Bmw 1M vs M3

[azmurciev12]

take it for what it is. all of the drivers of the car are experienced and capable drivers. and it's not as if we did it only once and it was done from low take off speed (40kph) and higher take off speed (80kph) and the result was the same. we are all very surprised. we don't know what it is, fuel quality/ hot ambient temps, but all the M5s and M6s perform similarly to what's in the videos.

once my buddy has the 997 GTS v. my now evolve tuned 1M i'll post it here also for reference.

[BrokenVert]

congrats on the win. I made this for you to celebrate your kill story (apparently we arent cracking down on those like we used to)

Ohh well its to your gain I guess. Here you go!

[mlhj83]

Originally Posted by azmurciev12

take it for what it is. all of the drivers of the car are experienced and capable drivers. and it's not as if we did it only once and it was done from low take off speed (40kph) and higher take off speed (80kph) and the result was the same. we are all very surprised. we don't know what it is, fuel quality/ hot ambient temps, but all the M5s and M6s perform similarly to what's in the videos.

once my buddy has the 997 GTS v. my now evolve tuned 1M i'll post it here also for reference.

Wasn't referring to your videos but I've just watched it. And it is just physically impossible for a stock 1M to outrun an M5 and M6 and even an M3 by that much especially at higher speeds. Using facts based on actual calculations, even a remapped 1M still has less BHP per ton than an M5. There is most definitely something else happening.

[azmurciev12]

mlhj83 - that's fine. i understand. we are surprised as well and really didn't think it was possible. we couldn't believe it ourselves. for further reference, we tested around 7 M5s and M6s combined, most of them did 60-130mph at 15-16 seconds. the fastest one had the most mileage at 30Tkm and did a 13.5sec. the M3 on the vid did 60-130 at 14sec. my 1M stock did it at 13.2sec. now that it is tuned, the fastest i've gone is 11 sec.

going to the C63s, i believe stock C63s here did 60-130 in 12.5sec. the one you see on the video, which is tuned, has a time of around 10.8 sec. all these times are taken on the same stretch of road at the same take off point using a vbox to measure the times.

[M///1rider]

Originally Posted by Chris1M

lol at those videos. They are all so off. The c63 will pull slightly on an M3. So how did you pull hard on an M3 then get pulled slightly by the AMG? A 911 GTS will smoke an M3. There's no way a 1M is keeping up with that car.

M6>M5>M3>1M
In terms of straight line speed.

What are you insane? You think an m3 is faster from a 40 roll then a 1m wow

All i can say is ive been in the n54 platform for a while. Against a stock m5 and fbo n54 will beat it. Im not positive how much lighter the m6 is but it will probably beat a stock one to.

The c63 is a monster on rolls. Its basically what its meant for. The m3 is for a nice long track where torque cannot beat it. Like we have seen from the 1m against the m3. On several tracks.

Please im tired of all these m3 drivers thinking there can can keep up from a highway roll.

If you have not seen turboed cars vs even ferrari f430s porsche gt3s yea they pull hard when you get about 140 mph bc of there high revving ability but there not fast down low.

Even a supercharger 535 m3 will get smoked by a fbo 135i on meth.

I just cant take the cockiness of there NA ppl .


Lets get the facts straight
-every single bmw is turboed now besides the e92 m3 in the 2012 lineup.
-they will im pretty sure be the first company to accomplish this.
-stop hating NA is dying. Even the fastest mustangs are supercharged now!!!!
- the m5/m6/m3 will and have alrdy been released to be turboed. The new m5 will poopy on anything bc it is a v8 twin turbo.with just a tune that thing will be running almost 10s!!!! And the new m3 will be magnificent.
Even better than the last m3 yes i have said it.

- so chill out the dude lost to a tune c63 those shits are out and are one of the fastest NA motors in its price range. 500 wheel is alot they will smoke an m3 any day.

