[heavyD^2]

Originally Posted by M3WC

The CT5-V BW beat all the BMW's, including the M5CS which was on much better rubber. PZC4 on the CS is basically a track tire, 80 treadwear compared to 4S 300 treadwear.

CT4-V BW is like older BMW's, lose in speed but wins due to driver connection and feel(at least that is what C/D like about the Blackwing). In the past Benz fanboys use to hate on magazines when they picked the BMW over the Benz eventhough the Benz was actually quicker that day. I remember the old..."the magazines are paid off".

What I find interesting is that all the talk of the CT4-V being the better handling car when pushed to the limits the M3 is by C&D drivers own admission the better handling of the two cars.

Sharper on turn-in than the Caddy, the BMW moves with slightly more confidence. The steering only whispers what the front tires are up to, while the Cadillac's steering never stops crying "Hear ye, hear ye!" Call it a wash on braking feel and strength, and we're back to power. BMW's six delivers near supercar numbers, while the Cadillac musters sports-car speeds. Judged solely on times, the BMW is the winner.

No argument from me on the CT5-V as that car is an amazing machine.

[wtwo3]

For me the most surprising results are:

1) Panamera Turbo S - HOW is this thing so fast?? I get it's on Cup2 tires but sheesh.... it's 600 lbs heavier than an M5cs...

2) Mustang Mach1 - For a ~$50k car that's an incredible time

3) Civic Type R - I know this is an incredible car... but it's still SO surprising to me to see a Civic do THIS well.

[Jashue]

Not mentioned in the quote:
On run-flat tires.
Run. Flat. Tires.
Run freaking flat tires!!!
It’s almost as though BMW wants to downplay this cool new car to make sure to maximize the thunder of the upcoming M2.
Disgusting.

[Robert]

Man the Porsche cayenne mid size SUV posts a 2:50, impressive.

[jkap27]

Originally Posted by Mako

Where did they get their M3 xdrive base price from?
maybe thats what dealers are charging for a base?

BMW Website M3 Comp xdrive
base $77,100

Car and Driver reported M3 Comp xdrive
base $89,845


am I missing something?

I think feature for feature, RWD to RWD the CT4 and M3 are close in price (both low $70s) but this comparison makes it look like the M3 costs 25% more

yea that makes a big difference too...i might have considered the ctv5 blackwing if it was a little cheaper. the pricing categories used for this comparison are pretty strange.

[AlexFL]

That Mercedes is a beast!

[NightWriter]

Originally Posted by Robert

Man the Porsche cayenne mid size SUV posts a 2:50, impressive.

They must underrate their engine output even more than BMW.

[trey100]

Originally Posted by M3WC

The CT5-V BW beat all the BMW's, including the M5CS which was on much better rubber. PZC4 on the CS is basically a track tire, 80 treadwear compared to 4S 300 treadwear.

CT4-V BW is like older BMW's, lose in speed but wins due to driver connection and feel(at least that is what C/D like about the Blackwing). In the past Benz fanboys use to hate on magazines when they picked the BMW over the Benz eventhough the Benz was actually quicker that day. I remember the old..."the magazines are paid off".

I like the improvement to the CT4 Blackwing but the reason I disagree with your assessment is that the engine in the Caddy always comes up as a negative. The comment typically revolves around being fast enough but not being anything special. It's a pity as they were almost there and this being the last ICE version stinks.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by NightWriter

They must underrate their engine output even more than BMW.

That's what it seems like. The C2S seems to make more power than advertised, for example.

[themnmd]

Nice job by the X5MC

[McLaren720s]

I'm personally disappointed by the M3 XDrive lap time. I know they complained about the lack of tires but I was really hoping for a 2:50 flat. Maybe on Cup2 with more seat time they would have reached that…

It beat the M4 GTS on the Ring by 7 seconds so I was expecting about a 2 second win here over it

Also the M5 CS barely edged it out on the Ring so I was expecting a similar time at VIR

[BulkBen]

Originally Posted by McLaren720s

I'm personally disappointed by the M3 XDrive lap time. I know they complained about the lack of tires but I was really hoping for a 2:50 flat. Maybe on Cup2 with more seat time they would have reached that…

It beat the M4 GTS on the Ring by 7 seconds so I was expecting about a 2 second win here over it

Also the M5 CS barely edged it out on the Ring so I was expecting a similar time at VIR

Yep, I felt the same way.
The Ring comparison to the CS is a good one, given the Ring average speed would be higher I was hoping a tighter circuit would see the M3 come out on top.

Im moving from an X3M to a g80 m3 Xdrive and personally it feels a bit disappointing to see our dedicated sports sedan hosed by Porsche's heavy Panamera, a far cheaper Ford Mustang and worst of all Porsche's SUV!

[Neptune7]

Originally Posted by BulkBen

Yep, I felt the same way.
The Ring comparison to the CS is a good one, given the Ring average speed would be higher I was hoping a tighter circuit would see the M3 come out on top.

Im moving from an X3M to a g80 m3 Xdrive and personally it feels a bit disappointing to see our dedicated sports sedan hosed by Porsche's heavy Panamera, a far cheaper Ford Mustang and worst of all Porsche's SUV!

Agree, it's disappointing. But the BMWs didn't have more than one tire set and also do not feature rear wheel steering which helps the heavier cars tuck in their turns better.

[Bumpinjeep]

What the actual F? Some of these times are mind blowing. I get that the track has been repaved and widened in some areas recently but still, madness. A Civic Type R equalling a Ford GT (06)? An SUV spanking virtually every sports car? A Ford Mustang with a 2:51?!? What a time to be alive.
One thing to note, don't forget that these are essentially 'hero' laps. Someone mentioned that a X-Drive G80 was only a few seconds off of a M4 GTS, sure, but again this is for one lap. Given a 30 minute track session, that time will be widened by minutes.
If you're a car enthusiast, cherish these times, buy manual sports cars, enjoy the driving experience while you can.

[Ugly Kar]

Originally Posted by NightWriter

They must underrate their engine output even more than BMW.

Why do people keep repeating this? The Germans use the DIN meth, most others use SAE. They are not comparable and even on top of that 1 perferdestarke is less than 1 hp.

You get exactly what you would expect to get when comparing BMW/Audi Porsche/MB and what you would expect to get for American and Japanese cars. It baffles my mind why people think something is overrated when they're using a different methodology and think they're comparing HP numbers apples to apples.

[NightWriter]

Originally Posted by Ugly Kar

Why do people keep repeating this? The Germans use the DIN meth, most others use SAE. They are not comparable and even on top of that 1 perferdestarke is less than 1 hp.

You get exactly what you would expect to get when comparing BMW/Audi Porsche/MB and what you would expect to get for American and Japanese cars. It baffles my mind why people think something is overrated when they're using a different methodology and think they're comparing HP numbers apples to apples.

The old SAE brake (gross) horsepower measurements were performed on an engine crankshaft that was not attached to any accessories (alternator, water pump, etc.), but in the last few decades has been replaced by the SAE net procedure, which does include those accessories (but excludes drivetrain/transmission losses). This is very similar to the current DIN method, and although there's some minor variations (lb-ft vs kg-cm), one SAE HP is only about 1.4% less than one DIN PS. So, the differences are pretty small, and I believe that German manufacturers normally convert between the two when advertising in the US, though I could be wrong on that.

Even if they didn't...
(a) real-world acceleration and track results suggest the numbers are low, and
(b) the large number of dyno tests that a number of people and companies have performed on stock engines have consistently shown higher than expected output, accounting for standard ~10-15% drivetrain losses. I think it's fair to conclude that companies are advertising minimum horsepower levels to account for a variety of factors (e.g. fuel, air pressure and temperature), and/or for marketing reasons (e.g. not to cannibalize or impact other models in their lineup).

So... the reason people keep repeating this is because it's generally true.

[DS_BMW]

Originally Posted by Ugly Kar

Why do people keep repeating this? The Germans use the DIN meth, most others use SAE. They are not comparable and even on top of that 1 perferdestarke is less than 1 hp.

You get exactly what you would expect to get when comparing BMW/Audi Porsche/MB and what you would expect to get for American and Japanese cars. It baffles my mind why people think something is overrated when they're using a different methodology and think they're comparing HP numbers apples to apples.

I dunno this looks like a lot more than 50hp difference.

https://youtu.be/bA2_8qBgJ2M

[Ugly Kar]

Originally Posted by NightWriter

The old SAE brake (gross) horsepower measurements were performed on an engine crankshaft that was not attached to any accessories (alternator, water pump, etc.), but in the last few decades has been replaced by the SAE net procedure, which does include those accessories (but excludes drivetrain/transmission losses). This is very similar to the current DIN method, and although there's some minor variations (lb-ft vs kg-cm), one SAE HP is only about 1.4% less than one DIN PS. So, the differences are pretty small, and I believe that German manufacturers normally convert between the two when advertising in the US, though I could be wrong on that.

Even if they didn't...
(a) real-world acceleration and track results suggest the numbers are low, and
(b) the large number of dyno tests that a number of people and companies have performed on stock engines have consistently shown higher than expected output, accounting for standard ~10-15% drivetrain losses. I think it's fair to conclude that companies are advertising minimum horsepower levels to account for a variety of factors (e.g. fuel, air pressure and temperature), and/or for marketing reasons (e.g. not to cannibalize or impact other models in their lineup).

So... the reason people keep repeating this is because it's generally true.

I disagree it's generally true, you get exactly waht you would expect when comparing German rivals. Case and point:

BMW M340ix 382 hp
Audi S4 349 hp

Exactly what you would expect. MB no launch control.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...4AB9&FORM=VIRE

Other examples can be found.

[TAZ007]

Originally Posted by NightWriter

They must underrate their engine output even more than BMW.

Agree. On my stock G29 M40 getting 399 WHP on an OEM 382 BHP car. That is some serious underrating.

[NightWriter]

Originally Posted by Ugly Kar

I disagree it's generally true, you get exactly waht you would expect when comparing German rivals. Case and point:

BMW M340ix 382 hp
Audi S4 349 hp

Exactly what you would expect. MB no launch control.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...4AB9&FORM=VIRE

Other examples can be found.

I'm not sure what that video proves regarding Porsche underrating their power output, other than the fact that the BMW is faster and launches better.

https://rennlist.com/forums/cayenne-...o-results.html
https://www.porsche**********/content.php?13009 (URL is being masked for some reason... porscheboost[dot]com)
https://carbuzz.com/news/here-s-proo...clusive-series
https://www.supercars.net/blog/porsc...power-numbers/

[thurston]

Cool video. Gave me old Gran Turismo PlayStation vibes.

Impressive numbers for a few of these in the lower value range. But now I just want an X4M Comp even more. That's my jam.

[RugbyBro]

Originally Posted by McLaren720s

It beat the M4 GTS on the Ring by 7 seconds so I was expecting about a 2 second win here over it

It didn’t beat M4 GTS. It beat M4 CS by 7ish seconds on a repaved ring and better rubber