BMW X5
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      01-20-2020, 11:50 PM   #45
MisterF80M3
Lieutenant
MisterF80M3's Avatar
192
Rep
433
Posts

Drives: 2018 M3
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: CA

iTrader: (3)

BMW needs to step up. 70k car with 760HP. I paid 80k for a F80 and it only came with 425HP.
__________________
2018 BMW F80 ///M3
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2020, 09:32 AM   #46
JamesNoBrakes
Lieutenant Colonel
989
Rep
1,914
Posts

Drives: 428i xdrive GC
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Alaska

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterF80M3 View Post
BMW needs to step up. 70k car with 760HP. I paid 80k for a F80 and it only came with 425HP.
Well, dynoing 425, yours probably has around 500 at the crank and the shelby is most definitely measured at the crank. Still not 760, but when you do the math with the dynos the crank HP should be significantly more. Also, you have a flat torque curve, which the shelby most certainly does not. Torque below the curve is what wins races and gives you the seat-of-the-pants experience. Putting down 760hp is another matter and on a road course, it's damn near impossible without radical mclaren-like engineering. The ZL1 has less HP, but beats it around a track because of these two factors, torque and handling (to put down the power). And it's not that the GT500 sucks around a track, it doesn't, but going that high with the HP increases the requirements for everything else if you are going to put down the power and take full advantage of it. It's an impressive machine, but I don't think it's much more than an M3 or M4, they are simply different machines.
__________________
Dinan Shockware, Dinan F3x Swaybars, ACS Springs
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2020, 09:41 AM   #47
Red Bread
Major General
United_States
3488
Rep
8,445
Posts

Drives: Smog machines
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterF80M3 View Post
BMW needs to step up. 70k car with 760HP. I paid 80k for a F80 and it only came with 425HP.
Well, dynoing 425, yours probably has around 500 at the crank and the shelby is most definitely measured at the crank. Still not 760, but when you do the math with the dynos the crank HP should be significantly more. Also, you have a flat torque curve, which the shelby most certainly does not. Torque below the curve is what wins races and gives you the seat-of-the-pants experience. Putting down 760hp is another matter and on a road course, it's damn near impossible without radical mclaren-like engineering. The ZL1 has less HP, but beats it around a track because of these two factors, torque and handling (to put down the power). And it's not that the GT500 sucks around a track, it doesn't, but going that high with the HP increases the requirements for everything else if you are going to put down the power and take full advantage of it. It's an impressive machine, but I don't think it's much more than an M3 or M4, they are simply different machines.
Uh, no? The GT500 most certainly is underrated and also certainly has a flat torque curve. I'm not sure why you'd think a larger motor with more cylinders would be inferior to the S58, but here's a dyno, just to give you a glimpse of what's going on with the GT500.

Of note, I do think you're talking about the GT350, which is naturally aspirated, would have a more traditional torque curve, does get out lapped by a ZL1, but most certainly does not have 760 hp. The GT500 will not be outpaced by a ZL1 on probably any track.

[IMG]https://www.racepagesdigital.com/wp-...0-tuning-2.jpg[/IMG]
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2020, 11:12 AM   #48
JamesNoBrakes
Lieutenant Colonel
989
Rep
1,914
Posts

Drives: 428i xdrive GC
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Alaska

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Bread View Post
Uh, no? The GT500 most certainly is underrated and also certainly has a flat torque curve. I'm not sure why you'd think a larger motor with more cylinders would be inferior to the S58, but here's a dyno, just to give you a glimpse of what's going on with the GT500.

Of note, I do think you're talking about the GT350, which is naturally aspirated, would have a more traditional torque curve, does get out lapped by a ZL1, but most certainly does not have 760 hp. The GT500 will not be outpaced by a ZL1 on probably any track.

[IMG]https://www.racepagesdigital.com/wp-...0-tuning-2.jpg[/IMG]
GT500 already beat by a ZL1:

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison-test/a30540966/2020-ford-mustang-shelby-gt500-vs-2019-chevy-camaro-zl1-1le/

The non-1LE is the same or faster to 60 and in the quarter and itís no slouch on the track either. ZL1 faster to 60, a wash at the quarter and faster on the track.

