Login

Post Reply 

Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
06032013, 05:52 PM  #46 
First Lieutenant
130
Rep 371
Posts 

Appreciate
0

06032013, 05:56 PM  #47  
Major
196
Rep 1,248
Posts 
Quote:
Swamp, great work bud and seems to all make good sense. A lot of the naysayers are guys who won't be in a position to get one of these next year. Very excited for the weight loss. Last edited by Carl L; 06032013 at 06:03 PM.. 

Appreciate
0

06032013, 07:25 PM  #48  
Major General
4583
Rep 5,410
Posts 
Quote:
The new m5 does 12.0@119... my FBO on E85 335i barely traps 120 and you are saying this new m3 will do it no problem? My car dyno'd 430 whp which is almost 500 crank hp if you count a 15% auto drivetrain loss, then how do you figure a 430450 crank HP car will do this? Even with a 100lb advantage this will be impossible... the only current sub 100K cars that can do this are the C6 Z06, Mustang gt500, Nissan GTR and Viper... You need to recalculate your numbers asap man... lol
__________________
2020 HS M2C DCT (Perfect)
2 x N54 (Unreliable) 1 x N55 (Slow) 

Appreciate
0

06032013, 07:42 PM  #49  
Colonel
99
Rep 2,030
Posts 
Quote:


Appreciate
0

06032013, 08:56 PM  #50 
Brigadier General
3451
Rep 3,351
Posts 
Is this sort of performance increase unprecedented in your view?
E36 M3  14.2.6 @ 9398 mph. E46 M3  13.3.5 @ 103106 mph. E9X M3  12.5.7 @ 113115 mph. I know a similar power increase is reportedly not in store for the F80, but less weight, likely superior launch control, power characteristics more favorable to straight line acceleration. 120 mph trap doesn't strike me as crazy. History indicates that it's not.
__________________
M4 GTS, GT3, C63 S  E90 M3s, E39 M5

Appreciate
0

06032013, 09:41 PM  #51  
Colonel
101
Rep 2,857
Posts
Drives: 2011 335is E93
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ontario

Quote:
And btw, it's his educated guess based on vague information currently available. Can almost call it an opinion really. Lets see your mathematical justification.... 

Appreciate
0

06032013, 09:55 PM  #52  
Lieutenant General
534
Rep 10,408
Posts 
Quote:
C6 Z06s have trapped as high as 128, just a hair under 129. You must understand statistics a bit. There are numbers from magazines, numbers from local drag strip track rats, number from manufacturers and numbers from average every day Joe owners. The simulations take out ALL traction, weather and driver variables, meaning the results tend to be closer to the best possible results. Just like every other car in history the new M4 will trap at a variety of different values. Just like my prior comments about the 060, the 1/4 mi traps will vary and (reasonably big) IF my weight AND power values are accurate the car should trap at or above 120. As to sun 4 second 060 it was done by Car and Driver magazine. For a link and a better idea of what statistics mean for the current E92 M3 have a look here at the performance "database" we have put together.
__________________
E92 M3  Space Gray on Fox Red  MDCT  CF Roof  RAC RG63 Wheels  Brembo 380mm BBK   Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust  Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors   Alekshop Back up Camera  GP Thunders  BMW Aluminum Pedals  Elite Angels   XPEL Full Front Wrap  Hardwired V1  Interior Xenon Light Kit  

Appreciate
0

06032013, 10:04 PM  #53  
Lieutenant General
534
Rep 10,408
Posts 
Quote:
I agree about the 1.2 g, it is quite high. That being said if the next generation of the Michelin Pilot is out by that time, who knows, just like cars tire tech continues to march on. Pretty sure the interruption in acceleration is wheel spin. Again despite the existence of a power plateau, as long as the force curves vs. speed and across gears do not overlap, it still provides better acceleration to shift at redline after a period of rapidly dropped torque. Quote:
__________________
E92 M3  Space Gray on Fox Red  MDCT  CF Roof  RAC RG63 Wheels  Brembo 380mm BBK   Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust  Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors   Alekshop Back up Camera  GP Thunders  BMW Aluminum Pedals  Elite Angels   XPEL Full Front Wrap  Hardwired V1  Interior Xenon Light Kit  

