M3/M4 BMW M3 Spy pics 400hp V8!

[Yperion]

The carbonroof is a helpful and not only a gimmick some people might think. I wouldnt be surprised if we see this in future Audis and Benzes

Just an example: 4 kgr in a 1650 kgr car is a 0.24% reduce. So it depends if you consider that 0.24% is a significant percentage or not.

 

[Zafiro]

What is a M3 CLS? A BMW 4 door coupe? j/k

oh no not again

 

[Zafiro]

Just an example: 4 kgr in a 1650 kgr car is a 0.24% reduce. So it depends if you consider that 0.24% is a significant percentage or not.

obviosly its significant enough.

Gimmick or not or carbonroof or without, it wont affect the sales for the M6.

By comparison, conventional steel is four times heavier than carbon-fiber, weighing approximately 7.8 kilos per cubic decimeter. Every kilo saved especially on the roof has a very positive effect on the car’s driving dynamics. With the weight of the roof being reduced by 50 per cent versus a conventional steel structure right at the “top” where it really counts, the car’s centre of gravity is lowered accord-ingly. The benefit for the customer is higher speed in bends and further re-duc-tion of body dive and roll.

 

[warot]

Just an example: 4 kgr in a 1650 kgr car is a 0.24% reduce. So it depends if you consider that 0.24% is a significant percentage or not.

You see, it's not that simple though. In a straight line, it is .24%. But in a corner, you have to consider the forces as well as the fact that that weight is on the top of the car.
I'm not saying it's a huge huge difference, but it's more than .24% of a differences

 

[Yperion]

By comparison, conventional steel is four times heavier than carbon-fiber, weighing approximately 7.8 kilos per cubic decimeter. Every kilo saved especially on the roof has a very positive effect on the car’s driving dynamics. With the weight of the roof being reduced by 50 per cent versus a conventional steel structure right at the “top” where it really counts, the car’s centre of gravity is lowered accord-ingly. The benefit for the customer is higher speed in bends and further re-duc-tion of body dive and roll.

How much reduced is the center of gravity compared to the same car with a conventional roof? And how much that affects the car's performance? I say again that the difference should be insignificant.
Since 645i had an engine with lower displacement it is possible that it actually has a lower center of gravity than M6 although i don't have the data to support that assumption.

 

[Porsche Guy]

Here's a way to look at things. If you don't know what centrifugal forces are, it's the force that tries to push you out when you are (let's say) driving in a circle. The equation for that force is mass*rpm^2*radius

If you can give me some facts such as turning circle of the M6, we can figure out how much force the CF roof reduces.

Where does center of gravity factor into this equation? It merely uses mass of the entire object and does not take into account how the mass is distributed throughout the object. I think we need a much more complicated equation but I could be horribly wrong. The last time I did psychics was 4 years ago. Anyone a psychics major?

just wait for M6 CSL and we are going to see more carbon and lighweight materials

The carbonroof is a helpful and not only a gimmick some people might think. I wouldnt be surprised if we see this in future Audis and Benzes

I do not doubt that the M6 CSL is going to be a lot lighter with some expensive lightweight materials (magnesium) but we're talking about the regular M6 here. And of course MB and Audi are going to step up cabin fiber production in cars. The entire car industry has acknowledged that it is the material of the future. I would say in the next 20 years, or whenever carbon fiber production reaches an acceptably fast and cheap enough production level, every car manufacturer will use it.

Since 645i had an engine with lower displacement it is possible that it actually has a lower center of gravity than M6 although i don't have the data to support that assumption.

I don't think displacement has an effect on center of gravity unless your engine increases in weight with displacement. The configuration of the cylinders does have an affect on center of gravity though. A flat six, like Porsche and Subaru use, has a lower center of gravity than a V6 or inline 6.

 

[warot]

I was just talking about centrifugal forces, which is easier to compute than center of gravity because I figured we don't want to sit in a math class all day... but if you want center of gravity, good luck

Ok wait, all of a sudden I don't see the point of this anymore. BMW managed to save weight (albeit it being a small amount) on a car. They implemented the technology to lower the cars center of gravity (again, although it might be a small amount).

To me that is progress... that's all that matters no?

 

[Zafiro]

I was just talking about centrifugal forces, which is easier to compute than center of gravity because I figured we don't want to sit in a math class all day... but if you want center of gravity, good luck

Ok wait, all of a sudden I don't see the point of this anymore. BMW managed to save weight (albeit it being a small amount) on a car. They implemented the technology to lower the cars center of gravity (again, although it might be a small amount).

To me that is progress... that's all that matters no?

Its not about of much or little carbon BMW are using. Their goal was to save weight and improve handling and that excalty what they've done. Just like Porsche_guy said, its expensive. To keep the price not to high, BMW cant make the whole car in Carbonfibre.
M6 is a GT car, its fast, sporty, good driving dynamics, comfortable, equipped with all kind of luxury and at the same time has a very competitive price compared to the competitiors.
CSL versions are expensive, limited production, better suited for the track than daily-use. Price and costs isnt that important as standard M6's. Standard M6 are aiming for a widther public and CLS versions for a smaller public so to sell many standard M6's, the price cant be to high.

