Hmmmm...

[sakimano]

I dunno. I am not a big fan of American cars, but you can p’bly get something that would eat that things lunch for the coin you would spend on a new M3/4. Hellcat is a beast and does 10.8 on street legal drag radials, plus you might even have some leftover to spend elsewhere. Ford is saying the 5.0 will do a 12.8 and yould still have about 30K to amp it up. That M4 is still might impressive.

Street legal drag radials are not street tires though

What does it do on street tires?

And has anyone tested the new Z06 yet ?

[Jones2012s4]

I dunno. I am not a big fan of American cars, but you can p’bly get something that would eat that things lunch for the coin you would spend on a new M3/4. Hellcat is a beast and does 10.8 on street legal drag radials, plus you might even have some leftover to spend elsewhere. Ford is saying the 5.0 will do a 12.8 and yould still have about 30K to amp it up. That M4 is still might impressive.

Street legal drag radials are not street tires though

What does it do on street tires?

And has anyone tested the new Z06 yet ?

Yup…

http://www.hotrod.com/news/2015_corvette_z06_clocks_0_60_in_less_than_3_seconds/

And for fun

http://jalopnik.com/dodge-charger-hellcat-also-stupid-fast-does-0-60-in-2-1641256969

[westwest888]

At least 400lbs. A DSG is 3900 easily. The new M4 is coming in around 3458 lbs, per BMWs website.

The old M3 sedan was 3590 on corner balance scales. The new M3 sedan is 3560. 30 pounds was saved with the lithium starter battery. It’s basically the same weight as the old car, within the margin of a tank of gas.

My S4 is a nudge under 3800 pounds.

http://www.bimmerboost.com/images/imported/2014/04/photo3copy-1.jpg

[westwest888]

Just saw on Bimmerpost that a bone stock M3 went 11.66 @119.24 (and had another 120+ trap). It was running 103 fuel and at Atco which typically puts out really good times. Other than that it was a completely stock DCT car with launch control used (at 3500 RPM). Contrary to what West thinks, that car should put out a lot more than 340-350 WHP on any dyno…

Jeebus. That’s not far off the B8.x 3.0T record and the car is supposedly completely stock with race gas. WTF.

It’s cool that the engine can adjust up to use aviation gasoline. But on California 91 it should put out about 350. I suppose 400 is within the realm of possibilities on that fuel. Then again, couldn’t an S4 also do that on that fuel?

[westwest888]

wow I had no idea the new m3 was that quick that’s insane. that thing will be running 10s in no time.

American muscle doesn’t stand a chance anymore, even in a drag race.

American muscle can do that all day until the car is 30 years old. Drag race your M3 all day and it will be broken in your first season.

[sakimano]

At least 400lbs. A DSG is 3900 easily. The new M4 is coming in around 3458 lbs, per BMWs website.

The old M3 sedan was 3590 on corner balance scales. The new M3 sedan is 3560. 30 pounds was saved with the lithium starter battery. It’s basically the same weight as the old car, within the margin of a tank of gas.

My S4 is a nudge under 3800 pounds.

those numbers sound optimistic. Are you talking with full fluids?

The RS4, M3, C63 and IS-F were tested in 2008 by Road And Track, full fluids. The E90 M3 was 3765 lbs. The RS4 was 3965. C63 4100 , ISF 3985 for interest

When they tested a B8 S4 they said it was over 4100 lbs. http://www.roadandtrack.com/cm/roadandtrack/data/CT_2010-Acura-TL-SH-AWD-Tech-HPT-vs-2010-Audi-S4-Quattro-vs-2010-BMW-335i-vs-2010-Infiniti-G37S-Sport_data.pdf

When Motor Trend tested one, they said it (DSG) was 3982. http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1307_2013_audi_s4_first_test/

[jran76]

Just saw on Bimmerpost that a bone stock M3 went 11.66 @119.24 (and had another 120+ trap). It was running 103 fuel and at Atco which typically puts out really good times. Other than that it was a completely stock DCT car with launch control used (at 3500 RPM). Contrary to what West thinks, that car should put out a lot more than 340-350 WHP on any dyno…

Jeebus. That’s not far off the B8.x 3.0T record and the car is supposedly completely stock with race gas. WTF.

It’s cool that the engine can adjust up to use aviation gasoline. But on California 91 it should put out about 350. I suppose 400 is within the realm of possibilities on that fuel. Then again, couldn’t an S4 also do that on that fuel?

No and no.

