|
Post Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
06-08-2014, 07:27 PM | #1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Major
226
Rep 1,064
Posts |
M3/4 VS Comparable car list (Fuel Economy, Engine, Power, Weight)
A table formatted list to compare the stats of cars in the M3/4 world. If you have a comment or suggestion just let me know. For a background of why this list exists, just check out below.
Just a list made to compare cars based around the idea the specific power output is related to fuel economy. I will try to keep adding cars to the list for comparison, if you have a request, let me know. This came about since many complained that the 17/26 mpg was not sufficient for the M3/4. Many compared it to the higher achieving MPG of the C7 stingray or the Audi S6, but I feel that the M4 has an engine that is tuned higher, and therefore is more thirsty. Comparisons to cars with much larger engines and much less specific power output seems trivial. In general, a smaller engine that is "hopped up" if you will, consumes more fuel than a similar sized engine that is less potent. I wonder what the F1 cars consume with their tiny displacements... This list is the best I could do in finding accurate information, if you feel the need to correct any of these numbers, I am sure you will let me know. Note that turbos help the EPA numbers when compared to engines with similar displacements and power output... AWD, weight, short gearing, and drag will hurt the EPA numbers. Do not underestimate the power (see what I did there) of specific outputs relative to fuel efficiency. With that, the idea that higher specific output means lower fuel economy is not a bulletproof idea, as it relies on too many other variables. With enough data points, one could lay out a graph, and see that a curve would probably emerge showing a non linear relationship. Hell, I could probably make a formula out of all these numbers if I wanted to waste even more time! Disclaimer, I am sure many will have retorts to this information, theory, idea, but keep in mind this is more an experiment than anything else and I decided to put the list here to share information. Last edited by mxa121; 06-15-2014 at 09:04 PM.. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
06-08-2014, 07:41 PM | #2 |
Major General
1125
Rep 6,067
Posts |
Thanks.
I didn't know S6 is heavier than M5!
__________________
Current : 2020 F92 Black Sapphire M8 - ZF8
Gone : 2018 F80 Mineral Gray M3 - 6MT Gone : 2016 F82 Austin Yellow M4 - 6MT Gone : 2013 F13 Sakhir Orange M6 -7DCT Gone: 2013 F13 Alpine White 650i -ZF8 |
Appreciate
0
|
06-08-2014, 09:38 PM | #5 |
Major General
1125
Rep 6,067
Posts |
isn't M5 14/20? I think it's the same as M6
__________________
Current : 2020 F92 Black Sapphire M8 - ZF8
Gone : 2018 F80 Mineral Gray M3 - 6MT Gone : 2016 F82 Austin Yellow M4 - 6MT Gone : 2013 F13 Sakhir Orange M6 -7DCT Gone: 2013 F13 Alpine White 650i -ZF8 |
Appreciate
0
|
06-08-2014, 10:03 PM | #7 |
Major General
1125
Rep 6,067
Posts |
Great job... also M3 (F80), RS7
__________________
Current : 2020 F92 Black Sapphire M8 - ZF8
Gone : 2018 F80 Mineral Gray M3 - 6MT Gone : 2016 F82 Austin Yellow M4 - 6MT Gone : 2013 F13 Sakhir Orange M6 -7DCT Gone: 2013 F13 Alpine White 650i -ZF8 |
Appreciate
0
|
06-08-2014, 11:00 PM | #8 |
First Lieutenant
365
Rep 358
Posts
Drives: '16F80,TR6,Defender,PA23-250T
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: CYVR
|
Cool idea! Good for a quick reference and comparison. I find myself looking at weights and power... and not at all at cD. But love the idea!!
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-09-2014, 10:41 PM | #12 | |
Major
226
Rep 1,064
Posts |
Quote:
I used fueleconomy.gov for that one. Further searching on some forums reveal 16/24, I will update that number. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-09-2014, 10:53 PM | #13 | |
Major
226
Rep 1,064
Posts |
Quote:
Have a look at this video around the 11:30 mark. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9faC-XExtc |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-10-2014, 07:38 AM | #14 |
Brigadier General
2721
Rep 3,337
Posts |
Thanks for the list. Couple of comments that came to mind:
Looking at final drive ratios without knowledge of the transmission gearing (and of course engine powerband) imparts no knowledge really. Also, "comparing" Cd values is also a moot point as it does not allow a comparison of aero drag between cars. To actually have a comparison you need to multiply the Cd times the frontal area for each car to arrive at (Cd x A). Now you can actually compare aerodynamic drag between different cars. Regards, Chuck
__________________
Current Stable:
2024 G20 M340i Melbourne Red/Cognac 2019 F87 M2 Competition 6MT, LBB, slicktop, exec pkg 2007 E91 328i Silver, slushbox, Eibach fr/E93 M3 rear sway bars, ARC-8 |
Appreciate
0
|
06-10-2014, 11:51 AM | #15 |
Moderator
7515
Rep 19,368
Posts |
Nice list. I'd suggest a BBCode table for this application:
http://www.bbcode.org/reference.php Also, perhaps more AMG models such as the C63 and E63. Finally it would be cool to see some columns with quick indicators (maybe green up-arrow, red down-arrow) for specific output relative to M3 and fuel economy relative to M3. Maybe a turbo/NA column too. |
Appreciate
0
|
06-11-2014, 09:23 PM | #16 | ||
Major
226
Rep 1,064
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
I have tried putting in a table and followed the example, but it does not work. Any advice? [table] [tr] [th]Make[/th] [/tr] [tr] [td]Audi[/td] [/tr] [/table] Last edited by mxa121; 06-11-2014 at 09:51 PM.. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
06-11-2014, 11:10 PM | #17 | ||||||||||||||
Moderator
7515
Rep 19,368
Posts |
^^^ I got it to work using different tags. Reply to this post with quote to see the code.
Note: Make sure there is no white space within the table tags or you'll get blank lines above the table. |
||||||||||||||
Appreciate
0
|
06-12-2014, 10:06 AM | #18 |
BMW Fanatic
374
Rep 1,413
Posts
Drives: 2020 X3 M
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Austin, TX
|
Can you add US MSRP and lbft of torque?
__________________
SteveSpy
Current Ride: 2020 X3 M |
Appreciate
0
|
06-12-2014, 05:28 PM | #19 |
Captain
278
Rep 823
Posts |
I think the hp/L calculation is off for the Stingray...
I am however assuming that you are calculating horsepower per liter of fuel consumed and NOT displacement of the engine. Thanks Edit: nevermind. I see that it is hp/L(of displacement). I would really like to see a curve of horsepower per unit fuel consumed. I mean, we all buy cars to drive them and the direct cost to drive a car is what you pay at the pump. It would be nice to see which cars offer the most amount of power at the least amount of running cost, not including price, depreciation, insurance, etc... |
Appreciate
0
|
06-13-2014, 06:17 PM | #20 |
Major
226
Rep 1,064
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|