[///AVM]

Originally Posted by Poochie

Nice find and gracias!

I can't view the PDF on my phone, for some strange reason, so I had to whip out my laptop to be able see it. Which, I usually only reserve usage for downloading hardcore porn but this is just as sexually exciting

Enjoy brother!

Need you fully up to speed . . . lots of future G87 owners will depend upon you.

///AVM

[CSBM5]

Originally Posted by richard in NC

Bottom line, the S58 in the X3M has nothing down low. Most of the time it readily downshifts unless you're behind a slowpoke merging on the interstate. Then it thinks you're set to cruise at 50 mph, drops into 7th or 8th and takes a hard punch to downshift 3 gears, get into 3rd or 4th and accelerate to highway speeds and pass the idiot.

I need to take both cars out and time ~40-80 runs starting at 1500 RPMs. The M2C would run away from the X3M.

Richard,

Your experience mirrors actual instrumented test data on both the X3M, X4M and G8x M3/M4 which is easily seen in Car and Driver's test data. The 0-60 times are phenomenal, but the 5-60mph times are much slower. For the G8x M4 tested in the lightest G8x possible (CCBs and carbon seats and 6MT), 0-60 timed at 3.8s while 5-60mph was 4.7s. Similarly, in the X3MC test data, 0-60 timed at 3.3s while 5-60mph was 4.7s. (as an aside, note that the G82 RWD was traction limited in getting off the line and hence initially left behind by the AWD X3MC, but it does post higher 1/4 trap speeds showing its superior power/weight ratio).

While subjective opinions will vary all over the place (and always will), instrumented test data outlines exactly what you're experiencing.

[richard in NC]

Originally Posted by CSBM5

Richard,

Your experience mirrors actual instrumented test data on both the X3M, X4M and G8x M3/M4 which is easily seen in Car and Driver's test data. The 0-60 times are phenomenal, but the 5-60mph times are much slower. For the G8x M4 tested in the lightest G8x possible (CCBs and carbon seats and 6MT), 0-60 timed at 3.8s while 5-60mph was 4.7s. Similarly, in the X3MC test data, 0-60 timed at 3.3s while 5-60mph was 4.7s. (as an aside, note that the G82 RWD was traction limited in getting off the line and hence initially left behind by the AWD X3MC, but it does post higher 1/4 trap speeds showing its superior power/weight ratio).

While subjective opinions will vary all over the place (and always will), instrumented test data outlines exactly what you're experiencing.

I'd like to do a comparison test on my own, such as 2nd & 3rd gear runs from low RPMs vs say 3k+ to compare the 2. I think speeds in gears are similar in most gears, other than the X3M having an 8th gear.

[phriz]

Y'all, my car arrived at the Performance Center today! 11 days until delivery!

[richard in NC]

Originally Posted by richard in NC

I'd like to do a comparison test on my own, such as 2nd & 3rd gear runs from low RPMs vs say 3k+ to compare the 2. I think speeds in gears are similar in most gears, other than the X3M having an 8th gear.

Just for grins I did a few runs comparing my S55 M2C vs my S58 X3M.

The X3M from 25 to 70 mph, starting from 1500 RPMs in 4th took 9 seconds.
The M2C starting from 1200 RPMs! in 4th took only 7 seconds 25-70.

The X3M in 3rd from 25 MPH, around 2200 RPMs took 7 seconds to 60 MPH.
The M2C in 3rd from ~ 2000 RPMs took 4 seconds 25-60 MPH.

My X3M has nothing until it hits you in the back at 3K. Ridiculous for a 2020 model.

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by richard in NC

Just for grins I did a few runs comparing my S55 M2C vs my S58 X3M.

The X3M from 25 to 70 mph, starting from 1500 RPMs in 4th took 9 seconds.
The M2C starting from 1200 RPMs! in 4th took only 7 seconds 25-70.

The X3M in 3rd from 25 MPH, around 2200 RPMs took 7 seconds to 60 MPH.
The M2C in 3rd from ~ 2000 RPMs took 4 seconds 25-60 MPH.

