Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

[ryan]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

Street cars, including mine has a soft chassis by nature as a STREET car.

Why does everyone in here think they have some kind of race chassis so long they have a coupe? Even my car with ARBs, Recaro pole positions etc won't be able to come close to sniffing a track spec proton wira. At this point i can't even take on any Street Honda CTR with semis at Sepang.

A BMW M3 Cab is freaking awesome as a daily, top down lifestyle + the power (more than enough to get you into trouble), WITHOUT the exotic (ferrari/lamb/porsche) servicing expenses.

IMO, it's really balanced. One shouldn't' think of it as a weekly track car but I'm sure it'll still hold it's own. So many people in here hardly even go down to track with their rides. LOL.

 

[rex7_vtec]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

Street cars, including mine has a soft chassis by nature as a STREET car.

Why does everyone in here think they have some kind of race chassis so long they have a coupe? Even my car with ARBs, Recaro pole positions etc won't be able to come close to sniffing a track spec proton wira. At this point i can't even take on any Street Honda CTR with semis at Sepang.

A BMW M3 Cab is freaking awesome as a daily, top down lifestyle + the power (more than enough to get you into trouble), WITHOUT the exotic (ferrari/lamb/porsche) servicing expenses.

IMO, it's really balanced. One shouldn't' think of it as a weekly track car but I'm sure it'll still hold it's own. So many people in here hardly even go down to track with their rides. LOL.

Fuel consumption already backside tear!

 

[Shaun]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

Actually, road cars can have pretty stiff chassis because they need to last a long time, and carry some serious load. The weight issue is not a huge one for them. Some road cars have stiffer chassis' than racecars. In fact many racecars especially low/no minimum weight classes have relatively soft chassis in the 25,000 - 30,000 Nm/deg range. A good sedan or coupe can run 35,000 ++ Nm/deg.

It is possible to have lower chassis stiffness with little to no performance penalty, depending on min weight rule, weight distribution, drive system type, and spring damper spec. It is not very common however.

The stiffer a roadcar chassis is, the more comfortable the car can be actually, letting the suspension do its work and tuning the suspension with much more certainty vs an overall soft system with 2 variables, 1 much more difficult to quantify and tune, but still in the mix.

===

But I think what Jack and Ryan are saying is that whether a chassis is soft or stiff doesn't really matter until you really start taxing the system to where the softness becomes a limit instead of the usual limit - the driver. Running 3% or more off the pace and many drivers drive 3 - 5% off the pace, the limit is still the driver by far. At that range the car in turns is literally on rails, there is no slip, no controlled states of under or oversteer - only accidental US and OS when big mistakes are made. The numbers sound small, but 7% is already deemed unsafe by the FIA because of the speed differentials.

Beyond the 3 - 5%-off drivers, there are another 90 something % that don't even know where they stand because they've never tracked. And quite frankly, in Singapore, if you don't track, you can't possibly feel how a car really handles, in a responsible way, or to any proper degree. But of course there are thousands of guys who disagree with this because they all love to sit around talking to their friends about how they tested this and that car and they could feel it was doing this and that, and how it compares to other cars, and why that one if better than this one and ball that, but without being close to the edge, all cars drive like they're on rails. They will never admit this because to do so means also admitting that all the talk has basically been BS, regurgitating what magazines write, etc. These are also the same guys who like to mess around on the roads and talk big about it, but who've never turned a lap, or when they do turn laps, are very slow for how good the car is. That's why they put so much focus on how fast the car is in a straight line, or push how reckless they can be on the roads. Neither requires skill, and has little to nothing to do with dynamics that the manufacturers have so painstakingly worked out.

This is not to say that track drivers are automatically good drivers. There are many who drive years without aim or efficiency, but at least here and there they get to feel their cars in a real dynamic state whether in control or not, and more importantly they do it in a safer and much more responsible way.

 

[totoseow]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

i can easily feel my chasis flex when i pull 3.5G in sepang turn 18. now standing on my balcony looking at my garage i can c my left front wheel suspension about 2 mm lower than right. sigh must be bushing wear due to favtory imperfections of the thread..i prob sped for 8mins at 320kmh thats why...but too scared to take picture to prove.

oops sorry wrong thread...shud go into tua kang.

 

[golfgti]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

Fuel consumption already backside tear!

can buy m3 fuel cost is nothing la

rich boy toyz... im getting 6.5km/l for 100% city driving on my tripmeter...

hows that for all the V8 jazz? well i only live once so i drive while i still can & oil hasnt reached USD200/bbl!!!!

 

[ac323]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

can buy m3 fuel cost is nothing la

rich boy toyz... im getting 6.5km/l for 100% city driving on my tripmeter...

hows that for all the V8 jazz? well i only live once so i drive while i still can & oil hasnt reached USD200/bbl!!!!

true..........we only live once, if can afford then just do it..............i also just wack like mine is a M3......Lolz



vroom vroom
cheers

 

[ac323]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

Street cars, including mine has a soft chassis by nature as a STREET car.


IMO, it's really balanced. One shouldn't' think of it as a weekly track car but I'm sure it'll still hold it's own. So many people in here hardly even go down to track with their rides. LOL.

you are so right, Ryan.............................more for Street Driving Pleasure.................



can't wait for BMW.sg Track Day
cheers

 

[hetraa]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

Enjoyed reading your comments...very true...

u damn tech...which is gd!

Actually, road cars can have pretty stiff chassis because they need to last a long time, and carry some serious load. The weight issue is not a huge one for them. Some road cars have stiffer chassis' than racecars. In fact many racecars especially low/no minimum weight classes have relatively soft chassis in the 25,000 - 30,000 Nm/deg range. A good sedan or coupe can run 35,000 ++ Nm/deg.

It is possible to have lower chassis stiffness with little to no performance penalty, depending on min weight rule, weight distribution, drive system type, and spring damper spec. It is not very common however.

The stiffer a roadcar chassis is, the more comfortable the car can be actually, letting the suspension do its work and tuning the suspension with much more certainty vs an overall soft system with 2 variables, 1 much more difficult to quantify and tune, but still in the mix.

===

But I think what Jack and Ryan are saying is that whether a chassis is soft or stiff doesn't really matter until you really start taxing the system to where the softness becomes a limit instead of the usual limit - the driver. Running 3% or more off the pace and many drivers drive 3 - 5% off the pace, the limit is still the driver by far. The numbers sound small, but 7% is already deemed unsafe by the FIA because of the speed differentials.

Beyond the 3 - 5%-off drivers, there are another 90 something % that don't even know where they stand because they've never tracked. And quite frankly, in Singapore, if you don't track, you can't possibly feel how a car really handles, in a responsible way, or to any proper degree. But of course there are thousands of guys who disagree with this because they all love to sit around talking to their friends about how they tested this and that car and they could feel it was doing this and that, and how it compares to other cars, and why that one if better than this one and ball that, but without being close to the edge, all cars drive like they're on rails. They will never admit this because to do so means also admitting that all the talk has basically been BS, regurgitating what magazines write, etc. These are also the same guys who like to mess around on the roads and talk big about it, but who've never turned a lap, or when they do turn laps, are very slow for how good the car is. That's why they put so much focus on how fast the car is in a straight line, or push how reckless they can be on the roads. Neither requires skill, and has little to nothing to do with dynamics that the manufacturers have so painstakingly worked out.

This is not to say that track drivers are automatically good drivers. There are many who drive years without aim or efficiency, but at least here and there they get to feel their cars in a real dynamic state whether in control or not, and more importantly they do it in a safer and much more responsible way.

 

[golfgti]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

to buy a few hundred thousand $ car, it doesnt make $ sense.

so buyers with such cars shld be 1) rich boys 2) genuine car freaks. When one starts to consider the practical aspects of them, they usually dont end up owning them. So if u wanna be an M3 owner, dont think so much!!!

 

[flyinlo]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

Whether u track or not, chassis stiff or not, the main problem with cabriolet is weight. U don't need any scientific instrument to measure or feel.

 

[pbear1973]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

I don't normally make useless posts like the one I'm about to, but I think Shaun makes so much sense that I have to write this:

R.E.S.P.E.C.T.

Actually, road cars can have pretty stiff chassis because they need to last a long time, and carry some serious load. The weight issue is not a huge one for them. Some road cars have stiffer chassis' than racecars. In fact many racecars especially low/no minimum weight classes have relatively soft chassis in the 25,000 - 30,000 Nm/deg range. A good sedan or coupe can run 35,000 ++ Nm/deg.

It is possible to have lower chassis stiffness with little to no performance penalty, depending on min weight rule, weight distribution, drive system type, and spring damper spec. It is not very common however.

The stiffer a roadcar chassis is, the more comfortable the car can be actually, letting the suspension do its work and tuning the suspension with much more certainty vs an overall soft system with 2 variables, 1 much more difficult to quantify and tune, but still in the mix.

===

But I think what Jack and Ryan are saying is that whether a chassis is soft or stiff doesn't really matter until you really start taxing the system to where the softness becomes a limit instead of the usual limit - the driver. Running 3% or more off the pace and many drivers drive 3 - 5% off the pace, the limit is still the driver by far. At that range the car in turns is literally on rails, there is no slip, no controlled states of under or oversteer - only accidental US and OS when big mistakes are made. The numbers sound small, but 7% is already deemed unsafe by the FIA because of the speed differentials.

Beyond the 3 - 5%-off drivers, there are another 90 something % that don't even know where they stand because they've never tracked. And quite frankly, in Singapore, if you don't track, you can't possibly feel how a car really handles, in a responsible way, or to any proper degree. But of course there are thousands of guys who disagree with this because they all love to sit around talking to their friends about how they tested this and that car and they could feel it was doing this and that, and how it compares to other cars, and why that one if better than this one and ball that, but without being close to the edge, all cars drive like they're on rails. They will never admit this because to do so means also admitting that all the talk has basically been BS, regurgitating what magazines write, etc. These are also the same guys who like to mess around on the roads and talk big about it, but who've never turned a lap, or when they do turn laps, are very slow for how good the car is. That's why they put so much focus on how fast the car is in a straight line, or push how reckless they can be on the roads. Neither requires skill, and has little to nothing to do with dynamics that the manufacturers have so painstakingly worked out.

This is not to say that track drivers are automatically good drivers. There are many who drive years without aim or efficiency, but at least here and there they get to feel their cars in a real dynamic state whether in control or not, and more importantly they do it in a safer and much more responsible way.

 

[Ahbengdriver]

Re: Whats the point of buying an E93 M3 Cabriolet

I also respect Shuan's post.

Anyone driving E93 M3 care to throw in some views?