[JustChris]

[IMG]https://media0.giphy.com/media/1pw5H...786c674df618ef[/IMG]

[adc]

Originally Posted by norMcal

While those times are always a great reference, do folks realize how much variable factors, such as ambient temperature or tire heat cycles, affect lap times? I mean those things make a couple seconds difference on a 3 mile track, so figure how much it would do on the Nordschleife. If we truly want to compare down to a few seconds, then they need to run these cars all at the same time, with the same tires, and equal drivers.

Like a said, good reference, but not the last word which car is faster.

That is absolutely right.

Another thing many people don’t get is that when you track your car you don’t run just 2 flying laps, you run a 25-30 min session, perhaps 10-15 laps on most tracks. Very few cars can do that in stock form without serious performance degradation. The M2 and M4 certainly cannot.

That’s why people who track have a minimum number of supporting mods: tires, brake pads, brake fluid are common and have great impact.

Basically what you see happening at the track, even taking driver skill/commitment level out of the equation, is very different from what you may read in these comparison tests.

[ryem3]

That's why sportauto does all their ring lap times with THE SAME DRIVER. Also, unlike the crap American magazine reviews we've seen, sportauto also puts the car on the dyno to compare actual hp to advertised hp. Since they use the same dyno for all the tests, it also provides a good relative comparison to other vehicles. They also test the cars at Hockenheim, a shorter circuit where the m2 should shine.

[________]

Originally Posted by ryem3

That's why sportauto does all their ring lap times with THE SAME DRIVER. Also, unlike the crap American magazine reviews we've seen, sportauto also puts the car on the dyno to compare actual hp to advertised hp. Since they use the same dyno for all the tests, it also provides a good relative comparison to other vehicles. They also test the cars at Hockenheim, a shorter circuit where the m2 should shine.

Why would the M2 shine at a shorter circuit to you?

[Robin_NL]

Shorter wheelbase

M2C did 1:12.2 Sportauto Hockenheim Short.
just like the best M2 time 'ever'.....

Cheers
Robin

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by Robin_NL

Shorter wheelbase

M2C did 1:12.2 Sportauto Hockenheim Short.
just like the best M2 time 'ever'.....

Cheers
Robin

M2C or OG M2?

[D22M2]

OG M2 putting down some great times for a non M car



http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/hockenheim-short

[Daleb]

Original M2 sport auto snippet translated:

“With a lap time of 8:01 minutes, the M2 is approaching three seconds of its factory default. But the conditions in the super test were far from ideal. On barely one lap, the track was completely dry. In addition, the fox tube was heavily contaminated with binder. The grip level during the supertest was accordingly.”

Would be good to see a proper dry lap for an apples to apples comparison.

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by cntzl

M2C or OG M2?

Both of them same laptime. M2c & OG M2.

Cheers
Robin

[Robin_NL]

Com'on guys OG M2 is a blast of a car!

Never underestimate an OG M2 when driven hard. Not kidding.

M2C is just easier going fast(S55)

Cheers
Robin

[Montaver]

I'm surprised at how much understeer was apparent in the video, perhaps front end weight combined with lack of front camber and overheated tires.

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by Montaver

I'm surprised at how much understeer was apparent in the video, perhaps front end weight combined with lack of front camber and overheated tires.

My bet is overheated tyres. Common on Nordschleife when driving with faster cars, I had it too last march when I was driving there in my OG M2 , but much later because not as fast as CG off course: until Karussell it was more or less fine, but then it began, stock brakes, flushy, pedal travel and the mgggggggmgggg sound, but still stopping power and more understeer from overheated PSS.

Cheers
Robin

[PLF69]

Originally Posted by Montaver

I'm surprised at how much understeer was apparent in the video, perhaps front end weight combined with lack of front camber and overheated tires.

I got it too last weekend on PSS, they are wonderfull street tires but if your aggressive enaugh on track you find there limits pretty fast..

[norMcal]

Originally Posted by ryem3

That's why sportauto does all their ring lap times with THE SAME DRIVER. Also, unlike the crap American magazine reviews we've seen, sportauto also puts the car on the dyno to compare actual hp to advertised hp. Since they use the same dyno for all the tests, it also provides a good relative comparison to other vehicles. They also test the cars at Hockenheim, a shorter circuit where the m2 should shine.

Motor Trend aka Randy Pobst do that at Laguna Seca. So his lap times are a pretty good reference, but it still does not account for every variable. Laguna Seca is a very short track and I see a 1-2 second/lap difference, depending on ambient temp alone.

[Davil]

Originally Posted by norMcal

Motor Trend aka Randy Pobst do that at Laguna Seca. So his lap times are a pretty good reference, but it still does not account for every variable. Laguna Seca is a very short track and I see a 1-2 second/lap difference, depending on ambient temp alone.

I love that track. Ok, granted I’ve only driven it in Project Cars in my 1M on PS4 with G29 and Playseat but even that’s enough to get some buttock clenching moments. Must be amazing in real life. Those Motor Trend track tests are always a must watch.

[M3GymNut]

[QUOTE=CanAutM3;23836070] No, because it's not an apples-to-apples comparison

Oh I see why you didn't reply to my post, because you edited it after I replied because the conscience bug was maybe biting you a bit.

It may not be a perfect comparison for your mind, but it's a comparison that can be done nonetheless. Sports car to sports car, whether its 2dr or 4dr and in roughly the same price range can be compared.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by M3GymNut

It may not be a perfect comparison for your mind, but it's a comparison that can be done nonetheless. Sports car to sports car, whether its 2dr or 4dr and in roughly the same price range can be compared.

The reason I am saying it is not a valid comparison is because the Giulia's state of tune for those factory laps in unclear. Similar to that Civic Type-R time.

Multiple independent track comparos show the Giula QV to be pretty much on par with a base M3/4 in terms of lap times, with the M3/4 winning some and the Giulia winning others. When the Giula's lap times at different tracks are compared with M3/4cs, it gets seriously spanked. The Giula time being 18 seconds faster around the 'ring than the base M3/4 and 3 seconds faster than the M4cs is completely inconsistent with all the other reference points, which makes it an outlier.

And BTW, this takes nothing away from the fact that Giulia QV seems to be a fantastic driver's car.

No back on topic on that great 7:50 time from the M2C

[M3GymNut]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

No, because it's not an apples-to-apples comparison



Certainly they would not. Because if SA/AM&S would supertest the Giulia QV off the showroom floor it would likely be nowhere close to the Alfa factory time.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

The reason I am saying it is not a valid comparison is because the Giulia's state of tune for those factory laps in unclear. Similar to that Civic Type-R time.

Multiple independent track comparos show the Giula QV to be pretty much on par with a base M3/4 in terms of lap times, with the M3/4 winning some and the Giulia winning others. When the Giula's lap times at different tracks are compared with M3/4cs, it gets seriously spanked. The Giula time being 18 seconds faster around the 'ring than the base M3/4 and 3 seconds faster than the M4cs is completely inconsistent with all the other reference points, which makes it an outlier.

And BTW, this takes nothing away from the fact that Giulia QV seems to be a fantastic driver's car.

No back on topic on that great 7:50 time from the M2C

The Alfa QV was driven in stock form unlike the Civic Type R. Why do you question the time if it's faster than the car you own yet if it beats the competition you say it's completely legitimate?

[PARTS@STBMW]

This is amazing, thank you for sharing!

[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by Daleb

Original M2 sport auto snippet translated:

“With a lap time of 8:01 minutes, the M2 is approaching three seconds of its factory default. But the conditions in the super test were far from ideal. On barely one lap, the track was completely dry. In addition, the fox tube was heavily contaminated with binder. The grip level during the supertest was accordingly.”

Would be good to see a proper dry lap for an apples to apples comparison.

Yep, SA went on to say if the conditions are the same, they believe the M2CP will be faster than M2 by one second.

[Chasing Dreams]

Would cooling issues be the main difference between M3/4 and their CS equivalents?
I think the OG M2 and the base F8X's would put down better times with a better intercooler. It's a long and very high speed track.

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by Chasing Dreams

Would cooling issues be the main difference between M3/4 and their CS equivalents?
I think the OG M2 and the base F8X's would put down better times with a better intercooler. It's a long and very high speed track.

All M3/M4 variants including CS (except for GTS) and M2C share the same cooling system. Base, Comp Pack or CS M3/M4s have zero engine cooling problems. Cooling is usually an issue with OG M2.