[NISFAN]

     Featured on BIMMERPOST.com

Enjoy


[SIZE="5"]

Same track, same driver F80 M3 2015

And again M2 OG vs 1M vs M4C 2016

For comparison as mentioned by PeregrineFalcon M5 Competition vs Audi RS6 2020

A dry M5 Non Comp vs E63S

[/SIZE]


In case you want to skip straight to the results:

BMW G80 M3 Competition Auto RWD...43.9
Alfa Gulia Quadrifoglio ...........................44.4
BMW F90 M5..........................................44.7
BMW F90 M5 Competition ....................45.7
BMW M2 Manual (OG)..test 1.................46.1
BMW M2 Manual (OG)..test 2.................46.1
BMW 1M Manual.....................................46.4
BMW F82 M4 competition DCT(damp)..45.8
BMW F80 M3 DCT..................................46.7
Mercedes E63 S......................................44.6
Audi RS6 Avant (damp)...........................46.0

Note: llandow is a very short track at 1450m (0.9 mile), so lap times differences are potentially smaller than on more conventional length tracks.
These lap times were all done by journalist Steve Sutcliffe as the driver, although not all on the same day / conditions.

[nublu2u]

Very impressive.

[PeregrineFalcon]

I didn't expect the M3 to be that fast around this particular track, because historically most of the latest BMW's were not that fast around it.
For example, the new M5 was marginally faster than the new RS6, but on every other track it was significantly faster!
The same story with the old M3, even the TypeR was slightly faster, but for the new one to set the fastest time for the 4 door saloon on this track without race tires is nothing short of amazing!

Well done BMW

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by PeregrineFalcon

I didn't expect the M3 to be that fast around this particular track, because historically most of the latest BMW's were not that fast around it.
For example, the new M5 was marginally faster than the new RS6, but on every other track it was significantly faster!
The same story with the old M3, even the TypeR was slightly faster, but for the new one to set the fastest time for the 4 door saloon on this track without race tires is nothing short of amazing!

Well done BMW

I've added some more videos in the series as comparisons. Thanks for the heads up.

Agree on the comments, Llandow circuit is very tricky for larger RWD chassis cars. Non straight straights and a very tight section.

[bm323]

M3 doing well

[GOLFFRR]

Originally Posted by bm323

M3 doing well

seems to be a positive trend in all these various reviews

[Sedan_Clan]

Loved this! Bring on more....

[Spun Crankhub]

Thanks for posting!

[EXE46]

All hail the King, it's a wrap folks, new girl disguises her weight well. Bravo!

[DocWeatherington]

What's good for the BMW and bad for the Alfa is the fact that the Alfa is on a much more aggressive tire and appears also have carbons vs. the steels on the BMW.

Im curious to see how much more time the BMW would have gained on the more sticker Michs, carbons, and warmer track temps.

[jayg80]

Are those posted weights correct in the 1st video? My understanding was that maybe the M3 was 100 lbs heavier than the Alfa but not the close to 400 lbs they are describing.

[VIERsr]

The downshifts on the Alfa sound much better and sharper, more similar to the DCT, in the M3 they sound like a normal automatic gearbox instead.

[DocWeatherington]

Originally Posted by VIERsr

The downshifts on the Alfa sound much better and sharper, more similar to the DCT, in the M3 they sound like a normal automatic gearbox instead.

Same tranny.... different tuning. Note the Alfa by design is older, so might not be, or might I would say, grandfathered in on some of the new and future euro emissions so that the sound could be on its side.

[EXE46]

Originally Posted by DocWeatherington

What's good for the BMW and bad for the Alfa is the fact that the Alfa is on a much more aggressive tire and appears also have carbons vs. the steels on the BMW.

curious to see how much more time the BMW would have gained on the more sticker Michs

Don't forget the weight advantage lol and still lost.

[DocWeatherington]

Originally Posted by EXE46

Don't forget the weight advantage lol and still lost.

Agree, increased weight isn't always bad just depends on how it's accounted for.

Curious to see as this platform gets refined how much better it gets.

Burg time bets sub 7:32?

[VIERsr]

Originally Posted by DocWeatherington

Same tranny.... different tuning. Note the Alfa by design is older, so might not be, or might I would say, grandfathered in on some of the new and future euro emissions so that the sound could be on its side.

I agree, but I'd have preferred a more aggressive transmission tuning on the Bmw, just like on the Alfa.
Actually, the Giulia Q match the new euro emission standards without any OPF, that's why still sound loud.

[mirob]

Originally Posted by DocWeatherington

What's good for the BMW and bad for the Alfa is the fact that the Alfa is on a much more aggressive tire and appears also have carbons vs. the steels on the BMW.

Im curious to see how much more time the BMW would have gained on the more sticker Michs, carbons, and warmer track temps.

Also @ 3:04 the QV appears to have Akra exhaust? Don't know much about the QV but the tips don't look stock.

[KevinGS]

Originally Posted by VIERsr

I agree, but I'd have preferred a more aggressive transmission tuning on the Bmw, just like on the Alpha..

Agreed. I even see a significant delay in the shift from when the paddle is used. I'm not excited about that at all. The BMW simply sounds like a pure automatic. Such nice paddle shifters, but such a lackluster experience with the transmission.

Here's hoping that Steve simply forgot to put the tranny in its most quick-shifting position (doubtful), and that the delay is reduced when using the most aggressive tranny setting. And I will so miss the DCT blipping of the throttle, the rush of sound to signify a gear change in an aggressive setting.

I'm quite surprised how many reviewers don't complain incessantly about it, especially during spirited or track driving. But I guess all that power and agility makes up for it. Sometimes speed blinds.

[Neptune7]

The M5 competition is slower than the base M5? Interesting considering that the changes for the competition model was to make it more track ready.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Neptune7

The M5 competition is slower than the base M5? Interesting considering that the changes for the competition model was to make it more track ready.

Dry vs wet track...

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by Neptune7

The M5 competition is slower than the base M5? Interesting considering that the changes for the competition model was to make it more track ready.

Track was slightly damp in the M5 Comp test.

[matmanx1]

Seriously impressive. The chassis tuning on the new M cars appears to be extremely well sorted. Coupled with that monster of an engine the new M3 and M4 are coming out of the gate looking very strong.