King320

Nice video! the guy in the SL's a d-bag for flipping them off like that though. I hate it when people get mad and egotistical when they race, if you arent having fun, why do it?

AndrewAZ

Again I have lost to many cars that are slower than the M3 at drag races for 1 being in the wrong gear or not being prepared. I have lost to a stock F-150 in and M3 for being in the wrong gear.. The video just proves my point that the majority of M3 drivers do not know how to drive the car properly which also includes me but at least I have an understanding that you have to be over 5,500 rpm in the car to make power.

Going from what I have read about the SL600 I still have a hard time figuring out how a car that is over 1 second slower to 60 can even stick with an M3 its quite obvious driver error is to blame. To me saying an Sl600 can hang with an M3 is like saying an M3 can beat a E55 AMG.. Why dont you get some drag times of your Sl600. So far I can only find S600 coupes and they are also 1-1.5 seconds slower in the 1/4 mile than an average M3 1/4 mile time of 13.4.

King320

Is your M3 SMG or 6-spd? If it's manual, what is your launch technique? I still havent quite gotten it down.

AndrewAZ

SMG... But recently I have found a sort of SMG I guess "bug" that will let me launch at higher RPM than using LC. I discovered it one day waiting for a train to pass I began to tap the throttle lightly in boredom and the RPM's began to rise up without the clutch being engaged I got it to a tad past 3k RPM and when I floored the car it peeled out but since I was in S5 mode DSC bogged it down... I have been able to do this 2 other times now but it requires a very light foot and was hard to duplicate.

But for a manual car I really discourage launches since it is very hard on the clutch, if you find someone that wants to race you I suggest not "biting" off the line and slowly accelerate and they will slow down and get next to you, that way you will be in 1st gear at 4-5k rpm ready to punch it. But if you insist on launching the guy who got high 12's did 5,000 RPM launches but I would recommend revving it up to 3,200-3,400 but get your manual driving skills down before you work on a launch, I also find it hard on BMW's for me at least to get the 1-2nd gear shift fast to me something feels wrong but 2-3 3-4 I am fine. Also you might want to get your CDV (clutch delay value) removed if you do a search on a BMW forum you will find a DIY or I think a dealer will do it for like $100 or $200.

HLG600

Interestingly enough, I could not find drag times either. The S600 coupe also weighs 500 additional pounds, bear in mind, and is a vault of an automobile. The scenarios I mentioned were not 0-100+ and I believe you are assuming it as such. I am referring to rolling pulls, where the vehicle is in motion. After driving other lighter automobiles, the additional 1000+ lbs is felt. But, based on my observations, the straight line pull from a rolling start tremendously diminishes this weight. It may appear that way to you, and that is your perspective and opinion, but it is not that extreme in difference. As for the video, was it not an SMG? A bit harder to miss a shift on that gearbox as opposed to the standard transmission.

The reason the M120 performs so well on the highway is the design of the motor. As a fellow enthusiast I am assuming you will understand this. The M3 needs 5500 rpm to make power, while this motor packs it in the midrange and top end. It is the heart and key to the smooth performance aspect of this automobile. However, in order to be built strong enough to run through a brick wall, a weight penalty is paid. I have tested this car from 0-60 and also from 60-120+ and let me tell you, it becomes an entirely different animal. I am just wondering why you kept bringing up 0-60 when I was referring to highway pulls. For future reference, doing 0-60 runs on the highway is not the best of ideas.

HLG

transferred

I rev to 4000rpm on the street if i'm feeling sociable, 5000 if i'm not.
I wouldn't worry about hurting your clutch as the M3 is designed for fast launches and doesn't swamp the transmission with huge amounts of torque.

I've driven stick cars since I passed my test over 20yrs ago so if your new to sticks then you may want to take it a little easier for a while.

For reference, I've previously owned an 01 Euro spec M3 stick and a CSL (which is now in car heaven). the launch control on the CSL was fabulous but sometimes inconsistent. And there's more pride in running a 12.9 1/4 mile when you've done it all yourself.

pcviewer

Some info on the quarter for the SL600:

https://mbworld.org/forums/sl-class-r129/76258-1997-sl600-track.html

This is just one example... But at least it is one that exists.

For those who don't want to click the link, here is the basic info:

1997 SL600
Completely stock with standard tire pressure all around. (16" rims)
Soft top was up (hard top was in storage).
Spare was still in the trunk.
A lot of misc. junk in the car, including some car parts, don't know the details.
Traction control was left on.

Run 1: 14.170 @ 101.59MPH
Run 2: 13.900 @ 102.42MPH
Run 3: 13.623 @ 104.50MPH
Run 4: 13.698 @ 104.30MPH

SL BRABUS

This is what I find out........ from Autocar & Motor Germany magazine 600SL

ACCELERATION SECONDS
0-30 mph 2.2
0-40 mph 3.1
0-50 mph 4.2
0-60 mph 5.5
0-70 mph 7.0
0-80 mph 8.9
0-90 mph 11.2
0-100 mph 13.6
0-110 mph 15.4
0-120 mph 18.4
0-130 mph 22.2
0-140 mph 27.8
0-150 mph 34.1
0-155 mph 38.7


Standing ¼ mile 14.2 seconds @ 106mph

What is the M3 time.....??
meaning how fast is the M3 at those speed......??

Please fill in the blank.......


0-110 mph ?
0-120 mph ?
0-130 mph ?
0-140 mph ?
0-150 mph ?
0-155 mph ?

1985mb

Ouch!

1985mb

The rest of you -- thumbs up for keeping this thread relatively mature and good-spirited, unlike the usual Kill Stories threads...

Improviz

Well, if those SL600 numbers are accurate, the M3 won't be putting "buslengths" on it: the M3 traps at 104-106, and if the old SL600s trapped at 102-106, then from a roll, it'd be a close race.

Remember: those older Benzes are pretty slow off the line, by design. It was from a roll that they're designed to shine. Conversely, the M3s' acceleration times are greatly helped by the agressive launch they can get with their limited slip diff and wide rear tres. From a roll, things would even out a bit more.

Still, I wish someone could come up with a road test from one of the American mags so we could get a bit better idea!

Edit: I did find a few numbers that can shine a light on this. BMW specs the M3 at 5.2 seconds 0-100 km/h (giving about 4.9 0-60 mph, pretty accurate), and with a standing-start km of 24.2 seconds.

The German magazine Auto Motor und Sport tested a 1999 SL600 in the standing-start km: 24.9 seconds.

I'd still like to see some 1/4 mile stuff from the American mags, though...any of you packrats on this board got anything???

Holson

Yea what's up w/ flippin off the M3?! Unsporting punk

On any case, I'd say the 600SL does pretty good for a car that came out in 1991 (?).

Here's an even sweeter V12 R129 SL
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xyoCDkDyt4o&search=

AndrewAZ

I found various M3 times and I have taken what I think is the average meaning I found at least 3 different sites and took the average.

M3

0-30 ---- 1.7 seconds
0-60--- 4.7 seconds
0-100--- 11.6 seconds


I can not find reliable data over 0-100 MPH the difference in sites is in some places almost 2 seconds.

I will add one thing even the slowest 0-120 mph time I found for the M3 the M3 was still .8 second faster and the fastest one I found the M3 was 1.7 seconds faster.

Just for comparison a C55 amg does 0-100 in 11.3 seconds
0-120 in 16.7


So from the times posted we have the M3 is almost 2 seconds faster to 100 MPH which equates to several bus lenghts.

Lets rephrase the argument this way. How badly would a C55 lose to an SL600.. The answer the C55 would win by bus lengths. I dont want to get into the C55 vs M3 debate but from 0-120 MPH they are very similar in performance aka a drivers race. If you go back and read the original kill story not only does the guy miss a shift but he is in the wrong gear and continues to stick with the SL600.


Again the 1/4 mile time listed for the SL600 is not even close to an M3 again almost 1 second slower. 1 second in the 1/4 mile is bus lenghts.. Just to happens the E55 AMG is 1 second faster than an M3 in the 1/4 mile and will easily pull bus lengths on the M3.

bltserv

Here is a another young M3 driver working on his launch technique.

CLK55 driver he went up against is charged with manslaughter for this
kids inability to control his car at high speed.

My point in my earlier post was why do you very young
low experience drivers buy or receive these cars and then go stupid ?
I have had at least a dozen under 25 aged M3 drivers come up and attempt to
take on my SL55. Whats the point ? Just because you have gotten into a
nice BMW your ego gets the best of you ? Happened just now at lunch.
M3 owner with girlfriend just makes an *** of himself in a lame attempt to show off. Its not worth wasting my gas to respond.

Improviz

Again: those old MBs were not set up for agressive standing-start launches, in fact they flat-out SUCK off the line. It is once rolling that they shine.

This is why if you look at its trap speed, you will note that in the test SLBrabus provided, the car traps the same as the M3. 106 mph.

Meaning that after accelerating for a 1/4 mile, both vehicles will be traveling at the same speed, 106 mph--IF his numbers are accurate.

You are citing standing-start numbers, but these don't always tell the full tale. For example, watch a video of an M3 running an S4 standing-start (with both being driven by good drivers, in stock condition, etc), then watch a video of an the same two cars rolling-start.

Standing-start, the S4 will run within a few tenths of an M3 in the 1/4 mile. But rolling-start, the M3 will kill it.

It's the same here. The M3 can be launched much more agressively. You can see this most clearly in the 0-30 numbers: using the ones you provided, it's 1.7 seconds for the M3, 2.2 in the SL..

But if you look at the xxx-yyy numbers for each, there is a trend: as speeds increase, the gap narrows. And we're talking about a rolling-start race here.

SL600 100-200: 14.2 seconds

M3 100-200: 12.9 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m3e46st2000-1.htm

M3 100-200: 12.0 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m32003-2.htm

M3 100-200: 12.8 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m3e462005-1.htm

M3 100-200: 12.9 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m32003-1.htm

M3 100-200: 13.4 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m32002-1.htm

M3 100-200 average: 12.8 seconds Difference: 1.4 seconds.


SL600 140-200: 9.9 seconds

M3 140-200: 9.6 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m32002-1.htm

M3 140-200: 9.0 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m3e462005-1.htm

M3 140-200: 9.3 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m32003-1.htm

M3 140-200: 8.3 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m32003-2.htm

M3 140-200: 9.1 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m3e46st2000-1.htm

M3 140-200 average: 9.06 seconds Difference: 0.94 seconds


SL600 180-200 km/h: 4.1 seconds

M3 180-200 km/h: 4.1 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m32003-1.htm

M3 180-200 km/h: 3.1 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m32003-2.htm

M3 180-200 km/h: 3.7 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m3e462005-1.htm

M3 180-200 km/h: 3.8 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m32002-1.htm

M3 180-200 km/h: 3.4 seconds
http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m3e46st2000-1.htm

M3 180-200 average: 3.5 seconds. Difference: 0.6 seconds

So, like the guys who own it say: at higher speeds, the V12 comes into its own.

One other thing: don't mix up time-to-speed differences with time-to-distance.
A one second difference from 0-100 does not correspond to a one second
difference in 1/4 mile times, and vice versa.

Here's one example: Car & Driver had a Jaguar XJR for a long-term test car.
Check out the acceleration numbers from when it was new and at 50,000 miles;
here's the link:
http://www.caranddriver.com/longroad...xjr-page2.html

New:
0-60: 4.8
0-100: 12.2
0-130: 23.6
1/4 mile: 13.4 @ 105

50,000 miles:
0-60: 4.7
0-100: 11.3
0-130: 20.7
1/4 mile: 13.2 @ 107

So, you can see: even though it was 0.9 seconds faster to 100, and 2.9 seconds faster to 130, it was only 0.2 faster to the 1/4 mile. Time to distance numbers will always be far closer than time to speed.

Don't underestimate those V12s from a roll. They're fast little devils.

Anyway, I'm positive that a well-driven M3 would definitely pull it, but I think "buslengths" is a bit optimistic., particularly with a 102-104 mph trap speed for the SL.

SL BRABUS

nice data.........!!

SL BRABUS

M3 may pull bus lengths at first but as the time go by the V12 will catch up to the M3....... so it would be a close race..... The driver of the M3 better make sure he will not make any mistake or he will get beating.......

transferred

S4 example is slightly flawed as it is AWD. I've ran the V8's and found them to be very closely matched to the M3. On the highway though, their higher weight and AWD see my establish itself as ultimately faster.

AndrewAZ

Well I talked about this with a few buddies of mine and we all agree that an M3 would beat it the same way it takes out a 350z... So I bet you are saying big deal you and your buddies are stupid. Well one of them knows another person here in arizona that has a white 2000 sl600 with AMG package so hopefully I can get something worked out in the next few weeks and post a video instead of this numbers talk.


But again if you have 2 cars that and you are both rolling from say 50-100 mph and 1 is 1 second faster it will pull a considerable length and a bus length is not that much.

transferred

God I hate 350z's and their whiny little exhausts. They are POS

HLG600

The documented drag time for the R129 SL600 was a 13.6 QTR, an M3 runs a 12.6 QTR? Being humorous, I find it interesting how you no longer wish to let the "numbers talk" after Improviz made a few contributions to this thread.

I would love to play with an E46 M3, it will be two car fanatics enjoying themselves. If you can get a video set up, sounds great; a second video to compare the first one to would be cool.

I still believe buslengths is slightly exaggerated/optimistic in most scenarios of this encounter. Like SL Brabus said, just be sure you are in the right gear, otherwise...

Improviz

Actually, I chose this example because the only reason the S4 *can* hang with the M3 from a dig is because its AWD enables a much shorter 60' time. This is the same when comparing the M3 to the SL600; the M3's 0-30 time is 1.7 seconds. The SL600's is 2.2. This guarantees that the M is getting a 60' time around a half second better than the SL600, which translates to about a full second in the 1/4 mile.

Btw, I did some digging through my old car mags, and found the following. In May 2001, Car & Driver tested an S600. This had the same motor, drivetrain, engine etc. as the SL600 we're discussing here, and also weighed 4439 pounds, about the same as an SL600.

It ran 0-60 in 5.4, but just as with the others we've seen, once rolling it picked up steam and ran a 13.7 @ 103 1/4 mile. This is only 2-3 mph less than an M3, and is 2-3 mph more than a 350Z.

Two other interesting figures are the car's 30-50 and 50-70 passing times. They are:
30-50: 3.0
50-70: 3.2

I was actually surprised, as these compare pretty favorably to the CLK55, which got:
30-50: 2.7
50-70: 3.1

Which again lends credence to that V12 pulling hard up high, as the gap is 0.3 seconds 30-50, but only 0.1 50-70. And these are pretty good times: the RS6, in fact, ran 2.4/3.1 respectively. Quite an eye-opener.

Also, I checked again, and the M3 they tested against the CLK55 ran 0-150 in 34.5 seconds. The test Brabus has it at 34.1.

So it seems that the faster you get, the harder that thing pulls. I think a properly-run rolling start race where both cars were in the proper gear (if the SL driver just stomps it and waits for the car to kick down, he's toast) at the honk would be pretty close....but driver reaction time is going to be a big factor here as well. I'd like to see it if it ever goes down.

Improviz

Well, that'd be great, although a few other people have posted video, and don't forget: you were quoting some numbers yourself.

Oh, and hey, btw: what about this video of an SL600 vs an M3?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=wzt6DygJrhg

Well, that may be what you think, but here's a concrete example of how that reasoning doesn't work. Time to speed and time to distance are different animals. You're talking more like a few tenths in the 1/4, a few carlengths, not buslengths.

Anyway, I think that in a rolling start race the M3 will win, just not by buslengths.

King320

Dude, you are in the wrong forum or something. What's your beef with young "low experience" drivers. What do you care if someone on the other side of the country "go stupid". You're the one coming into this thread talking trash about your completely unrelated car, trying to sound impressive and wise with your barely coherent english, but somehow WE are the ones with egos People have fast cars for a reason, and its not to talk trash about people with slower cars. It's to enjoy them and to talk to other people who enjoy them. Lighten. up.

AndrewAZ

Geezeee I dont live here I have a life I have not had time to read everything new.

Again go read the posts again^^^ someone posted the SL600 with a 14.2 second 1/4 mile M3 is 13.4 on average.