ultraseven

I'm not sure how much the DCT can help in improving 1/4 mile times. 0-60, maybe. From a roll, torque plays a much more important factor. DCT will bring the M3 closer in a straight line, but I highly doubt how it can take over a C63.

AWDman

true-to some extent. again it falls to gearing. consider what constitutes the actual driving force between tire and road and you may start to understand. (any gearing reduction is a torque multiplier).

F10 M5

once you're rolling torque plays less of a factor your already moving. torque helps you get off the line but does not make you go faster. think about F-1 high horsepower low torque. look at Ferrari high horsepower low torque. you also need to compare torque to the wheels and torque under the power curve. torque is great for city driving and is great when you miss shift but not for racing or from a roll or in the twisties.

Improviz

Not true. The laws of physics do not change with the speed of a vehicle. Torque is rotational force, and without it, your vehicle wouldn't move, period. What gets a vehicle moving is how well the engine produces torque over its operational range, combined with how well its gearing optimizes the usage of the torque band of the engine.

At any given speed, the force accelerating the vehicle is equal to the engine's torque at that rpm times the multiplication of the gear times the final drive ratio, multiplied by a constant.

This is why M5s do so well at high speeds compared to an E55, but are equal down low: if you look at the torque multiplication times the peak engine torque of the two cars, it is illustrative. The following is the percentage of torque multiplication provided by gears 1 thru 4 in an E55 to that of an M5. So, for example, in 1st gear, the gearing of an E55 provides 69% of the torque multiplication of an M5. This helps the M5 run with the E55 at lower speeds, even though the E55's torque is around 140% greater.

You can see this mathematically: if you take the E55's max torque of 530 lb-ft and multiply it by .69, you get 365--right in the same range as the M5's peak torque.

1st: 0.69
2nd: 0.64
3rd: 0.61
4th: 0.56 <-- looky here!
5th: 0.56

As you can see, there's a sharp drop going into third, and a marked drop off in 4th gear, which if you watch videos of stock vs stock, you will see that the top of third into 4th (in the E55) is where the M5 starts to pull away. It is geared better.

Of course, the drawback to more agressive gearing is poorer fuel economy, which is why I get better mileage in my 5.5L V8 than the E46 M3 gets with a 3.2L I6.

kip

The dkg M3 is not that much faster...
Autobild test drove the dkg M3 vs the manual m3:
http://www.autobild.de/artikel/test-...kg_692888.html

Results:

Technische Daten M3 Coupé M3 Coupé DKG
Motor V8, vorn längs V8, vorn längs
Hubraum 3999 cm3 3999 cm3
kW (PS) bei U/min 309 (420)/8300 309 (420)/8300
Drehmoment bei U/min 400/3900 400/3900
Getriebe Sechsgang manuell 7-Gang-DKG
0–100 km/h 4,8 s 4,6 s
0–200 km/h 16,3 s 15,2 s
Elastizität 60–100 4./5. Gang 5,1/6,3 s 4,3/5,5 s
Elastizität 80–120 6./7. Gang 7,6/– s 6,3/8,2 s
Verbrauch auf 100 km – CO2 13,8 l – 328 g/km 13,0 l – 311 g/km
Rundenzeit* 1:35.41 min 1:35.11 min
Preis 66.650 € 70.450 €

M3 still slower!
http://www.autobild.de/artikel/test-...mg_513824.html

Messwerte B3 M3 C 63 AMG
Beschleunigung
0– 50 km/h 2,1 s 2,1 s 2,2 s
0–100 km/h 5,0 s 4,8 s 4,7 s
0–130 km/h 7,5 s 7,4 s 6,9 s
0–160 km/h 10,8 s 10,3 s 9,6 s
0–200 km/h 16,9 s 15,2 s 14,4 s
Viertelmeile
0–402,34 m 13,21 s 13,07 s 12,70 s
Elastizität
60–100 km/h 2,4 s (Zwischenspurt) 3,8 s (4. Gang) 2,2 s (Zwischenspurt)
80–120 km/h – 5,7 s (5. Gang) –
80–120 km/h 3,0 s (Zwischenspurt) 7,1 s (6. Gang) 2,7 s (Zwischenspurt)
Bremsweg (Verzögerung)
100–0 km/h kalt 36,6 m (–10,5 m/s²) 32,7 m (–11,8 m/s²) 34,6 m (–11,1 m/s²)
100–0 km/h warm 35,2 m (–11,0 m/s²) 34,8 m (–11,2 m/s²) 35,2 m (–11,0 m/s²)
200–0 km/h warm 149,0 m (–10,4 m/s²) 143,7 m (–10,7 m/s²) 151,8 m (–10,2 m/s²)
Testverbrauch
Ø auf 100 km 13,3 l Super Plus 13,6 l Super Plus 16,5 l Super Plus
Reichweite 470 km 460 km 400 km

C63///AMG

it's reasonable. C&D tested the C63 and did 3.9/12.3 fastest version
R&T tested the manual M3 and did 4.1sec fastest version
bmw say the MDCT is 0.2sec faster than the manual in 0-60mph
so? 3.9 vs 3.9, match~~~

kip

RandTmanual m3 got 4.6... so it would be 4.4! And the c63 got 4.1!
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...comp_chart.pdf

CandD got 3.9 vs 4.3 in the test you are referring to so it would be 3.9 vs 4.1 and the c63 is fater at the top end!
http://www.caranddriver.com/content/...comparo_ts.pdf

Please dont compare different mags as they use different equipment etc.

