M3/M4's making some big power
10-08-2014, 04:36 PM
#51
Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 142
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C6 Z06, 997 C2S
Maybe on a scale....with a person and fuel in it. If that's the case, add that to the BMW, too.
Curb weight is under 3200lbs. Just like the curb weight of the M4 is just under 3600lbs.
Thanks for trying to obscure the numbers to prove yourself correct!
Z06 weigh sub 3200lbs, dyno around 450hp on dynojets and run low 11's at 125.
Mustang GT's weight 3550ish, dyno around 390 on a dynojet and run 12.5's at 112-114.
BMW M4's weight 3550, dyno around 420hp and run high 11's to low 12's at 119mph. Which slots right in between the two. Sounds perfectly reasonable.
Curb weight is under 3200lbs. Just like the curb weight of the M4 is just under 3600lbs.
Thanks for trying to obscure the numbers to prove yourself correct!
Z06 weigh sub 3200lbs, dyno around 450hp on dynojets and run low 11's at 125.
Mustang GT's weight 3550ish, dyno around 390 on a dynojet and run 12.5's at 112-114.
BMW M4's weight 3550, dyno around 420hp and run high 11's to low 12's at 119mph. Which slots right in between the two. Sounds perfectly reasonable.
Also look up YouTube videos of C63's dyno on EAS' dyno...the numbers all line up IMHO, even when you take into account the different day / weather variables.
Like I said the same day when all the M3/4s were dyno'ed a full bolt-on E90 M3 made 366whp and my buddy's stock LS3 Vette made 395whp. The same day a stock M4 made 422whp IIRC.
10-08-2014, 04:44 PM
#52
Out Of Control!!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 11,803
Received 2,070 Likes
on
1,443 Posts
2014 E63S; AMS 100 octane ecu tune; edok tcu tune; BB intakes; dyno tuned
Lotta action lotta action
Last edited by PeterUbers; 10-08-2014 at 04:46 PM.
10-08-2014, 04:49 PM
#53
Peak Numbers look good but damn that motor dies off quickly uptop. The peak numbers of Map 1 & 7 are 30 whp and 40wtq but uptop the numbers are the same so good for midrange acceleration but wont help much unless you short shift the crap out of it with short gearing. The S63tu motor in the M5/M6 is a lot more impressive not only for peak numbers but they hold there power all the way to 7,200rpm redline and even BMS has tried running them on vbox on the same roads with the m5 much faster in 60-130 runs aka highway roll races. Not to mention the m157 tuned is clearly faster then the s63tu. I think the m177 will have a decisive advantage over the s55 and the weights should be close
10-08-2014, 04:53 PM
#54
Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 142
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C6 Z06, 997 C2S
Yup S55 definitely dies off top end due to tiny turbos
There's a vid of a JB4 M4 vs. a stock Stingray and top end the Stingray stuck with the M4 really well
There's a vid of a JB4 M4 vs. a stock Stingray and top end the Stingray stuck with the M4 really well
10-08-2014, 05:11 PM
#55
Yup S55 definitely dies off top end due to tiny turbos
There's a vid of a JB4 M4 vs. a stock Stingray and top end the Stingray stuck with the M4 really well
M4 JB4 Stage 1 Vs. C7 Corvette Stingray - YouTube
There's a vid of a JB4 M4 vs. a stock Stingray and top end the Stingray stuck with the M4 really well
M4 JB4 Stage 1 Vs. C7 Corvette Stingray - YouTube
Wow that stingray started coming back hard at the end ! Expected more vs a stock stingray even if its only a stage 1 jb4
10-08-2014, 05:32 PM
#57
Wrongo
Unladen
Using your numbers the M is 7-8% heavier but has 7-8% more torque
Should be same speed
The M4 should be faster dct vs manual
Should be running same as gtr
It isn't lol
Unladen
Using your numbers the M is 7-8% heavier but has 7-8% more torque
Should be same speed
The M4 should be faster dct vs manual
Should be running same as gtr
It isn't lol
Maybe on a scale....with a person and fuel in it. If that's the case, add that to the BMW, too.
Curb weight is under 3200lbs. Just like the curb weight of the M4 is just under 3600lbs.
Thanks for trying to obscure the numbers to prove yourself correct!
