Nij

Relax buddy, I wasn't making fun of any kind of car besides the fact that everyone has a predetermined idea that the BMW M3 is superfast, when it's not. It runs 13's...low 13's at best stock. I consider any car in the 12's fast, since you wanted to know.

Erik

OK, then we agree

Improviz

OK, so if I strip 400 pounds off of a car that'll run a low 13 and it dips into the 12's, what, exactly, does this prove, other than the fact that stripping weight off of a car makes it faster??

Physics tells us that force = mass*acceleration, so acceleration = force/mass. Lighten mass, and acceleration goes up: 1/100 is greater than 1/200. Great, so we've proven that Physics still works.

The point is that this car was not stock. It was modified. Modified != stock. I've run low 13's in my car, and if I took out the power seat, spare tire, rear seat, tool kit, radio, and every thing else that wasn't nailed down, I'd be in the 12's as well. Whoop-de-do...but my car would NOT be stock. It would be modified.

I don't believe it. He did a several-second long burnout, and anyone with a cursory knowledge of drag racing knows that this would actually *hurt* your times with street radials.

Yes, I know, he is the Greatest Driver in the History of Mankind, and he alone is capable of doing this--of course, stripping all of that weight, mounting new wheels (lighter wheels greatly help accleration, in case you weren't aware of this), and doing who knows what else had nothing to do with it.

"Knowledge of powershifting"??? Powershifting is simply keeping the throttle to the floor when you shift, so that you pick up a tenth or so from beating your driveline up...no special knowledge required. Unless you're claiming that keeping your left foot to the floor takes a special kind of skill....

So if it's oh so easy to break into the 12's in a stock M3, how about this: you, personally, come to my local drag strip. You, personaly, present a stock, unmodified M3. I, personally, will give you $1,000 for each run you get into the 12's.

Of course, to be fair: you, personally, will give me $1,000 for each run you do not.

Street tires, no pumping up the fronts to 90 psi, no juice, no removed filters, or other weight-saving measures.

How's that? I'm down...want to ante up??

As to Rutter: I flat-out busted him lying about his car when he posted the infamous video. Read for yourself:

And it still holds....not stock. So it proves that stripping weight, adding lighter wheels and probably drag radials, all make a car faster.

But it damn sure doesn't prove a stock, unmodified M3 can hit the 12's.

ano0oj

I'm not saying I don't believe him or anything, but doesn't the C55 have some trouble when it comes to an M3?

BiTurboV12 AMG

Lees car was 100% stock... end of story... a fight broke out on the M3 forum about this so he went back and did it with members that owned M3s and other people from other boards and proved them wrong.

first off lee has a drag racing history. he was able to launch his M3 great 5,000RPM launches plus power-shifting. he was a good driver..

If you guys really want to know why i doubt the M3 was racing or got a fair race here you go in the authors own words...

I slowed down and he came up in the lane next to me. As soon as he was about to the side door (going about 40) I floored it again and walked away from him again,..

so yes i have no doubt you pulled 4-5 cars since the M3 driver prop didnt floor it till way later since you didnt get a nice line up. with cars this close a .5 sec slower reaction time would be about 4-5 cars.

TopGun32

I had a similar experience with a STI, he would NOT line up and he tried to get the jump on me. I still reeled him in and over took him after 3rd and into 4th. Probably the M3 was about to take the jump, but the C32 took the jump before. Personally I would of waited.. a bit more..

by the way...if the M3 was NOT trying, the distance from one car to another would of been Greyhound buses and lots of them.

If a car is travelling 100 and the other car is travelling 60... you would NOT have only a 3 for 4 advantage. Logic right?

I do agree, that the driver probably floor it too late and gave up some point. But to think he was on the wrong gear or didn't try does not add up.

enough said about it... there are plenty of stories of M3 kiling C55/c32's/z06/GTO... so chalk one up to a pullied C32.

The other day I got my *** handed to me buy a S/C 6.0 SS Silverado with no cats and muffler, no bumper, and stock black wheels. He was infront of me, he took off like a demon, without me realizing he had the Vortec S/C and highly modified. I waited 1 or 2 secs and I went after him... he had about a 5 car lead and I reeled back 2 or 3 after 100mph... I would of needed to hit 120 or so to make up the difference..

if we would of lined up on the light, he would had the jump with AWD, massive torque, but I would say around 80 to 90 I would of overtaken him. I have never seen a 5k lbs truck move so fast at take off.