[sakimano]

Just saw on Bimmerpost that a bone stock M3 went 11.66 @119.24 (and had another 120+ trap). It was running 103 fuel and at Atco which typically puts out really good times. Other than that it was a completely stock DCT car with launch control used (at 3500 RPM). Contrary to what West thinks, that car should put out a lot more than 340-350 WHP on any dyno…

Jeebus. That’s not far off the B8.x 3.0T record and the car is supposedly completely stock with race gas. WTF.

It’s cool that the engine can adjust up to use aviation gasoline. But on California 91 it should put out about 350. I suppose 400 is within the realm of possibilities on that fuel. Then again, couldn’t an S4 also do that on that fuel?

has that same car run at that same track in that same density altitude and weather with pump gas? If so, maybe we should wait for that to see if the fuel really helped.

maybe he’d run similarly on pump/.

[Badtoyz]

I dunno. I am not a big fan of American cars, but you can p’bly get something that would eat that things lunch for the coin you would spend on a new M3/4. Hellcat is a beast and does 10.8 on street legal drag radials, plus you might even have some leftover to spend elsewhere. Ford is saying the 5.0 will do a 12.8 and yould still have about 30K to amp it up. That M4 is still might impressive.

ill believe those numbers when I see em remember all the hype on how fast they were all supposed to be when they started bringing the nostalgia rides out. and give a tuner a couple hours with that m3 and itll do 10s

[westwest888]

Just saw on Bimmerpost that a bone stock M3 went 11.66 @119.24 (and had another 120+ trap). It was running 103 fuel and at Atco which typically puts out really good times. Other than that it was a completely stock DCT car with launch control used (at 3500 RPM). Contrary to what West thinks, that car should put out a lot more than 340-350 WHP on any dyno…

Jeebus. That’s not far off the B8.x 3.0T record and the car is supposedly completely stock with race gas. WTF.

It’s cool that the engine can adjust up to use aviation gasoline. But on California 91 it should put out about 350. I suppose 400 is within the realm of possibilities on that fuel. Then again, couldn’t an S4 also do that on that fuel?

has that same car run at that same track in that same density altitude and weather with pump gas? If so, maybe we should wait for that to see if the fuel really helped.

maybe he’d run similarly on pump/.

As we learned about the newer Siemens ECU in the other thread, the maps can adjust up with better fuel. This is impressive but I’m sticking with my Audi until they have a proper chance to respond with the new S4 and RS B9.

[Badtoyz]

good point and well said.

[sakimano]

Just saw on Bimmerpost that a bone stock M3 went 11.66 @119.24 (and had another 120+ trap). It was running 103 fuel and at Atco which typically puts out really good times. Other than that it was a completely stock DCT car with launch control used (at 3500 RPM). Contrary to what West thinks, that car should put out a lot more than 340-350 WHP on any dyno…

Jeebus. That’s not far off the B8.x 3.0T record and the car is supposedly completely stock with race gas. WTF.

It’s cool that the engine can adjust up to use aviation gasoline. But on California 91 it should put out about 350. I suppose 400 is within the realm of possibilities on that fuel. Then again, couldn’t an S4 also do that on that fuel?

has that same car run at that same track in that same density altitude and weather with pump gas? If so, maybe we should wait for that to see if the fuel really helped.

maybe he’d run similarly on pump/.

As we learned about the newer Siemens ECU in the other thread, the maps can adjust up with better fuel. This is impressive but I’m sticking with my Audi until they have a proper chance to respond with the new S4 and RS B9.

great. In theory. However the commentary attributed the great result to the fuel.

Reality check - half a dozen periodicals have already found the M3/M4 traps 116-119 at 0 feet of density altitude on pump gas. This car went 11.6 @ 119 at ATCO in what DA? Looked cold. Bet it was negative.

Point being, this car could potentially have run the exact same time on pump.

[boosteasy]

great. In theory. However the commentary attributed the great result to the fuel.

Reality check - half a dozen periodicals have already found the M3/M4 traps 116-119 at 0 feet of density altitude on pump gas. This car went 11.6 @ 119 at ATCO in what DA? Looked cold. Bet it was negative.

Point being, this car could potentially have run the exact same time on pump.

http://www.dragtimes.com/BMW-M3-Timeslip-26888.html -350ft DA in 53’F. Not quite miracle weather yet.

[westwest888]

Even the magazines, which are optimistic and apply corrections, show a 12.2-12.3 at 117-119.

Anyway you can expect Audi to make. a good showing and MB to annihilate that. BMW will come back with a competition pack. This is all good for us as enthusiasts who can and do buy these cars.