What makes new M3's so fast? Such a piece of **** (GTFIH)

[DoYouEven1]

Well first off I can't comprehend how the 425 horsepower car is running 11.66 quarter miles bone stock.. It doesn't make sense to me. What makes them so fast? So overpriced too.. Brb paying 80k for an i6 twin turbo barely over 400 horsepower.

Anyways how does a 2015 GT run 12.7 with more horsepower, nearly identical weight/torque.. Surely gear ratios can't make a car more than an entire second slower.


If I'm right now pushing 435 to crank and somewhere near 369-382 to wheels and get it up to 400-412 to wheels (tune and an intake) how much faster will my numbers be?

I can't comprehend how BMW claims these numbers I highly doubt in a real life scenario an m3 will win against my 400+ whp gt but numbers wise there's no way either car Will achieve the numbers BMW claims

0-60 3.8 seconds
Quarter mile 11.66 seems implausible on a stock m3

Can someone shed some knowledge on this subject please?

Cliffs:
- 2015 Mustang GT is very similar in specs to M3
- what makes the m3 a second faster in 1/4 mile?
- what can I expect with a 31 whp increase (total 400+ to wheels) in a 2015 mustang GT

[cheeksbrah]

A 200 pound weight difference is pretty substantial. Most M3/M4's I've seen tested have the 7 speed dual clutch which helps. M3/4 also has a much more advanced active suspension system, chassis, and aero. The Mustang is mostly relying on its power to get it moving.

[CurryTech777]

aerodynamics

[DoYouEven1]

I mean even in aerodynamics It's not like we're comparing an SLS to a Ford Focus.. They're very similar

[KilaByte]

A turbo motor that makes a lot of power under the curve and a dual clutch transmission that shifts faster than anything but more importantly keeps it in boost and in the sweet spot of the powerband, here's your answer.

[iifymbro]

Dat low-mid rpm torque, dat dere double clutch tranny.

[nsnick67]

would think sophistication plays a big part in it, drivetrain, power broadband etc.

[DoYouEven1]

A turbo motor that makes a lot of power under the curve and a dual clutch transmission that shifts faster than anything but more importantly keeps it in boost and in the sweet spot of the powerband, here's your answer.

But didn't the e92 m3 have all of this (minus the turnos obviously different engine) but was significantly slower

[Zerafian]

Im still perplexed at how sh*tty the car sounds. The exhaust note is just horrid

[KilaByte]

But didn't the e92 m3 have all of this (minus the turnos obviously different engine) but was significantly slower

The turbos make all the difference, you should read up on it instead of just being concerned with some numbers.

[oe7Leo]

like many ppl have stated, DCT and weight make a big difference

but there's also this

http://blog.caranddriver.com/2015-bm...numbers-video/



it put down 424hp and 426tq AT THE WHEELS...

i wouldn't be surprised if it's true, since BMW is notorious for understating their #s

[IH8RICE]

A turbo motor that makes a lot of power under the curve and a dual clutch transmission that shifts faster than anything but more importantly keeps it in boost and in the sweet spot of the powerband, here's your answer.

This

like many ppl have stated, DCT and weight make a big difference

but there's also this

http://blog.caranddriver.com/2015-bm...numbers-video/



it put down 424hp and 426tq AT THE WHEELS...

i wouldn't be surprised if it's true, since BMW is notorious for understating their #s

and this

But didn't the e92 m3 have all of this (minus the turnos obviously different engine) but was significantly slower

Never think like this

[DoYouEven1]

like many ppl have stated, DCT and weight make a big difference

but there's also this

http://blog.caranddriver.com/2015-bm...numbers-video/

[youtube]VTB8BGQGmZQ[youtube]

it put down 424hp and 426tq AT THE WHEELS...

i wouldn't be surprised if it's true, since BMW is notorious for understating their #s

Don't be naive.. Trust me if an M3 was making 424 to wheels it'd be over 500 to crank which they wouldn't hesitate to advertise. Motortrend is always the most reliable source
http://www.automobilemag.com/feature...#__federated=1

[iifymbro]

Don't be naive.. Trust me if an M3 was making 424 to wheels it'd be over 500 to crank which they wouldn't hesitate to advertise. Motortrend is always the most reliable source
http://www.automobilemag.com/feature...#__federated=1

Obviously it's a fast car, faster then your mustang that's for damn sure. Ever stop to think about why BMW would under rate it? Maybe they don't want to poach sales of their own more expensive m5 and m6 line that are advertised at 500+hp? The M3 is less expensive and has to fit.

[5431]

German horses are bigger than American horses.

[BBLuder]

They can be easily tuned to see some crazy numbers...M3 was always naturally aspirated and so it was difficult to see gains. Now what, 2 or 3 turbo straight 6? (IDK but that's what I heard)

Dual clutch, slicks, good launch - I can see it easy even if a fully loaded one weighs just under 4000lbs.

Now the way it drives is something else. Especially sideways. The angles at which it can initiate controlled slides (drift) is mind blowing. Not sure exact terminology for it but yeah. Torque/power delivery is nuts, freight train with no lag (what they're going for these days - efficient turbocharging).


