M235 0-60 is tested at 4.3 (rated at 4.8), how much faster will M4 be?

[Audio Fan]

C&D tested the automatic M235 at 4.3 seconds 0-60, which again shows BMW underrating a car by a decent margin. It's rated at 4.8. Since the DCT M4 is rated at. 3.9, what are we realistically expecting? I'm thinking it is underrated as well. Otherwise, it will be the first properly rated m-car ever. I know this has been kicked around a bit, but I'm curious to see some simple replies on whether you think it will meet or beat the rating. I'm hoping and kind of expecting it can pull a 3.7, but I know it get exponentially harder to shave off each tenth.

[JoeFromPA]

As a completely subjective opinion, in no way does the m235 feel that fast when driven hard from a roll. This reminds me how the WRX got an amazing 0-60 time but was kind of a pig in everyday driving ( I owned one )

[onatuesday]

Originally Posted by JoeFromPA

As a completely subjective opinion, in no way does the m235 feel that fast when driven hard from a roll. This reminds me how the WRX got an amazing 0-60 time but was kind of a pig in everyday driving ( I owned one )

Agreed. The m235i does not feel THAT fast even if the numbers say it is.

I'm expecting 3.8s for the M4. Of course everything depends on if we're talking with 1ft of rollout or not. My hunch is that the substantial increase in torque will make traction very hard to optimize off the line even with LC.

[stressdoc]

Oh geez, C&D... The M3 will be -0.3 secs 0-60. Prepare for the universe to shrink, and no fair loading up on Tesla and Facebook stock after a drive...

[accce]

Originally Posted by Audio Fan

C&D tested the automatic M235 at 4.3 seconds 0-60, which again shows BMW underrating a car by a decent margin. It's rated at 4.3. Since the DCT M4 is rated at. 3.9, what are we realistically expecting? I'm thinking it is underrated as well. Otherwise, it will be the first properly rated m-car ever. I know this has been kicked around a bit, but I'm curious to see some simple replies on whether you think it will meet or beat the rating. I'm hoping and kind of expecting it can pull a 3.7, but I know it get exponentially harder to shave off each tenth.

Do you say what BMW rated the M235i at for 0-60?

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by accce

Do you say what BMW rated the M235i at for 0-60?

The title of the thread says 4,8s... (even though the OP wrote 4,3s twice in the actual post )

[Boss330]

I suspect that C&D uses a 1 foot rollout as per US style. The BMW numbers most certainly are from a standstill.

The 1 foot rollout should account for most of the 0,5s difference IMO.

[gthal]

0-60 is a fairly useless stat these days anyway. As much about traction as anything once you are into high HP and light cars. The 1/4 is a better measure... 60-130 too.

0-60 is, IMO, all about bragging rights.

[stressdoc]

C& D learned that they get cited more and elevate their testosterone levels more by having the fastest times because they are, after all, the most macho bestest rag drivers ever...

[FogCityM3]

On RWD cars, as you delve into the 3s you are getting deeper into the limits of adhesion, so M3/4 time may not be as much as 0.5 secs better than what quoted by BMW, but as others have said, is pretty much a worthless stat that gives little to no indication of how a vehicle really performs on the road or on the track.

[ASAP]

lol, look at the 1/4 mile trap speed difference... if that doesn't tell u the difference in performance... then u shouldnt compare cars

[Audio Fan]

I'm just wanting the M4 to have a lot more gusto in lower speed acceleration than my E92 M3. It makes the daily drive more fun.

[karbonphiber]

Originally Posted by stressdoc

Oh geez, C&D... The M3 will be -0.3 secs 0-60. Prepare for the universe to shrink, and no fair loading up on Tesla and Facebook stock after a drive...

lol...talk about messing up the space-time continuum.

[JoeFromPA]

Originally Posted by Audio Fan

I'm just wanting the M4 to have a lot more gusto in lower speed acceleration than my E92 M3. It makes the daily drive more fun.

Nearly double the power enough for you?

[Audio Fan]

Originally Posted by JoeFromPA

Nearly double the power enough for you?

Double would be great. Where do you get that? Tuned next gen Z06?

[E36toF30]

Originally Posted by Audio Fan

Double would be great. Where do you get that? Tuned next gen Z06?

I think he's saying that at low RPM, the F8X has almost double the torque (and hence double the HP at a given RPM) compared to E9X.

[onatuesday]

It's a bit of a catch 22. The F8x will certainly feel much faster in everyday situations over the e92 bc of the abundance of torque. I worry though that while it still revs fairly high, it won't appear to have the high end surge like the e92 which to me is what made that car so special (as well as a nuisance to some).

Most cars have a punchy midrange, it's why I prefer my old b8 S4 for a daily commute than the e92. Same is true of the m235i (though i prefer the s4 -both the same price) in that it has a punchy midrange but the top end feels kind of boring...you can rev it past 6k sure but you feel like your waiting for the needle to hit redline vs a RS5 or the e92 M where the redline is upon you before you know it.

One way or another of power delivery is neither better or worse but M absolutely changed the character and the driving sensation of the F8x. Overall the FX8 may feel faster most of the time though. I do wonder if those who loved the e92 will enjoy the F8x while those who wanted more torque certainly got what they wanted perhaps at the expense of high rev drama.

[e39>all]

My humble predictions-

1. Rollout or whatever conditions the US mags used to get the m5 a 3.7 will probably get a very slightly faster time in the new m4.

2. Then of course the m5 guys will descend in droves here for damage control and make this or that excuse and ending up pulling out their ultimate secret boomstick weapon......the good old fashioned roll race on an airstrip! And the force will be balanced and order restored to the galaxy.

[Blindside_137]

Originally Posted by trinim3

It's a bit of a catch 22. The F8x will certainly feel much faster in everyday situations over the e92 bc of the abundance of torque. I worry though that while it still revs fairly high, it won't appear to have the high end surge like the e92 which to me is what made that car so special (as well as a nuisance to some).

Most cars have a punchy midrange, it's why I prefer my old b8 S4 for a daily commute than the e92. Same is true of the m235i (though i prefer the s4 -both the same price) in that it has a punchy midrange but the top end feels kind of boring...you can rev it past 6k sure but you feel like your waiting for the needle to hit redline vs a RS5 or the e92 M where the redline is upon you before you know it.

One way or another of power delivery is neither better or worse but M absolutely changed the character and the driving sensation of the F8x. Overall the FX8 may feel faster most of the time though. I do wonder if those who loved the e92 will enjoy the F8x while those who wanted more torque certainly got what they wanted perhaps at the expense of high rev drama.

Precisely. Both cars are phenomenal I'm sure, but will provide entirely different sensations of speed behind the wheel at different ranges in the power band.

[LDSM]

I'm really curious to see how the M2 will stack up.

[JustChris]

Originally Posted by e39>all

My humble predictions-

1. Rollout or whatever conditions the US mags used to get the m5 a 3.7 will probably get a very slightly faster time in the new m4.

2. Then of course the m5 guys will descend in droves here for damage control and make this or that excuse and ending up pulling out their ultimate secret boomstick weapon......the good old fashioned roll race on an airstrip! And the force will be balanced and order restored to the galaxy.

100% this man. Team M5 not happy at any suggestion of a faster 0-60 in an M3/4.

[Powaup]

C&D will get something crazy like 3.5 in 0-60 or some shit they always get some super fast numbers for some reason