Underrated?
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2020, 11:25 AM   #49
gonzo
Lieutenant General
gonzo's Avatar
United_States
8140
Rep
13,563
Posts

Drives: as many as possible
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: TeXXXas

iTrader: (0)

I'm trying to find one. I've owned one Ford in my life which was an old f150 beater on the ranch and it was indestructible.

Every test I've watched on the GT500 ends with praise for the car. Manageability, brakes, handling and ride comfort off track are all there.
Manageability was my biggest concern.
__________________
Crazy Diamond
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2020, 11:30 AM   #50
Red Bread
Major General
United_States
3488
Rep
8,445
Posts

Drives: Smog machines
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Bread View Post
Uh, no? The GT500 most certainly is underrated and also certainly has a flat torque curve. I'm not sure why you'd think a larger motor with more cylinders would be inferior to the S58, but here's a dyno, just to give you a glimpse of what's going on with the GT500.

Of note, I do think you're talking about the GT350, which is naturally aspirated, would have a more traditional torque curve, does get out lapped by a ZL1, but most certainly does not have 760 hp. The GT500 will not be outpaced by a ZL1 on probably any track.

[IMG]https://www.racepagesdigital.com/wp-...0-tuning-2.jpg[/IMG]
GT500 already beat by a ZL1:

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...amaro-zl1-1le/

The non-1LE is the same or faster to 60 and in the quarter and it's no slouch on the track either. ZL1 faster to 60, a wash at the quarter and faster on the track.

Underrated?
Where does that say it's faster on the track? I just saw max grip numbers, no lap times.

It was still 8 mph behind at the quarter, they were clearly having an easier time hooking up the Camaro.

Why can't someone build one of these two in 5/8's scale, and 500-600 pounds lighter?
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2020, 02:55 PM   #51
5.M0NSTER
Captain
5.M0NSTER's Avatar
United_States
790
Rep
789
Posts

Drives: 2017 BMW M2 6MT Drivers Pack
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Little north of Stuttgart, Germany

iTrader: (0)

Or is it?

__________________
2017 BMW M2 German Spec
6MT, Driver's Package

"Redline a day keeps the mechanics away"
Appreciate 0
      01-21-2020, 03:30 PM   #52
Red Bread
Major General
United_States
3488
Rep
8,445
Posts

Drives: Smog machines
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5.M0NSTER View Post
Or is it?

Same 8 mph advantage as C&D had, just with the Mustang having the favorable launch this time. There's no denying that the Mustang is pulling away at the end.
Appreciate 0
      01-22-2020, 05:10 PM   #53
gonzo
Lieutenant General
gonzo's Avatar
United_States
8140
Rep
13,563
Posts

Drives: as many as possible
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: TeXXXas

iTrader: (0)

Good golly.

*2.50 griptech pulley from Lethal Performance
*Race pipes from Lethal Performance
*ID1050x injectors from Lethal Performance
*R888R tires
*Palmbeachdyno E85 tune

9.7s @ 144 mph.
__________________
Crazy Diamond
Appreciate 0
      01-23-2020, 12:28 AM   #54
TXSTYLE
BIGMARCUS
TXSTYLE's Avatar
United_States
5477
Rep
2,796
Posts

Drives: F01 & F15 / Mineral White
Join Date: May 2013
Location: The GYM! (The Burbs - N TX)

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzo View Post
Good golly.