Appreciate
0

06032013, 10:05 PM  #54 
Lieutenant General
534
Rep 10,408
Posts 
I have slightly modified your statement. Cheers.
__________________
E92 M3  Space Gray on Fox Red  MDCT  CF Roof  RAC RG63 Wheels  Brembo 380mm BBK   Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust  Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors   Alekshop Back up Camera  GP Thunders  BMW Aluminum Pedals  Elite Angels   XPEL Full Front Wrap  Hardwired V1  Interior Xenon Light Kit  
Appreciate
0

06032013, 10:07 PM  #55 
Lieutenant General
534
Rep 10,408
Posts 
Thank you to jamarino21 and eMvy, background is an essential element in appreciating certain contributions.
__________________
E92 M3  Space Gray on Fox Red  MDCT  CF Roof  RAC RG63 Wheels  Brembo 380mm BBK   Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust  Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors   Alekshop Back up Camera  GP Thunders  BMW Aluminum Pedals  Elite Angels   XPEL Full Front Wrap  Hardwired V1  Interior Xenon Light Kit  
Appreciate
0

06032013, 10:09 PM  #56 
Lieutenant
21
Rep 490
Posts 
Think all you guys are forgetting one big competitor. The C63 AMG.
The current one already has 481HP and 443lb torque. It will do 060 in 3.7 and 1/4 mile in 12.1 at 120mph. I will be truly disappointed if the new M3 won't break 500HP. It's competition the next C63, next RS4/5, and many many other cars will put the M3 in the dust if this happens. http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012mercedesbenzc63amgcoupeinstrumentedtest
__________________
2011 535i Alpine White, Oyster on black interior, Premium 1 & 2 Package, Magnaflow Full CatBack Exhaust, JB4 Stage 2

Appreciate
0

06032013, 10:14 PM  #57  
Lieutenant General
534
Rep 10,408
Posts 
Quote:
I think you have missed the contributions and large amount of effective hp that MDCT is good for. There are many threads on this topic but MDCT may be good for at least 20 perhaps in some cases and some metrics good for close to 50 hp. Also have a look at my prior comments about ranges and statistics. Single figures do not make good comparisons. Every component on each generation of car evolves, chassis stiffness, suspension, suspension hook up ability, parasitic drive train losses (these evolve slowly...), tires, etc. Again for the nth time, consider these numbers a range to cover the best reported times.
__________________
E92 M3  Space Gray on Fox Red  MDCT  CF Roof  RAC RG63 Wheels  Brembo 380mm BBK   Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust  Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors   Alekshop Back up Camera  GP Thunders  BMW Aluminum Pedals  Elite Angels   XPEL Full Front Wrap  Hardwired V1  Interior Xenon Light Kit  

Appreciate
0

06032013, 10:16 PM  #58 
Lieutenant General
534
Rep 10,408
Posts 
Both excellent points. Like I've said many times before and also in the OP, garbage in, garbage out. The inputs here are not unreasonable but are absolutely ASSUMPTIONS at this point.
__________________
E92 M3  Space Gray on Fox Red  MDCT  CF Roof  RAC RG63 Wheels  Brembo 380mm BBK   Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust  Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors   Alekshop Back up Camera  GP Thunders  BMW Aluminum Pedals  Elite Angels   XPEL Full Front Wrap  Hardwired V1  Interior Xenon Light Kit  
Appreciate
0

06032013, 10:19 PM  #59  
Lieutenant General
534
Rep 10,408
Posts 
Quote:
Despite the AMGs rapid improvements in the handling department and on track performance the M has most often bested competitors on a road course but not always at the drag strip. Probably not much different this time around...
__________________
E92 M3  Space Gray on Fox Red  MDCT  CF Roof  RAC RG63 Wheels  Brembo 380mm BBK   Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust  Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors   Alekshop Back up Camera  GP Thunders  BMW Aluminum Pedals  Elite Angels   XPEL Full Front Wrap  Hardwired V1  Interior Xenon Light Kit  

Appreciate
0

06032013, 10:30 PM  #60  
Major General
4583
Rep 5,410
Posts 
Quote:
__________________
2020 HS M2C DCT (Perfect)
2 x N54 (Unreliable) 1 x N55 (Slow) Last edited by ASAP; 06032013 at 10:35 PM.. 

Appreciate
0

06032013, 11:16 PM  #61  
Lieutenant
21
Rep 490
Posts 
Quote:
The C63 AMG with performance pkg will break 120 mph in 1/4 mile. It's $70k. The Vette C06 also does 11.8 at 120. It starts at $76k. The GT500 does it in 11.5 at 126mph. It starts at $60k. I'm pretty sure the next base Vette with 460HP, 450lb torque, weights 3300lbs will break 120mph as well. And that starts at $50k. Add those to your sub 100k cars that does 120. Point is as much I love BMW, they are pretty behind in the HP game.
__________________
2011 535i Alpine White, Oyster on black interior, Premium 1 & 2 Package, Magnaflow Full CatBack Exhaust, JB4 Stage 2


Appreciate
0

06032013, 11:49 PM  #62  
Lieutenant General
534
Rep 10,408
Posts 
Quote:
Let's get to the main point here though with another approach. Your guesses/observations are fundamentally rooted in a cars power to weight ratio, correct? Have a look at the "state of the art" in predictions of trap speeds based on power to weight alone. Generally speaking it is much less accurate than a physics based simulation approach used in my OP but it still offers some definite insights and you might relate to it better. LRT best fit regression. Now if you are better at curve fitting large, complex data sets, IN YOUR HEAD, than this formula, feel free to let me know. However, I doubt it. Humans tend to get pretty good at such curve fitting and extrapolation but you CANNOT ON AVERAGE beat the formula. That basically the definition of the curve fit formula... For a 440 crank hp E92 M3 (give me 25 hp on top of 414 for DCT, that is a minimal number) with a weight with driver of 3700 lb. The formula above predicts an trap speed of 113 mph. Not bad for a quick first pass formula, eh!? The best time for a stock E92 M3 in the database I referred to earlier is about 115 mph. Let's say the formula is under predicting by 2 mph (you could also figure out if that a higher power figure is better, which in this case might indicate some underrating). For the sake of simplicity I'll stick with this approach. The formula certainly can not predict each and every car perfectly, with this simple model so many variables are not accounted for. However, it captures the simplest dominant effect of power to weight ratio. Next for the M4 lets use 475 hp (450 actual + 25 for DCT benefits), with a weight with driver of 3600 we get 117 mph from the formula. You might personally have a gut feel that this number is "just about right". However, giving the same +2 mph of difference between observation and predictions for the current E92 M3 we then arrive at 119 mph. Hmmm.... Maybe 120 mph really isn't too unreasonable. Maybe we'll also never see 123 out in the real world. As a small aside though I have noticed that trap speeds from CarTest are not its strongest prediction capability. I've received some valid criticism of my prior work on the forum where trap speeds are a bit under predicted compared to the best achieved results from real tests. Note that 113 mph and change from CarTest for the current E92 M3 whereas 115 is a better best figure! It is all coming together for you? I do hope there is some of this getting through to you, it's actually some really good stuff in my humble opinion.
__________________
E92 M3  Space Gray on Fox Red  MDCT  CF Roof  RAC RG63 Wheels  Brembo 380mm BBK   Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust  Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors   Alekshop Back up Camera  GP Thunders  BMW Aluminum Pedals  Elite Angels   XPEL Full Front Wrap  Hardwired V1  Interior Xenon Light Kit  Last edited by swamp2; 06042013 at 12:04 AM.. 

Appreciate
0

06042013, 02:17 AM  #64 
Lieutenant
162
Rep 438
Posts 
Nice analysis swamp2.
Regarding about shifting at redline or lower to get as much acceleration as possible ,some of you guys must understand that even if the engine does not produce peak power at redline it can still be better to shift at this point. Because when you shift up obviously the rpms will drop and your power output may be higher in this point as oppose to shifting at lower rpm where peak power is but land on lower power in the next gear. The goal is to use as much average power as possible to the ground not just shift at peak engine power. If its best to shift at redline or lower depends on the engines power delivery and on how the gearing is set up it may be diffrent for certain gears as clearly swamp2 understand. Last edited by Holset; 06042013 at 02:23 AM.. 
Appreciate
0

06042013, 03:18 AM  #65 
Brigadier General
103
Rep 3,094
Posts 
You got at least one key thing wrong
F10 m5 not shifting at redline? You dont shift at peak tq you shift at the point where tq effective (counting final drive and gear ratio) is higher in higher gear M5 you ALWAYS shift at redline 
Appreciate
0

06042013, 03:39 AM  #66  
Brigadier General
103
Rep 3,094
Posts 
Quote:
Going by the graph an data you yourself provided.. It WILL be a shift at redline every gear, as it carries more power/torque there than you'll gain with the longer multiplication 

Appreciate
0

Post Reply 
Bookmarks 
Thread Tools  Search this Thread 

