BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read




 

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      04-30-2014, 04:05 AM   #45
Asbjorn
Captain
Asbjorn's Avatar
China
89
Rep
833
Posts

Drives: Z4 N54 DCT (VTT GC lites)
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: European in China

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacSmallFries View Post
I have to say your write up sounds really biased towards your particular 'taste' of cars.
What else should it be biased towards? What did you expect?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacSmallFries View Post
You sound like one of those guys that spends hours trying to convince others the 1M is just as good as an M3. lol
The 1M is much better than an M3 to those who like how the 1M drives over how the M3 drives. It is not science, but a matter of differences in preferences among driving enthusiasts...

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacSmallFries View Post
The steel synchros, titanium 'race' exhaust, 4 wheel drive level of grip in first gear, bucket seats, torque right up to redline, telepathic steering, communicative brakes.... I don't know where to begin. The GT3 RS is on another level of excitement. And no, you're not supposed to drive this car to work.
Are race car drivers the only true driving enthusiasts on the planet? Do I feel excited in the wrong way when I feel enthusiastic about driving my car to work?

I also get excited while listening to music while driving. And it is a very different feeling compared to just sitting at home listening to music. Does that make me a non-driving-enthusiast? I bet most people on this forum feel the same. BTW does the GT3 RS have a nice stereo?

I also get excited when I can put the roof down while driving. Does the GT3 allow this?

And does the steering really need to be telepathic before you are driving for real? Or can it be comfortable, only requiring one hand while cruising, and let you be able to enjoy other aspects of driving instead?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacSmallFries View Post
You do realize true driving enthusiasts consider this the ultimate driver's car, right?
An F1 race car is a billion times more exciting than a GT3 (on paper). But look at any F1 car review by top gear or similar, and tell me that they are enjoying the experience... they just aren't...
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 06:06 AM   #46
spuntyb
Brigadier General
spuntyb's Avatar
United_States
4050
Rep
4,975
Posts

Drives: 2019 F90 Competition
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Very cool write up for those of us lacking 4 race cars in our stable - ha!

Thanks Pete!
__________________
<b>2023 M5C SRG|Aragon || 2018 Macan GTS</b>

2019 F90 Comp MBB|Black (sold)
2018 F80 ZCP TB|SS (sold)
2015 F30 335 AW|CR (sold)
2015 F31 MG|CR (sold)
2011 E90 JB|Oyster (sold)
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 06:21 AM   #47
slalomfever
slalomfever's Avatar
United_States
1095
Rep
2,151
Posts

Drives: Nardo Grey F80
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Long Island, NY

iTrader: (5)

Great write up. My dream car.
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 06:47 AM   #48
Ant Man
Major
United Kingdom
75
Rep
1,179
Posts

Drives: E92 M3 Individual Edition
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Anglia

iTrader: (1)

Pete, an excellent and wise review. The road thrills, being able to experience a car's performance and character is much more accessable to the masses if it occurs at lower speeds. Too many people are obsessed with performance numbers when actually the important thing is how a car feels and makes a driver feel at real world speeds. You have made such points clearly.
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 07:02 AM   #49
smq42
First Lieutenant
smq42's Avatar
13
Rep
138
Posts

Drives: BSM 1m coupe
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: MA

iTrader: (0)

Great write-ups.

I'd love to hear Pete's and others' thoughts on driving the 1M vs an air-cooled 993 or the outgoing water-cooled 997--not the turbo or GT3 models, just the straight six engines.

I realize that the 1M has more HP and more torque than the 993 and similar numbers compared to the 997. I don't care about numbers or which car is "faster."

But, what's it like to drive these cars, both on the track and on day-to-day road use? Thx.
__________________
____________________________
?98 993
?11 E82 1M
?13 E70 X5
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 08:08 AM   #50
Sean@PSI
Sean@PSI's Avatar
United_States
2112
Rep
5,008
Posts

Drives: 2021 IOMG M3 Sedan
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oviedo, FL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by yllwwgn View Post
^ This EXACTLY... all of it. I couldn't have said it better myself. The driving experience is SO much more than numbers on a spreadsheet... and the adjective of "faster" is just that... faster; nothing more, nothing less. And as cool as that adjective may be, for me anyway, there are about 30 others that I can think of that are more enjoyable... in the "driving experience"

100% agree - great point and wonderfully written.