*2.50 griptech pulley from Lethal Performance
*Race pipes from Lethal Performance
*ID1050x injectors from Lethal Performance
*R888R tires
*Palmbeachdyno E85 tune

9.7s @ 144 mph.
That's foking bananas! Basically a trailer car for the road.
Appreciate 0
      01-23-2020, 10:06 AM   #55
See5
Real Goon
See5's Avatar
United_States
263
Rep
589
Posts

Drives: Nothing
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Atlanta

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes View Post
Well, dynoing 425, yours probably has around 500 at the crank and the shelby is most definitely measured at the crank. Still not 760, but when you do the math with the dynos the crank HP should be significantly more. Also, you have a flat torque curve, which the shelby most certainly does not. Torque below the curve is what wins races and gives you the seat-of-the-pants experience. Putting down 760hp is another matter and on a road course, it's damn near impossible without radical mclaren-like engineering. The ZL1 has less HP, but beats it around a track because of these two factors, torque and handling (to put down the power). And it's not that the GT500 sucks around a track, it doesn't, but going that high with the HP increases the requirements for everything else if you are going to put down the power and take full advantage of it. It's an impressive machine, but I don't think it's much more than an M3 or M4, they are simply different machines.
Lol at this whole post.
Appreciate 2
Rmtt3666.00

      01-23-2020, 11:30 AM   #56
Rmtt
Lieutenant Colonel
Rmtt's Avatar
United_States
3666
Rep
1,904
Posts

Drives: 2011 BMW 128i, 2008 LS3 C6
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: South Carolina

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by See5 View Post
Lol at this whole post.
I started to say something, but stopped.

Incidentally and you probably already know this since you have owned some, my MT C6 has averaged about 16% loss through the drive-train stock and through each mod. Tested with numerous dynos and it's almost the same every time.

My old C6Z was the same. Stock rwhp accounting for 16% loss came out at around 507hp at the crank.

That's pretty good considering some of the cars I have owned. Advertised HP can be all over the board. My E46 M3 MT had around a 21% loss.

I once had a new 2004 Terminator that was advertised at 390/390 at the crank. Within a week I had it tested on a dyno and it almost put that exact number down to the rear wheel. So it was underrated big time.
__________________
Everybody has a gameplan....until they get punched in the mouth.
Appreciate 0
      01-23-2020, 01:46 PM   #57
Red Bread
Major General
United_States
3488
Rep
8,445
Posts

Drives: Smog machines
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by pennsiveguy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rmtt View Post
I started to say something, but stopped.

Incidentally and you probably already know this since you have owned some, my MT C6 has averaged about 16% loss through the drive-train stock and through each mod. Tested with numerous dynos and it's almost the same every time.

My old C6Z was the same. Stock rwhp accounting for 16% loss came out at around 507hp at the crank.

That's pretty good considering some of the cars I have owned. Advertised HP can be all over the board. My E46 M3 MT had around a 21% loss.

I once had a new 2004 Terminator that was advertised at 390/390 at the crank. Within a week I had it tested on a dyno and it almost put that exact number down to the rear wheel. So it was underrated big time.
Did you arrive at that 16% loss factor by comparing engine dyno vs. chassis dyno? Just curious.
Further it seems like 15% still applies to manuals, but the two pedal set is seeing something in the 8-10% range these days.
Appreciate 1
Rmtt3666.00

      01-24-2020, 05:43 AM   #58
Rmtt
Lieutenant Colonel
Rmtt's Avatar
United_States
3666
Rep
1,904
Posts

Drives: 2011 BMW 128i, 2008 LS3 C6
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: South Carolina

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Bread View Post
Further it seems like 15% still applies to manuals, but the two pedal set is seeing something in the 8-10% range these days.
That is crazy how efficient they have become. I don't see pennsiveguy response except in your quote....but all my dynos were on chassis dynos to answer his question.

My stock C6 put down ~ 375 if I recall correctly. So pretty close to the advertised 430 Crank HP.

And as mentioned, my previous stock C6Z was almost 440 at the wheels....so again close to the advertised crank hp.

In retrospect, that car had plenty of hp stock but I did H/C/I like everyone else. Really a lot of unusable power and just bragging rights. My wife would not ride in this car with me at all after that work.

That's why with my current one, I stopped where I did. For a car that is as light as it is, it's plenty as a weekend fun car and enough to get me into trouble or even worse...."bite me" if I'm not paying attention. Plus my wife will go along for the ride now.

I plan at some point to move to a C7, but I probably won't do any modifications to it. I guess I have mellowed out as I have aged!

Don't get me wrong as I love seeing the crazy HP numbers again. And I love the fact that they are making them more capable of putting it all down to the road.
__________________
Everybody has a gameplan....until they get punched in the mouth.
Appreciate 1
Red Bread3487.50

      01-24-2020, 08:16 AM   #59
FuriouslyFast
Stop. Hammer Time.
FuriouslyFast's Avatar
United_States
786
Rep
372
Posts

Drives: Miss Daisy
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: PA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterF80M3 View Post
BMW needs to step up. 70k car with 760HP. I paid 80k for a F80 and it only came with 425HP.
Sucker born every minute
__________________
2018 Charger Hellcat
2004 Mazdaspeed Miata
Appreciate 1
      01-24-2020, 08:17 AM   #60
FuriouslyFast
Stop. Hammer Time.
FuriouslyFast's Avatar
United_States
786
Rep
372
Posts

Drives: Miss Daisy
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: PA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes View Post
Well, dynoing 425, yours probably has around 500 at the crank and the shelby is most definitely measured at the crank. Still not 760, but when you do the math with the dynos the crank HP should be significantly more. Also, you have a flat torque curve, which the shelby most certainly does not. Torque below the curve is what wins races and gives you the seat-of-the-pants experience. Putting down 760hp is another matter and on a road course, it's damn near impossible without radical mclaren-like engineering. The ZL1 has less HP, but beats it around a track because of these two factors, torque and handling (to put down the power). And it's not that the GT500 sucks around a track, it doesn't, but going that high with the HP increases the requirements for everything else if you are going to put down the power and take full advantage of it. It's an impressive machine, but I don't think it's much more than an M3 or M4, they are simply different machines.
The weight is the problem more than it having more HP.
Appreciate 0
      01-24-2020, 08:19 AM   #61
FuriouslyFast
Stop. Hammer Time.
FuriouslyFast's Avatar
United_States
786
Rep
372
Posts

Drives: Miss Daisy
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: PA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rmtt View Post
That is crazy how efficient they have become. I don't see pennsiveguy response except in your quote....but all my dynos were on chassis dynos to answer his question.

My stock C6 put down ~ 375 if I recall correctly. So pretty close to the advertised 430 Crank HP.

And as mentioned, my previous stock C6Z was almost 440 at the wheels....so again close to the advertised crank hp.

In retrospect, that car had plenty of hp stock but I did H/C/I like everyone else. Really a lot of unusable power and just bragging rights. My wife would not ride in this car with me at all after that work.

That's why with my current one, I stopped where I did. For a car that is as light as it is, it's plenty as a weekend fun car and enough to get me into trouble or even worse...."bite me" if I'm not paying attention. Plus my wife will go along for the ride now.

I plan at some point to move to a C7, but I probably won't do any modifications to it. I guess I have mellowed out as I have aged!

Don't get me wrong as I love seeing the crazy HP numbers again. And I love the fact that they are making them more capable of putting it all down to the road.
Unusable? You wasted the car LOL. My C6Z had exhaust, intake, cam, blah blah 535 WHP & it was not wasted in my hands.

The LS2 C6 I had before that put down 384 WHP with exhaust, intake & tune.
__________________
2018 Charger Hellcat
2004 Mazdaspeed Miata
Appreciate 1
Rmtt3666.00

      01-24-2020, 08:20 AM   #62
FuriouslyFast
Stop. Hammer Time.
FuriouslyFast's Avatar
United_States
786
Rep
372
Posts

Drives: Miss Daisy
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: PA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Bread View Post
Same 8 mph advantage as C&D had, just with the Mustang having the favorable launch this time. There's no denying that the Mustang is pulling away at the end.
Aero. If the RE driver did not use the useless launch control, it would have been winning, and likely won, provided it got traction of course.