SEXSPHERE

He wasnt really raced you.. He just kept on following you..

cntlaw

It is a waste of time debate.

Based on my experience with many close contacts in our little jam roads here; if he/she is really that good, normally they will take over you once they have a chance. Only the guys with average cars such as S2000, 300zx nonSTi Subaru, SLK350 will follow your C55/C32 tail.

The guy could be a lousy driver / newbie or he/she just borrowed his daddy's M3 to impress his girlfriend on her birthday. A true M3 owner will not follow the damn C55/C32 tail. It is only he does not feel like to race for any reasons.

The best example was a M3 following my tail for quite a while and he had finally launched his car and that was loud and fast. I was carrying 4 persons at that time so no way I could have too much chance to race.

And I only found out very later why he was following my tail..... fck - there was a damn radar there which I did not know until I received the fcking ticket.

Erik

This is getting OT, but....

I have read the thread about this run before, and as much as I am supprised that it is possible to launch the M3 as fast as he did, he does sound creditable.
So his car is not 100% stock, he has a pulley and he has not the original rims and his car weighs 3230 lbs without driver. Does not sound like a car stripped of much weight to me.

Pulley: that is a "performance" mod, in this case not very helpfull, since he claims to run a 12,7x without it, and then the car was 75lbs heavier. Meaning an improvement of less than 0,1 sec!

Rims: I would not define a car as modded just by changing its rims. My guess is that they are 18", same as original. They may be leighter, and that could help a bit. The stock wheels aint excatly made by lead, so I have a hard time beliving it will be a significant change.

Weight of car: He him selves claim that the car has been 75 lbs heavier when he run without the pulleys, so yes he must have done something. 75 lbs is more or less the difference between half a tank of fuel and full tank of fuel.

Tire: He claim to run normal tires, I cant prove that right, and nobody can prove that wrong based on the available info.

Trap speed: 106-107 mph. That does not indicate anything special, I have seen both higher and lower. Since I have read several times on this board and other that the best indicator for increased power is the trap speed, it should indicate that this particular M3 has more or less average power, and that the possible weight reduction did not help much if anything at all. (Probably in the upper part of what is normal)

So to sum this up, we have a car that is for some reasson 75lbs leighter than it has been, it has aftermarked rims and he has a pulley.

So technically it is a modified car, but those mods are not worth much and his results are still impressive.

jpog

For the record, I just traded a 2005 M3 for a C55 a few months ago. The AMG is definitely faster. Just last night I raced a buddy of mine in a 2004 Carbon black/cinnamon M3 (beautiful) and left him several cars behind. No surprises here.

JPOG

Improviz

...after all, you are here for only one reason, to promote BMWs, as your posting history clearly shows....but the fact remains that Rutter lied about his mods. Read the link I posted to the thread of his where he first posted the video. He was asked, point blank, what his mods were when he ran that video. He said, in response, that his only mod was a pulley.



Removing seats is a mod. Adding new, lighter wheels and drag radials is a mod. Other weight-stripping measures is a mod. Mod stands for "modification". And M3's are not shipped like this one was shown.

As to your statement of the car's weight at the time of this run: you have absolutely no proof whatsoever that, at the time of this run, the car weighed what you claim it does. Nor do you have any proof, other than the word of a man who made patently false claims about his car's modifications at the time the video was taken, that the car had no further modifications.

And your silly claim that you, or we, need to disprove his over-the-top claims is laughable. The burden of proof is not on us; it is on him. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. He has claimed to have run this time in a stock M3, but has no proof, other than a video of an obviously-modded car. We don't have to prove he DIDN'T do it; he has to prove he DOES. I can't go out and claim to have run a 2 second 100 m dash with no witnesses or video and get a gold medal in track and field...duh.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

And in any case, I already DID prove the car was modified; watch the video. Those are not stock M3 wheels. The front and rear seats are missing. Obviously, modifications were made to the vehicle.

So troll to your heart's content, but any idiot can look at that video, pause it, and see that there is no front seat, that there are non-stock wheels, etc...in fact, I'll post the scans in the follow-up post immediately below this one. Further, anyone who knows anything about drag racing knows that you don't get a 1.7' 60' time in an M3 without drag radials.

Improviz

Not end of story. I did read the debates on the forum, and they didn't prove it any more than your claims and repeated parroting of the same unsubstantiated claims prove it. You are not the final word on this subject, and Rutter's own video shows that the car was not 100% stock. You are not even within 100 miles of him, did not witness this event, and cannot in any way, shape or form vouch for the condition of his car at the time of this run.

But the video can, and it clearly shows non-stock wheels, and missing front/rear seats.

End of story.

anerbe

what's with all the hostility Imp?

in all seriousness - please read my post carefully. I never once mentioned the word stock. I was simply pointing out that his so called mods do not reflect such a large difference in acceleration. Giving Lee's car to a novice/amateur will result in times very close to a stock m3, not into the 12's.

Secondly, I never claimed to have the same driving abilities as Lee, so I'd rather spend my money elsewhere. You can still keep your end of the deal, if you are willing to pay for a flight, provide me a car, and give me $1000 to try with no strings, sure. Or you can prove your point that his 'modified car' can run 12's with anybody driving - why don't you take out the seats on an m3 (after you borrow one) and run 12's? This sidetrack topic has no value in this thread.

Regarding his powershifting - read closely to my thread again. Powershifting abilities is different from 'knowledge' of the track. Send me a video of you doing similar shifting, then I'd consider it easy for anybody to do. You may want to remember this before you attempt - you keep your right foot planted when powershifting - left foot goes on the clutch.....

I don't know why you have such issues with disproving others? Why should he prove to you about what time he ran? He has witnessness. Speculate all you want, but it comes down to this - Street racing, there will not be a given winner between the M3, C32, C55, S4, etc.......why don't you prove your car will run in the 12's by removing weight. Then you can race the e55.....it runs 12's too....

No hard feelings were ever intended on my side, however I don't understand why you would be so condescending. You don't know my education background regarding physics - I'm finishing my Masters in ME - so I wouldn't play professor with such an elementary subject as a Force equation. Weight also affects traction.....BTW. All your theoretical BS regarding his lightened weight and "lightweight wheels" equaling a car that should do 12's clearly proves you have little experience in M3's and how difficult it is to squeeze faster times out of them.

My whole reason for posting was to clarify stats about Lee that were witnessed by others. I'm sure if people watching saw drag radials, it would have come up.

The thread starter claimed a 4-5 carlength victory on an m3. Good kill - however this does not say that the m3 is slower than a c32.

Oh yeah, I hope you don't continue with your personal remarks/dares towards me. I've been on this board for a while, and only try to help clarify topics, not to get in p3nis wars. Again, no hard feelings.

konaforever

400 pounds? You know how much you'd have to strip off an M3 to get 400 pounds off? You could replace every part with carbon fiber and you might get 400.

At most, with the removed parts, he lost a little over 100 pounds, maybe up to 150.

That's maybe 1/10 of a second off in the 1/4 mile.

konaforever

You do realize he's been to the track more than once and with different setups, don't you? That one video does not record every run he has had on the track. Geez.

BiTurboV12 AMG

Improve i never promote BMWs... show where i have. from personal experience of having an M3 SMG i can tell you its a crappy car and i wish i had gotten an AMG. I just hate it when we have people that come calling kills like this, the other day on the M3 forum some retard posted he killed an E55 AMG, he described it the same way as the C32 vs M3. Pulling up and flooring it then the E55 didnt have enough time to catch back up and pass. I bet you if i had a C350 came next to a C55 amg and floored it your C55 AMG wouldn't catch up till way over 100mph and up to 100mph i would have 4-5 cars i know that sounds strange but in the real world thats how it works. a prime example is that old video of the SLR playing with the E55 on the street it takes a ton of power to stop a car from pulling and then to walk away from one.

BiTurboV12 AMG

For all the doubters Lee went back to the track with people who *****ed about him having Mods including that pulley which he did have on his car for a shot time and took it off. He still ran a high 12 second 1/4mile. the topic of Lees car being stock has been beaten to death and i am sure if he still had his M3 he would prove you wrong but he just sold it this week.

Bing

What the fark!






double post

one here


and one in here:


https://mbworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=130319










like what i said in the other thread:

Erik

Yeah yeah yeah, and BMW even pay me tons of money to **** of the allmigthy Impro..... ,




Stupide me, that must be the most effective mods in history of mankind. Change the rims and maybe remove the seat and voila..... I cut my 1/4 mile time with almost a 1 sec. Why did I not think of that before......
Since you are such a genious, you cant reallly claim that the improvement from your " no way in hell a M3 can do better than low 13" down to mid 12 based on different rims and a removed seat and a (in this case) useless Pulley do you
If this car is heavily modified as you claim, changed rims and all...... would it not reflect in the trapspeed?

Lighten up Impro, you really need to get laid of something........ One guy does the 1/4 mile faster than you like and you go ballistic ( as usuall)...

Vomit

So do we all agree now that Ringer pulled 4-5 cars on an E46 from 40-100 MPH, and that it was a fair race?

If there is someone reading this in San Diego with a stock E46 and a good video camera, I would be happy to put this matter to rest once and for all.

Improviz

....konaforever, a picture says a thousand words, and that car was clearly modified well above and beyond what Rutter said. And I reiterate: IN THE POST where HE POSTED THE VIDEO from which THE ABOVE SHOTS WERE TAKEN, ***HE*** responded that his ONLY mod was a pulley.

And yet, as can be clearly seen in the photos above, the front and rear seats are gone, the wheels have been changed, and almost certainly the tires as well.

In other words, the photos of his car, from his video, directly contradict his claim of only a pulley mod. Click on the link and see for yourself. I am not talking about other times he went to the track, I am talking about the video he posted and the claims he made when he posted it.

Now, you guys can play shoot-the-messenger all day long, but it doesn't change the above facts. I don't care what someone *claims*, I care what the *facts* show, and in this case, the facts clearly contradict the claims.

So if you want to join the Flat Earth Society and deny the earth is round, by all means, please do so, but the facts are clear and irrefutable. The car was modified well beyond what he claimed, which at the very least puts his credibility on other claims into doubt.

And there were and are plenty of M3 owners who doubted and still doubt him, as can be seen by reading through the threads on those forums.

Now, Erik, as to you:

Whether or not you are compensated for what you do here is irrelavent. You are clearly here to promote BMWs over Mercedes; I invite anyone who thinks otherwise to click on your username, view your profile, select "find all posts by Erik", and judge for themselves. Virtually all that you do is inject yourself into whatever BMW vs Mercedes threads you find on any of the forums on this board, and take a position against Mercedes, for BMW. This is pretty difficult to dispute, and if you have any evidence to put forth to counter it, please do, because I sure haven't seen it.

And your typical deflect-through-namecalling tactics won't change this. People can read for themselves and see what motivates you.

Yes, changing the rims to a lighter rim can gain you a few tenths, just as changing to a heavier rim can cost you a few tenths. But my point is that the car obviously had drag radials. And drag radials would in and of themselves account for the lower ET but normal speed. They will pick you up time. This is why they sell them. They help your 60', and would explain how he was able to hit a 1.7 60' time.

And unless you can prove that his car weighed what you're claiming it weighed, you have nothing to support your argument.

The point is that the car was not stock. The claim was that stock M3's routinely dip into the 12's. The facts show otherwise.

No magazine test has hit the 12's, on any continent, and most are in the 13.3-13.6 range. This alone shows that the statement that they "routinely dip into the 12's" is to be taken with a shaker of salt. Couple it with the inconsistencies in Rutter's posts, and you certainly don't have an overwhelming case for taking this guy's experiences as The Gold Standard, to put it mildly.

As I said: if I claimed to have run a 2 second 100m dash, I would not be given a gold medal, and there is a reason for this.

Biturbo, on to you. Recently, there was a video posted in the C32/C55 forum recently which showed a stock C32 pulling a stock M3 by 2-3 lengths in three, not one, but three, rolling-start races. I take it you missed this?

This was stock vs. stock. We are talking (presumably) stock M3 vs. modded C32.

Furthermore, I did not invent the fact that each 0.1 in the 1/4 mile translates to about one carlength. It is widely known; look it up.

In mag tests, the C32 and M3 are pretty much even-steven. So if mods on a C32 pick it up 0.5 in the 1/4 mile, one would expect it to pull an M3 by about five carlengths in the 1/4 mile.

Period. Again: this is not my opinion, it is fact. If you have factual evidence to contradict the claim, which I've read in multiple car and drag racing mags, that each 0.1 translates to one carlength, OR that C32s with mods cannot pull 0.5 faster than stock, then you have something to support your argument.

Otherwise, you really don't have anything other than a belief which is unsupported by facts. There was a video posted in the C32/C55 forum recently which showed a stock C32 pulling a stock M3 by 2-3 lengths in three, not one, but three, rolling-start races.

You state that you're interested in facts; fine. So present some facts, not opinions, to refute the two previous facts, which I pointed out and can prove, with references and videos.

lastly, anerbe: I made no personal insults towards you. If I did, point it out. I simply countered your claims with facts.

I contend that "powershifting" is *defined* as keeping the throttle flat on the floor when shifting. Look it up. There is no skill involved, other than flooring the throttle at the beginning of the run and keeping it there throughout. If you have any evidence to support your claim that it takes special skill, present it.

And if this is all one does, how, exactly, is that complex? I've been driving manuals for longer than I've been driving autos, and can assure you that powershifting is a cakewalk; no motion of the right foot is involved! To perform a NON-powershift is more complex, as one must remove the right foot from the throttle; on a power shift, the only thing you have to do is hit the clutch with your left. Which you do every time you shift. Wow.

Now, you claim on one hand to be an ME student, and then claim that it is "theoretical" for me to state that removing mass from an object with a constant force will cause it to accelerate faster. This contradicts Newton's second law, force = mass*acceleration, => acceleration = force/mass. Therefore, acceleration is inversely proportional to mass. Therefore, removing mass will make the car accelerate faster if force is held constant.

Can you please explain where in your graduate studies you learned that Newton's second law does not apply to automobile acceleration?

As to traction: I already addressed that. I maintain that he had drag radials. A burnout like that shown in the video on street tires would hurt, not help, his time, because they are not designed to gain traction in response to an episode like that, as drag radials are.

As to Rutter's car, I've dealt with that already. I have shown that his claims are directly contradicted by photos from his own video. If you find him to be absolutely credible despite this, fine; it is your choice. But you don't have any proof.

I read the threads. There were lots of BMW M3 owners who discounted and still discount his claims. His car was modded. There is no video, no evidence whatsoever other than his word, that he ran 12's stock.

And I am not "obsessed with disproving" anything; I am simply stating my opinion that this is not possible in a stock M3, and that the facts don't show it to be possible either. If someone came in here and claimed to be running 1.7 60' times and 12.7 1/4 miles in a CLK55, I wouldn't believe them either.

My reason for posting this is because Rutter is constantly cited as "proof" that M3's are really capable of, in stock form, running nearly a full second faster than what the magazines are getting, and I've run and beaten far too many of them to buy that. Further, I've been drag racing for longer than you've been alive assuming you graduated high school and went straight to college, and can promise you that an M3 is incapable of hitting a 1.7 60' time stock, period, and I'll gladly give $1000 to anyone who can perform that feat, provided I can drive and inspect thier car and tires.

And lastly, I again don't understand your statement that I have 'hard feelings" towards you; I am merely stating my position and facts which I feel support it. Nor do I feel that I have in any insulted you, and looking back over my response to you I am hard pressed to see where you feel I did so. This was the post where I quoted you, the only post in which I responded to you.

And my offer of a race was genuine, not meant as a taunt or an insult. If M3's can dip into the 12's stock, then they can dust my car, and I'll be losing a lot of money to you, but my experiences show me that I really don't have much reason for alarm.

I wouldn't make a bet like that if I wasn't certain I'd win, put it that way.

Finally, to all of the doubters of the original poster's claim: we have vomit offering to replicate it, and videotape it. Instead of throwing rocks, why not round up a stock M3 and settle it? vomit, I'm sure, also has good reasons for his confidence.

anerbe

this is getting too off topic -

insulting and condescending are two different things. I never claimed the first.
also, it seems you thrive on internet debates. there's obviously no winning on this, considering you have multiple debates you like to keep on the same post.

i'm tired of saying this, but once again, read my post more carefully. I never claimed F=MA as "theoretical". The assumption that the car will be faster by removing weight is theoretical. You are not taking into account other factors that are affected by weight. Lightening up the car will decrease traction due to the decreased frictional forces. Friction = u (constant) *N, where N = the normal force on the road. decreasing weight decreases this, thus reducing friction (traction) between the road and tires. Another example of weight affecting the vehicle is the weight transfer - E55 drivers put the suspension on comfort to get more load on the rear tires when accelerating. removing weight in center/rear will provide less traction. Want one more example where weight reduction does not necessarily equate faster 1/4 times? Remove 150 lbs from a bike, focusing on the front. The driver will spend more time on partial throttle preventing the bike from flipping.
Theoretically, your are correct - but theory often doesn't account for other affected conditions. If all other conditions remained constant, including the friction/traction available, then yes, less mass = more accleration with a given force. Real world, no. Assuming I think F=MA as being theoretical itself is insulting. That's like saying a falling box will accelerate at a rate of the Gravitational constant without accounting for drag.
i'm sure this will go over your head and you will totally misunderstand this explaination. if you must.....i think Newton was an idiot - what a load of crock.

as for powershifting - keeping the right foot down is the easy part - speed of clutch actuation and shifting is another. so, you're as fast as anybody else when it comes to shifting. think you are? why don't you look up mario andretti's shift abilities (much faster than SMG). i'm sure you can duplicate those..... faster shifting will allow you to get your car closer to redline before shifting. a slow shift will result in bouncing off the limiter. most compensate by shifting at a lower rpm, or end up slowing down by bouncing on the limiter. but obviously you have a natural ability to shift at incredible speeds. I also assume you're a professional driver then. Win any races this year? ....

lastly, your 'proof' of him having drag tires is a result of him doing a burnout and 'digitally enhanced' (or should i call them pixelated) pictures of his wheels is not concrete evidence. I call concrete either an eye witness, or a tech sheet of his drag tires. It's all speculation. You assume based off the facts. Others can disprove you - you have no closeup of the sidewall, or the tread of the tire. Your assumptions would never hold up in court. That's why things have become heated - you make it out to be that your assumption is fact. You then call out people being liars due to your assumptions. Why don't you gather hard proof if you make such bold claims? Others have witnessed him. Interview his tire supplier. Check the tire residue in the car's wheel well. No more "you have to have drag tires, you ran a 1.7 60 ft!!!!!!" I agree this doesn't add up either, but I assume that this is out of the ordinary. Normal M3's with normal drivers will 99.9% not run a 1.7.

Drag racing for longer than i've been alive? Also, so certain that M3's won't run it? Have you owned and driven an M3 at the track? I'm pretty sure you would need to own one to really learn the car (unless you're a professional). I'm not gonna speculate and call this fact, cause I DONT KNOW! You may have owned one......But I'll make an assumption that you have never since you never once claimed owning one. I'll take your 'fact' that a M3 will never run a 1.7 stock with a grain of salt.....as with the rest of your facts....i mean assumptions.

You have yet to prove to me anything.

MJ1133

http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=67620

5 12.727 @ 107.42 MPH Lee (Mathews) E46 M3 Bone stock 60': 1.796 Fuel: Pump Rubber: Stock radials: Raceweight: ?

Falco

http://www.dragtimes.com/compare2.ph...ame=Compare%21

C32: 12.579-13.05
BMW M3: 12.980-13.20

Fastest times for both were slightly modded vehicles. Seems pretty clear that a C32 in general is faster than an M3 and in the case of this story a modded C32 coudl easily be .3-.4 quicker in the 1/4.

Also keep in mind this was race from a roll, so the C32 downshifting to the correct gear vs the M3(not to mention s/c torque vs n/a torque) would still support a win by what was claimed...

MJ1133

I never said I didnt believe the C32 or C55 was faster then the M3, I was just trying to end the arguement above.