C63///AMG

road & track tested the lexus IS350 two times, one is 6.0sec, one is 4.9sec, all from R&T.
this is just one example. There are also lots other examples that same magz same car but different results.

so u r saying that becuz they use different equipments, one mag's measurements could be either faster or slower than the other mag.
There are even much more examples to prove that u are wrong.
one example: R&T: 3.4sec for GTR, C&D: 4.1sec for GTR, so R&T is faster than C&D.
BUT, R&T: 4.1sec for C63, C&D: 3.9sec for C63, so C&D is faster than R&T.
This is according to ur theory. self-contradiction. and nonsense.


u know, u can get ur C63 to 60mph in 4.5sec ezly, u can also get ur C63 to 60mph in 6.5sec too. But u cannot get ur C63 to 60mph in 3.0sec

no matter what equipment they use, 4.1sec M3 is a fact. so does 3.9 for C63. (maybe that's not yet the best number that the cars can do, but so far, it's the record up to now)

There could only be one fastest version. But so many slower versions.

U cant just pick a slower version for car A and compare to the fastest version for car B. u think that's fair?

ItalianStallion

I saw a black paddle shift e92 M3 at the Edgewater meet. I also test drove the manual e92 M3. The lack of torque was disturbing to me.

I'm sure the dual clutch sequential is faster than the traditional manual. Just look at a stick-shift M5/M6 against the SMG version. The SMG is considerably faster.

Last Emperor

a fully loaded 09 C63 is over 70K


and even if the M3 has the performance edge

it dosnt look HALF AS GOOD as the C63 IMHO

kip

First of all RELAX!

But since you want a debate:

This form the r&t test, please READ why the result was 0-60 in 6.0:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=2772

"The new 3.5 is a great engine with enough power to make the IS 350 a very quick car, able to hit 60 mph in 6.0 seconds flat and consume the quarter mile in 14.5 sec. at 98.6 mph…this, on a power-sapping 93-degree summer day. A trained ear can tell this V-6 is direct injected via the slight clicking sounds it makes at idle. Inside the car, however, the engine is nigh impossible to hear, barring wide-open-throttle conditions when the exhaust takes on a slightly aggressive character. At idle, our sound meter shows the IS to be especially silent, nearly as quiet inside as its LS 430 brethren."

The reasons are all there: Hot day, bridgestone vs Dunlop tires, 2005 vs 2006 model (different ecu maybe?, look at the e55 reflash). Idont understand why u are surprised. But on that 2005 october day the Infinity and Acura would have been slower also.

The tests I posted are from the same magazine, most from the SAME DAY. The other tests might be done by different drivers on a different track???!!! I dont even understand why you mean with the equipment thing there? Off course different equipement give different results and different days also, but weather conditions, tire condition, amount of fuel, weight of the driver give different results and they are never stated in the results. SOme mags use the 1 foot delete, others dont.

You use a lot of energy in proving me wrong (I agree that you cant fully compare different day tests on even same mags but the same mags give you some idea and why would you try to prove that wrong?), but why dont you try to explain to me what you want, real life videos or other proof maybe???? What possible MORE info could they give?

My point was, not that car magazine tests are exact, because they ARE NOT, but they are closest to the truth. What would YOU regard as truth?

You can see that the C63 is consistently faster than a M3 DKG or manual, thats what also your tests prove. Comparing different mag results does not give almost ANY info. The truth is that comparing same mags might also not, but atleast they are MORE accurate.

And buy the way who actually gives a crap about 0-60. You can get the same time from a sl65or slr 0-60, but higher up they will be faster. The c63 is also faster higher up than the M3. We should be talking about 1/4 mile and trap speeds or 0-120mph.

And where did I say this??? :

"U cant just pick a slower version for car A and compare to the fastest version for car B. u think that's fair?"

Because I dont see where I am saying that!

mcc3456

CORRECTION:

Car and Driver has tested the DCT and had the article on their website yesterday. I don't want to spoil the ending for you, but let's put it this way, it was a grave disappointment. Check it out for yourself!

I am glad I did not wait for my M3 to come in. Only 5 more weeks til my C63 arrives. Woo Hoo!!

mcc3456

[QUOTE=ItalianStallion;2903526]I saw a black paddle shift e92 M3 at the Edgewater meet. I also test drove the manual e92 M3. The lack of torque was disturbing to me. QUOTE]



Exactly why I made the leap to the C63.