OP - Great post!
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 08:16 AM   #51
mcx_
Enlisted Member
mcx_'s Avatar
United Kingdom
2
Rep
46
Posts

Drives: BMW 1M Coupe, 991 50th edition
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Brentwood, UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by smq42 View Post
Great write-ups.

I'd love to hear Pete's and others' thoughts on driving the 1M vs an air-cooled 993 or the outgoing water-cooled 997--not the turbo or GT3 models, just the straight six engines.

I realize that the 1M has more HP and more torque than the 993 and similar numbers compared to the 997. I don't care about numbers or which car is "faster."

But, what's it like to drive these cars, both on the track and on day-to-day road use? Thx.
I had a 2005 997 c2s for 7 years until summer '12, overlapping with my 1m for about 10 months. Now have 991 c2s 50th anniversary. The 997 was a great car, the longest I have ever owned 1 car, but I found I was using it less and less. I loved driving it, but my wife rarely was a passenger, complaining it was too harsh + noisy etc, so we never went anywhere together in it. Not a good reason in itself to change but the 1m is a great compromise for practicality, quiet touring and hooning around when you want to, so it get used a lot more. I think the steering on the 1m is as good as the 997 , different to the 991 which actually has more front grip but less feel than the 1m. The 1m has better inherent balance than anything I have ever owned. I understand the earlier review where the 1m is great up to 9 tenths, but the 911s have greater depth of talent, only really discovered on the track, higher quality damping and ultimately better control especially when really pushing it. The 991 is a very talented machine but I love the simplicity of the manual 'box, great steering, non adjustable dampers and balance of the 1m. Luckily I don't have to choose between the 2 at the moment.
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 08:18 AM   #52
Diver
Brigadier General
Diver's Avatar
United_States
504
Rep
3,446
Posts

Drives: Black '12 135i - Sold
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Texas

iTrader: (0)

Now I can do my 135i/PPK vs F150 review
__________________
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 09:11 AM   #53
monkawekrue
Brigadier General
monkawekrue's Avatar
United_States
67
Rep
3,214
Posts

Drives: f25 X3 AW
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: LOS ANGELES, CA

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
nice write up OP. cars are amazing.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 11:28 AM   #54
Pete_vB
Captain
Pete_vB's Avatar
United_States
118
Rep
898
Posts

Drives: '69 GT3, GT4, 1M, 912
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, Shenzhen, Oman

iTrader: (0)

Whoa, this got busy...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malbolge View Post
Is the 4.1 the same car featured on J Lenos Garage (the Blue/Orange scheme)? Wow.
Yep, that's the one. It's a beast...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Needsdecaf View Post
Just read your article in Panorama. Nice job. It was interesting since the SharkWorks 4.1 had just been in Excellence and they drooled a little more over it than you did.
Thanks, and I agree. I think it was a huge advantage to drive the cars back to back and over two full days rather than in isolation. In isolation the 3.8 and 4.1's suspension feels great, and the torque of the 4.1 is initially almost overwhelming, but back to back with the 4.0 you get a much more nuanced picture. It will come down to personal preference, so I tried to communicate as much of that as possible to let people decide for themselves.
__________________
1M, GT4, 1969 Porsche 911 w/ 997 GT3 Cup Motor (435hp & 2,100 lbs)
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 11:59 AM   #55
Pete_vB
Captain
Pete_vB's Avatar
United_States
118
Rep
898
Posts

Drives: '69 GT3, GT4, 1M, 912
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, Shenzhen, Oman

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e1000 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete_vB
The 1M, of course, is the exact opposite: it borrows its rear end and tires from a car that puts around 100 ft lbs less to the wheels
Simply not correct. Torque is multiplied through gearing, horsepower is not.
The 1M puts over 100 more lb-ft to the wheels than the E9X on the average a wheels dyno, ie dynojet. ~360 lb-ft for the 1M plays against around 255, which is where my comment came from.