My X3M has nothing until it hits you in the back at 3K. Ridiculous for a 2020 model.

Richard

We have 'known' each other on this forum long enough for you to know I respect your views and am not giving you a hard time to simply give you a hard time.

With the above stated, why would you ever thinK an SUV is going to compete with your F87C? With the G80C?

You seem to be trying to say your SUV is a dog. I am sure it is not, relative to a Chevy Blazer. . . compared to the F87C and G80C I suspect it may seem so.

Would you be happy with your F87C if your SUV blew it out of the water???

///AVM

[richard in NC]

Originally Posted by ///AVM

Richard

We have 'known' each other on this forum long enough for you to know I respect your views and am not giving you a hard time to simply give you a hard time.

With the above stated, why would you ever thinK an SUV is going to compete with your F87C? With the G80C?

You seem to be trying to say your SUV is a dog. I am sure it is not, relative to a Chevy Blazer. . . compared to the F87C and G80C I suspect it may seem so.

Would you be happy with your F87C if your SUV blew it out of the water???

///AVM

Above 3k RPM, the X3M does blow it out of the water. I'm just disappointed in the complete lack of torque/power below 3k. Given that the X3M is 1000 lbs heavier, it needs it.
I agree part of the problem is perception, but that is because my M2C has plenty of low end torque as did my last 12 BMWs.

PS: I did not own the E60 M5 or E92 M3, just for that reason. I just didn't test drive the X3M enough to realize it was tuned like them.....

[Poochie]

Hey AVM,

I finally got me some free time today to study to the technical manual for the G8X, that you've recently linked.. Good stuff

Anyways, I'm not really on the G8X section, so I'm not sure if there was any sort of chatter on the subject but I was looking for some real-world feedback on this new launch control feature for the manual G8Xs..

My search(s) have uncovered very little info but maybe since you've defected to a G80, you might be a little more privy to this subject than I am..



Manual transmission launch control? https://g20.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1820135

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by Poochie

Hey AVM,

I finally got me some free time today to study to the technical manual for the G8X, that you've recently linked.. Good stuff

Anyways, I'm not really on the G8X section, so I'm not sure if there was any sort of chatter on the subject but I was looking for some real-world feedback on this new launch control feature for the manual G8Xs..

My search(s) have uncovered very little info but maybe since you've defected to a G80, you might be a little more privy to this subject than I am..

Poochie

As you know, I possess the G80C which comes with ZF8, so I have not explored MT launch control. . . truth be told, I have never used launch control in any of my vehicles.

The above stated, there were many posts early on addressing confusion pertaining to launch control and the community seemed to figure things out pretty quickly. I am sorry I do not have immediate recall/access to these posts as, again, they did not really draw too much attention on my part.

I will see if I can find the referenced posts in the G80/82 section.

///AVM

[Poochie]

Originally Posted by ///AVM

Poochie

As you know, I possess the G80C which comes with ZF8, so I have not explored MT launch control. . . truth be told, I have never used launch control in any of my vehicles.

The above stated, there were many posts early on addressing confusion pertaining to launch control and the community seemed to figure things out pretty quickly. I am sorry I do not have immediate recall/access to these posts as, again, they did not really draw too much attention on my part.

I will see if I can find the referenced posts in the G80/82 section.

///AVM

Thanks you, regardless 🙏

It seems to be a novel feature and I'm assuming since not a lot of folks is opting for the Competition version, it's obviously sparsely discussed overall.

I can launch a manual vehicle with the best of them, however, at the back of mind, I always wary about possible prematurely burning out my pressure plate and throwout bearing.

It certainly would be nice to finally have some electronic assistance in this department, to lessen the potential wear, yet, still have my cake too - as they say..

I'm looking forward to BMW carbon-copying this feature onto the manual G87.

[///AVM]

Poochie

Seems pretty straightforward . . .

///AVM

[HelpMeHelpU]

Oddly enough, I had never really considered buying a BMW because (please forgive me!), none seemed too interesting to me.

And then in the past two weeks, I stumbled upon a review of the new M2 CS, which sounded very intriguing. MotorTrend liked it slightly more than a GT4. Wow, I said, I love my GT4--I've got to check out this car. So I started to learn more and actually got to visit a local dealer who still had one on the floor, though it was sold. But I got to see it and sit in it and check out the back seats, which are real.

I then reached out to a friend I know who knows a ton about cars--indeed, he has a BMW dealership, along with Porsche and Audi--and he said, when I asked about the "lowly" M2 Competition compared with the CS, that he didn't believe the CS was worth the extra scratch...for my intended use case, which is non track.

I had been trying to find a nice Porsche 997 MT Coupe but their prices have been skyrocketing and I was seeing only mediocre cars, for a lot of money.

I wanted a sporty car in MT with real back seats. The BMW M2 also is much less of a statement when arriving anywhere, compared with any 911, which I like. For the uninitiated, it's just a small BMW that fits in nicely with the gazillion other BMWs out there.

So I went on Cars.com looking at prices, made a few inquiries of the cars available all over the country, and got an email saying they had an open allocation at MSRP. And the dealer was just 30 minutes from my home!

So I figured out the few options and placed an order. The car is LBB, slick top, Exec Package, and two-tone wheels (I go back and forth on the wheels and sometimes think I should have gone all black, which I don't often like, but these will be fine).

I am really looking forward to enjoying this car, which should get a lot of use.

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by HelpMeHelpU

. . . The car is LBB, slick top, Exec Package, and two-tone wheels (I go back and forth on the wheels and sometimes think I should have gone all black, which I don't often like, but these will be fine).

HMHU

Welcome onboard.

Quick note, BOTH the F87C wheel options are bi-color . . . 'black' is a bit misleading on the part of BMW.

Other than that, pretty simple . . . take ownership and enjoy.

///AVM

[baege]

Originally Posted by HelpMeHelpU

Oddly enough, I had never really considered buying a BMW because (please forgive me!), none seemed too interesting to me.

And then in the past two weeks, I stumbled upon a review of the new M2 CS, which sounded very intriguing. MotorTrend liked it slightly more than a GT4. Wow, I said, I love my GT4--I've got to check out this car. So I started to learn more and actually got to visit a local dealer who still had one on the floor, though it was sold. But I got to see it and sit in it and check out the back seats, which are real.

I then reached out to a friend I know who knows a ton about cars--indeed, he has a BMW dealership, along with Porsche and Audi--and he said, when I asked about the "lowly" M2 Competition compared with the CS, that he didn't believe the CS was worth the extra scratch...for my intended use case, which is non track.

I had been trying to find a nice Porsche 997 MT Coupe but their prices have been skyrocketing and I was seeing only mediocre cars, for a lot of money.

I wanted a sporty car in MT with real back seats. The BMW M2 also is much less of a statement when arriving anywhere, compared with any 911, which I like. For the uninitiated, it's just a small BMW that fits in nicely with the gazillion other BMWs out there.

So I went on Cars.com looking at prices, made a few inquiries of the cars available all over the country, and got an email saying they had an open allocation at MSRP. And the dealer was just 30 minutes from my home!

So I figured out the few options and placed an order. The car is LBB, slick top, Exec Package, and two-tone wheels (I go back and forth on the wheels and sometimes think I should have gone all black, which I don't often like, but these will be fine).

I am really looking forward to enjoying this car, which should get a lot of use.

congrats on the allocation, look forward to your comparison with your GT4.
I previously had a 2016 Cayman S manual.

My coles notes comparo is that the porsche is more race car with more visceral sound, throttle response, steering feel, overall higher handling limits and just more precise overall.
The M2 comp is more powerful but suffers from turbo lag, has a less engaging manual and doesn;t sound as good. But if you ask me which car is actually more fun, it's a tough question to answer. the M2 has a hooliganism about it that brings a lot of smiles. It also takes corners with a sort of playfulness that makes it fun. The porsche had higher overall limits around curves, but I am not sure it actually felt more fun around the curves, the M2 just might be actually more fun somehow.

They definitely offer different kinds of fun and enjoyment. You are about to be the in the best scenario with both of them.

Enjoy!

[HelpMeHelpU]

Originally Posted by baege

congrats on the allocation, look forward to your comparison with your GT4.
I previously had a 2016 Cayman S manual.

My coles notes comparo is that the porsche is more race car with more visceral sound, throttle response, steering feel, overall higher handling limits and just more precise overall.
The M2 comp is more powerful but suffers from turbo lag, has a less engaging manual and doesn;t sound as good. But if you ask me which car is actually more fun, it's a tough question to answer. the M2 has a hooliganism about it that brings a lot of smiles. It also takes corners with a sort of playfulness that makes it fun. The porsche had higher overall limits around curves, but I am not sure it actually felt more fun around the curves, the M2 just might be actually more fun somehow.

They definitely offer different kinds of fun and enjoyment. You are about to be the in the best scenario with both of them.

Enjoy!

Thank you. Indeed, the car I am selling to get into the M2C is a 981 CS (and keeping the GT4), so I appreciate your comparison. The benefits of the M2C from my perspective is (1) it's brand new with a warranty, (2) less of an event showing up anywhere, and, importantly, (3) two back seats. If the BMW is 85%-90% of the Porsche, I will be satisfied. I think.

Looking forward to seeing.

[Davil]

Originally Posted by HelpMeHelpU

I then reached out to a friend I know who knows a ton about cars--indeed, he has a BMW dealership, along with Porsche and Audi--and he said, when I asked about the "lowly" M2 Competition compared with the CS, that he didn't believe the CS was worth the extra scratch...for my intended use case, which is non track.

Yes. He wants to sell you one. Having owned both, the changes for the CS actually make it a much better road car. It actually feels like a different car. But the C is still terrific and you'll love it. Just don't ever drive the CS. Both are far better choices than the Cayman unless you live on a track.

[CSBM5]

Originally Posted by richard in NC

Above 3k RPM, the X3M does blow it out of the water. I'm just disappointed in the complete lack of torque/power below 3k. Given that the X3M is 1000 lbs heavier, it needs it.
I agree part of the problem is perception, but that is because my M2C has plenty of low end torque as did my last 12 BMWs.
.

Richard,

Just following up on the S58 lack of low end torque, Joe Achilles discusses exactly what you're talking about and displays it in action while driving the G80 M3. He also talks about how dead the steering is in the G80 compared to his M2C. I'll post the video link starting at about 11:00 mark where he talks about the steering and then around 12:22 he discusses the X3M and G80 M3 S58 low rpm torque issue and shows the complete lack of low end torque in action while talking about what a beast by comparison the B58 is down low:

https://youtu.be/u-H6-XO6qxU?t=670

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by CSBM5

Richard,

Just following up on the S58 lack of low end torque, Joe Achilles discusses exactly what you're talking about and displays it in action while driving the G80 M3. He also talks about how dead the steering is in the G80 compared to his M2C. I'll post the video link starting at about 11:00 mark where he talks about the steering and then around 12:22 he discusses the X3M and G80 M3 S58 low rpm torque issue and shows the complete lack of low end torque in action while talking about what a beast by comparison the B58 is down low:
[/URL]

Joe is entitled to his opinion . . . I do not agree with him on either account.

///AVM

[Poochie]

Originally Posted by ///AVM

Joe is entitled to his opinion . . . I do not agree with him on either account.

///AVM

Hmm.. I admire your diplomatic response to criticism of your current wheels, I wish others where this nonchalant.

I can guarantee that if, for kicks, I jump over to another subsection and declare something abstract like; "The M2 CS cost too much" - I would have ten people ready to nail me to a cross..

This is good forum-ing, it leaves room for constructive criticism, without it turning every other opinion into an inevitable pissing match.

Also, I don't care what anyone says, I know the G80 is now where in realm of being under-torqued. Joe just needed time to fill in his time to his "content," so he picked on the lowest hanging fruit; the supposed low end torque rumor..

Coming from someone who outran the cops with a B48 4 cylinder, I know sometimes all about the driver, not so much the car or the tune itself.

[CSBM5]

Yeah, I agree 100% that it shouldn't be a pissing match. I suppose you can argue that dyno tests done by companies like Evolve are in error and reviews are in error, but the testing clearly shows how weak the S58 is below 2500 rpms if not below 3000rpms. For example, even as late as 3000rpms, Evolve's testing (see their youtube dyno results graphs) shows the S58 only putting out about 170 whp while the stock S55 is putting out 210 whp. At 2500rpms, the S58 in the M3C is putting down only 100whp while the S55 is about 35% higher at 135whp.

If you look at the actual dyno test power output, you can see the S58 is very weak on low end and then makes a dramatic upturn in power output starting around 3000rpms, and finally overtakes the S55 at 3500rpms on its way to a crescendo of mid to high rpm power.

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by Poochie

Hmm.. I admire your diplomatic response to criticism of your current wheels, I wish others where this nonchalant.

I can guarantee that if, for kicks, I jump over to another subsection and declare something abstract like; "The M2 CS cost too much" - I would have ten people ready to nail me to a cross..

This is good forum-ing, it leaves room for constructive criticism, without it turning every other opinion into an inevitable pissing match.

Also, I don't care what anyone says, I know the G80 is now where in realm of being under-torqued. Joe just needed time to fill in his time to his "content," so he picked on the lowest hanging fruit; the supposed low end torque rumor..

Coming from someone who outran the cops with a B48 4 cylinder, I know sometimes all about the driver, not so much the car or the tune itself.

Thank you Poochie

///AVM

[///AVM]

Originally Posted by CSBM5

Yeah, I agree 100% that it shouldn't be a pissing match. I suppose you can argue that dyno tests done by companies like Evolve are in error and reviews are in error, but the testing clearly shows how weak the S58 is below 2500 rpms if not below 3000rpms. For example, even as late as 3000rpms, Evolve's testing (see their youtube dyno results graphs) shows the S58 only putting out about 170 whp while the stock S55 is putting out 210 whp. At 2500rpms, the S58 in the M3C is putting down only 100whp while the S55 is about 35% higher at 135whp.

If you look at the actual dyno test power output, you can see the S58 is very weak on low end and then makes a dramatic upturn in power output starting around 3000rpms, and finally overtakes the S55 at 3500rpms on its way to a crescendo of mid to high rpm power.

I will not suggest the dyno numbers are in error, but will suggest the 'numbers' do not correlate with actual driving dynamics or experience.

Saying the "S58 is very weak on the low-end" is not an accurate statement. Saying the S58 does not have as much torque on the low-end as the S55 is accurate. . . you know, the S55 that 'throws up' its torque all over you.

Torque is only as good as the traction supporting it. In other words, whatever torque is produced on the dyno does not mean it translates to functional torque on the roadways. Perhaps part of the reason the G8x is pretty universally accepted to be 'better planted' than the F80/82 is that it supports the torque it produces better than the F8x? I am not the only enthusiast who stated the F87C was 'under-tired,' but could have just as easily stated it was 'over-torqued.'

What is the low-end? Seems we are talking about 2-3K RPM range. Who - when driving in a spirited manner in which having access to torque matters - spends any time below 3k RPM? I know I do not.

I do not feel the numbers, I feel the torque and the G80C has more than plenty of torque throughout the rev range, even with ZF8 in automatic mode and engine in Comfort settings. Very true that the S58 is tuned to provide a more linear torque/power output than the S55. It has been stated the S58 is naturally aspirated-like, except with more low-end torque. I think that is a very accurate statement.

Getting back to Joe, he states, if you get caught napping and below 2.5K RPM . . . not sure you can get the G8x below 2.5K RPM unless you are in a coma.

Before closing, I have never driven the X3M Competition, so I have no knowledge or opinion of the ills it is said to suffer. I know the G80C and never once have I thought it suffered a lack of torque in the low-end, or otherwise.

///AVM