Activity Stream

Sort By Time Show
Recent Recent Popular Popular Anytime Anytime Last 24 Hours Last 24 Hours Last 7 Days Last 7 Days Last 30 Days Last 30 Days All All Photos Photos Forum Forums Articles Articles
Filter by: Popular Last 24 Hours Clear All
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:07 PM
    The BMW F80 M3 is the worst of this trio? That is what MotorTrend thinks which is in stark contrast to Car and Driver who picks the M3 over the other two. Car and Driver also though the ATS-V belonged in last place whereas MotorTrend puts it in the middle and behind the comparison winner which is the new Mercedes-AMG C63 S. Here is how they stacked up: 3rd Place: BMW M3 It's cliché to say, but this is the best third-place finisher in Motor Trend history. C'est la vie. 2nd Place: Cadillac ATS-V
 This stud athlete is let down by its lack of powertrain refinement and sonic thrills. Cadillac has very little tweaking to do to get things right. 1st Place: Mercedes-Benz C63 S AMG 
 An iron fist in a velvet glove. Race mode transforms the beast into an iron fist in an iron glove. Lap times: Caddy ATS-V 1:31.43 C63 1:31.52 BMW M3 1:32.51 How the M3 finishes behind the other two on the track is a head scratcher. The M3 is a full second behind the other two? Huh? It is the lightest car with the best balance. At 3498 pounds it undercuts the ATS-V by 286 pounds and the C63 AMG S by 434 pounds. The C63 AMG S weight distribution is 54/46% front to back and the ATS-V is 52/48%. The M3 is stated to be 50/50 in this test. The ATS-V is not beating the M3 around the track based on power or being lighter. It is tested as the slowest of this trio which is in stark contrast to Car and Driver's absurdly fast numbers for the automatic ATS-V. MotorTrend previously tested the automatic ATS-V and got a 12.3 @ 114.6 out of in the 1/4 mile. Now in this comparison they get a 12.1 @ 116.2. Quicker and faster yet still nowhere near Car and Driver's ATS-V tester which now looks like a ringer. We can not make sense of the acceleration numbers for the ATS-V as they are all over the place but the M3 and C63 appear to be exactly where they should be. The C63 AMG S is shown to be the fastest of the trio yet it was the slowest in the Car and Driver test. Seriously, what the hell is going on? The acceleration numbers here at least do not look suspect as the C63 AMG S should be faster than the M3 which it is. The wild card is really the ATS-V but it is performing more like the early reports showing trap speeds in the 115 miles per hour range than the outlier of 122. A spread of over 7 miles per hour is at least a difference of 70 wheel horsepower. It is also interesting to note all three get to 100 in 8.8 seconds but the ATS-V seems to start to run out of steam above 100 miles per hour. Ok, enough about potential ringers and testing anomalies. The main thing here is the stunning last place finish for the M3. The ATS-V is said to feel sportier and the C63 AMG S is said to be the best all around package. How the lightest and best balanced car here loses and posts such a poor laptime we can not explain. The ATS-V posting the quickest laptime considering its figure eight advantage and best braking performance makes sense but the C63 beating the M3 here does not considering other track tests have shown the opposite. An interesting test to say the least. Let the debate over the results begin. 2015 BMW M3 2016 Cadillac ATS-V Sedan 2015 Mercedes-AMG C63 S POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT Front-engine, RWD Front-engine, RWD Front-engine, RWD ENGINE TYPE Twin-turbo I-6 alum block/head Twin-turbo 60-deg V-6 alum block/heads Twin-turbo 90-deg V-8, alum block/heads VALVETRAIN DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DISPLACEMENT 181.8 cu in/2,979 cc 217.5 cu in/3,564 cc 243.0 cu in/3,982 cc COMPRESSION RATIO 10.2:1 10.2:1 10.5:1 POWER (SAE NET) 425 hp @ 5,500 rpm 464 hp @ 5,850 rpm* 503 hp @ 5,500 rpm TORQUE (SAE NET) 406 lb-ft @ 1,850 rpm 445 lb-ft @ 3,500 rpm* 516 lb-ft @ 1,750 rpm REDLINE 7,500 rpm 6,500 rpm 7,000 rpm WEIGHT TO POWER 8.2 lb/hp 8.2 lb/hp 7.8 lb/hp TRANSMISSION 7-speed twin-clutch auto. 8-speed automatic 7-speed automatic AXLE/FINAL-DRIVE RATIO 3.46:1/2.32:1 2.85:1/1.85:1 2.82:1/2.06:1 SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR Struts, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multi-link, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar Struts, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multi-link, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar Multi-link, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multi-link, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar STEERING RATIO 15.0:1 15.5:1-11.1:1 14.1:1 TURNS LOCK-TO-LOCK 2.5 2.4 2.5 BRAKES, F;R 15.8-in vented carbon-ceramic disc; 15.0-in, vented carbon-ceramic disc, ABS 14.5-in vented disc; 13.3-in vented disc, ABS 15.8-in vented, drilled carbon-ceramic disc; 14.2-in vented, drilled carbon-ceramic disc, ABS WHEELS, F;R 9.0 x 19-in; 10.0 x 19, forged aluminum 9.0 x 18-in; 9.5 x 18-in, forged aluminum 8.5 x 19-in; 9.5 x 19-in, cast aluminum TIRES, F;R 255/35ZR19 92Y; 275/35ZR19 100Y Michelin Pilot Super Sport 255/35ZR18 94Y; 275/35ZR18 99Y Michelin Pilot Super Sport 245/35ZR19 93Y; 265/35ZR19 98Y Michelin Pilot Super Sport DIMENSIONS WHEELBASE 110.7 in 109.3 in 111.8 in TRACK, F/R 62.2/63.1 in 60.5/60.4 in 63.3/60.9 in LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 184.5 x 73.9 x 56.1 in 184.0 x 71.3 x 55.7 in 187.2 x 72.4 x 56.1 in TURNING CIRCLE 40.0 ft 38.4 ft 37.0 ft CURB WEIGHT 3,498 lb 3,788 lb 3,936 lb WEIGHT DIST., F/R 50/50 % 52/48 % 54/46 % SEATING CAPACITY 5 5 5 HEADROOM, F/R 40.3/37.7 in 37.6/35.1 in 37.1/37.1 in LEGROOM, F/R 42.0/35.1 in 42.3/33.5 in 41.7/35.2 in SHOULDER ROOM, F/R 55.1/55.1 in 54.1/51.1 in 54.0/50.3 in CARGO VOLUME 12.0 cu ft 10.4 cu ft 12.6 cu ft TEST DATA ACCELERATION TO MPH 0-30 1.8 sec 1.5 sec 1.8 sec 0-40 2.5 2.2 2.5 0-50 3.2 2.9 3.2 0-60 4.0 3.7 4.0 0-70 5.0 4.7 5.0 0-80 6.1 5.8 6.1 0-90 7.4 7.1 7.3 0-100 8.8 8.8 8.8 PASSING, 45-65 MPH 1.7 1.7 1.6 QUARTER MILE 12.3 sec @ 118.1 mph 12.1 sec @ 116.2 mph 12.2 sec @ 119.5 mph BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 104 ft 99 ft 101 ft LATERAL ACCELERATION 1.01 g (avg) 1.03 g (avg) 1.01 g (avg) MT FIGURE EIGHT 24.1 sec @ 0.86 g (avg) 23.7 sec @ 0.88 g (avg) 24.1 sec @ 0.86 g (avg) 2.41-MI ROAD COURSE LAP 92.51 sec 91.43 sec 91.52 sec TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH 1,750 rpm 1,450 rpm 1,600 rpm CONSUMER INFO BASE PRICE $62,995 $61,460 $72,825 PRICE AS TESTED $84,370 $73,570 $89,035 STABILITY/TRACTION CONTROL Yes/Yes Yes/Yes Yes/Yes AIRBAGS Dual front, front side, f/r curtain, driver knee Dual front, f/r side, f/r curtain, front knee Dual front, front side, front pelvic, f/r curtain, driver knee BASIC WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 miles 4 yrs/50,000 miles 4 yrs/50,000 miles POWERTRAIN WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 miles 6 yrs/70,000 miles 4 yrs/50,000 miles ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE 4 yrs/Unlimited 6 yrs/70,000 miles Unlimited FUEL CAPACITY 15.8 gal 16.0 gal 17.4 gal EPA CITY/HWY/COMB ECON 17/24/19 mpg 16/24/19 mpg 18/25/20 mpg ENERGY CONS., CITY/HWY 198/140 kW-hrs/100 miles 211/140 kW-hrs/100 miles 187/135 kW-hrs/100 miles CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB 0.99 lb/mile 1.03 lb/mile 0.94 lb/mile REAL MPG, CITY/HWY/COMB Not available 17.6/24.2/20.1 mpg 17.6/22.8/19.6 mpg RECOMMENDED FUEL Unleaded premium Unleaded premium Unleaded premium *SAE Certified
    24 replies | 406 view(s)
  • spxxx's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:29 PM
    I've tried a ton of different throttle maps (stock, linear, MHD check box option) and no matter my throttle map settings I get behavior like you see in this log where 25-30% pedal = 100% throttle... I'm lightly modulating the throttle in the log to achieve this behavior but you can see the pedal never goes past 30%
    8 replies | 139 view(s)
  • Terry@BMS's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:33 PM
    Hey guys, Got the M3 back finally and headed over to the dyno for a little tuning. Changes since last go around: Slightly larger wheels on the PURE S2 turbos BMS S55 intake Less octane this time around: ~95 octane and 50/50 boost juice, last time was ~98 octane and a higher meth mix. General thoughts: 1) The new wheels spool a touch slower than the previous ones but seem to hold boost better towards redline. All in all doing what they should be. 2) Sorry, I didn't take the time to swap back to the OEM intake. Preemptive answer: I don't know how much of the power gains if any can be contributed to the intake vs. other changes made. 3) I found this setup on the OEM timing curve is under advanced even at this lower octane level. Going from 9 degrees peak timing (normal timing target) up to say 12 degrees peak timing (JB4 adjusted target), keeping boost the same, resulted in a ~20whp swing at high rpm. This partially explains the heavy dyno variance people see testing in different ambient weather conditions. And just goes to show how easy it is to make hard parts like intakes or exhausts look like they are adding (or subtracting) a ton of power when they might not be doing anything. 4) Note the JB4 we have on ours has a special wire set that lets us adjust the timing curve above OEM values. No one else has this at least yet. 5) When the weather cools down I'll head back with straight race gas and see how far we can push it. I'm thinking it should do around 675whp @ 34psi in 50 degree ambient weather.
    5 replies | 51 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:07 PM
    I've always liked these things but now with factory turbo motors they are becoming insane. 144 horses, badass:
    3 replies | 56 view(s)
  • Digitalism's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:25 PM
    My transmission pan was leaking, which is a common item that fails so I had the transmission pan replaced along with the mechatronic sealing ring. After a few days I came back to a small puddle of tranny fluid. I took the car back to my mechanic who cleaned it up and re-tensioned the bolts. Again after a few days it leaked again, the shop has replaced it with a second brand new transmission pan. It continues to leak even after a second pan is fitted, the leak has been isolated around a few bolts and these bolts have been replaced just to make sure they were not stretched. All bolts a torqued to the correct value. Has anyone experienced this? Any solutions?
    1 replies | 34 view(s)
  • spxxx's Avatar
    Today, 10:11 AM
    Hi all, I wanted to share the results of one user of my maps. He was basically running my E50 base map with some small tweaks. Yes, it's overly aggressive for the street. Yes, it hits 21psi for a few RPM. I don't want tuning arguments.... Most importantly, I wanted to show that some schmuck on the Internet could build a decent map that hits insane dyno numbers. I'm not a pro tuner and I don't have time to custom tune everyone's car but I hope folks take my maps and run with them in the interest of the community. Do your research, log often, ask questions and POST YOUR RESULTS ON THE FORUMS, we are still learning a lot about this car and I think it's best that we document the wins and losses along the way.
    1 replies | 17 view(s)
  • bigdnno98's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:48 PM
    So a local guy has a BMS tune and intake F10 M5. All I can say is that car is very impressive. Enjoy.
    0 replies | 42 view(s)
  • BoostAddict's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:55 PM
    A very good friend of mine, who is very respected in the tuning industry, has written a couple books on EFI tuning. They mostly pertain to LSx tuning using HPtuners and EFI live. He has since stopped selling his book and now posted all the information for free on his site. He is continually adding new case studies, and tuning information. I know this forum caters to mainly the BMW crowd, but the information is great for anybody looking to get into tuning, or just likes to read. He goes through basic engine operation, efi components, and then into tuning.
    0 replies | 29 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:53 PM
    Law, we appreciate you taking the time to join.
    0 replies | 23 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:17 PM
    gwakie, we appreciate you taking the time to join.
    0 replies | 19 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:58 PM
    Hey erikc61: :text-welcomewave:
    0 replies | 17 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:11 PM
    llloyalmiche, we appreciate you taking the time to join.