I admit its a gimmick but its helpful as well, more or less.

It's amusing to see that people seem to think they have better knowledge than M-divison.

Anyway, if you dont think M6 is good enough, then I guess you have to wait for the CSL version.

Oh wait a minute, wasnt this thread about " BMW M3 Spy pics 400hp V8!"

 

[Yperion]

I don't think displacement has an effect on center of gravity unless your engine increases in weight with displacement.

Normaly engine weight increases with dispacement unless other more lightweight materials are used.

The configuration of the cylinders does have an affect on center of gravity though. A flat six, like Porsche and Subaru use, has a lower center of gravity than a V6 or inline 6.

That's true. Boxer engines reduce the center of gravity of the car.Automobiles and motorcycles powered by a flat engine generally have a lower center of gravity, giving better stability and control. However, these engines are also wider than normal engines and are more expensive to build than traditional engines and, thus, are not widely used by automobile manufacturers.

Center of Gravity =The point within an object at which gravity can be considered to act; in uniform gravity it is equal to the center of mass.

BTW i have a University Degree in Physics although i don't make a living out of it.

 

[warot]

Normaly engine weight increases with dispacement unless other more lightweight materials are used.



That's true. Boxer engines reduce the center of gravity of the car.Automobiles and motorcycles powered by a flat engine generally have a lower center of gravity, giving better stability and control. However, these engines are also wider than normal engines and are more expensive to build than traditional engines and, thus, are not widely used by automobile manufacturers.

Center of Gravity =The point within an object at which gravity can be considered to act; in uniform gravity it is equal to the center of mass.

BTW i have a University Degree in Physics although i don't make a living out of it.

Wouldn't the suspension (height of car, body roll) be more important than the type of engine?

 

[Porsche Guy]

Wouldn't the suspension (height of car, body roll) be more important than the type of engine?

A lot of factors add up to produce a car's center of gravity. We were just debating the importance of a 5lb weight reduction on the roof of a car. Yes, ride height will definitely affect your car's center of gravity. Now imagine your engine, a substantial part of your car's mass, lower in the car's chassis (closer to the ground) because of it's design, a la boxer engine. That's going to produce more of an impact than a carbon fiber roof panel. All purpose built race cars are designed to have their components sitting as low in the chassis as possible and the car is designed to ride as close to the ground as possile without hampering performance. Wonder why monster trucks don't race F1?

 

[Matt]

First off, you're post is a blatant attempt a brand flame war which is just lame. I'm not going to get into a huge argument about Porsche vs. BMW, because I just don't care, but I think you should know that the 996 GT3 did the Nurburgring in 7:52 and the 997 GT3 should only improve upon that time. What was the M6's lap time? I want to know because I couldn't find it. And what's your problem with the Panamera? "That stupid four door thing" is going to give the M5 some serious competition. Also, we know basically nothing about the car so how can it be stupid? You're so BMW bias it's ridiculous. Did you know that I drive an X5 and that my dad's getting an E60 M5? Probably not, because you won't find me running around the forum blindly commenting about BMW's amazing qualities. Yes, they are a good company and have some good products but they are not the end all of car companies. Learn to live with that. I don't think Porsche is the perfect car company either so don't even bother going into a Porsche slandering post.

Honestly, who besides BMW leaves their car's carbon fiber body panels unpainted for all to see? Zonda aside and they actually have enough of it to brag about. The M6 has one piece of carbon fiber. Yes, if I had one piece of carbon fiber I would probably also place it on the roof or maybe the hood or trunk to help weight distribution. But as I pointed it out in my other post, why doesn't BMW brag about the M6's injection molded body panels and leave them unpainted? It's because the average consumer doesn't want to show off the injection molded panels, they want to show off what most people associates with exotic and expensive, which is carbon fiber, not plastic. The average consumer probably buys into it but it leaves me just laughing. Look at the Corvette C6 Z06, it has a lot more carbon fiber than the M6, plus it costs way less, but I don't see any exposed carbon fiber. Also, the carbon fiber roof does not provide structural support, it's merely for weight savings.

I happen to have a 993 Porsche turbo so I am not Brand Biased. The M5's time around Nurburgring was also 7:52 and the M6's should be even faster. The M5 also beat the GT3 on the stig track on Top Gear by over a second. Anyway, Im just saying you made the M6 sound like a fake performance car which is made of all gimmics. And like I said before I think BMW should have painted the carbon fiber, but the reason they didnt was so they could leave a CSL look to it. I think your right about the carbon fiber being a luxury item people associate with. BTW the ZO6 is to ashamed to show carbon fiber because everyone knows it has Leaf Spring suspension. L E A F S P R I N G S. It sounds like they saved money somewhere.

You also have to consider BMW did it for only aesthetic reasons. Maybe they thought it looked good and was a nice way to de-associate the car with the regular 6er. It looks good, i think so at least.

 

[Centurion]

Well it is not a mystery that the M5 bet the GT3, It has more power. Why put the M5 or M6 up against the 996 GT2 which has nearly as much power as them.

 

[Imhotep Evil]

Well, on a dry track the GT2 ofcourse, on wet maybe the GT2, on real roads, well I would bet on an UNLIMITED M5. Until the UNLIMITED M5 spanks the deriere of the Porsche 't is but a matter of time. Ofcourse if the E90 M3 is just as good or better as the E46 M3 CSL then the M3 is the choice. I'm hopeing that a E90 M3 with the SMS III will kick the deriere of 996 GT2.

 

[Porsche Guy]

I happen to have a 993 Porsche turbo so I am not Brand Biased. The M5's time around Nurburgring was also 7:52 and the M6's should be even faster. The M5 also beat the GT3 on the stig track on Top Gear by over a second. Anyway, Im just saying you made the M6 sound like a fake performance car which is made of all gimmics. And like I said before I think BMW should have painted the carbon fiber, but the reason they didnt was so they could leave a CSL look to it. I think your right about the carbon fiber being a luxury item people associate with. BTW the ZO6 is to ashamed to show carbon fiber because everyone knows it has Leaf Spring suspension. L E A F S P R I N G S. It sounds like they saved money somewhere.

You also have to consider BMW did it for only aesthetic reasons. Maybe they thought it looked good and was a nice way to de-associate the car with the regular 6er. It looks good, i think so at least.

You mean to tell me that car companies don't have unlimited funds and have to cut corners sometimes? Leaf springs aren't the end of the world. You can tune them to work fine. The Z06 isn't ashamed of it's carbon fiber. I was unaware that cars have the ability to feel shame. Anyways, no one besides BMW even bothers to show their carbon fiber peices off. Are the Carrera GT or Enzo ashamed of their carbon fiber too because they have a lot of it's but it's painted? Anyways, the Z06 with its cheap leaf springs and super cheap price will destroy the M6. I agree about the whole aesthetic reasoning, that's what I've been saying. BMW did it for aesthetic reasons but the carbon fiber roof doesn't provide anywhere near the performance gain BMW would like you to think.

Well it is not a mystery that the M5 bet the GT3, It has more power. Why put the M5 or M6 up against the 996 GT2 which has nearly as much power as them.

No, HP is not the sole factor which determines a car's level of performance. Too often people look just at hp figures. Weight is way more important. I can't stress that enough. People should worry more about hp/lb than HP/liter or total hp output. HP/lb can also be a false indicator of a car's performance as a 4000lb car with 400hp is not going to be nearly as fast through a slalom as a 2000lb car with 200hp, like a Lotus Elise. Weight!! It's all about weight, weigth distribution and center of gravity. A well balanced light car is way more competent than a nose heavy hp moster, unless you measure a car's performance soley in a straight line.

 

[Centurion]

Off course horsepower isn't the only thing that determins a car's performance(that is why I love the 911) but the fact is that HP is the core of many sport cars. Take this example A Porsche Boxter handels better than a M5 but with the huge hp difference between the cars the boxter would have no chance on a track against the M5. To a certain extent hp does matter alot. I'm just saying this because lots of moorons yelling out "OMFG The M5 is amazing beat the F430 and 911!!!!!!!!" Off course the M5 can beat a Ferrari in a straight line if it has more power than the Ferrari. That is why I wrote that it would be better to put up the M5 or M6 against something with equally as much power becasue then you can see how good either cars han handle all the power, hence showing which one is the better sports car.

 

[Zafiro]

I dont see a problem that M5/M6 beat a Porsche at straightlines, many cars does that but on a track, a guy who knows how to drive with his Porsche will beat a M5/M6 anyday. M5/M6 isnt a trackcar like Porsche.

Who is the fastest cars in straightlines dont decide which car is the best. Cars isnt only about straightline performance. And more important, its personal preferences that decide which car is the best. There are no right or wrong.

 

[Centurion]

I dont see a problem that M5/M6 beat a Porsche at straightlines, many cars does that but on a track, a guy who knows how to drive with his Porsche will beat a M5/M6 anyday. M5/M6 isnt a trackcar like Porsche.

Who is the fastest cars in straightlines dont decide which car is the best. Cars isnt only about straightline performance.

............and if there are lots of straight on a track the M6/M5 has a good chance of beating the Porsche. Therefore it is best to compare cars who have equaliy amount of power.

 

[Zafiro]

............and if there are lots of straight on a track the M6/M5 has a good chance of beating the Porsche. Therefore it is best to compare cars who have equaliy amount of power.

good chances yes but how many tracks are about straightlines.
It best to compare cars when they have the same amount of torque, horsepowers and gears and same weight and same tires. But its impossible . There is no such word as "best" cause every car is built differently. It cant never be equal.

 

[Centurion]

Who cars about gears and torque. Comparing cars by power is the most common method and I think that it is the best way of comparis cars. Off course a Cayenne Turbo shouldn't be comared with the CLS55.