But people who only care about straight line speed are neanderthals. I've driven a s*** ton of cars and the only thing that matters to me is how it drives overall: balance, road feel, steering feel, how planted it feels, how much G's it can pull off stock, braking...which carbon ceramics on the M3/M4 is a nearly $10k option. Mustang has no option for that. Enter Shelby GT350 and the 350R.

[chrsschb]

They can be easily tuned to see some crazy numbers...M3 was always naturally aspirated and so it was difficult to see gains. Now what, 2 or 3 turbo straight 6? (IDK but that's what I heard)

Dual clutch, slicks, good launch - I can see it easy even if a fully loaded one weighs just under 4000lbs.

Now the way it drives is something else. Especially sideways. The angles at which it can initiate controlled slides (drift) is mind blowing. Not sure exact terminology for it but yeah. Torque/power delivery is nuts, freight train with no lag (what they're going for these days - efficient turbocharging).


But people who only care about straight line speed are neanderthals. I've driven a s*** ton of cars and the only thing that matters to me is how it drives overall: balance, road feel, steering feel, how planted it feels, how much G's it can pull off stock, braking...which carbon ceramics on the M3/M4 is a nearly $10k option. Mustang has no option for that. Enter Shelby GT350 and the 350R.

350/R doesn't use Carbon Ceramics. Ford claims their solution is better.

[mot1ve]

Two words: German Engineering.

We're talking about BMW's here.. Not rocket science.

[Scarrdbutsmartr]

BMW M3 = 406 LBFT of torque at 1850 RPM
Mustang GT = 400 LBFT torque at 4500 RPM

and BMW is underrated as many have said....

[DrFeeIGood]

How the fck does the manufactuer #s differ so much from 3rd party dynos? I mean I understand different temps, altitudes that day etc., but shouldn't every M3 with the same outside factors produce the same #s over and over, how can BMW not know exactly what the car puts down?

[gswarrior510]

http://media.caranddriver.com/ez/ori...af8a28559a.pdf

E92: 0-60: 3.9 seconds, 12.4 1/4 mile

sorry op, your ricer mustang isn't a match for superior German engineering. Not everything is about power and weight.




F80: 0-60: 3.8 seconds, 12.0 1/4 mile.


it's clearly mostly about transmission..DCT is amazing. Way quicker than manual or the auto crap americans put in their cars.

[sanblz33]

The F80M3/4 is probably making close to 480hp @ the crank

[WSG1]

http://media.caranddriver.com/ez/ori...af8a28559a.pdf

E92: 0-60: 3.9 seconds, 12.4 1/4 mile

sorry op, your ricer mustang isn't a match for superior German engineering. Not everything is about power and weight.




F80: 0-60: 3.8 seconds, 12.0 1/4 mile.


it's clearly mostly about transmission..DCT is amazing. Way quicker than manual or the auto crap americans put in their cars.

Maybe Germans should start engineering their cars to last more than 3 years without falling apart.

[brianphi]

Im still perplexed at how sh*tty the car sounds. The exhaust note is just horrid

Lucky for you it's so much faster you won't have to hear it long pony boy

[gswarrior510]

Maybe Germans should start engineering their cars to last more than 3 years without falling apart.

yawn.

[taddpole]

Maybe Germans should start engineering their cars to last more than 3 years without falling apart.

brb my 2007 BMW Z4 M Coupe / 100k miles / replaced only battery
brb my 2004 VW Passat / 180k miles / no major repairs
brb best buddy's 2014 Charger / 8k miles / fuked up tranny / electrical issues
brb roommate's 2013 Mustang / 15k miles / 3 new batteries / electrical issues / alignment not possible /
brb brb

[Getlean89]

They definitely underrated the power. Just look at the trap speed. It's 119mph!

[DoYouEven1]

http://media.caranddriver.com/ez/ori...af8a28559a.pdf

E92: 0-60: 3.9 seconds, 12.4 1/4 mile

sorry op, your ricer mustang isn't a match for superior German engineering. Not everything is about power and weight.




F80: 0-60: 3.8 seconds, 12.0 1/4 mile.


it's clearly mostly about transmission..DCT is amazing. Way quicker than manual or the auto crap americans put in their cars.

Except for the fact that in reality an e92 loses to a 5.0 in real life scenarios every time (proven by head2head 2011 m3 vs 2011 gt)

Not to mention its TWICE my cars price. Corvette, Shelby, viper, roush, Saleeen, hellcat, etc takes a dump on //M's any day.

[AndYUKnowThis]

$80k for a mid tier Sedan? Trolol.

3 cars from the top of my head:

-Porsche.
-SRT Viper
-Chrysler 300c

[sanblz33]

How the fck does the manufactuer #s differ so much from 3rd party dynos? I mean I understand different temps, altitudes that day etc., but shouldn't every M3 with the same outside factors produce the same #s over and over, how can BMW not know exactly what the car puts down?

BMW really underrated the advertised power. The E9x M3 is closer to the 2015 Mustang GT powerwise.