The Challenger is a brick so not surprised a GT500 would maybe pull away at high speeds, but the RE would be way ahead by then from a dig.
__________________
2018 Charger Hellcat
2004 Mazdaspeed Miata
Appreciate 0
      01-24-2020, 08:55 AM   #63
Rmtt
Lieutenant Colonel
Rmtt's Avatar
United_States
3666
Rep
1,904
Posts

Drives: 2011 BMW 128i, 2008 LS3 C6
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: South Carolina

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FuriouslyFast View Post
Unusable? You wasted the car LOL. My C6Z had exhaust, intake, cam, blah blah 535 WHP & it was not wasted in my hands.

The LS2 C6 I had before that put down 384 WHP with exhaust, intake & tune.
My LS3 in my sig with exhaust, intake, and tune put down almost 420 WHP. The cam added the rest.

Now that was longtubes, a ported FAST from one of the best guys in the country, and tuned.

Most of the LS2's I seen with full exhaust, FAST, and tune were knocking at 400/400 to the wheels.

That's the allure of these cars. It's cheap and easy to add more power!
__________________
Everybody has a gameplan....until they get punched in the mouth.
Appreciate 0
      01-24-2020, 09:08 AM   #64
FuriouslyFast
Stop. Hammer Time.
FuriouslyFast's Avatar
United_States
786
Rep
372
Posts

Drives: Miss Daisy
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: PA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rmtt View Post
My LS3 in my sig with exhaust, intake, and tune put down almost 420 WHP. The cam added the rest.

Now that was longtubes, a ported FAST from one of the best guys in the country, and tuned.

Most of the LS2's I seen with full exhaust, FAST, and tune were knocking at 400/400 to the wheels.

That's the allure of these cars. It's cheap and easy to add more power!
The LS3 really is much better than the LS2 that's for sure. Especially now, a base C6 is stupid cheap for what you get. Even a C6Z can be had for low to mid 30s or less if you want high mileage.
__________________
2018 Charger Hellcat
2004 Mazdaspeed Miata
Appreciate 1
Rmtt3666.00

      01-24-2020, 09:15 AM   #65
JamesNoBrakes
Lieutenant Colonel
989
Rep
1,914
Posts

Drives: 428i xdrive GC
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Alaska

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FuriouslyFast View Post
The LS3 really is much better than the LS2 that's for sure. Especially now, a base C6 is stupid cheap for what you get. Even a C6Z can be had for low to mid 30s or less if you want high mileage.
A friend at work has an old C6, the first engine in it was not the LS3, that came for the next year's model. He kept offering me a ride because I took him in the 1LE. I must say, I was not impressed, not only was there miles of hard plastic, but it felt like I was sitting way up high and at 5'11", my head was at the top of the roof. It pulled nicely, but I think the C7 is the first generation that I'd seriously consider (in fact I did during shopping). Compared to that first year C6, the first C7s are at least 2-3x the quality, materials, seats, etc. Agree the LS3 was a good engine though, I had it and it was smooth and sweet. The torque curve was great.
__________________
Dinan Shockware, Dinan F3x Swaybars, ACS Springs
Appreciate 0
      01-24-2020, 09:28 AM   #66
FuriouslyFast
Stop. Hammer Time.
FuriouslyFast's Avatar
United_States
786
Rep
372
Posts

Drives: Miss Daisy
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: PA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes View Post
A friend at work has an old C6, the first engine in it was not the LS3, that came for the next year's model. He kept offering me a ride because I took him in the 1LE. I must say, I was not impressed, not only was there miles of hard plastic, but it felt like I was sitting way up high and at 5'11", my head was at the top of the roof. It pulled nicely, but I think the C7 is the first generation that I'd seriously consider (in fact I did during shopping). Compared to that first year C6, the first C7s are at least 2-3x the quality, materials, seats, etc. Agree the LS3 was a good engine though, I had it and it was smooth and sweet. The torque curve was great.
That's why I said LS3 > LS2. I know the LS3 came in the C6 after the LS2.

Sitting way high in a C6? LOL it's a super low sports car. Go drive a modded C6Z or C6 ZR1. You'll change your tune. Obviously, the C7 is a world better than the C6 with the interior.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:28 AM.




xbimmers
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST