Z4M Roadster 0to60 in 4.6 seconds - Page 2

crosvs · #11 05-02-2006, 02:04 AM

... and rescind my prior comment in full. i definitely agree 100%

Sponsored Links

DINANM3 · #12 05-02-2006, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crosvs

... and rescind my prior comment in full. i definitely agree 100%

Thanks

SANguru · #13 05-02-2006, 10:38 PM

there are many factors that play into a 0-60 time.. with launch and traction being 2 of the biggest ones. Gearing also as cars that have short gearing will require a shift which slows down 0-60 times.. There are also other real good test of a car's true power ie 40-70, top gear accelleration and 0-150-0. so no, not always the case.. good case in point, turbo diesel cars that have big torque but low hp in europe can post some pretty spectacular 0-60 times but not for 0-100. Also say if you compare the Mz4 to and E55, the have similar 0-60 times at ~4.6 but if you look at the qtr mile, there's a drastic difference.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DINANM3

Allright well it did 0to100 in 11.4 sec. thats faster than the M3 too. You said that 0to60 doesnt matter but 0to100 does. I think they both matter, and the fact that it is faster to 60mph usually means it will be faster to 100mph too 99% of the time. Dont you agree. I cant remember ever seeing a car that was faster to 60mph but slower to 100mph

DINANM3 · #14 05-03-2006, 02:02 PM

You are right but that wasnt the original point. we were talking strictly about 0to60 times. I stated that C&D tested the ZM4 and it did 0to60 in 4.6 sec. Now one of the other members here said that that test means nothing because someone who is going to buy the car will probably only be able to do 5sec 0to60. So i said all that matters is the maximum ability of the car. Not what some buyer can do with it. Especially since its competitors are tested in the same fashion by test drivers. The porsche Cayman S is tested in the same way and it is lower to 60 than the Z4M. You have to compare apple to apples.

Bavarian · #15 05-03-2006, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DINANM3

To me the only thing that matters is what the fastest time possible is for any car. I think the driver testing it should use every means neccesary to extract every last tenth out of the car in there test. Because at the end of the test all that matters is what the car is capable of. Not what a regular person with no driving ability is able to get. As long as all the cars getting tested are being tested by the same people or equally experienced drivers then the numbers are relavant. If someone does 4.8 in a m3 and 4.5 in the ZM4 then which is faster. The ZM4 is faster! Now if i take it out and do a 5sec in the m3 and a 5sec in the zm4. does that mean they are equally fast. No that means i didnt know how to get the power down right and the other guy was faster than me.
Only professional drivers can extract full performance from cars and the cars true capability shows in there hands and to me thats what matters. theres alot of people out there that wont hit those numbers but i for one have hit 4.8 sec in my m3 and have done 13.3 quarter miles when it was stock. It took some practice runs and my years of non pro racing helped for sure. But if CandD hit 4.5 in the ZM4 i know i could get close eventually. and who cares if i smoke a clutch. thats the price you pay for having fun. Buy a new one. If i didnt want to pay for a new clutch i wouldnt have done it.

I do understand how obviously experienced drivers will be the ones who will find the true maximum ability of a car. That's fine - that's why these people exist, as pros and as ethusiasts (possible you).

However the fact is that most M-cars out there are not owned by people who use them anywhere near their limit. Rather people who have money and like to be special.

So I think since the largest portion of the customer base for these fast cars are actually average Joes (in terms of driving ability), the manufacturer claims are plenty good enough to asses how good a car is under normal conditions, with a "normally skilled" driver.

Don't get me wrong. If you can do faster times than BMW posts, that is awesome, and by all means you may do this at every light if you wished. But these magazine times just don't tailor to most of the customer base of these vehicles. I was at a BMW dealership the other day talking to a friend, and there was an older gentleman in his late 60s purchasing an M3 they had on the lot. The salesman was explaining to him why the car was faster, etc.

This gentleman clearly had no idea of the car's capabilities, and his current ride was apparently a 2001 S430. You can imagine that most probably this gentleman won't be amused by a 4.6 second run reported by C&D. And there are more like him buying M3s rather than younger, performance drivers.

But that is merely my perspective, and nothing more.

SANguru · #16 05-03-2006, 05:27 PM

you're not.. you never do.. barometer pressure, temp, track/tarmac compound, heat in the tires.. they all vary...

Quote:

Originally Posted by DINANM3

You are right but that wasnt the original point. we were talking strictly about 0to60 times. I stated that C&D tested the ZM4 and it did 0to60 in 4.6 sec. Now one of the other members here said that that test means nothing because someone who is going to buy the car will probably only be able to do 5sec 0to60. So i said all that matters is the maximum ability of the car. Not what some buyer can do with it. Especially since its competitors are tested in the same fashion by test drivers. The porsche Cayman S is tested in the same way and it is lower to 60 than the Z4M. You have to compare apple to apples.

crosvs · #17 05-03-2006, 08:47 PM

well. perhaps then you're comparing green apples to red apples.

but at least they're still apples

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Sponsored Links