[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by Jcali86

Wow faster than the GTS! This car is insane.

If you look at the comparison bar, you can see that the F8X was also faster than the E92 GTS and using street tires to boot . It’s normal progression.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by VIERsr

+100
Something is wrong with the weight distribution, I assume they meant 53/47.

Yes, if you do the math based on the weight that they show, it comes up to 53-47, more in line with what is expected. Typo on their part... but they got it right in the tech sheet.

[VIERsr]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

If you look at the comparison bar, you can see that the F8X was also faster than the E92 GTS and using street tires to boot . It’s normal progression.

Agree. 7 more years of development on chassis, suspension, tyres, electronics and so on. I would be surprised otherwise.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

A very impressive showing indeed.

A few precision points, the G82 tested here only has marginally wider front tires than the F82 CS/GTS (275 vs 265) and same rear size. I believe the main difference regarding the tires is from the latest gen PSC2. Pretty cool that they tested both the PS4S and PSC2.

Regarding chassis bracing, there is no indication that the G8X has superior bracing over the F8X. IMO, chassis improvements stem from the wider track and latest gen suspension tech (EDC).

With a 7.8s 100-200km/h, the S58 is mightily impressive too!

1,595kg is a nice surprise. What strikes me is the weight distribution: 57/43 . That's Audi territory. EDIT: it is a typo in the picture, the tech sheet shows the correct 53/47 distribution.

To me the underbody bracing is quite a bit more substantial and solidly anchored than on the F8x. This should benefit the front crossmember especially, meaning less flex in pick up points for the front suspension.

The sector analysis was also interesting to read. The G8x was one second quicker in the fast sector vs the GTS...

Would have preferred no weight gain of course, but it seem BMW M have delivered a quite well developed and capable car once again.

[PeregrineFalcon]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Comparing apples to apples on street tires, it is 1.6 seconds according to the article though...

True, but in reality, real apple to apple comparison would be with the new M4 CS (if we include the price tag), and in that case I'm pretty sure CS will be quicker since only the tires narrow the gap to only 0,4 sec.

And if we compare the F82 Competition time with the Porsche 911 Carrera S (991 facelift), the difference is much bigger, 2,6 sec. compared to 1,6 in the case of G82 and Porsche 911 Carrera S (992).
The M3/4 was never this close to Carrera S!

If you look at the comparison bar, you can see that the F8X was also faster than the E92 GTS and using street tires to boot . It’s normal progression.

On the surface yes, but realistically the E92 GTS was the "worse" special addition M3 to date.
It was "marginally" faster than the base car on the Nürburgring, and was nowhere near the F82 GTS, or E46 CSL in that regard (CSL was only one second slower on the ring than the E92 GTS!).

In my opinion the G8X had much, much harder task to catch up with the F82 GTS, because the F82 GTS has set the bar much higher compared to E92 GTS!

Regarding chassis bracing, there is no indication that the G8X has superior bracing over the F8X. IMO, chassis improvements stem from the wider track and latest gen suspension tech (EDC).

It probably has superior bracing to some degree, since the G8X has stiffer chassis than the F8X according to BMW?!

[VIERsr]

Don't forget that the G8x has more front camber, it makes the difference on the track.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by PeregrineFalcon

True, but in reality, real apple to apple comparison would be with the new M4 CS (if we include the price tag), and in that case I'm pretty sure CS will be quicker since only the tires narrow the gap to only 0,4 sec.

And if we compare the F82 Competition time with the Porsche 911 Carrera S (991 facelift), the difference is much bigger, 2,6 sec. compared to 1,6 in the case of G82 and Porsche 911 Carrera S (992).
The M3/4 was never this close to Carrera S!

You would need to compare the 991.1 to the F8X, which was the relevant 911 chassis when the F8X was released. The 991.2 was released 3 years after the F8X launch. In the same way, the 992.2 will coming out in a couple of years.