Taking gearing into account, as you suggest, the 1M 1st (4.11) gear and final drive (3.154) give torque multiplication resulting in a peak of nearly 4700 lb-ft to the rear wheels in 1st gear, while the M3's engine and gearing results in 3900 lbs-ft, or 800 lb less.

In second gear the 1M is putting a peak of 2600 lb-ft of torque to the wheels while the M3 has 2300, 300 less. Thus in lower gears where you're traction limited the 1M is trying to put hundreds of lb-ft more torque to the ground than the E9X M3, which is much of where it gets its tail happy character.

Does that address your concern?
__________________
1M, GT4, 1969 Porsche 911 w/ 997 GT3 Cup Motor (435hp & 2,100 lbs)

Last edited by Pete_vB; 04-30-2014 at 05:32 PM..
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 12:32 PM   #56
Pete_vB
Captain
Pete_vB's Avatar
United_States
118
Rep
898
Posts

Drives: '69 GT3, GT4, 1M, 912
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, Shenzhen, Oman

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacSmallFries View Post
Being an owner of an '11 GT3 RS, an E92 M3, and E93 M3 currently, I have to say your write up sounds really biased towards your particular 'taste' of cars.

No offense, but you don't really 'get' this car and who it's designed for. But then again, you drive a 1M so I wouldn't expect you to understand anyways. You sound like one of those guys that spends hours trying to convince others the 1M is just as good as an M3. lol

The steel synchros, titanium 'race' exhaust, 4 wheel drive level of grip in first gear, bucket seats, torque right up to redline, telepathic steering, communicative brakes.... I don't know where to begin. The GT3 RS is on another level of excitement. And no, you're not supposed to drive this car to work.

I should write up my own review that isn't self-serving and post it on here for anyone that's actually serious about a GT3. For anyone reading, please drive a GT3 at least once in your life, you'll never forget it. Lame review, you sound like an advertisement for BMW, and just fulfilling your own ego. You do realize true driving enthusiasts consider this the ultimate driver's car, right? You missed something along the way when you drove these cars.
I re-read my post to try to understand which parts you felt were "self serving" and "like an advertisement for BMW" based on your comments, but I must admit I'm still not exactly sure. Perhaps the most positive thing I said about the 1M is that it "may well be the better everyday tool", but you seem to agree that the GT3 isn't an everyday car? Or that the 1M is even more playful than the GT3 RS at lower speeds?

Perhaps you can point out what issues you took, or as you say write your own review. Despite the fact that I perhaps didn't "gush" over the RS 4.0 enough for your taste, I do love the car and may eventually pick one up, though as I said only for occasional use. Meanwhile I do very much enjoy cars with "mobile" chassis, a personal preference that I try to communicate as honestly as I can.

At the outset I said these cars are very different and hence unfair to compare. That said, many do exactly that. The 1M placed 3rd behind the RS 4.0 and MP4-12C in Evo's 2011 car of the year, ahead of eight other cars in a strong year that included the Aventador, Cayman R, M5, Ferrari FF, etc. Point being I'm not the only one that likes it. I realize there are some that don't feel the same- you're certainly welcome to your opinion, hopefully assuming you've driven one.

As for my bias, I've owned about a dozen Porsches and currently own a couple, while I've only had the pleasure of owning two BMWs, an E46 M3 and the 1M. I mainly compete in Porsches- GT2, Cayman S with 3.8S swap, my '69 Cup, etc. I simply try to be honest. Sorry it didn't find you well for whatever reason.
__________________
1M, GT4, 1969 Porsche 911 w/ 997 GT3 Cup Motor (435hp & 2,100 lbs)
Appreciate 1
duder13767.00
      04-30-2014, 12:58 PM   #57
ozinaldo
Brigadier General
ozinaldo's Avatar
Portugal
115
Rep
3,070
Posts

Drives: 1M
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete_vB View Post
I re-read my post to try to understand which parts you felt were "self serving" and "like an advertisement for BMW" based on your comments, but I must admit I'm still not exactly sure. Perhaps the most positive thing I said about the 1M is that it "may well be the better everyday tool", but you seem to agree that the GT3 isn't an everyday car? Or that the 1M is even more playful than the GT3 RS at lower speeds?

