| VERSUS AUTO SUPRA vs SUBARU, Mercedes vs Bmw, pilotul x vs pilotul y. Aceasta rubrica este dedicata provocarilor,analizelor,pariurilor(virtuale bineinteles),comparatiilor. Rog moderatorii sa fie foarte duri pe acest subiect. Fara OFF-TOPIC |
|
View Poll Results: AMG vs M vs RS
|
|
AMG
|
   
|
493 |
30.45% |
|
M
|
  
|
759 |
46.88% |
|
RS
|
  
|
367 |
22.67% |
12-12-13, 12:00
|
#3196
|
 Stage 5
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,547
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
Quote:
Originally Posted by specialist
Masa sub1500 kg e dry weight. Adica echivalenta celor 1560 la e92. Fara sofer, fara combustibil.
Este fff bine tinand cont ca si masina e mai voluminoasa.
|
Am gasit mai multe detalii:
3300 lbs / 1497 kg (all fluids, 90% fuel, no driver)
3466 lbs / 1572 kg / (plus 68kg driver and 7kg luggage)
M4 is 80kg (176 pounds) lighter than E92 M3 coupe, when comparably equipped
M4 is 23kg (50 pounds) lighter than F80 M3 sedan
Detalii si informatii complete (cu multe poze interesante), aici:
http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=923203
P.s. Ce ma bucura e ca M3-ul arata mai bine ca M4 ! 
Last edited by UNLORD; 12-12-13 at 12:06.
|
|
|
|
14-12-13, 23:12
|
#3197
|
 General SupervisorStage 5
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 17,791
Member of:
[Super Moderators]
[PARTICIPANT CURSE]
[BMW]
[MERCEDES]
[2 Roti]
[ALFA ROMEO]
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluey
Frumusetea sta in ochii privitorului.
Dupa logica ta, de fiecare data cand apare o Alfa Romeo, nemtii ar trebui sa se bage intr-un colt si sa planga.
|
Eu ieri am mers dupa un A4 modelul nou, break si am crezut ca-i A6 break... Asa de frumoase si fluide linii, si asa de agresiv se misca, la demaraje, pe curbe etc, dar atat de putin individualizate in cadrul marcii...
Ai tu dreptate insa, daca ar reusi sa imprumute din frumusetea diferita a italiencelor, ar fi superbe intr-adevar...
|
|
|
|
|
26-12-13, 12:51
|
#3198
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,394
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
__________________
Mazda MX5 ND 2.0 Revolution
BMW 535d(E60)- 2005
Nissan Pathfinder 2.5 dci - 2006 (Sold)
|
|
|
|
|
26-12-13, 13:51
|
#3199
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,547
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
Masuratori de la Car & Driver pt Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG S-Model Wagon. Not Baaad!
Zero to 60 mph: 3.4 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 8.0 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 13.4 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.1 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.5 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 2.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 11.7 sec @ 122 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 174 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 153 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.97 g
Last edited by UNLORD; 26-12-13 at 13:54.
|
|
|
|
|
09-01-14, 16:34
|
#3200
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,547
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
|
|
|
|
|
10-01-14, 15:16
|
#3201
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,394
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNLORD
|
Mda, am vazut si eu, buna gluma!
Nu mai stiu astia ce sa mai faca, ridica orice Ford in slavi.
|
|
|
|
|
15-01-14, 15:09
|
#3202
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,547
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
Cateva detalii noi despre viitorul M3/M4:
■ F80 M3 / F82 M4 are more than 10 seconds faster around the Nurburgring than the E90/E92 M3.
■ The M3/M4 were more or less built and developed around the steering. This electric power steering system (EPS) is the best that money can buy today. Our benchmark was to beat the current M3 in terms of steering feedback and we beat it (and there's not much out there that can claim to beat the current M3 when it comes to steering feedback and precision). The steering is very much an enjoyable part of the car and you will be able to enjoy it not just on the Nurburgring, but also just going to the office everyday.
■ Reported DIN weight is with standard brakes (not carbon ceramics).
■ Carbon ceramic brakes save 6-7kg (13.2lbs - 15.4lbs) overall. Not as much weight saved as on the F10 M5 with ceramic brakes, but that's because the caliper upgrade is much bigger than in the M5's situation. Here, we're seeing the calipers go from 4 piston front / 2 piston rear on the standard M3/M4 brakes to the 6 piston front / 4 piston rear calipers on the M Carbon Ceramic Brakes.
■ Automatic rev matching on the manual transmission is disabled in Sport+ mode. It's active in the Sport and Comfort modes.
■ Center of gravity is pretty much the same between the M3 and M4, but not identical since the two cars have different shock absorber settings. Both are a little lower than the 3/4 Series.
■ M3 naturally has an aerodynamically better shape than the M4 (if the M4 did not have its gurney integrated trunk) due to the M4's less steep and longer roof. The gurney flap integrated into the M4 trunk spoiler helps the M4 catch up aerodynamically.
■ New trunk lid removes 5kg (11 lbs) from the car instead of active rear spoilers which would have added weight to the car.
■ Manual transmission is a further developed gearbox from the 1M Coupe, with twin blade clutch, updated oil system and coating within the gearbox to take the higher load of the S55 engine. It's also lighter by more than 12kg (26.5 lbs) compared to manual gearbox in E90 M3.
■ Manual transmission gearbox saves 55 pounds in the US curb weight (compared to DCT).
■ Rear seats are 5kg (11 lbs) lighter than regular 3 or 4 Series.
■ Engine crankshaft is about 3kg (6.6 lbs) lighter than typical BMW inline 6 engine, but 20% stiffer.
■ Crankcase housing is 2.8kg (6.2 lbs) lighter. No steel liners. Unique aluminum alloy plasmacoated with steel plasma, which reduces friction levels. This technology was used on the M3 GTS with its upgraded 4.4L 450hp engine.
■ Car's components are engineered to withstand up to 1.4g braking force and more than 1.2g of lateral acceleration.
|
|
|
|
|
17-01-14, 03:58
|
#3203
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,394
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNLORD
Cateva detalii noi despre viitorul M3/M4:
■ F80 M3 / F82 M4 are more than 10 seconds faster around the Nurburgring than the E90/E92 M3.
|
Diferenta de 10 sec pe Nurburgring nu este deloc o performanta, pentru ca pe Nurburgring nu avea deloc un timp de laudat.
150. BMW M3 E9* - 8:05.00
Adica s-ar bate cu astea:
107. Subaru Impreza WRX STi 7:54.15 156 '07 308 / 1480 AndreaDg1989
108. Porsche Cayman S 7:55.00 156 '13 325 / 1320 Walter Rohrl
Pai sa ne uitam la asta:
95. BMW M3 CSL (E46) 7:50.00 158 '03 360 / 1385!!!
|
|
|
|
|
17-01-14, 04:00
|
#3204
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,394
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
2014 Audi RS7 vs 2014 Porsche Panamera Turbo! - Head 2 Head
RS7 - "a lot of understeer" - se pare ca nu au scapat de de urata problema!
|
|
|
|
|
17-01-14, 10:26
|
#3205
|
Stage 5
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 511
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
anormal ar fi sa nu apara understeer )
R8 si parca TT-S sau TT-RS sunt singurele exceptii
|
|
|
|
|
17-01-14, 15:06
|
#3206
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,547
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR
Diferenta de 10 sec pe Nurburgring nu este deloc o performanta, pentru ca pe Nurburgring nu avea deloc un timp de laudat.
150. BMW M3 E9* - 8:05.00
Adica s-ar bate cu astea:
107. Subaru Impreza WRX STi 7:54.15 156 '07 308 / 1480 AndreaDg1989
108. Porsche Cayman S 7:55.00 156 '13 325 / 1320 Walter Rohrl
Pai sa ne uitam la asta:
95. BMW M3 CSL (E46) 7:50.00 158 '03 360 / 1385!!!
|
As paria un timp intre 07:55 - 07:50, probabil mai aproape de timpul CSL-ului …
|
|
|
|
|
23-01-14, 12:02
|
#3207
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,547
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
|
|
|
|
|
23-01-14, 18:57
|
#3208
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,547
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
|
|
|
|
|
29-01-14, 16:20
|
#3209
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,547
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
|
|
|
|
|
02-02-14, 13:55
|
#3210
|
Stage 5
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,547
|
Re: AMG vs. M vs. RS
|
|
|
|
|
|