Originally Posted by PeregrineFalcon

On the surface yes, but realistically the E92 GTS was the "worse" special addition M3 to date.
It was "marginally" faster than the base car on the Nürburgring, and was nowhere near the F82 GTS, or E46 CSL in that regard (CSL was only one second slower on the ring than the E92 GTS!).

In my opinion the G8X had much, much harder task to catch up with the F82 GTS, because the F82 GTS has set the bar much higher compared to E92 GTS!

Not quite sure where you're coming from . According to AM&S supertest data, the E92 GTS is 16s faster than the base E92 while the F82GTS is 15s faster than the base F82. Even greater gap is shown in the article in the OP: 3.7s improvement for the E92GTS compared to 2.8s improvement for the F82GTS. Based on that, one could argue the F82GTS is "the worst special edition to date"

Looking at the versions on street tires:
E90C 1:41
--> 5 sec
F82C: 1:36
--> 2 sec
G82C: 1:34

We're comparing only one data point here, so it means what is means, but I see this just as a normal generational leap. Nothing extra-ordinary. A big portion of the leap from one generation to the next is attributable to tire tech. We can't even directly compare the F8X and G8X with PSC2 as Michelin have made significant improvements with the latest gen PSC2.

Originally Posted by PeregrineFalcon

It probably has superior bracing to some degree, since the G8X has stiffer chassis than the F8X according to BMW?!

According to BMW, the base G2X chassis is 25% stiffer than the base F3X chassis while the G8X is 15% stiffer than the F8X. Do the math...

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

You would need to compare the 991.1 to the F8X, which was the relevant 911 chassis when the F8X was released. The 991.2 was released 3 years after the F8X launch. In the same way, the 992.2 will coming out in a couple of years.

On street tires:
E92: 1:41
--> 3 sec
F82C: 1:36
--> 2 sec
G82C: 1:34

We're comparing only one data point here, so it means what is means, but I see this just as a normal generational leap. Nothing extra-ordinary. A big portion of the leap from one generation to the next is attributable to tire tech. We can't even directly compare the F8X and G8X with PSC2 as Michelin have made significant improvements with the latest gen PSC2.

According to BMW, the base G2X chassis is 25% stiffer than the base F3X chassis while the G8X is 15% stiffer than the F8X. Do the math...

What is more interesting than absolute chassis stiffness is which areas they have focused on. We have discussed this before...

As mentioned in my previous post, the underbody bracing on the G8x is larger and has more solid anchorage to the chassis. This helps control especially the front crossmember. Meaning less movement in front suspension anchorage points.

This is also a point made by BMW.

[bgexpress]

Originally Posted by Boss330

It's "just" 94kg (207lbs) heavier than the GTS (1601kg vs 1695kg).

It has more tire on the ground and probably better bracing to support/stiffen suspension pickup points. However it has std suspension and not coilovers like the GTS. So it's quite impressive yes.

This gen M3/M4 has the potential to be the largest leap between generations in track performance in the history of M3/M4...

Nürburgring Supertest lap times:

E36 M3: 8:35
E46 M3: 8:22
E46 M3 CSL: 7:50
E92 M3: 8:05
E92 M3 GTS: 7:49
F82 M4: 7:52
F82 M4 GTS: 7:37
F82 M4 CS: 7:42
G82 M4 Comp: 7:28-7:29

All the lap times are Sport Auto Supertest lap times, apart from the G82 which is a inside source BMW factory lap time (unclear if that is the SA layout or full length lap).

Previous gen std M3/M4 have been slower than the predecessor CSL/GTS models. The G8x Comp seem to be faster than the previous gen GTS and CS...

What really sticks out to me is the e46 m3 CSL time, far ahead of its time.

[VIERsr]

Originally Posted by bgexpress

What really sticks out to me is the e46 m3 CSL time, far ahead of its time.

Tires... The first generation of Sport Cup was insane.

[Darth One]

Aha this is exactly the test I was looking for. I had the feeling that they benchmarked the G8x against the outgoing GTS

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by VIERsr

Tires... The first generation of Sport Cup was insane.

