04-30-2014, 04:05 AM | #45 | |||
Captain
90
Rep 833
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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? 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 |
Brigadier General
4059
Rep 4,983
Posts |
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, 06:47 AM | #48 |
Major
75
Rep 1,179
Posts |
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 |
First Lieutenant
13
Rep 138
Posts |
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 | |
2135
Rep 5,011
Posts |
Quote:
100% agree - great point and wonderfully written. OP - Great post! |
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-30-2014, 08:16 AM | #51 | |
Enlisted Member
2
Rep 46
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-30-2014, 08:18 AM | #52 |
Brigadier General
504
Rep 3,446
Posts |
Now I can do my 135i/PPK vs F150 review
__________________
See my photography at http://ronscubadiver.wordpress.com
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-30-2014, 09:11 AM | #53 |
Brigadier General
67
Rep 3,214
Posts
Drives: f25 X3 AW
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: LOS ANGELES, CA
iTrader: (2)
Garage List 2004 e46 M3 AW RETIRED [0.00]
2003 e46 M3 CB RETIRED [0.00] 2013 f25 X3 AW [0.00] 2007 e92 328i SG RE ... [0.00] 2007 e90 335i AW RE ... [0.00] |
nice write up OP. cars are amazing.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-30-2014, 11:28 AM | #54 | |
Captain
119
Rep 898
Posts
Drives: '69 GT3, GT4, 1M, 912
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, Shenzhen, Oman
|
Whoa, this got busy...
Quote:
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 | ||
Captain
119
Rep 898
Posts
Drives: '69 GT3, GT4, 1M, 912
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, Shenzhen, Oman
|
Quote:
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 | |
Captain
119
Rep 898
Posts
Drives: '69 GT3, GT4, 1M, 912
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SF Bay Area, Shenzhen, Oman
|
Quote:
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 | |
Brigadier General
116
Rep 3,070
Posts |
Quote:
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 | |
that's what SHE said!
75
Rep 1,163
Posts |
Quote:
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 | |
Second Lieutenant
68
Rep 254
Posts |
Quote:
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 | |
that's what SHE said!
75
Rep 1,163
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-30-2014, 07:18 PM | #61 |
Second Lieutenant
68
Rep 254
Posts |
You were arguing the M3 makes more torque than the 1M, not that the M3 was faster...
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-30-2014, 07:21 PM | #62 | |
that's what SHE said!
75
Rep 1,163
Posts |
Quote:
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 | |
Second Lieutenant
68
Rep 254
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-30-2014, 07:34 PM | #64 | |
that's what SHE said!
75
Rep 1,163
Posts |
Quote:
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 | |
Private First Class
16
Rep 180
Posts |
Quote:
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 | |
Brigadier General
116
Rep 3,070
Posts |
Quote:
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 |
|
|