C63///AMG

I know those factors could affect the results. THATS WHY there is always a fastest version, becuz MAYBE they tested it at a very good condition. THATS WHY we should use their fastest version to compare to be fair.

the 0-60mph number is just an idea, so does 1/4mile. if u like the 1/4mile number, i can change all of them to 1/4 mile numbers, not a problem.

kip

Thank You! Now we agree.

And the conclusion is that the c63 will be faster than a DKG M3 anyway you look at it.

th3Stig

This is hilarious. Didn't you all forget about how C&D rated the new M3 better than a 997 turbo and the GT-R??? American Car mags are a waste of paper. Even there quoted figures can't be trusted anymore.

Although, as ironic as this is as per their title, 0-60 is actually legitimate. Read their latest issue and see what they say... seriously. In the meantime...


Wait a few months, get legitimate drag slips and numerous videos (not just one) for the E92 M3 vs C63 feud and compare them to everything else on the market. It will tell you the most once the REAL numbers are out; until then just give it some time for the M3 owners to ACTUALLY drive them like they say...

kip

[QUOTE=th3Stig;2906409]This is hilarious. Didn't you all forget about how C&D rated the new M3 better than a 997 turbo and the GT-R??? American Car mags are a waste of paper. Even there quoted figures can't be trusted anymore.
QUOTE]

No I think I will never understand the result. It was the most sensible car in the group??? WTF! They were lookinf for a sensible car from a group of 997 turbo, gtr, m3. WHy not add a F1 Mclaren, Bugatti Veyron and a Nissan Micra and choose the Nissan as a sensible. But you have to say the testsed cars are interesting and the mags cost about 1/10 of what they cost here in Europe. And even though they are expensive here they DO manipulate the results and get wierd results here also. Like SPort auto got exactly the same result for a 545i BMW and a 535d. The 545i result was the worst ive ever seen. THey wanted to make a statement that a diesel car is just as good, but it just isnt.

spr

Have you ever seen how C&D or R&T get those uber low 0-60 results? They will rev the car on up to 5k+ and jump the clutch. How many times can you do that or how many people know how to do that without hurting or breaking things?? In the real world I don't know of anyone who does this 2k sure 5k+ never! Further they experiment on dumping it from redline on down to see what's optimal

MB needs to get with it and design more room for tire for their C's. What is the widest rear tires and rims anyone has gotten to fit btw?

On a rolling start I do think torque plays into the mix and manual mode defnitely is a killer. It simply lags too much to allow you to obtain the exact proper shift point regardless of how much more quickly it shifts. It's actually quite silly. They should transfer the mapping and shifting latency to S mode

Last Emperor

BTW, a fully FULLY loaded '09 C63 is over 70-71K

C63///AMG

well if u agree to use all fastest version, then it's 3.9 vs 4.1
M3 plus MDCT = 4.1 - 0.2 = 3.9
so 3.9 vs 3.9 match again. just like i said
MAYBE after 1/4, C63 still a lil bit faster, like maybe after 160mph, but we dont have a prove yet, thats almost topspeed. so usually when u compare acceleration, just 0-60 or 1/4miles.
at least i dont wana get pulled over by the police

C63///AMG

then how does a bmw 335i faster than a E36 M3? and matchs E46 M3?
the era are changing man.

And, the ratings are NOT just 0-60mph and 1/4mile. they compare everything. the looks, design, engine, comfort, eco, space, etc etc etc.

Personaly i dont 100% believe the total number of ratings because it includes some personal opinions or biased.
But for test result, i do. At least they are not lying.

U believe all those ppl tested on the drag. well, I dont 100% believe, becuz, for most of the times, it's not fair. first of all. some ppl might has some mod that u DONT know. eventhough they say it's all stock. but by changing the tires, changing the gear ratios, they still say it's stock. but it will really affect the acceleration result compare to the REAL stock car. Secondly, most of them do burn out before launch. Do u always do burn out on the street whenever u launch?

whoever u believe, that's just ur personal opinion.

jarjoug

It might be a repost
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...&highlight=c63

George

kip

No I agreed there are differences in tests even on the same day and that factors effect results, but not to your speculation of best in any mag comparison. Plus your dct time is pure speculation until proven c63 3.9 vs 4.1 for the m3 for now and even more higher up even on your best in any test result (12.3@116 vs 12.8@113/ 0-200 0r 0-120 mph 13.7 vs 15.3). WOW how close!!! Dont speculate or show dct tests below 4.1 first!


Look at the test posted above! According to your theory, because the fastest test for M3 dct is now 0-60 4.1 the M3 manual and DCT are equally fast.

END of story!

py0413

depends on where you live. some ppl out there already enjoy their DCT M3 for a while

Clk&Slk

Yup !!! He's exactly right. It hard to believe if you only look at the numbers. Depending on how fast and what gears the roll race start, sometime you not even in the "torque" powerband anymore and so there's not much benefit. Remember, torques=quick and hp=speed.