^ This

[solstice]

Eagerly waiting for the AWD numbers now and expecting it to be a perfectly executed double double tap on the usual competition and a shot fired at a range of cars formerly out of reach.

It’s obvious now that the RWD G8X live up to and exceed track speed expectations and historic performance. The AWD will likely put it at a new level never seen before in the M3 base car history. Then the CSL will do the same for special models. If M live on borrowed time, they’re going out with a bang.

[PeregrineFalcon]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

You would need to compare the 991.1 to the F8X, which was the relevant 911 chassis when the F8X was released. The 991.2 was released 3 years after the F8X launch. In the same way, the 992.2 will coming out in a couple of years.

Exactly, and I have presented the data for the F82 Competition that came about three years after the base model, so the comparison is very valid.

On street tires:
E90C 1:41
--> 3 sec
F82C: 1:36
--> 2 sec
G82C: 1:34

We're comparing only one data point here, so it means what is means, but I see this just as a normal generational leap. Nothing extra-ordinary. A big portion of the leap from one generation to the next is attributable to tire tech. We can't even directly compare the F8X and G8X with PSC2 as Michelin have made significant improvements with the latest gen PSC2.

Of course it is a generational leap, but the point was that the difference between, for example E46 M3 CSL and E92 M3 GTS is nowhere near as big as the difference between E92 M3 GTS and F82 GTS.
In its time, CSL was even faster than Porsche GT3 on some tracks, and M4 GTS was very close to GT3.
Despite the fact that all versions of the BMW had the semi slicks, the E92 GTS in its time was nowhere near the GT3 if I remeber corectly?

Now we have the G82 that is faster than the F82 GTS and even just in Competition form (no AWD, no CS/CSL) very competitive to P cars such as Carrera S. Latest M4CS was slower than Carrera S on this track, and the new CS will most porobably be faster.
I would call that a very good progress!

According to BMW, the base G2X chassis is 25% stiffer than the base F3X chassis while the G8X is 15% stiffer than the F8X. Do the math...

You have said that there is no indication that the G8X has superior bracing over the F8X, and that chassis improvements stem from the wider track and latest gen suspension tech, and if the G8x has 15% stiffer chassis than the F8X, how does that translate in to not having improvements in that field, and how that doesn't increase the overall performance of the vehicle?
Because that is the point I was making.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by PeregrineFalcon

Exactly, and I have presented the data for the F82 Competition that came about three years after the base model, so the comparison is very valid.

Of course it is a generational leap, but the point was that the difference between, for example E46 M3 CSL and E92 M3 GTS is nowhere near as big as the difference between E92 M3 GTS and F82 GTS.
In its time, CSL was even faster than Porsche GT3 on some tracks, and M4 GTS was very close to GT3.
Despite the fact that all versions of the BMW had the semi slicks, the E92 GTS in its time was nowhere near the GT3 if I remeber corectly?

Now we have the G82 that is faster than the F82 GTS and even just in Competition form (no AWD, no CS/CSL) very competitive to P cars such as Carrera S. Latest M4CS was slower than Carrera S on this track, and the new CS will most porobably be faster.
I would call that a very good progress!

You have said that there is no indication that the G8X has superior bracing over the F8X, and that chassis improvements stem from the wider track and latest gen suspension tech, and if the G8x has 15% stiffer chassis than the F8X, how does that translate in to not having improvements in that field, and how that doesn't increase the overall performance of the vehicle?
Because that is the point I was making.

Even though the G8x both has a dome-dome strut (unlike the F8x) and a larger and better anchored front underbody chassis brace, some insist the F8x has just as good, or even better, chassis bracing... 😉

BMW also points to having extra focus on stiffening the suspension pick up points on the G8x.

