M3 & C63 AMG Killer? Yes or No

[HighestOfHigh]

what can the car do that other cars cant do? can it fly?

Huh?

 

[Guibo]

I agree with you to a certain extent but your not going to find a newer DOHC
engine that doesn`t flow very well or for that matter flow slower than an OHV design. The newer ECU units in most world-class vehicles are much more sophsticated than thay were 10 years ago.
The older ECUs were designed to ring out the most of an engines power no matter what the cost. Today (no matter what the implementation) the newer ECUs units are designed to flex out the valvetrains with maximum efficiency. The short-coming would be in the hardwear of the design.

Great posts Btw.

Thanks.
ECU's are much more advanced, but I'm not so sure about the maximum efficiency thing. Many of today's cars (even from world-class premium brands) can still benefit from ECU reflashes. Surely, the manufacturers still leave something on the table.
IMO the implementation still matters. The C6 Corvette has surprised some British mags (like Evo) with its penchant for revs. In a comparo against the MG SV-R, for example, they noted that it was peculiarly free-revving while the MG was much more asthmatic. The LS7 in the Z06 is also a rev-hungry engine, with the same redline as the E39 M5; not bad for a low-tech lawnmower engine. It also compares favorably in refinement and force developement against the engines of the F430, 997TT, 997GT2, and Gallardo, by AutoZeitung tests. The LS3 does the same against the XK.
The LS3 is not from a world-class premium marque, but by comparing it to BMW's 4.8L V8, you might understand the findings of those British mags. These engines rev to within 400 rpm of each other, despite the LS3's OHV layout, lack of double-VANOS valve control, and longer stroke. The LS3 actually makes its peak torque 1200 rpm higher than the BMW. If you've ever seen their dyno charts laid on top of each other, you'd be hard pressed to figure out which is OHV. They have similar torque fall-off at higher revs, and both have peak HP 700 rpm short of redline.
None of the premium marques will touch OHV, and unfortunately, Cadillac will do what they've done in the past: simply take the engine GM have developed for the Corvette and revise it only mildly for their purpose instead of investing some leading-edge innovation into the design. If they had the same fervour for engine innovation and development as BMW or AMG, the OHV would likely be in a different place.

 

[ALI]

As for the looks on these cars, my vote would also go to the C63, 2nd S5 audi,and 3rd M3......

The Audi s5 looks awesome, but still looks like every other Audi out there, that means it shares the same problem IMO, Audi makes awesome front ends, I like the rear ends, but what I truely hate is their side and pillar design, it messes up the whole purpose of the aggressive front end look, and drags it closer to VW design... same goes for all the other Audi's including the R8 ..

 

[GTA45E]

Thanks.
ECU's are much more advanced, but I'm not so sure about the maximum efficiency thing. Many of today's cars (even from world-class premium brands) can still benefit from ECU reflashes. Surely, the manufacturers still leave something on the table.
IMO the implementation still matters. The C6 Corvette has surprised some British mags (like Evo) with its penchant for revs. In a comparo against the MG SV-R, for example, they noted that it was peculiarly free-revving while the MG was much more asthmatic. The LS7 in the Z06 is also a rev-hungry engine, with the same redline as the E39 M5; not bad for a low-tech lawnmower engine. It also compares favorably in refinement and force developement against the engines of the F430, 997TT, 997GT2, and Gallardo, by AutoZeitung tests. The LS3 does the same against the XK.
The LS3 is not from a world-class premium marque, but by comparing it to BMW's 4.8L V8, you might understand the findings of those British mags. These engines rev to within 400 rpm of each other, despite the LS3's OHV layout, lack of double-VANOS valve control, and longer stroke. The LS3 actually makes its peak torque 1200 rpm higher than the BMW. If you've ever seen their dyno charts laid on top of each other, you'd be hard pressed to figure out which is OHV. They have similar torque fall-off at higher revs, and both have peak HP 700 rpm short of redline.
None of the premium marques will touch OHV, and unfortunately, Cadillac will do what they've done in the past: simply take the engine GM have developed for the Corvette and revise it only mildly for their purpose instead of investing some leading-edge innovation into the design. If they had the same fervour for engine innovation and development as BMW or AMG, the OHV would likely be in a different place.

Very interesting opinion there Guibo, however I don`t believe your going to find the OHV design on Hi-Performance cars like AMG and M. The Germans are all about pricision (clock-work if you will) hi-performance timing is a very
critical. Take a look at this link. It proves what I`m talking about.

----->> OHV, OHC, SOHC and DOHC (twin cam) engine - Automotive illustrated glossary

 

[Guibo]

Very interesting opinion there Guibo, however I don`t believe your going to find the OHV design on Hi-Performance cars like AMG and M.

I never said we would. In fact, I said the exact opposite.

It proves what I`m talking about.

