09-21-2017, 07:46 PM | #1 |
General
21127
Rep 20,742
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
M4 vs Giulia QV - MT BDC Hot Lap
Giulia QV was only able to beat the base M4 by 0.01 seconds around MLSR despite being shod with R-compound tires and having an 80hp advantage:
1:39.68 Giulia QV 1:39.69 2015 M4
__________________
Porsche 911 turbo 2021 992 GT Silver
Previous cars: M4cs 2019 F82 Limerock Grey / M4 2015 F82 Silverstone / M3 2008 E92 Silverstone / M3 2002 E46 Carbon Black Last edited by CanAutM3; 09-22-2017 at 01:54 PM.. |
09-21-2017, 08:07 PM | #2 |
Colonel
408
Rep 2,171
Posts |
All these mag videos are super fun to watch but don't tell me much other than being fun to watch. I'm not Randy at Laguna and I think its more about how easy is a car for me to drive... meaning I want a car that I can drive easily at fast speeds.. for e.g, I bet I'd be much slower in an ACR because its limits are so high.. but a M2/M3 I can more easily drive fast...
Also from a track day perspective, I'd buy a car that has great aftermarket support, is reliable, and I see ton of them on the track ... aka //M ... the Giulia has poor dealer support, has had many reported reliability issues and has no good after market support. In my mind the M4 wins everytime.. |
09-22-2017, 10:09 AM | #4 |
Colonel
313
Rep 2,576
Posts |
Probably none. Stopping distance has more to do with tires, since Ccb and steel are both hitting abs in hard stops. Ccb will have less fade, but that would be minimal in a test like this. Most track nuts opt for the steel.
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-22-2017, 10:28 AM | #5 |
General
21127
Rep 20,742
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
For a few fast laps, I seriously doubt the CCB will make much difference in lap times.
__________________
Porsche 911 turbo 2021 992 GT Silver
Previous cars: M4cs 2019 F82 Limerock Grey / M4 2015 F82 Silverstone / M3 2008 E92 Silverstone / M3 2002 E46 Carbon Black |
Appreciate
0
|
09-22-2017, 10:32 AM | #6 | |
Private First Class
50
Rep 139
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-22-2017, 10:33 AM | #7 | |
General
21127
Rep 20,742
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
It is all about how static and kinetic frictions are balanced between the pad-disc and tire-road interfaces. A less powerful or faded brake system can still have the capability to lock-up or induce ABS, but it will provide much less kinetic friction at the pad-disc interface and will not be able to fully exploit the grip provided by the tires. And the rotors are not made of steel, but of iron
__________________
Porsche 911 turbo 2021 992 GT Silver
Previous cars: M4cs 2019 F82 Limerock Grey / M4 2015 F82 Silverstone / M3 2008 E92 Silverstone / M3 2002 E46 Carbon Black |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-22-2017, 11:25 AM | #8 |
Lieutenant
341
Rep 561
Posts |
Carbon ceramic rotors are advertised as being lighter vs cast iron rotors. This weight savings is amplified being an unsprung component (like lightweight wheels). But I haven't seen how much weight exactly.
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-22-2017, 11:42 AM | #10 | ||
Colonel
313
Rep 2,576
Posts |
Quote:
Regardless, carbon ceramics won't make you stop in a shorter distance. Or induce abs less than iron. Their main advantages are fade resistance and unsprung weight, both of which are negated by price for track use by the unfunded track rat. In this comparison I doubt the brake type had any major impact. Over multiple laps, possibly. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
09-22-2017, 12:34 PM | #11 | ||
General
21127
Rep 20,742
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
Quote:
But don't get me wrong, I am fully on the same page as you. Being a track rat myself, I did not opt for the CCB due to their prohibitive cost with track use. Further, I get practically the same overall braking performance (including resistance to fade) with the iron rotors paired with proper track pads. We are in agreement, I posted the same in post #5 .
__________________
Porsche 911 turbo 2021 992 GT Silver
Previous cars: M4cs 2019 F82 Limerock Grey / M4 2015 F82 Silverstone / M3 2008 E92 Silverstone / M3 2002 E46 Carbon Black Last edited by CanAutM3; 09-22-2017 at 01:56 PM.. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
09-22-2017, 12:39 PM | #12 | |
General
21127
Rep 20,742
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
To me, this is just one more data point that shows that the Giulia QV, despite it's R-compound tires and significant power advantage, is not able to trounce the M3/4 on a track. So it still leaves me with the same unanswered question, if the Giulia QV has more grip, better acceleration and better overall driving dynamics (according to so many reviews), why is it not any faster around a track?
__________________
Porsche 911 turbo 2021 992 GT Silver
Previous cars: M4cs 2019 F82 Limerock Grey / M4 2015 F82 Silverstone / M3 2008 E92 Silverstone / M3 2002 E46 Carbon Black Last edited by CanAutM3; 09-22-2017 at 01:56 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-22-2017, 12:44 PM | #13 | ||
General
21127
Rep 20,742
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Porsche 911 turbo 2021 992 GT Silver
Previous cars: M4cs 2019 F82 Limerock Grey / M4 2015 F82 Silverstone / M3 2008 E92 Silverstone / M3 2002 E46 Carbon Black |
||
Appreciate
1
ClothSeats341.00 |
09-22-2017, 01:52 PM | #14 |
enthusiasm > practicality
4027
Rep 2,247
Posts
Drives: 987 CS | G35x
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Chester County, PA
|
My guess....tighter, more rigid chassis.
__________________
FSI 3.8L Stg II|6MT|SOUL|IPD+GT3 TB|Numeric Racing|KW|Tarett|Rennline|Raceseng|APEX|Recaro|7.3 lb/hp
VQ35HR|5AT|Stillen|FI|UpRev tune 8k rpm|TransGo|Hotchkis|Whiteline|H&R|Z1|Corbeau|R1 Concepts|10 lb/hp Left lane campers, GTFO! |
Appreciate
0
|
09-22-2017, 04:03 PM | #15 | |
Private First Class
140
Rep 187
Posts |
Quote:
In the video, Randy did mention that sometimes the car turns in really well but sometimes understeers a lot. Seems like maybe the torque vectoring system is getting overwhelmed by heat or something and is not able to always give the car it's intended dynamic behavior. Our Active M-Differential sure does not seem to have this problem. I have a few days worth of seat time in this car on the road, not race track. I can tell you for 100% confidence that torque management is always there. Your throttle demands are never fulfilled 100%. Unlike in the M3/4, in Sport Plus engine mapping and with DSC off, whatever you do with the throttle is what you will get, instantly, good or bad. You may crash and burn or you may get the most wonderful feeling of car control, it all depends on your skills. Truly more of a driver's car than the Giulia QV, IMHO. |
|
Appreciate
1
CanAutM321126.50 |
09-22-2017, 04:12 PM | #16 | |
Captain
368
Rep 697
Posts |
Quote:
I wish they would have taken a M3 ZCP with them this year to see how it would compare, same day/week? however they decide to run these laps. Wouldn't be surprised if the ZCP was a bit quicker. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-22-2017, 07:32 PM | #18 | |
Banned
544
Rep 1,338
Posts
Drives: Round n' Round
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Paradise
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-22-2017, 08:02 PM | #19 | |
General
21127
Rep 20,742
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
... which still does not explain the lap time difference.
__________________
Porsche 911 turbo 2021 992 GT Silver
Previous cars: M4cs 2019 F82 Limerock Grey / M4 2015 F82 Silverstone / M3 2008 E92 Silverstone / M3 2002 E46 Carbon Black Last edited by CanAutM3; 09-22-2017 at 08:13 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
1
Powerslide1098.50 |
09-23-2017, 03:07 AM | #21 | |
Brigadier General
1882
Rep 3,341
Posts |
Quote:
per car and driver: M3 comp 8.2 hp/lbs------> 12.2 @ 120 mph ATS-V 8.3 hp/lbs ----->12.2 @ 117 mph C63S 7.9 hp/lbs-------> 11.9 @ 123 mph GUILIA 7.6 hp/lbs -------> 11.9 @ 121 mph accounting for the better efficiency of the dct vs the autoboxes you can see all cars perform acceleration tests pretty in line with their hp/lb ratios. http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-6 but it's more convenient to believe in a lie. BMW has magical horses!
__________________
Currently:
2018 GT3 2020 X3MC Previously: 1999 M3 2002 M3 2005 S4 2008 C63 2015 M3 2016 X5M 2019 911S Last edited by dkhm3; 09-23-2017 at 03:18 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
2
CanAutM321126.50 Powerslide1098.50 |
09-23-2017, 01:53 PM | #22 | ||
First Lieutenant
152
Rep 336
Posts |
Quote:
I do believe however, that a big part of the M3/M4's good performance numbers is from the efficiency of their turbos, not just because they're underrated. The high midrange torque means that versus an NA car of similar peak power, you're making a significant amount of power higher everywhere else other than the peak. This really matters a lot because as much as peak power is great, you gotta get through the midrange to get there |
||
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|