Perhaps you can point out what issues you took, or as you say write your own review. Despite the fact that I perhaps didn't "gush" over the RS 4.0 enough for your taste, I do love the car and may eventually pick one up, though as I said only for occasional use. Meanwhile I do very much enjoy cars with "mobile" chassis, a personal preference that I try to communicate as honestly as I can.

At the outset I said these cars are very different and hence unfair to compare. That said, many do exactly that. The 1M placed 3rd behind the RS 4.0 and MP4-12C in Evo's 2011 car of the year, ahead of eight other cars in a strong year that included the Aventador, Cayman R, M5, Ferrari FF, etc. Point being I'm not the only one that likes it. I realize there are some that don't feel the same- you're certainly welcome to your opinion, hopefully assuming you've driven one.

As for my bias, I've owned about a dozen Porsches and currently own a couple, while I've only had the pleasure of owning two BMWs, an E46 M3 and the 1M. I mainly compete in Porsches- GT2, Cayman S with 3.8S swap, my '69 Cup, etc. I simply try to be honest. Sorry it didn't find you well for whatever reason.
Pete, too good of a post in response to a post which was only good for arrogance and I felt like an intended one too.

Still, was a pleasure to read yours.
__________________
"The mark of a great car is one whose overall competence exceeds what you should expect from its individual components and the 1M does just that", Chris Harris.
BMW 1M-SOLD-: TECH: Evolve Race+N55mids, Evolve IC, Michelin PSS, ER cp, aFe filter, CDVx, Vorshlag camber plates, BMS OCC EXTERIOR: trunk spoiler, blacklines, black grills, IND goodies INTERIOR: Alcantara steering wheel, steel pedals, custom mats, MPower e-brake.
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 06:08 PM   #58
e1000
that's what SHE said!
75
Rep
1,163
Posts

Drives: 2011 E92 M3 ZCP
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: OC

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete_vB View Post
The 1M puts over 100 more lb-ft to the wheels than the E9X on the average a wheels dyno, ie dynojet. ~360 lb-ft for the 1M plays against around 255, which is where my comment came from.

Taking gearing into account, as you suggest, the 1M 1st (4.11) gear and final drive (3.154) give torque multiplication resulting in a peak of nearly 4700 lb-ft to the rear wheels in 1st gear, while the M3's engine and gearing results in 3900 lbs-ft, or 800 lb less.

In second gear the 1M is putting a peak of 2600 lb-ft of torque to the wheels while the M3 has 2300, 300 less. Thus in lower gears where you're traction limited the 1M is trying to put hundreds of lb-ft more torque to the ground than the E9X M3, which is much of where it gets its tail happy character.

Does that address your concern?
No.

1. It's not "to the wheels". To the wheels is after gearing. Torque figures are given at the crank. Dyno results give torque figures at the crank. Trust me on this one. Go ask a physics person. There's NO WAY 300ft-lbs of torque "to the wheels" could light up a 265 rear tire.

2. Personally I think we shouldn't use dyno figures but even if we take your numbers as correct, you have to think that the 1M torque figure is at just over 4k rpm, and then steadily declines all the way to readline. By the time you shift into your next gear, you've dropped down to nearly 200ft-lbs! The M3 however, maintains the 260-ish ft-lb all the way through it's 8,300 redline starting at just before 3,000rpm. Once you add back the multiplication factor, the difference builds and is quite largely in favor of the M3 after 5,500rpm...

Easily put, stock for stock, if the M3 is consistently not putting down more torque through the wheels, how is it accelerating quicker (or even similarly) than the 1M?
__________________
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 06:46 PM   #59
Slow///1
Second Lieutenant
68
Rep
254
Posts

Drives: F80, GT3, X7
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e1000 View Post
No.

1. It's not "to the wheels". To the wheels is after gearing. Torque figures are given at the crank. Dyno results give torque figures at the crank. Trust me on this one. Go ask a physics person. There's NO WAY 300ft-lbs of torque "to the wheels" could light up a 265 rear tire.