The v8 has died BMW has been reborn

[M///1rider]

If you couldnt tell look how fast the porsche panamera turbo is and tell me you dont want a turboed car. That basically the same speed as the new m5. I cant wait to get a ride in the new m5

Oh and if you own a 1m and have seen all the single turbos that are comming out you might be happy.

BW 8374 twinscroll by full race capable up to around 700-800 whp umm see ya later everything for 10k.
-they said there full race n54 will be ready by SEMA 2012 in november

[mlhj83]

Originally Posted by M///1rider

What are you insane? You think an m3 is faster from a 40 roll then a 1m wow

All i can say is ive been in the n54 platform for a while. Against a stock m5 and fbo n54 will beat it. Im not positive how much lighter the m6 is but it will probably beat a stock one to.

The c63 is a monster on rolls. Its basically what its meant for. The m3 is for a nice long track where torque cannot beat it. Like we have seen from the 1m against the m3. On several tracks.

Please im tired of all these m3 drivers thinking there can can keep up from a highway roll.

If you have not seen turboed cars vs even ferrari f430s porsche gt3s yea they pull hard when you get about 140 mph bc of there high revving ability but there not fast down low.

Even a supercharger 535 m3 will get smoked by a fbo 135i on meth.

I just cant take the cockiness of there NA ppl .


Lets get the facts straight
-every single bmw is turboed now besides the e92 m3 in the 2012 lineup.
-they will im pretty sure be the first company to accomplish this.
-stop hating NA is dying. Even the fastest mustangs are supercharged now!!!!
- the m5/m6/m3 will and have alrdy been released to be turboed. The new m5 will poopy on anything bc it is a v8 twin turbo.with just a tune that thing will be running almost 10s!!!! And the new m3 will be magnificent.
Even better than the last m3 yes i have said it.

- so chill out the dude lost to a tune c63 those shits are out and are one of the fastest NA motors in its price range. 500 wheel is alot they will smoke an m3 any day.

The v8 has died BMW has been reborn

Relax. All M cars are great. Nobody is hating turbos or NA. We are only stating facts. I'm sorry but an M3 will still outrun a 1M from a roll as long as the M3 is in the right gear and optimal rev range, I've tried, but the M3 is only a little faster in a straight line. It's pure physics - BHP per ton. BHP is a product of torque and RPM. I'm no hater, I love the power delivery of the 1M. But numbers are facts, I won't try and say the M3 is faster than the V10 M5 or M6, as it's ludicrous given that the M5 and M6 have higher BHP per ton than an M3. No doubt it is easier to accelerate quickly in a 1M compared to the M3, due to its torque, but as long as the M3 is in the correct gear, it'll still outrun it. Obviously, it is easier to remap the 1M and it will be quicker than a standard M3.

[azmurciev12]

Originally Posted by M///1rider

If you couldnt tell look how fast the porsche panamera turbo is and tell me you dont want a turboed car.

i think you hit it spot on with the turbo cars. they just have so much torque down low that it doesn't give time for the NA cars to catch up. it's not all about horsepower. you need to see both torque and hp the engine makes and take the weight of the car into consideration.

i have a panamera turbo as well. that's rated at 500bhp, same as M5 or M6, but that car is as fast as the C63 on the video, and will leave all the M5s and M6s behind despite being heavier and AWD. there's a lot of torque down low. the C63 on the other hand, has a big 6.3L V8 which produces so much torque as well.

hopefully my buddy gets the 997 GTS video as well. that car has 410hp but gets left behind by my tuned 1M again... i believe it has much less torque due to the NA engine.

[mlhj83]

Originally Posted by azmurciev12

i think you hit it spot on with the turbo cars. they just have so much torque down low that it doesn't give time for the NA cars to catch up. it's not all about horsepower. you need to see both torque and hp the engine makes and take the weight of the car into consideration.

i have a panamera turbo as well. that's rated at 500bhp, same as M5 or M6, but that car is as fast as the C63 on the video, and will leave all the M5s and M6s behind despite being heavier and AWD. there's a lot of torque down low. the C63 on the other hand, has a big 6.3L V8 which produces so much torque as well.

hopefully my buddy gets the 997 GTS video as well. that car has 410hp but gets left behind by my tuned 1M again... i believe it has much less torque due to the NA engine.