Just a visual comparison of the front underbody bracing between the F8x and G8x shows that the G8x has larger triangulated brace elements. It's also anchored to the chassis on what BMW explains is a stiffer part of the unibody.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by Boss330

Even though the G8x both has a dome-dome strut (unlike the F8x) and a larger and better anchored front underbody chassis brace, some insist the F8x has just as good, or even better, chassis bracing... ��

BMW also points to having extra focus on stiffening the suspension pick up points on the G8x.

Just a visual comparison of the front underbody bracing between the F8x and G8x shows that the G8x has larger triangulated brace elements. It's also anchored to the chassis on what BMW explains is a stiffer part of the unibody.

Have you even bothered looking at the F8X subframe and bracing arrangement ?

[heavyD^2]

It's good that they staggered the AWD release as releasing both at the same time the AWD version may have overshadowed the improvements of the RWD G8x. If you are lucky enough to live in a part of the world where you don't need AWD, the RWD version is proving to be quite capable in its own right.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by PeregrineFalcon

Exactly, and I have presented the data for the F82 Competition that came about three years after the base model, so the comparison is very valid.

The Competition package for the F8X was launched in January 2016, ~1.5 years after the the F8X hit the market and well over a year before the 991.2 hit the market. Get you facts straight.

Originally Posted by PeregrineFalcon

Of course it is a generational leap, but the point was that the difference between, for example E46 M3 CSL and E92 M3 GTS is nowhere near as big as the difference between E92 M3 GTS and F82 GTS.
In its time, CSL was even faster than Porsche GT3 on some tracks, and M4 GTS was very close to GT3.
Despite the fact that all versions of the BMW had the semi slicks, the E92 GTS in its time was nowhere near the GT3 if I remeber corectly?

AM&S Supertest 'ring times:

• 7:48 2010 M3 GTS
• 7:40 2010 911 GT3
• 7:37 2016 M4 GTS
• 7:32 2016 911 GT3
• 7:18 2017 911 GT3

Base vs GTS:

• E92 8:05 --> 7:48 = 17 seconds faster
• F82 7:52 --> 7:37 = 15 seconds faster

Again, get your facts straight. The M4GTS is not the superstar you make it to be.

Originally Posted by PeregrineFalcon

Now we have the G82 that is faster than the F82 GTS and even just in Competition form (no AWD, no CS/CSL) very competitive to P cars such as Carrera S. Latest M4CS was slower than Carrera S on this track, and the new CS will most porobably be faster.
I would call that a very good progress!

The F82C on street tires was faster than the E92GTS was on track tires. The G8X needs PSC2 to beat the F82GTS by a few tenths; on street tires it is slower. Good progress, but nothing extra-ordinary.

Originally Posted by PeregrineFalcon

You have said that there is no indication that the G8X has superior bracing over the F8X, and that chassis improvements stem from the wider track and latest gen suspension tech, and if the G8x has 15% stiffer chassis than the F8X, how does that translate in to not having improvements in that field, and how that doesn't increase the overall performance of the vehicle?
Because that is the point I was making.

15% is marginal in terms of chassis rigidity improvement and IMO, in mostly stems from the wider and taller body of the G8X. Look up torsional stiffness. And like I said, do the math: if the base car is 25% stiffer and the ///M is only 15% stiffer it cannot have "more effective stiffening".

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Have you even bothered looking at the F8X subframe and bracing arrangement ?

I have (as you very well know since we have discussed this before in other threads).

Please explain to me how the underbody shear plates on the G8x, both front and rear, are not an improvement over the F8x chassis bracing?

The F8x front bracing does not have these shear plates and does not anchor the front subframe to the chassis in this way. The F8x rear bracing has a much less rigid design for the bracing and also does not connect the bracing across the width of the car.

The G8x also connects the front and rear bracing via the sill area of the chassis. On the F8x the front bracing is not connected to the sill or even triangulated back to the sill.

I don't understand how you can claim that the F8x bracing is just as good (or even better as you have implied previously). Clearly both front and rear bracing on the G8x is more complex and ties the front and rear subframe more solidly together as well as allows for less movement of these two critical components with regards to stability of suspension pick up points. It also has a dome-dome strut unlike the F8x.

As an engineer, please explain to me why the bracing of the G8x is not better than the F8x when it comes to their role in anchoring the front and rear subframe to the chassis (and together) in order to decrease movement of these parts and provide for direct transfer of forces between them?

Why is it just as good not to have the front triangulated shear plate?

Why is it just as good to have the individual struts on the rear instead of the shear plates on the G8x?

Why is it just as good to just have a brace under the rear of the transmission tunnel on the F8x as the full body width brace combination of shear plate on both sides and a shear plate that connects the two on the G8x?

Claiming that, especially the underbody bracing, of the F8x is just as good as on the G8x is something I as an engineer simply don't get...
Are you saying triangulation is a bad thing and that it's better with the individual struts on the rear than the shear plates on the G8x?
And that it's just as good to to even connect these individual struts and not have a full body width rear brace connecting the two shear plates as on the G8x?

Have you even bothered to look at this video of the G8x...? : 😉

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by Boss330

I have (as you very well know since we have discussed this before in other threads).

Please explain to me how the underbody shear plates on the G8x, both front and rear, are not an improvement over the F8x chassis bracing?

The F8x front bracing does not have these shear plates and does not anchor the front subframe to the chassis in this way. The F8x rear bracing has a much less rigid design for the bracing and also does not connect the bracing across the width of the car.

The G8x also connects the front and rear bracing via the sill area of the chassis. On the F8x the front bracing is not connected to the sill or even triangulated back to the sill.

I don't understand how you can claim that the F8x bracing is just as good (or even better as you have implied previously). Clearly both front and rear bracing on the G8x is more complex and ties the front and rear subframe more solidly together as well as allows for less movement of these two critical components with regards to stability of suspension pick up points. It also has a dome-dome strut unlike the F8x.

As an engineer, please explain to me why the bracing of the G8x is not better than the F8x when it comes to their role in anchoring the front and rear subframe to the chassis (and together) in order to decrease movement of these parts and provide for direct transfer of forces between them?

Why is it just as good not to have the front triangulated shear plate?

Why is it just as good to have the individual struts on the rear instead of the shear plates on the G8x?

Why is it just as good to just have a brace under the rear of the transmission tunnel on the F8x as the full body width brace combination of shear plate on both sides and a shear plate that connects the two on the G8x?

Claiming that, especially the underbody bracing, of the F8x is just as good as on the G8x is something I as an engineer simply don't get...
Are you saying triangulation is a bad thing and that it's better with the individual struts on the rear than the shear plates on the G8x?
And that it's just as good to to even connect these individual struts and not have a full body width rear brace connecting the two shear plates as on the G8x?

Have you even bothered to look at this video of the G8x...? : 😉

Have a look at the F8X subframes.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Have a look at the F8X subframes.

First of all, we are discussing the chassis bracing so please stick to the subject and explain why that isn't better on the G8x.
I have attached photos to my previous post so you can compare.

Second of all, instead of being smart. Explain what you mean is the difference in the subframes?

You have made several posts about the chassis bracing, pointing out that you see no improvement at all in the chassis bracing. Please answer why that is your understanding.

If you want to discuss subframes that is a different topic!

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by Boss330

First of all, we are discussing the chassis bracing so please stick to the subject and explain why that isn't better on the G8x.
I have attached photos to my previous post so you can compare.

Second of all, instead of being smart. Explain what you mean is the difference in the subframes?

You have made several posts about the chassis bracing, pointing out that you see no improvement at all in the chassis bracing. Please answer why that is your understanding.

If you want to discuss subframes that is a different topic!

I am sticking to the subject. On the F8X, part of the bracing is imbedded in the subframe designs.

Again, I am not saying they did a bad job on the G8X chassis rigidity, far from it, but there's nothing that has me go "wow, this is a game changer".