2. Personally I think we shouldn't use dyno figures but even if we take your numbers as correct, you have to think that the 1M torque figure is at just over 4k rpm, and then steadily declines all the way to readline. By the time you shift into your next gear, you've dropped down to nearly 200ft-lbs! The M3 however, maintains the 260-ish ft-lb all the way through it's 8,300 redline starting at just before 3,000rpm. Once you add back the multiplication factor, the difference builds and is quite largely in favor of the M3 after 5,500rpm...

Easily put, stock for stock, if the M3 is consistently not putting down more torque through the wheels, how is it accelerating quicker (or even similarly) than the 1M?
There is so much fail in the above post... stock 1M makes more torque from 1800 to 6500 rpm than the M3 does anywhere in its rpm range. In fact, at no point between 1800 and 6500 does it make less than 250 lb/ft (more than the M3 puts down peak). I'm not sure how you shift gears, but at no point am I shifting into a gear where I'm stalling the car (necessary to achieve less tq than the M3).

Either way, the OP (who seems like he's got a decent perspective when it comes to enthusiast driving) was simply trying to convey some characteristics about a few cars that most of us will never be lucky enough to drive. No need to attack or criticize in order to defend the GT3, it simply doesn't need your defense...

Last edited by Slow///1; 04-30-2014 at 07:13 PM..
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 07:13 PM   #60
e1000
that's what SHE said!
75
Rep
1,163
Posts

Drives: 2011 E92 M3 ZCP
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: OC

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slow///1 View Post
There is so much fail in the above post... stock 1M makes more torque from 1800 to 6500 rpm than the M3 does anywhere in its rpm range. In fact, at no point between 1800 and 6500 does it make less than 250 lb/ft (more than the M3 puts down peak). I'm not sure how you shift gears, but at no point am I shifting into a gear where I'm stalling the car (necessary to achieve less tq than the M3).
If you're convinced you're so right, then explain to me how a heavier E92 M3 covers the quarter mile even with, or a tad quicker than a 1M?
__________________
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 07:18 PM   #61
Slow///1
Second Lieutenant
68
Rep
254
Posts

Drives: F80, GT3, X7
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e1000 View Post
If you're convinced you're so right, then explain to me how a heavier E92 M3 covers the quarter mile even with, or a tad quicker than a 1M?
You were arguing the M3 makes more torque than the 1M, not that the M3 was faster...
Attached Images
 
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 07:21 PM   #62
e1000
that's what SHE said!
75
Rep
1,163
Posts

Drives: 2011 E92 M3 ZCP
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: OC

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slow///1 View Post
You were arguing the M3 makes more torque than the 1M, not that the M3 was faster...
I know what a 1M dyno looks like. But answer the question. Your point is that the 1M makes somewhere in the ballpark of 30% more torque than the M3, which it does. My point is that the to the ground torque of the M3 and 1M are much closer, and overall the M3 actually puts down more power.

Again, if the 1M has such a huge torque advantage, and also lighter, why isn't it faster?
__________________
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 07:27 PM   #63
Slow///1
Second Lieutenant
68
Rep
254
Posts

Drives: F80, GT3, X7
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e1000 View Post
I know what a 1M dyno looks like. But answer the question. Your point is that the 1M makes somewhere in the ballpark of 30% more torque than the M3, which it does. My point is that the to the ground torque of the M3 and 1M are much closer, and overall the M3 actually puts down more power.

Again, if the 1M has such a huge torque advantage, and also lighter, why isn't it faster?
traction/lower peak hp/aero/gearing etc. Either way, lets stop thread-jacking and give the OP credit for the great thread that he deserves.
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 07:34 PM   #64
e1000
that's what SHE said!
75
Rep
1,163
Posts

Drives: 2011 E92 M3 ZCP
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: OC

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slow///1 View Post
traction/lower peak hp/aero/gearing etc. Either way, lets stop thread-jacking and give the OP credit for the great thread that he deserves.
I'll take this as "i don't know" and if so you should probably take back the comment that my post was "so much fail"

I don't think I'm threadjacking at all, I'm addressing something that was written by the OP in the post that started this thread.

Also, keep in mind I haven't said one negative thing about the 1M or the original post other than to correct the fact that overall, the 1M does not put more torque down to the wheels than an M3.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 07:37 PM   #65
Mad_Moose
Private First Class
Mad_Moose's Avatar
United_States
16
Rep
180
Posts

Drives: 2011 E90 335i
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Indianapolis

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete_vB View Post
I re-read my post to try to understand which parts you felt were "self serving" and "like an advertisement for BMW" based on your comments, but I must admit I'm still not exactly sure. Perhaps the most positive thing I said about the 1M is that it "may well be the better everyday tool", but you seem to agree that the GT3 isn't an everyday car? Or that the 1M is even more playful than the GT3 RS at lower speeds?

Perhaps you can point out what issues you took, or as you say write your own review. Despite the fact that I perhaps didn't "gush" over the RS 4.0 enough for your taste, I do love the car and may eventually pick one up, though as I said only for occasional use. Meanwhile I do very much enjoy cars with "mobile" chassis, a personal preference that I try to communicate as honestly as I can.

At the outset I said these cars are very different and hence unfair to compare. That said, many do exactly that. The 1M placed 3rd behind the RS 4.0 and MP4-12C in Evo's 2011 car of the year, ahead of eight other cars in a strong year that included the Aventador, Cayman R, M5, Ferrari FF, etc. Point being I'm not the only one that likes it. I realize there are some that don't feel the same- you're certainly welcome to your opinion, hopefully assuming you've driven one.

As for my bias, I've owned about a dozen Porsches and currently own a couple, while I've only had the pleasure of owning two BMWs, an E46 M3 and the 1M. I mainly compete in Porsches- GT2, Cayman S with 3.8S swap, my '69 Cup, etc. I simply try to be honest. Sorry it didn't find you well for whatever reason.
Fantastic write up sir!

Shame not everyone can appreciate it and feel the immediate need to bash on stuff that is not to their liking.

Massive props on keeping your cool, I know I wouldn't.
Appreciate 0
      04-30-2014, 07:46 PM   #66
ozinaldo
Brigadier General
ozinaldo's Avatar
Portugal
115
Rep
3,070
Posts

Drives: 1M
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e1000 View Post
I'll take this as "i don't know" and if so you should probably take back the comment that my post was "so much fail"

I don't think I'm threadjacking at all, I'm addressing something that was written by the OP in the post that started this thread.

Also, keep in mind I haven't said one negative thing about the 1M or the original post other than to correct the fact that overall, the 1M does not put more torque down to the wheels than an M3.
Seriously?

It is not the torque that makes a car quicker in full out acceleration it is the horse power essentially and M3 has more of it vs a 1M and while accelerating on a straight it can stay in the sweet part of its power band (at the top); factor it to much better aero, then you have a car manual to manual as quick as the lighter and definitely more torquey 1M up to a certain point and then starting to pull away at higher speeds (around 180 km/h), with DCT always stays a bit ahead of the 1M due to additional advantages of that transmission (speed of change, launch control).

1M of course puts more tq than a M3 starting from idle to around 6200-6300 rpm, stock to stock, only at the final 700 rpm (of 1M) S65 starts to produce more (because N54T starts to produce less and less). As a side note, up to that point of 6200 something rpm, 1M also produces more horsepower than the M3 all the way, naturally. It is bizarre to seriously defend otherwise after all these years, dynoes and shared experiences available all over the internet.

Now, I wrote all these not that I needed to or to give credit to your final posts, because you really are threadjacking! How is all this not a side topic which has been discussed so many times in many other threads?

Let's give this amazing thread a re-start and its patient poster a relief from this point on, please!
__________________
"The mark of a great car is one whose overall competence exceeds what you should expect from its individual components and the 1M does just that", Chris Harris.
BMW 1M-SOLD-: TECH: Evolve Race+N55mids, Evolve IC, Michelin PSS, ER cp, aFe filter, CDVx, Vorshlag camber plates, BMS OCC EXTERIOR: trunk spoiler, blacklines, black grills, IND goodies INTERIOR: Alcantara steering wheel, steel pedals, custom mats, MPower e-brake.

Last edited by ozinaldo; 04-30-2014 at 08:04 PM..
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:36 AM.




1addicts
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST