - 1.70 60' - binh513 / E92 M3 DCT / ESS VT 625 @ 10psi/ Water/Ice Tank / 93 / Weight Reduction /

By Trap Speed:
10.29 @ 140.64 MPH - 1.70 60' - filinm3/E92 M3 DCT/ Built Motor / ESS VT4 / 96 octane / Hoosier DR
10.46 @ 135.13 MPH - 1.70 60' - binh513 / E92 M3 DCT / ESS VT 625 @ 10psi/ Water/Ice Tank / 93 / Weight Reduction /

So, no, there isn't.

Not only is Filinm3's time impressive but it just shows you how well Binh's old m3 ran with basic bolt on upgrades. yes there was weight reduction and great DA but still impressive.

[spr]

FYI, I originally did the reverse flow. For ICE it is better but normal daily driving it is worse. I put the flow back. I'm also using the smallest rule bilge. It destroys the ESS stock bosch. Mine bosch is also dying I discovered today pulling the power to the bilge for fun....

This is an awesome build!

Originally Posted by Patrón

I agree, with the ice in the tank it's the best configuration. i think for daily use i might reverse the flow OR re-connect the original small can and bypass the box. congrats again. she sounds like a red beast.

[Stronie]

Epic build! Bravo and 4dr too!!!!

[Scharbag]

JTFC - That is just an epic car!!

I think I actually popped wood...

Tip of the cap big shooter!

[Weyne Masters]

Any updates,or the car is out off service!