What do you think about the M3 GTS?
 

do you think that the M3 GTS is a good choice?
http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/59...e082013008.jpg

Its nice but not as good as the CSL

Given the cost and power, it should really be faster - only 2 seconds a lap better around the Ring than the CSL says it all really (and explains why the CSL was the only M-car not present at the launch of the GTS - even BMW didn't want the comparison ;) ).

10 laps of any track as they left the factory and GTS would be gone. It is a much better engineered car out the box, gearbox cooler, proper suspension, proper brakes. If anything the fact that it is only 2 seconds quicker give credence to the rumours that the 7:50 csl wasn't standard ;)

Would love to see GTS on track. What other credence has that new rumour got?

Really wanted to love a GTS but seems a disappoint to me after watching some reviews. Only vbh seemed to rave about it.

I'd have one a heartbeat..

Was fence sitting when they came out, but I've fallen for them.

Though would have a CRT over this. Coolest car BMW made of late.

Absolutely brilliant car and very brave for bmw to have gone with such an extreme in your face car. Even the max power rear spoiler is growing on me. I love the colour :smt055

Not a new rumour, as old as the lap time itself. Legend has it that it was on ohlins...

The non standard CSL, aka CSL loaded did 7:22 not 7:50 ;)

I am talking about the sport auto 7:50 lap.

Yep! M3 CRT all day :notworthy:

If that is the case, it seems strange that BMW didn't want the comparison with the CSL - if the lap time setter was better than normal CSLs, they would have no reason to preclude a normal CSL from attending the GTS launch :).

I think that would be very unlikely to have been the case (other than the factory upgrade pads), as the egg on face if it was found out would be highly embarrassing and something BMW would not be able to risk.

I'm no Ring expert, but I could easily do a sub 8 minute lap BTG in my own car (with no traffic), so Horst Von Saumer's time of 7.50 is not unbelievable. I'm sure it has been said that someone off here has done a 7.50 BTG, which is around 8.10 to 8.15 for a full lap - not too far off the original time to doubt it IMO.

Their is a nice review of the gts if you Google Chris Harris on cars.

Not heard of anyone doing a 7:25 BTG in a completely standard car even with the proper flying start, 25 seconds over a lap is a lifetime, even on a long track. Most of the guys doing 7:40ish BTG laps have dampers, brakes, weight removed, wider front wheels etc.

Anyway, my point stands, over multiple laps a standard GTS would leave a standard CSL for dead IMO, modified further still.

E92 has much more potential than e46, just expensive to unlock it.

http://www.frozenspeed.com/gallery_e...c/rm1_m311.jpg

Standard engine, 7:22 full lap...

Seeing and hearing one coming down sideways through Brünnchen was fairly impressive I have to say

But I'd prefer an Alpina B3 GT3 myself I think

The Schirmer M3 always sounds and looks good at the Nordschleife. I am not sure how different it is from the GTS but I would have that over the bright orange behemoth.

I think the picture above is a Schirmer M3 and not the GTS.

Pip

It is, imagine that with a 4.4 engine :)

Schirmer M3
Alpina B3 GT3
M3 GTS

All highly focused cars and all aimed at a slightly different audience. In years to come, which one will be most highly regarded?

The CSL is a very tough act to follow, and will be even more highly regarded in the future, regardless of whether the newer cars are faster i.e. M4

GTS will come to be seen in same or better light than csl, remember the reviews when the csl came out saying not worth the money, couple of years later they all changed their minds...

Are you surprised they only managed 30 more bhp over the 4.0 E92 M3?

Nah, it was only done for homologation for the z4, no need to push it, we know what the potential of the 4.4 engine is from the race program.

It just happens that the engine is completely different apart from being a V8 and 4.4lt.

thank you vrey much for yours answers...

The Schirmer cars are quite extensively modified:
Firstly they do run a full Akraprovic exhaust system, which is supposed to release a good 20bhp, then they are gutted (just two race seats) and caged, with the weight reduced to an astonishing 1450kg. They then reduce the final drive with a Drenth rear diff and fit gearbox, engine and diff coolers (my mate was convinced it was supercharged, mistaking these for an intercooler LOL). The suspension is changed to Schirmer specced Nitrons and the wheels go down to lighter BBS 18s with APs all round and combined with the additional aero, the owner of the car pictured does comfortable 7:05s BTG :notworthy: .

That's kinda my point, lots of caged, 2 seat, suspension, brakes, exhaust modified CSLs and no one is anywhere near a 7:05 btg. E92 chassis really is excellent, just blunted by the weight of the car as standard.

Pretty sure it'll be a Drexler rear diff, makes a big difference, hence BMW motorsport using them for non transaxle applications.

http://drexler-motorsport.eu/page/de...motorsport.php

Hi Nathan,

I think Steve Gill's racing car had done 7:30ish full lap.
From memory stripped, caged, brakes, short ratio diff.

I think we need to compare apples to apples.
Which in my opinion is to have a very tuned CSL (as the Schirmer E92s) and using the same and capable driver drive both in the same conditions.

I have also seen this in the M3 E30 community.
They want to compare DTM specced M3 E30s with a CSL in stock configuration. At the same time they claim that the M3 E30 is "road legal".
That's plain silly.

I don't know the specs of the Schirmer E92s. I would love to find out, so if someone knows all details please share (for example changed wishbones, suspension details).

You're correct - I always get Drenth and Drexler mixed up :119:

They definitely do do something (as they refer to revised suspension kinematics), but it is almost impossible to find any definitive information on this, as Schirmer don't seem to even have a website - perhaps Sam can shed some light on this?

