[Forzanerazzurri]

Originally Posted by yousefnjr

My kids love it when we do launch control, they ask for it every time they get in lol. Going to end badly on one of these grocery runs.

For your drive train

[8262S]

Originally Posted by Forzanerazzurri

For your drive train

Alright, time to back that up with some technical data.

Whatcha got?

And the March 2021 thread does not cut it.

[MmmmmM2]

Originally Posted by Forzanerazzurri

For your drive train

I have NEVER used launch control on my M2C. I may have to try it some day, but I like my drivetrain the way it is.

[chicagofan00]

Originally Posted by Forzanerazzurri

RIP to the RWD version

Why? It's still a very capable version of the M3/M4.

I don't regret my choice in RWD one bit and would easily choose it again. 🤷🏻

[perryreid90]

Originally Posted by wtwo3

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...y-the-numbers/

Looks like they finally tested the AWD version.

2.8s to 60 and 11.0s 1/4 mile @125mph. Insane supercar-like figures.

Sometimes I think about what I'm giving up by going with the non comp 6MT RWD. But at the end of the day it's all about having fun over spreadsheet numbers.

bUt ThE gRiLl

[///BMW Junkie]

Originally Posted by wtwo3

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...y-the-numbers/

Looks like they finally tested the AWD version.

2.8s to 60 and 11.0s 1/4 mile @125mph. Insane supercar-like figures.

Sometimes I think about what I'm giving up by going with the non comp 6MT RWD. But at the end of the day it's all about having fun over spreadsheet numbers.

Unless… it's all about being faster lol

[Forzanerazzurri]

Originally Posted by 8262S

Alright, time to back that up with some technical data.

Whatcha got?

And the March 2021 thread does not cut it.

Physics. Plenty of books written on it for you to browse.

[Forzanerazzurri]

Originally Posted by chicagofan00

Why? It's still a very capable version of the M3/M4.

I don't regret my choice in RWD one bit and would easily choose it again. 🤷🏻

Cool, I can too. Hang on, let me press this button right here. Done!

[true_grit]

Yes but can you scare yourself with AWD the same way you can with RWD……we all could use a little fear in our daily I think to keep the lizard brain engaged.

[Mastakko]

Originally Posted by wtwo3

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a40368599/2022-bmw-m4-competition-awd-by-the-numbers/

Looks like they finally tested the AWD version.

2.8s to 60 and 11.0s 1/4 mile @125mph. Insane supercar-like figures.

Sometimes I think about what I'm giving up by going with the non comp 6MT RWD. But at the end of the day it's all about having fun over spreadsheet numbers.

Can you purchase a manual m4? I don't see it as an option in the states.

[NightWriter]

Originally Posted by forcefed

That 60mph time seems a bit unreal, just like their 2.1 time for the 911 turbo s lightweight.

That's because it is (actually 3.0 with the 1-ft rollout)

[techwhiz1]

Beast of a car. Impressive no doubt.
Still getting an i4 M50.

[mattssi]

Originally Posted by bri1042

I'm not going to pretend it doesn't cross my mind here and there, too...but only when I'm at my desk, not when I'm actually driving my car. :-)

Same! haha

[AndroidRobot]

Confirms what we already knew

[2011ninja]

Originally Posted by Forzanerazzurri

RIP to the RWD version

I got 2.1 to 60 mph in my manual G80

[McLaren720s]

If it had this grill from factory, would be faster :

[dct203]

Real ones pretend their city streets are the Nurburgring anyway

[dsforman13]

I thought tires were 275/40 front | 285/35 rear. C&D last 275 F and 295 R. A little extra width for traction or typo?

[Limegrntaln]

Originally Posted by NightWriter

That's because it is (actually 3.0 with the 1-ft rollout)

Originally Posted by Mastakko

Can you purchase a manual m4? I don't see it as an option in the states.

Yes, it's the base model.

Originally Posted by NightWriter

That's because it is (actually 3.0 with the 1-ft rollout)

The clock doesn't start on acceleration runs right when the vehicles start rolling. This practice, which is commonly called rollout, comes from the drag strip, where it's possible for a car to travel a foot or more before it trips the timing light that actually starts the clock.

The industry standard calls for a one-foot rollout before a timed run begins. Our old test equipment couldn't measure that precisely, so we approximated a foot by beginning our runs at 3 mph. That was a fair estimate when cars didn't launch as hard as they do today, but gains in traction, launch control, and horsepower have rendered our 3-mph approximation increasingly obsolete. Our GPS-based Racelogic VBox test equipment is accurate enough to measure the first foot of rollout, so starting with the December 2019 issue, we're changing our acceleration reporting.

Lining up a vehicle at a drag strip requires careful placement of the front tires relative to two beams of light. When a car's front tire crosses the first one, a "prestage" warning is lit. When the tire interrupts the second beam—the "stage beam," which is seven inches ahead—the car is staged and ready for a run. The clock starts when the car's tire moves enough to uncover the second light beam. The distance the car travels before the stage beam is uncovered (and therefore the timing begins) is what's known as rollout, and it can vary from nothing to more than a foot. Obviously, this affects the elapsed time, sometimes by as much as 0.3 second. Our testing now adopts the industry-standard one-foot rollout.

[NorCalAthlete]

We are rapidly approaching the modded / tuner high performance territory with stock cars...and I love it.

This video has always stuck in my head :

And now we're almost there with stock, straight from the manufacturer, out of the box, warranty included, etc.

[mjr24]

Slower than the F90 M5....kind of surprised given the M4 is lighter.
I think C and D tested the M5 base at 2.6.....which is surprising because I thought I read somewhere the M5 Comp actually tested slower than that.....maybe 2.7.

[NightWriter]

Originally Posted by Limegrntaln

The clock doesn't start on acceleration runs right when the vehicles start rolling. This practice, which is commonly called rollout, comes from the drag strip, where it's possible for a car to travel a foot or more before it trips the timing light that actually starts the clock.

The industry standard calls for a one-foot rollout before a timed run begins. Our old test equipment couldn't measure that precisely, so we approximated a foot by beginning our runs at 3 mph. That was a fair estimate when cars didn't launch as hard as they do today, but gains in traction, launch control, and horsepower have rendered our 3-mph approximation increasingly obsolete. Our GPS-based Racelogic VBox test equipment is accurate enough to measure the first foot of rollout, so starting with the December 2019 issue, we're changing our acceleration reporting.

Lining up a vehicle at a drag strip requires careful placement of the front tires relative to two beams of light. When a car's front tire crosses the first one, a "prestage" warning is lit. When the tire interrupts the second beam—the "stage beam," which is seven inches ahead—the car is staged and ready for a run. The clock starts when the car's tire moves enough to uncover the second light beam. The distance the car travels before the stage beam is uncovered (and therefore the timing begins) is what's known as rollout, and it can vary from nothing to more than a foot. Obviously, this affects the elapsed time, sometimes by as much as 0.3 second. Our testing now adopts the industry-standard one-foot rollout.

Do you work for a car magazine? Or (as I assume) are you just quoting C/D's testing regiment?

Yes, I'm familiar with the background and rationale for the 1-foot rollout. In the olden days when testing equipment was crappy -- and cars accelerated far slower -- excluding the rollout was a reasonable, and made a negligible difference. And it makes sense for normalizing quarter mile times at the drag strip when racing another car.

But it's still not 0-60, and it's still highly misleading. At the end of the one-foot mark, a hard-charging car (like the M4 xDrive) is going 5-6mph. So it's not 0-60, but 5-60 with a running start. In the quarter mile, a foot represents a fairly small chunk of the race (1/1320, or 0.075%). But in 0-60, 0.2s represents 7% of the time to get to 60! The faster a car is, the faster it's going after a foot, the less time it needs to get to 60, and therefore the more misleading this rollout is. Yes, the auto rags all do it*, but it's still BS.

* I'm no genius for making this argument. They likely know it's BS as well, but they also know that posting better numbers generates mouse clicks and drives ad revenue, and earns whatever passes for respect among auto journalists. So they have strong incentive to play along by these standards.