twisted Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 M3 GT STG1 Weight 3415 lbs HP 333 @7900 Torque 262@4900 0-60 4.8 sec GT STG1 3365 -3465 lbs (5MT or 5EAT) 250 @ 6000 285@ ???? 250 @ 3500 305 @ ???? 0-60 5.5 secs ?? ??? Weight is close between the two HP is higher on M3 but also comes about 2K revs later Torque is less as well on the M3 (unless the numbers on the bmw site are whp and i am reading them wrong) how come cobb doesnt provide us with official 0-60 numbers for stg1 at least? how come the m3 0-60 is faster when there isnt much difference in the other numbers? this is what kept me up last night?...someone put my mind at ease so i can sleep peacefully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twisted Posted January 26, 2006 Author Share Posted January 26, 2006 fck formatting lost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agctr Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 twisted, is that the sorta the correct format now, trying to help ? I know when u do it either in advanced or normal, the format you put it in doesnt always work because vB doesn't always see the multiple spaces. Ada///M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agctr Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 To answer your question. Look at the way the ///M is geared against the GT Then look at how much longer the ///M can hold each gear for. Getting maximum HP to the rears is also done thru DSC esp off the line. 3.2L has more linear power and doesnt have to wait till the RPM hits the boost region like the GT, hence the ///M gets much better acceleration throughout the rev range and in each gear. Ada///M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wukindada Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 The comparison would be much more even if you were comparing a Stage II LGT vs the M3.....It's pretty much a wash acceleration wise...edge slightly to the LGT (MT) Toyota 6EATS .........SUCK!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilT Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 The comparison would be much more even if you were comparing a Stage II LGT vs the M3.....It's pretty much a wash acceleration wise...edge slightly to the LGT (MT) That is correct, to the amazement of my buddy and his M3 convertible, now pw3nd by a wagon Double Award Winning Legacy GT Wagon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wukindada Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 :lol: Then to tell them it's stock;) To look @ the faces afterwords.......PRICELESS:) Toyota 6EATS .........SUCK!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Jedimaster* Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Swear ta me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-2.5-GT Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 To answer your question. Look at the way the ///M is geared against the GT Then look at how much longer the ///M can hold each gear for. Getting maximum HP to the rears is also done thru DSC esp off the line. 3.2L has more linear power and doesnt have to wait till the RPM hits the boost region like the GT, hence the ///M gets much better acceleration throughout the rev range and in each gear. Ada///M. Touchdown! Drivetrain and gearing is the biggest reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmundu Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 I beg to differ! The reason an M3 is as strong as it is, is due to it being able to sustain that 330+hp through it's powerband! A stg2 LGT WILL NOT pull an M3, I know I have tried a few times! I'm not talking from a dig, but from a highway roll where power discrepencies are really amplified. Even in the 1/4, an M3 is trapping 104-106 mph, to the LGT's stg2 103-104 mph! To understand why you need to look at the dyno charts! Stg2 LGT's at their peak make 240-260whp(note peak), because from 6k up the LGT is falling off sharpy! When you're running thru the gears, drag racing, whatever, you are in the 4.7k-6.7k rpm range depending on when you shift. In that rpm band, the LGT is only strong from 4.7-5.7k, clearly only half of the gear! The other half it is just clawing to get to 6.5-7k. On an M3, from 6.2k-8k, it pretty much is putting down it's peak power of 265-285! So taking the avg hp into account the LGT is down! The only saving grace is that the LGT is a good amount better in aerodynamic efficiency, .29cd vs .33cd, and taking into account frontal drag area, 6.58sqft. vs 7.36sqft.. This is a 12% advantage, which is alot!(This is what allowed me to go toe-to-toe with an Audi S4 V8!, at stg1 TMIC!) I also have proven this thru logging many times! I can note in the logs where the car starts accelerating at an equal to slightly faster rate than it did in the gear before! Have any of you noticed that the car pulls harder from 4.5-5.5k in 5th than it does 4th from 5.5-6.5k? Try it. It is directly due to the trq just dropping off, because the vf40 is literally starting to choke the 2.5l. I have an STI swap now, and the biggest difference between this and a stg2 LGT, is the power from 5.5k up is a fair amount better! With the vf39, the powerband has been extended by about 500 rpm! Thus enabling the wheel trq to stick around til 6.2-6.3k rpm's! It also tales off at a reduced dive angle... This STI swap setup, should be a match or more than likely beat a M3, but not a stg2 stock turbo'ed LGT.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmm def Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Edmund is right. I have seen him run and also have run many times. 2 of my good friends have the E46 M3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legacysteve68 Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 edmundu really loves exclamation points!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmundu Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 edmundu really loves exclamation points!!! Sorry about the overuse. Now that you pointed it out, I do seem to have an affinity for them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilT Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 I don't doubt your figures Edmundo, but I know what I saw, and that was an M///3 behind me Now, it was from a standing start admittedly, and I don't think my buddy knows how to get the most from his M///3, but I can still say I pw3ned him Another day, another driver, things would most likely be different. Double Award Winning Legacy GT Wagon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmanzs Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 The older ones are not near as fast as the newer m3s. I know because I have pulled from them too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmundu Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Great driving PhilT! I certainly didn't mean to imply that you were story telling, just that taking drivers out of the equation, the M3 will beat a stg2 LGT everytime. Again, this is from highway rolls, where there are no traction issues... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Jedimaster* Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 edmundu really loves exclamation points!!! Him and Stan Lee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twisted Posted January 26, 2006 Author Share Posted January 26, 2006 so what is needed for m3 pwntage...no matter the conditions/location??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWortham Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 There's still a pretty big difference in hp. So the M3 still has the better power / weight ratio by a good margin. My rough estimations are as follows: LGT Stg 1 MT hp / lbs: 0.08469539375928678 0 - 60 mph: 5.10 seconds M3 hp / lbs : 0.09751098096632503 0 - 60 mph: 4.79 seconds www.gldomain.com/accelerationcalc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmundu Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Normally power/ weight ratios are listed as xxlbs/xxhp, but you have the right idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmundu Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 so what is needed for m3 pwntage...no matter the conditions/location??? Well, you need to change the stock turbo... An 18g on top of your avg stg2 protune will be enough to school one. An STI swap should, but I'll have to confirm that someday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmm def Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Someday soon man...Give old man aaron a call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChruiSSer Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 STi swap LGT > 04ish M3 Barely though. I ate a 350Z the other day as well. Pretty badly from 65. Watch out for those cobalt SS's though. I ran one from 70 and only started to pull on him after 115. It looked stock, but I'm assuming that a pulley alone would bump it a good 35hp. I was very suprised... *NOTE* - NONE of this happened on public roadways Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godwhomismike Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 LGT is AWD, which loses more power between the engine and the wheels due to the AWD system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MUD Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 This makes me want to test drive a new M3! That's if they'd even let me on the lot! Haha! It is the disposition of men to desire that which he cannot have, hence my un-quenchable wet desire for Shakira! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.