First magazine comparison between MT and DCT

[GT3 Tim]

Originally Posted by K3N R3D

I think we need more reviews on this.

Agreed!

[ersin]

Originally Posted by K3N R3D

You know thinking more about it 4.6 seconds for MDCT? The manual cannot shift as fast as the dual clutch even if done by the most skillful person.

4.2 seconds was the fastest done with a manual that we know of. How come they only got 4.6 with MDCT? Was launch control even used? Are the other factors that affect time that much working against the MDCT M3 in this case? And come to think about it. 0 - 60MPH in 4.8 seconds for the manual is not exactly a great run either. I guess I answered my own question. Nevermind...

I think we need more reviews on this.

Many variables can account for the different 0 - 60 times. Altitude is the first thing that comes to mind, or rather air density affected by both pressure (read altitude) and temperature. But the fact that both cars were run side by side leads one to the conclusion that 0 - 60 times are .2 seconds quicker for the DCT as BMW has reported.

BTW, 4.1 seconds to sixty was the fastest done with manual in both the coupe and sedan. So, maybe under the same conditions we could see sub 4 seconds with DCT?

[masmole]

Originally Posted by DonM3

Thanks South and Hammer. Much appreciated.

Looking foward to my MDCT car in June/July!!!

2nd!

[footie]

Originally Posted by southlight

Ok, here's what we've all been waiting for (considering it I'm not sure any more ), Autobild tested the M3 E92 both as DCT and MT version. Here's the result:

__M3 E92 6MT | M3 E92 DKG
0-100kph: 4.8s | 4.6s
0-200kph: 16.3s | 15.2s
80-120(6th): 7.6s | 6.3s
fuel cons.: 13.8l | 13.0l
lap time: 1:35.41 | 1:35.11

Best regards, south

Thanks south, so the M-DCT made little head-way on the start, LC must not be all it's cracked up to be, but a one second improvement to 200km/h was to be expected which is almost exclusively down to the quicker shifts and zero lose in forward momentum with a smaller part being played by the shorter gearing.

Also I expected the lap times to be close, this all comes down to gearing and by the looks of it the MT's gearing suited the track better. I reckon on different track this gap might grow, like the ring.

Great to hear they liked it, there is nothing to dislike about the technology it's truly amazing.

[Yonkers]

Thanks for the translation. Sounds like DCT is the way to go!

[!Xoible]

Originally Posted by Yonkers

Thanks for the translation. Sounds like DCT is the way to go!

no it doesnt sound like that. it sounds like DCT is much faster than MT for sure

[T Bone]

The M3 with MDCT significantly out accelerates the 6MT between the shift times and the gear ratios....

Surprised the difference at the track is so little.

South what type of track is it? Is there much gear changing at this track?

[MDCTFTW]

MDCT FTW.

[!Xoible]

Originally Posted by T Bone

The M3 with MDCT significantly out accelerates the 6MT between the shift times and the gear ratios....

Surprised the difference at the track is so little.

South what type of track is it? Is there much gear changing at this track?

maybe the driver doesnt know how to drive it to its potential or something...

Originally Posted by MDCTFTW

MDCT FTW.

ur ETA is my bday
MDCT FTW for those who cant drive for sure

jp

[rai]

Originally Posted by footie

Thanks south, so the M-DCT made little head-way on the start, LC must not be all it's cracked up to be, but a one second improvement to 200km/h was to be expected which is almost exclusively down to the quicker shifts and zero lose in forward momentum with a smaller part being played by the shorter gearing.

Also I expected the lap times to be close, this all comes down to gearing and by the looks of it the MT's gearing suited the track better. I reckon on different track this gap might grow, like the ring.

Great to hear they liked it, there is nothing to dislike about the technology it's truly amazing.

I don't know what people think LC is cracked up to be anyway. I mean it's not magic. It can't do anything better than the best launch of a MT car. The benifits of DCT will be found in quicker shifts and better gearing. Also maybe LC will be more predictable (more times the same) but it's not like the DCT M3 is any more powerful or has any more traction than a 6MT they are the same cars the only thing is the quicker shifts and gearing which you won't see as much at 60 mph where there is only one shift. The higher speeds 100 or 120 or 150 mph will benifit more from having less time off power (quicker shifts).

[southlight]

Originally Posted by T Bone

The M3 with MDCT significantly out accelerates the 6MT between the shift times and the gear ratios....

Surprised the difference at the track is so little.

South what type of track is it? Is there much gear changing at this track?

That's the Continental 'Contidrome' handling track. 3800m, 11 turns, bottom of this pic:




Best regards, south

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by ///Mantis

maybe the driver doesnt know how to drive it to its potential or something...

jp

I doubt that but in some courses, there may be minimal shifting. Many courses are 2nd and 3rd gear courses. The fast ones are 3rd and 4th with the occassional shift to 2nd. THe fewer gear changes the less advantage for MDCT.

Even though I think the 6MT is archiac, we shouldn't give a total free pass to the MDCT. Much of the performance improvement and fuel economy improvement is due to the 7 speed gear box.

BTW, you can search the debate that Swamp2 and I had where I called out the MDCT 7th gear as a useless cruising gear.

[ersin]

Originally Posted by ///Mantis

maybe the driver doesnt know how to drive it to its potential or something...

Gee, ya think?

Originally Posted by ///Mantis

...
MDCT FTW for those who cant drive for sure
jp

[kbk_75]

Good to see some figures. Thanks for that!

[Voltigeur]

-

@south - thanks for reconfirming the desirability of M-DKG!

[!Xoible]

Originally Posted by T Bone

I doubt that but in some courses, there may be minimal shifting. Many courses are 2nd and 3rd gear courses. The fast ones are 3rd and 4th with the occassional shift to 2nd. THe fewer gear changes the less advantage for MDCT.

Even though I think the 6MT is archiac, we shouldn't give a total free pass to the MDCT. Much of the performance improvement and fuel economy improvement is due to the 7 speed gear box.

BTW, you can search the debate that Swamp2 and I had where I called out the MDCT 7th gear as a useless cruising gear.

u know what... i wish i had a 7th gear to save me some gas

[MDCTFTW]

Originally Posted by ///Mantis

MDCT FTW for those who cant drive for sure

jp

Haha ... touche, but I'll see you in my rear view.

[DonM3]

+1

Originally Posted by MDCTFTW

Haha ... touche, but I'll see you in my rear view.

[!Xoible]

Originally Posted by MDCTFTW

Haha ... touche, but I'll see you in my rear view.

yes. i enjoy looking at m3 rear's

[swamp2]

Thanks South. Again especially as a memeber of the 6MT!

Performance differences are very close to my predictions with CarTest the differences to 100/200 I got were 0.2 and 0.9 seconds. The efficiency benefits found here are larger than those quoted by BMW this difference is 6%. Not too shaby. I agree with the article, fast shifts, easy to use, faster, better mpg, what is not to like?

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by ///Mantis

u know what... i wish i had a 7th gear to save me some gas

Then buy a car with the MDCT.

To recap the debate that I had with Swamp2 and others.....the 7th gear is wasted for fuel economy instead of spacing them out for power.

If I wanted fuel economy, I would get a 335d.....the M3 is about performance.

[footie]

Originally Posted by T Bone

Then buy a car with the MDCT.

To recap the debate that I had with Swamp2 and others.....the 7th gear is wasted for fuel economy instead of spacing them out for power.

If I wanted fuel economy, I would get a 335d.....the M3 is about performance.

TB,

Does a 1.1s improvement look to you as if the gearbox was setup for economy. I think you are getting the best of both worlds, quit complaining old friend.