----->> OHV, OHC, SOHC and DOHC (twin cam) engine - Automotive illustrated glossary

I already know what you're talking about. I already said I agree that for outright breathing, DOHC has more potential. The reality is that in the vast majority of consumer automobiles, and even M/AMG models, rarely is the engine taken to its limit; thus, tuners exist to extract even more performance.
The information in that link you provided shows me nothing new. It even supports what I'm saying: in some cases, depending on the application, OHV can be better.
"has more compact size"
To give you some idea of this, consider these two engines:
[/URL]

And this is still a fairly mildly tuned engine. Yet its torque drop-off is no worse than a highly advanced, much more highly strung DOHC, like in the M5. It is certainly better than that found in the old M5. With smaller, per-cylinder displacement, shorter stroke, light-weight pistons, precision bearings, and more advanced ECU, it could greatly extend its rev range as well.

 

[GTA45E]

I`m wondering will the camless engines be almost as short as the OHV design.
It will be interesting to see when thay hit production.

 

[HighestOfHigh]

After seeing the S5 in person, I really have to say it's far better looking then the Caddy and BMW M3. Guess I have to wait for the new CLK to compare it.

 

[ateekt]

World's best-selling & most-successful sports car aka M3 is simply unmatched, yesterday & today ...!

 

[HighestOfHigh]

World's best-selling & most-successful sports car aka M3 is simply unmatched, yesterday & today ...!

I don't know. I think it just beat the M3 in a Car Magazine. Might have been Road and Track or Motor Trend.

 

[Shining Star]

C63 beat M3 in Road and Track...

 

[ateekt]

I don't know. I think it just beat the M3 in a Car Magazine. Might have been Road and Track or Motor Trend.

You've been away for quite long, you missed this & you just can't!

http://www.germancarforum.com/3-series/29509-2009-bmw-m3-world%92s-greatest-all-around-car.html

C63 beat M3 in Road and Track...

Y-E-A-H! When & where?

 

[Sunny]

Y-E-A-H! When & where?

Probably here.

 

[Shining Star]

RoadandTrack.com -- Comparison Tests - Ultimate Sedan Comparison (6/2008)

 

[Mr Robert]

Probably here.

Haha, yes, that is the place

Of couse the C63 will have beaten the M3 in a few tests, I mean R&T rated the Mercedes engine a 20.0 while the M3 engine got 15.6... I do not agree at all but that will not win the test for BMW.

 

[Guibo]

Since this thread was last really active, we've had some tests of the CTS-V. C&D is one of the few mags that has acceleration figures past 120 mph, so I'll reference them:

0-100
CTS-V (manual): 9.7
C63: 9.2
E92 M3: 9.8
E90 M3: 9.8

100-140
CTS-V: 9.5
C63: 9.8
E92 M3: 10.6
E90 M3: 10.7

Looks like the C63 is pretty close past 100. I'd wager that once the CTS-V gets into 6th @ 161 mph, an unlimited C63 would probably pull harder to the end.

C&D had all 3 cars on the Lightning Lap at Virginia International Raceway, a medium-high speed track.
CTS-V: 3:04.0
E92 M3: 3:05.6
C63: 3:06.5
The CTS-V's minimum cornering speeds slotted between the BMW and AMG.
http://www.caranddriver.com/content...on/1/file/The+Lightning+Lap,+2008+Results.pdf

Car Magazine had good things to say about the CTS-V:
"Should you buy a CTS-V instead of an M5, XFR, CLS63 or RS6? That's an awkward decision to make, because the Cadillac is every bit as impressive as its opposition - it can be mentioned in the same breath on merit, rather than on some insulting slight like bang-for-your-buck.
There might not be many corners in Florida, but when we've found them the CTS-V has steered sharply, stayed flat and gripped tight. It's way better than I expected, with a top-notch interior, an awesome engine and the option of an auto-box..."

Of couse the C63 will have beaten the M3 in a few tests, I mean R&T rated the Mercedes engine a 20.0 while the M3 engine got 15.6... I do not agree at all but that will not win the test for BMW.

Actually, if you awarded the M3 the same 20 points, it would have won (381.1 vs 380.9); the final tally was extremely close, and to Audi's credit, the RS4 was right up there.
Yeah, for every test where the C63 wins, there are probably 4-5 where the M3 wins.

 

[Mr Robert]

Actually, if you awarded the M3 the same 20 points, it would have won (381.1 vs 380.9); the final tally was extremely close, and to Audi's credit, the RS4 was right up there.
Yeah, for every test where the C63 wins, there are probably 4-5 where the M3 wins.

Oh, it had? Well, my point is that it is very much down to personal preferences on account of the testers. The reason why the M3 wins 4 out of 5 times is that its soft, or "hard to meassure" values appeal to a lof of reviewers, just as it does to a lot of driving enthusiasts (I don't know, maybe that is the reason the reviewers keep their jobs?).