I agree with you, it seems the V's are on the quiet side....but nothing an aftermarket exhaust wouldn't solve....

 

The 7:40.6 was run by Markus Draper for Octane Magazine, if you would have bothered to scroll up the Nurburgring lap time list, you would have caught that. I compared the CSL because that was the fastest BMW on the entire list, The BMW M6 (V-10 507 hp) bad boy ran a lousy 8:09. I was giving you a break by not comparing their V-10 coupe to the Viper, Z06, 911, GTR and Ford GT.

 

Wow we really took this guys thread to an EPIC FAIL.

 

1st of all, who the hell is Markus Draper?

2ndly, the only mention I've ever seen of a 7:40 time for the Ford GT in Octane Magazine was only an estimate given by Armin Hahne. He never did a timed lap in the GT, only a BTG lap during a tourist day. This is noted on page 107 of Issue 29 (2005/11).

3rdly, it was mentioned in this thread that no BMW had ever broken into the 7-minute barrier. That's false. The CSL had. And a reasonable inference can be made about the E92 M3, M5 and M6 (if you believe that GM lapped the C6 Corvette in 7:59).
Think about this for a moment: HvS could only lap the RS4 in 8:09. Meanwhile, factory Audi racer Frank Stippler lapped the 'Ring in 7:58 in the RS4, not only undercutting HvS's time by 11 seconds, but marginally beating the CTS-V's time as well. Yet Cadillac still claims their CTS-V is the fastest V8 production sedan on the 'Ring, even though the RS4 is faster and the Panamera Turbo is faster as well (and has been for about 2 months now).

4thly, you still cannot come up with a BMW-claimed time for the CSL (or just about any other BMW for that matter); most obvious reasonable explanation for this: BMW doesn't really give a rat's *** about 'Ring lap times. They test there for other reasons. Thank you for failing to dig up BMW-claimed times to prove my point.

Comparing their V10, steel-bodied 2+2 coupe on only 285mm wide rear tires against alloy/composite-bodied 2-seat sports cars with fat tires, or cars with 300kg's less weight. Wow, what next? Are you going to boast with pride that an elephant can crush an ant?

Yes, I already know of the exploits of the GT-R. That car embarasses far more than just BMW's.

 

You've got ricer excuses for everything first you talk about comparing an I-6 to larger motors, then when I compare the Viper V-10 to the BMW V-10 all of a sudden you talk about weight differences? The car companies decide what they build and we are comparing these vehicles. I don't know of any competing car companies that are building cars of exactly the same weight, same motors, same tires, etc...

BTW, I know the GT-R embarasses far more then BMW's. It just can't hang with the ZR1 and Viper ACR.

 

God Bless America, apparently we haven't forgot how to build fast cars!

 

Viper vs M6 is just about weight?? How about torque? Tires? Weight distribution? Not being saddles with 2 extra seats out back, the Viper has more room to play with in obtaining the optimum weight distribution. Yet in the hands of the same driver (Sport Auto's Horst von Saurma), the M6 was faster than the SRT-10 Viper.
They don't have to be the exact same specification, but if you think an elephant vs ant comparison is meaningful (and shows the elephant in a good light), then more power to you.

The GT-R might not be able to hang with the ZR1 and ACR, but it completely destroys the car it was designed to compete with (997 Turbo). As it stands, it's only a few seconds slower than those far more track-oriented cars.

Tell me, what ricer excuses do you have for the Gumpert Apollo crushing the ACR? I guess it must be because most Europeans can't cope with torque.?

Gumpert Apollo: 675 lb-ft
ACR: 560 lb-ft


Nevermind the UK-built Radical killing all of them...

 

Gumpert Apollo? Get out of here with that weak crap. 675 ft-lbs. ooooh I'm so scared - [/b]TRY 1,112 ft-lbs of good ol' American neck breaking torque! Shelby SSC is its name, oh yeah and it owns the current official top speed record at 256.15 mph - smashing the unofficial 252 mph of the Frenchy/Sauerkraut combo. of the Veyron.

The Radical? You consider that high powered go-kart a street car? Come on you can do better then that.

 

Lap time for the Shelby? Or are they too chicken to have it independently tested on a road course? The car has been around for some time now...

Shelby has more torque...therefore Europeans aren't used to dealing with torque? LOL. Huge disconnect in logic there.
In any event, the 1,298 lb-ft Weineck Cobra hails from Germany. Where they are apparently afraid of torque.

675 ft-lbs and the European driver was faster than the American driver in the ZR1 which has less torque.

The Radical is a street-legal car. Driven to the Nurburgring from the manufacturer.
If you want to compare a stripped out composite-bodied 2-seater with fat MPSC's, adjustable aero and suspension to a comfy 2+2 GT with electronics and luxuries up the ***, that can be driven daily and across country without it (or the owner) breaking a sweat, then you should be ready to have your ACR compared to a Radical. All's fair, right?

 

Weineck Cobra? A Shelby replica kit car, you are really strectching there. You are starting to bring tuner cars into the mix to try and make your point, pathetic.

 

That car is built about 3 hours from me, talk about Pride...

 

Let me guess that torque is generated by a German engine?

The fact is that BMW's are street tuned vehicles, they try to group them in with sports cars but they are not. Just like an S65 would be useless on a road course it seems there are more and more BMW's that are as well. It's been steadily going downhill, and of course there cars keep getting heavier since the E36.

 

If you ever want to modify it, and not take out a second mortgage to do so. You may want to look at this video, I think it also answers the sound of the exhaust question!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBaSnXlgZlY&feature=fvw


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vBaSnXlgZlY...</param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vBaSnXlgZlY&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

Doesn't matter if they're tuner cars. They're built in Europe for the European market which can apparently handle the torque contrary to your earlier post.
Where are these SCC lap times?


germeezy1:
BMW's have been getting heavier since well before the E36. An S65 would be useless on a road course, but not a CLK DTM (or M3 CSL or Z4 M Coupe for that matter).

 

I own a cooking class E36, slighly modified for power but basically stock suspension with good tires. IMO that was last gen that had the basic intrinsic goodness and BMW chassis balance without having to step up to the M chassis. I had a E36 328i, and even it bone stock had the steering purity and feel that define a BMW.......which my E46 330i M Sport did not have. I just feel that the BMWness that was even in the entry level cars and in the luxury class cars is slowly slipping away.

You guys better get used to torque if you like BMW's apparently they have decided that it takes torque to move increasingly heavy cars like the new generation M Suv's!
Who would have thought we would be talking about 5000 lb M SUV's!







But back on subject.....CTS-V Pwnnns all in its price and class!