Z4M Roadster 0to60 in 4.6 seconds

[DINANM3]

I just read in (I think in C&D or motortrend i always confuse the 2) that they tested the new M roadster it did 0to60 in 4.6 sec/ Way under what BMW was saying to no surprise of course. The New M coupe should be slightly faster when it comes out just because its a g\hard top and lighter. Im hoping 4.4 but prob 4.5 sec to 60.. Not bad for a motor thats been in production since 2000. I think the ZM4 coupe is going to be the best track car BMW has ever made.

[Bavarian]

It doesn't matter what magazines get as 0-60MPH times. The only thing that matters is what the manufacturer posts since that's what most people will be getting, and slower, too.

[SANguru]

0-60 means nothing.. is 0-100-0 that's the true test..

Originally Posted by DINANM3

I just read in (I think in C&D or motortrend i always confuse the 2) that they tested the new M roadster it did 0to60 in 4.6 sec/ Way under what BMW was saying to no surprise of course. The New M coupe should be slightly faster when it comes out just because its a g\hard top and lighter. Im hoping 4.4 but prob 4.5 sec to 60.. Not bad for a motor thats been in production since 2000. I think the ZM4 coupe is going to be the best track car BMW has ever made.

[asawadude]

If the rule that fixed tops are faster than convertibles holds up, the M Coupe should be a couple clicks faster than the Roadster.

[Wagner]

Amazing, I knew BMW was conservative on their numbers.

Important part of the C&D article: "We expect the 330-hp roadster will accelerate from 0 to 60 in about 4.5 seconds, 0.3 second faster than the last M3 we tested and more than a half-second faster than a Porsche Boxster S."

If the magazine tests both the M3 and the new MZ, then the same group is driving both cars...so logically the one with the better time is the one with the better time

http://www.caranddriver.com/previews...ter-page2.html

[crosvs]

yes but then magazines have ALSO gotten mitsu evos to hit 60 in 4.5 secs or so.

doing that 5+ times will rape your clutch.

so in a way, i find the magazine's 0-60 numbers to be quite pointless.

e.g., i'm sure my dad's porsche CAN do 60 in about 4.9 - 5.0 secs. but like the evo (since he's got the C4S) do it more than a few times and the clutch is FINISHED.

i think a good rule of thumb is that you always need to add at LEAST 0.5 secs to a magazine's 0-60 rating EVEN if you're a good driver and launch a car PRETTY hard without destroying it.

thoughts?

[Bavarian]

Originally Posted by crosvs

yes but then magazines have ALSO gotten mitsu evos to hit 60 in 4.5 secs or so.

doing that 5+ times will rape your clutch.

so in a way, i find the magazine's 0-60 numbers to be quite pointless.

e.g., i'm sure my dad's porsche CAN do 60 in about 4.9 - 5.0 secs. but like the evo (since he's got the C4S) do it more than a few times and the clutch is FINISHED.

i think a good rule of thumb is that you always need to add at LEAST 0.5 secs to a magazine's 0-60 rating EVEN if you're a good driver and launch a car PRETTY hard without destroying it.

thoughts?

I am not a manual tranny driver as many of you know, but I drive several manual cars each year out of necessity. Your statement makes perfect sense to me. It's exactly what I was trying to say above - the magazine times are useless in real life, cuz it's not like you can replicate them 50 times in the same day.

It's like running a computer overclocked. My dual-core CPU is clocked at the factory at 3.0GHZ. With aftermarket cooling and overvoltage, I've reached 3.7GHZ, but it gets unstable if you load it. So I go back to a lower overclock. You can't possibly have "sustainable" performance at the "limit" of a machine. Same thing with these times that the magazines are getting.

[crosvs]

It's like running a computer overclocked. My dual-core CPU is clocked at the factory at 3.0GHZ. With aftermarket cooling and overvoltage, I've reached 3.7GHZ, but it gets unstable if you load it. So I go back to a lower overclock. You can't possibly have "sustainable" performance at the "limit" of a machine. Same thing with these times that the magazines are getting.

having grown up most of my life as a computer nut (first pc was the XT when i was 3!!) i can certainly appreciate this.

however, i take issue with one comment you said:

You can't possibly have "sustainable" performance at the "limit" of a machine

I belive that should be modified to: You can't possibly have "sustainable" performance beyond the limit implied by a machine's warranty of fitness for a particular performance." Sorry, with contracts final coming up, I just couldn't help but notice and modify that statement.

Ok ok all joking aside, all that i mean is this: while I do not contend that a machine shouldn't be expected to perform if it is pushed beyond its "limits" if those limits are beyond its ordinary published limits as provided by its manufacturer, I *DO* believe that a machine should function just fine as long as it performs at or below its manufacturer's imposed limits.

In automotive terms, I firmly believe -- at least with today's modern cars and ever-present tort and contracts liability -- that thanks to rev limiters in cars, constantly redlining your engine while under load -- *NOT* freespinning it and bouncing off the rev limiter lol -- should *NOT* cause it to blow up or die before its usual time.

Agreed?

[DINANM3]

Originally Posted by SANguru

0-60 means nothing.. is 0-100-0 that's the true test..

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]

Originally Posted by Bavarian

It doesn't matter what magazines get as 0-60MPH times. The only thing that matters is what the manufacturer posts since that's what most people will be getting, and slower, too.

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.