    0 replies | 16 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:22 PM
    dario, we appreciate you taking the time to join.
    0 replies | 16 view(s)
  • JoeBezy's Avatar
    Today, 07:33 AM
    Hey All, Maybe i'll get a better response here. I have a 2008 BMW 535XI with 126K miles. All stock except BMS DCI's. Now the fun stuff. At 105K the injectors went out. Replaced all injectors, coil packs and spark plugs. 2000 Euro(i'm stationed in germany) When the injectors went out it sent a lot of fuel through the exhaust and i knew i needed new O2's, so i replaced them. The Bank 1 sensor 3 times sue to not loosing the code and the bank 2 once. now at 126K i get the generic P code of P112C and the BMW codes 2C2D, Lambda probe in front of catalytic converter, thrust control 2C3D, Lambda probe in front of catalytic converter, Leitungsfailure 2C39, Lambda probe in front of catalytic converter, dynamics I'm super lost. the car runs fine. Only every now and then does she stumble on herself. I'm thinking of just replacing the bank 2 sensor 1 O2 sensor, but dont want to shell out the $150 if it is not worth it. Has anyone delt with this? Can anyone point me in another direction? Possible wiring issue?
    0 replies | 15 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:07 PM
    Welcome to a real enthusiast forum acid325.
    0 replies | 15 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:30 PM
    Welcome to a real enthusiast forum ousuu8232y11.
    0 replies | 15 view(s)
  • triggz's Avatar
    Today, 10:42 AM
    Here are some videos of my buddy doing half-mile runs with other fast rides.
    0 replies | 13 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 01:03 AM
    dimitronn, we appreciate you taking the time to join.
    0 replies | 13 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:32 PM
    Welcome to a real enthusiast forum paragon643.
    0 replies | 13 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:30 PM
    Welcome to a real enthusiast forum 3jxdt.
    0 replies | 12 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:19 PM
    David Whitacre, we appreciate you taking the time to join.
    0 replies | 11 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 07:05 AM
    M3aaron, we appreciate you taking the time to join.
    0 replies | 9 view(s)
  • mithiral67's Avatar
    Today, 10:36 AM
    Second Track day with the Cayman GTS. See video details for info. Car was a lot slower with tires being heat cycled. I was 3 seconds off my best lap last time out. Me My brother Some additional videos on my channel as well from the day.
    0 replies | 8 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 11:45 AM
    Welcome SteveTate, take a look around, I think you will like what you see.
    0 replies | 2 view(s)
  • klipseracer's Avatar
    Today, 12:14 PM
    Oh yes, I remember this manifold now. They were going to run nitrous through it also... I was really stoked about that project. With that said, You'd think they would at least sell the manifold, even if they couldn't control it...
    142 replies | 1104 view(s)
  • G0TB00ST?'s Avatar
    33 replies | 268 view(s)
  • spxxx's Avatar
    Today, 12:04 PM
    Yeah I never had this issue either with BB flash, not sure if BB has the checksums for the torque tables that are effecting the jb4 throttle inputs.
    8 replies | 139 view(s)
  • klipseracer's Avatar
    Today, 12:02 PM
    And monkeys like bananas. What is your point? Posting a complaint prematurely is one thing. Posting a praise AFTER THE FACT is another. See, I can bold and capitalize just like you. Nobody wanna hear the bitching unless you got a beef with Tony. If somebody wants to make an informative post AFTER THE FACT then by all means. Inform away and do the community a good turn daily. Also, I don't need to search shit. I know very well where the XDF thread is, in fact, gosh I played a part in DME tuning as this platform knows it now, gosh I have the source code on my computer. What do you know about that? Or are you a OEM VTT turbo replacement expert?
    75 replies | 1815 view(s)
  • mastawyrm's Avatar
    Today, 12:02 PM
    Is it at all possible that they're just trying to nail down a good oem recreation for the sake of a starting point? I'm just trying to view possible angles here but maybe they're following the age-old process of Step1: Make it work Step2: Make it better Maybe they're just excited to share with everyone the fact that they're almost done with Step1 :confusion-shrug:
    142 replies | 1104 view(s)
  • Tony@VargasTurboTech's Avatar
    Today, 11:54 AM
    Undercover has a full manifold with PI built in over 2 years ago. I am not sure if anyone ended up running it, but it looked similar to this. They ditched the project because ProEFI dropped out.
    142 replies | 1104 view(s)
More Activity