Z06 weigh sub 3200lbs, dyno around 450hp on dynojets and run low 11's at 125.
Mustang GT's weight 3550ish, dyno around 390 on a dynojet and run 12.5's at 112-114.
BMW M4's weight 3550, dyno around 420hp and run high 11's to low 12's at 119mph. Which slots right in between the two. Sounds perfectly reasonable.
Curb weight is under 3200lbs. Just like the curb weight of the M4 is just under 3600lbs.
Thanks for trying to obscure the numbers to prove yourself correct!
Z06 weigh sub 3200lbs, dyno around 450hp on dynojets and run low 11's at 125.
Mustang GT's weight 3550ish, dyno around 390 on a dynojet and run 12.5's at 112-114.
BMW M4's weight 3550, dyno around 420hp and run high 11's to low 12's at 119mph. Which slots right in between the two. Sounds perfectly reasonable.
10-08-2014, 06:33 PM
#58
Senior Member
So again, I have no clue how you think a M4 dynoing 427hp at 3600lbs should be running the same times as a Z06.
Stop doing calculations and look at the numbers staring you in the face, my man.
Here's a stock Z06 on a dynojet.
HA!
So...please enlighten me as to why the 5.0 that's the same weight, that's RWD with a great auto, and has nearly identical hp/tq that you claim the BMW has, runs a half a second slower and 6-8mph slower in the 1/4 mile if the BMW isn't severely underrated?
Last edited by Illegal Machine; 10-08-2014 at 06:43 PM.
10-08-2014, 06:46 PM
#59
They do take trap speed into conideration
Gtr > 3800 lbs 450 lb ft (older base model 523 hp 451 lb ft)
M4 < 3600 lbs 505 lb ft
8-10 mph documented difference in trap speed
The lighter more powerful car is slower lol
The m4 is 7% lighter
Has 14% more torque
But traps >8 mph slower
Nope
Nadda
Not on this planet
Unless the m4 is at sea level and the Gtr on Everest lol
Gtr > 3800 lbs 450 lb ft (older base model 523 hp 451 lb ft)
M4 < 3600 lbs 505 lb ft
8-10 mph documented difference in trap speed
The lighter more powerful car is slower lol
The m4 is 7% lighter
Has 14% more torque
But traps >8 mph slower
Nope
Nadda
Not on this planet
Unless the m4 is at sea level and the Gtr on Everest lol
Last edited by Ingenieur; 10-08-2014 at 06:49 PM.
10-08-2014, 07:02 PM
#61
We must agree to disagree
He thinks a 400 lb lighter car with over 10% more power/torque is the same speed as the heavier less powerful car
I do not
0-150
M4 23.3
2008 base C 63 22.8
Same testing body
But if the m4 is rated 425/406 this is perfectly aligned
Less torque but lighter = same speed
Elementary my dear Watson
He thinks a 400 lb lighter car with over 10% more power/torque is the same speed as the heavier less powerful car
I do not
0-150
M4 23.3
2008 base C 63 22.8
Same testing body
But if the m4 is rated 425/406 this is perfectly aligned
Less torque but lighter = same speed
Elementary my dear Watson
10-08-2014, 07:09 PM
#62
Senior Member
They do take trap speed into conideration
Gtr > 3800 lbs 450 lb ft (older base model 523 hp 451 lb ft)
M4 < 3600 lbs 505 lb ft
8-10 mph documented difference in trap speed
The lighter more powerful car is slower lol
The m4 is 7% lighter
Has 14% more torque
But traps >8 mph slower
Nope
Nadda
Not on this planet
Unless the m4 is at sea level and the Gtr on Everest lol
Gtr > 3800 lbs 450 lb ft (older base model 523 hp 451 lb ft)
M4 < 3600 lbs 505 lb ft
8-10 mph documented difference in trap speed
The lighter more powerful car is slower lol
The m4 is 7% lighter
Has 14% more torque
But traps >8 mph slower
Nope
Nadda
Not on this planet
Unless the m4 is at sea level and the Gtr on Everest lol
Last I checked, GTR's dyno more HP and TQ than the M4. Traps that I've seen are 125-126mph. High 10's aren't uncommon because of the AWD and transmission bursting launch control.
10-08-2014, 07:15 PM
#63
YOUR M4 is 505 per the dyno with 15% losses
That is ONLY a 12% delta
So we agree
The M4 should be a sub 11 and 125+ car
10-08-2014, 07:16 PM
#64
Senior Member
But I guess your formulas took all of that into account, as well! Right?
Right?
Look at the videos posted above of the M4 falling on it's face in roll races.
Why does the M4 absolutely obliterate it in the 1/4 mile if BMW claims it to have essentially the same weight, HP and torque as the Mustang?
10-08-2014, 07:27 PM
#67
Senior Member
So yes, a GTR wth 470/430, 3800lbs and the most sophisticated AWD launching system on earth is much faster than the M4 in the quarter mile.
10-08-2014, 07:36 PM
#68
Wheel hp = crank hp- loss %/100 x crank hp
= chp x ( 1 - loss %/100)
If losses = 15%
chp = whp / ( 1 - 0.15) = whp / 0.85
Same math applies for torque or any system with losses
429/0.85 = 504.8 sorry I used 505 lol
10-08-2014, 07:48 PM
#69
Senior Member
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ment-pack-test
SAME MAG!??!/one!!MagaZineRaZcors!
Motortrend got a 12.4 at 114.8 out of the C63 P31, and a 12.1 @ 117.8 out of the M4.
WHAAATTT!!?!?
Did these tests not occur in a vacuum, all starting at the exact same time with the exact same driver!?!? BUT MAGAZINES! FORMULAS! /engineers
As evidenced by that M4 time slip, 12.0 at 119mph is with a 2.0+ 60ft in the heat. With more people driving them, you'll start seeing 11.8-11.9's at 121-122.
I'm not in here claiming to know what the BMW's dyno numbers are. I haven't seen enough graphs. The car hasn't been out long enough.
I'm just saying they're 100% not 425/406 at the crank. No way in hell.
Last edited by Illegal Machine; 10-08-2014 at 08:13 PM.
10-08-2014, 07:58 PM
#70
Senior Member
Makes no difference in my argument.
10-08-2014, 08:02 PM
#71
Super Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2006 BMW 330i, 2009 C63
I ran 12.18 in my P31. I am going again Oct 18. I suspect I will be a little slower, due to the cold weather-I won't be able to hook.
stock C63 PP have run 12.1/120 in documentated magazine tests
no M4 has run better than 12.1/119
it's a rare C63 that dyno's 420 at the rear wheels
427 whp is 500 crank...the M is rated 426 crank
it is NOT under-rated by 15%
C63 run 20-23 0-150
the M's typically 22-24
the C is 400 lbs heavier
a 500/500 car 400 lbs lighter should run much faster than a 440/480 car 400 lbs heavier
not 'suspicious'
not 'possible'
no M4 has run better than 12.1/119
it's a rare C63 that dyno's 420 at the rear wheels
427 whp is 500 crank...the M is rated 426 crank
it is NOT under-rated by 15%
C63 run 20-23 0-150
the M's typically 22-24
the C is 400 lbs heavier
a 500/500 car 400 lbs lighter should run much faster than a 440/480 car 400 lbs heavier
not 'suspicious'
not 'possible'
10-08-2014, 08:03 PM
#72
Senior Member
Another great example of how absurd Magazines are, Motortrend could only get a 11.7 sec @ 125.4 mph out of the 707hp Challenger Hellcat.
That's their "official" time.
If you read the article, they couldn't launch the car without the tires exploding, so the best time they could get was launching in 2nd gear.
I've got no idea how they launched the C63 in 2011 vs the M4 in 2014. Frankly, I don't care. The ONE time slip I can find, shows that it's faster than the magazine indicated. As more and more of those cars hit the track, the more we'll see in the 11's. Seems pretty obvious.
That's their "official" time.
If you read the article, they couldn't launch the car without the tires exploding, so the best time they could get was launching in 2nd gear.
I've got no idea how they launched the C63 in 2011 vs the M4 in 2014. Frankly, I don't care. The ONE time slip I can find, shows that it's faster than the magazine indicated. As more and more of those cars hit the track, the more we'll see in the 11's. Seems pretty obvious.
10-08-2014, 08:04 PM
#73
Senior Member
10-08-2014, 08:06 PM
#74
Super Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2006 BMW 330i, 2009 C63
10-08-2014, 08:06 PM
#75
Senior Member