Correct, it's not just about horsepower or torque, but, it's power to weight ratio, the spread of the torque curve and also the gearing ratios of the transmission. A car with a high revving NA engine, with the correct gearing, with sufficient power to weight ratio, is still faster than a car with a lower power to weight ratio and higher torque regardless to the road speed at which acceleration begins. But in the real world, there are so many variables that affect drag racing that it makes it difficult to scientifically verify the speed differential between cars, unless drag racing in done under test conditions. I agree that it is definitely easier to accelerate quickly in a car with a lot of torque low down, but it does not automatically mean it'll accelerate quicker than a car with a better power to weight ratio with the right gearing. Again, I'm not dismissing forced induction engines, they are the future and I'm most definitely embracing it, but I'm trying to be as scientific as I can with my retort. I shall do a test with my chum who has a 1M and will try to post some videos for a general illustration. Traffic laws will be abided.

[1SerieStud]

Not sure what's so difficult to be believe, here are some valuable points that the skeptical seem to neglect:

1) As mentioned right above this post, power-to-weight ratio. The 1M is the lightest of the M cars in question, and has outstanding power-to-weight figures.

2) Regardless of power-to-weight numbers, another important factor is how soon the power gets delivered. I don't care how much more power an M3, M5 or M6 has, they are much heavier and the power has to be extracted from their engines. By the time they get to their sweet spot, the 1M is gone. Also, the M6's are known to have the greatest disadvantage due to weight.

3) Once the laws of aerodynamics start to become significantly relevant (triple digit speeds), the 1M is already too far ahead for any of the more "slippery" cars to make a drastic comeback.

[Pete_vB]

Originally Posted by mlhj83

I'm sorry but an M3 will still outrun a 1M from a roll as long as the M3 is in the right gear and optimal rev range, I've tried, but the M3 is only a little faster in a straight line. It's pure physics - BHP per ton. BHP is a product of torque and RPM.

If we're going to bench race let's do it properly... The proper way is to create thrust curves for both cars. You take the torque from the car's dyno and calculate how much thrust results at the wheels by taking the gearing and tire diameter into account. You then divide that by the car's weight (with driver) and you have a thrust to weight ratio, from which you can derive acceleration. Higher thrust to weight is of course better. Do this for both cars you want to compare, for every gear.

Attached is this graph for a 1M with a typical dyno vs a typical manual M3. Compare the two lines- at any given speed when the blue line is on top the 1M is pulling harder, when the red line is on top the M3 is pulling harder...

Now, the OP said 40 mph roll-on. And we see at 40 mph the 1M is pulling 24% harder in 2nd gear, and will pull away quickly. At 60 mph the M3 starts to pull harder; it's slower at this point so it needs to build up speed before it can match the 1M and begin catching it, but at 70 the M3 shifts and the 1M is pulling harder until a bit over 90 mph. From there us the M3 and 1M go back and forth, but at these speeds you really need to factor aero in which will begin to favor the M3.

So not only plausible that the 1M will pull the M3 from 40 mph, but obvious, regardless of what gear the M3 is in. If the drag had started at ~52 it could have been a very close race. As you say it's pure physics, but it's more complex than BHP per ton...

[mlhj83]

Originally Posted by Pete_vB

If we're going to bench race let's do it properly... The proper way is to create thrust curves for both cars. You take the torque from the car's dyno and calculate how much thrust results at the wheels by taking the gearing and tire diameter into account. You then divide that by the car's weight (with driver) and you have a thrust to weight ratio, From which you can derive acceleration. Higher thrust to weight is of course better. Do this for both cars you want to compare, for every gear.

Attached is this graph for a 1M with a typical dyno vs a typical manual M3. Compare the two lines- at any given speed when the blue line is on top the 1M is pulling harder, when the red line is on top the M3 is pulling harder...

Now, the OP said 40 mph roll-on. And we see at 40 mph the 1M is pulling 24% harder in 2nd gear, and will pull away quickly. At 60 mph the M3 starts to pull harder; it's slower at this point so it needs to build up speed before it can match the 1M and begin catching it, but at 70 the M3 shifts and the 1M is pulling harder until a bit over 90 mph. From there us the M3 and 1M go back and forth, but at these speeds you really need to factor aero in which will begin to favor the M3.

So not only plausible that the 1M will pull the M3 from 40 mph, but obvious, regardless of what gear the M3 is in. If the drag had started at ~52 it could have been a very close race. As you say it's pure physics, but it's more complex than BHP per ton...

Cheers for the work. Yes, it is more complex than just power to weight ratio. I do agree that the S65 with the manual gearbox is a little compromised low down due to longer gearing. Could you possibly calculate for DCT as it would help explain my experience of an even acceleration with the 1M right up to ~60mph despite repeated attempts. Many thanks.

[1SerieStud]

Originally Posted by Pete_vB

If we're going to bench race let's do it properly... The proper way is to create thrust curves for both cars. You take the torque from the car's dyno and calculate how much thrust results at the wheels by taking the gearing and tire diameter into account. You then divide that by the car's weight (with driver) and you have a thrust to weight ratio, from which you can derive acceleration. Higher thrust to weight is of course better. Do this for both cars you want to compare, for every gear.

Attached is this graph for a 1M with a typical dyno vs a typical manual M3. Compare the two lines- at any given speed when the blue line is on top the 1M is pulling harder, when the red line is on top the M3 is pulling harder...

Now, the OP said 40 mph roll-on. And we see at 40 mph the 1M is pulling 24% harder in 2nd gear, and will pull away quickly. At 60 mph the M3 starts to pull harder; it's slower at this point so it needs to build up speed before it can match the 1M and begin catching it, but at 70 the M3 shifts and the 1M is pulling harder until a bit over 90 mph. From there us the M3 and 1M go back and forth, but at these speeds you really need to factor aero in which will begin to favor the M3.

So not only plausible that the 1M will pull the M3 from 40 mph, but obvious, regardless of what gear the M3 is in. If the drag had started at ~52 it could have been a very close race. As you say it's pure physics, but it's more complex than BHP per ton...

Bravo!

[Pete_vB]

Originally Posted by mlhj83

Cheers for the work. Yes, it is more complex than just power to weight ratio. I do agree that the S65 with the manual gearbox is a little compromised low down due to longer gearing. Could you possibly calculate for DCT as it would help explain my experience of an even acceleration with the 1M right up to ~60mph despite repeated attempts. Many thanks.

The DCT has a slightly shorter 2nd gear which will keep things slightly closer, though it is heavier. What speeds did you go from? The numbers work out similarly, so the most obvious explanations are either that you were in multiple gears and hence shift speed came into play, or the 1M was not in overboost mode (either due to bad gas, engine not warmed up fully, etc).

[azmurciev12]

guys, we started around 40KPH and 80KPH not MPH. no sense bench racing. mlhj83 go find a mate with a 1M and video your run with him and lets see what happens. cheers.

[mlhj83]

Originally Posted by azmurciev12

guys, we started around 40KPH and 80KPH not MPH. no sense bench racing. mlhj83 go find a mate with a 1M and video your run with him and lets see what happens. cheers.

Yup, I've been running with my chum's 1M, and we've been comparing our cars for quite sometime now, both on and off track. I'll get some in car footage of the gearing, revs and speed. We'll aim to keep within speed limits, nothing above motorway allowances.

Both of us run Shell/BP EU RON 97 and above, our mileage is above 14K miles and no more than 2000 miles difference between our cars. Both are running the same wheels with oem spec tyres. The 1M is also conservatively loaded with options with no electric seats and no upgraded audio system. We both weigh about the same and both have decent road and track driving experience with decent advanced driving qualifications. So the "tool" behind wheel is less of a variable .

[mlhj83]

Originally Posted by Pete_vB

The DCT has a slightly shorter 2nd gear which will keep things slightly closer, though it is heavier. What speeds did you go from? The numbers work out similarly, so the most obvious explanations are either that you were in multiple gears and hence shift speed came into play, or the 1M was not in overboost mode (either due to bad gas, engine not warmed up fully, etc).

We started from 30mph and 40mph, till no more than 80mph. At those speeds, I'll be going through gears 1 2 and 3. The 1M can only start from gear 2 at 30mph due to insufficient traction when we tested in winter. But we'll try again from gear 1 this time round. I'll do a video to get better clarity. Cheers.

[M///1rider]

Well i believe the results will still be the same till 100 mph+

The m3s are also DCT which gives them a huge advantage.

Now imagine if someone had a DCT 1m that didnt loose boost between shifts!!!! The 1m would really be out everytime.

And btw since were talking about stock vs stock we might as well talk about tune vs tune.

And no matter what the m3 till it is force inducted still wont catch up thats the whole reason why there switching to stock turboed cars and not NAs guys

[azmurciev12]

please make sure to run with M mode on and MDM. i noticed when not in MDM, i'm much slower as the electronics is killing power or braking the car once it senses even a little slip. take off the 1M around 3Krpm and shift at 6.5Krpm on second gear and around 6K on third onwards. no need to redline the 1M -at least that's what i do and i've been successful =) 40-80mph is very short. if your max speed is 80mph, then start from at least 20mph and see what happens =)

[Artemis]

Not my intention to criticize objective technical info such as "turbo vs. NA", but got issues with some superiority perfumed talk that creeps into, and intertwines with, the discussion (see earlier "135i vs. 1M" and "1M vs. M3" threads going up in flames).

Fair enough, it might be a fringe benefit to know, as some sort of side note, that under ideal circumstances (skilled pro pilot, fine-tuned car set-up, intensive practicing, minimal weight, perfect weather condition, excellent road condition, cop-free area, etc.) some car is (not) capable to achieve a certain output or performance. But that's merely car potential info, because in the end you perfectly know that it's hard (and probably useless) to recreate these IRL by you. Only really matters if car manufacturing, circuit racing or car sales is your job or hobby. Otherwise, IMHO it has no direct added value for (y)our personal lives.

///M cars are great cars. We're privileged to drive these marvels of motoring industry. Can't we all just settle on that, instead of those never ending "my car is more whatever(*) than yours" discussions (c.q. battles) ?

(*) Feel free to fill in the subjective adjective of your choice.

[mlhj83]

Originally Posted by azmurciev12

please make sure to run with M mode on and MDM. i noticed when not in MDM, i'm much slower as the electronics is killing power or braking the car once it senses even a little slip. take off the 1M around 3Krpm and shift at 6.5Krpm on second gear and around 6K on third onwards. no need to redline the 1M -at least that's what i do and i've been successful =) 40-80mph is very short. if your max speed is 80mph, then start from at least 20mph and see what happens =)

Thanks. That's what we did. Video will follow in due course. All in the name of objectivity. As I said, all M cars are great.

[Pete_vB]

Originally Posted by mlhj83

We started from 30mph and 40mph, till no more than 80mph. At those speeds, I'll be going through gears 1 2 and 3. The 1M can only start from gear 2 at 30mph due to insufficient traction when we tested in winter. But we'll try again from gear 1 this time round. I'll do a video to get better clarity. Cheers.

From 30 your results make some sense, as you can see. You won't get power down in 1st with PS2s in the 1M, PSS maybe. From 40 to 70 the smart money is on the 1M, especially if you brake boost to eliminate turbo spool.