Steve's car was a full racing car built from bare shell with a dg400 box and slicks, aftermarket management etc, not a road legal car.

Shirmer offers a revised motorsport axle system for the e92, is was around 20k euro I think, dunno if those cars have it but you'd assume so.

I had a look at the race cars times @ the Ring.

2005 24h race - E46 M3 GTR (this had the same setup with our cars and not the special rear axle found in the Spa configuration GTR). Best laptime in the race 08.47,602 and best in qualifying 08.45,323

2010 24h race - E92 M3 GT2 (with a transaxle gearbox, so not the same thing with the road car setup). Best laptime in tthe race 08.32,644 and best in qualifying 8:32 as well.

So the two race versions, although the GT2 has a different setup on the rear axle are not very far away.
Just makes me think again what the difference between the two cars would be in similar spec.

15 seconds per lap not far away?

Over a 24 hour race how many times would the e46 be lapped? :bigcry:

Don't answer, it is rhetorical :blalalala:

Oh yeah, and just to confirm, was the e46 running a straight six?

Nathan I said to compare apples with apples.
The race cars are from different years, differentt tyres etc.
Also the E92 has a massive advantage due to the transaxle gearbox.
Therefore I don't consider the 15sec laptime difference showing the superiority of the e92 chassis.

You mentioned the superiority of the E92 chassis and right after you said the Schirmer E92s might have 20k axle upgrades.
So it looks like an E92 with maybe 100k euros in upgrades is faster than a CSL with 20k euros in upgrades.
What a success.

Seriously, I would be very interested to know what the Schirmer cars have.

Ask Sam, he was socialising with the other Schirmer drivers, so he should know or be able to find out. I managed to collar the driver of the white car (pictured in my DN9 photos) and asked all the questions apart from exactly what was done to the suspension regarding the "revised kinematics".

As gorilla pointed out, at the speeds you need to drive at, 25 seconds is a massive amount....



apparently the 4.4 only needs a few restrictions removing to allow an easy extra 50bhp - as said by the bmw engineers at Maisach on the trip


The Schirmer cars have whatever the owner is willing to pay for, I've been in 3, all were mightily impressive - definitely the 3 fastest laps I've had,and in different states of upgrade depending on the depths of your pocket.

I think the point is that with the csl, BMW did a really good job developing the e46, and it is already a classic and rightly so a 360bhp 20thC design chassis is only going to go so far, The GTS on the other hand looks like a parts bin car, and isn't the deserved pinnacle of the E90 M3,that it should be Tom's cars are IMO what bmw should have done with the V8m3, but the newer chassis and engine - who can argue that an older car is better then the newer more developed version of it?

The e92 has an advantage from the transaxle but no mention of a complete engine swap for the e46 :D

Jim is correct, it is called progress, do you really think the BMW engineers would be happy making a chassis worse than the previous generation.

In stock form the older car is significantly superior.
In tuned format, I think the faster car (apart from cases that the chassis design is completely different // for example E30 vs. E46) will be the one that had the most money invested.
So back to my point, I don't think there is a CSL that is so tuned to compare it against the E92 M3s of Schirmer.
Nathan said there is no CSL doing 7:05 BTG and I believe there is no CSL so tuned like the E92 M3 that does 7:05 BTG.
Most probably it won't be as fast, but it might be 7:07 BTG (remember the 2 sec lap difference of the M3 GTS?).

So until there is a CSL so tuned, I wouldn't be throwing such statements.

PS: the CSL loaded is doing full lap @ 7:22 in damp conditions. What BTG is this ?

One of those M3s did a 7:22 full lap with a standard engine So what, 200+ bhp less, and no doubt more weight. But hey, the chassis is worse.

Hi,

All I can say is that I am not sure the
BMW E90/92/93 Chassis is really progress.

I think its better than the E46 single wishbone
front and Trailing arm rear, but I believe that
BMW had a problem with the E90 and that was
making it handle, due to its weight.

E34 ran a double wishbone front [wishbone and tension link]
all fitted to a Mac Strut, and Merc have run various
versions of the 5 link rear since 1983.

Go drive a E34 M5 and even the std car will turn in very
sharpley and its almost 2 ton.
E34 M5 runs 520i dampers with a proressive spring
so it not trick is it.

Not exactly progress to be running suspension that
has been around since the 80/90's.

A 5 Link rear will give almost double A arm dynamics
but not at the expense of ride quality.
Double wishbone front will give much better scrub
etc and not suffer the same amount of camber and toe
gains [does not pivot in the centre, the two
links are offset] than the E46 Single wishbone does, and then there
is virtually no flex with the double link front,
which is an inherent problem to any single alloy wishbone.

5 Link rear also allows for 'true' ramp angles
on the rear which when running a Plated Diff
translates into correct friction when loaded and
no drag on the overrun.

If your LSD is working hard in the corners then
the fact is your more than likely going slower.

Go look at the rear of most E46's that have been
lowered and the rear halfshafts will be inverted,
which is exactly the opposite you want when running
a Plated LSD.

Its why the ALMS E46 ran no rear subframe, ScHnitzer
had already raised the diff to beyound the restrictions
of the E46 rear subframe / diff carrier, trying to correct
the ramp angles to amke the diff work correctly.

The 20k package or whatever it is on the rear of Shrim cars
is a pure case of Sales B/S.

Plated diff aside, all you can do to a 5 link rear is fit
alloy arms and rod ends, if not already fitted,
so no wonder they smile everytime they sell one.

Most 5 link rear end suffer from 0.5 degree camber gain
and no more than 30 secs on toe, how the
fuck do you spend the thick end of 20k on improving
that ? simple by lining up Hans Stuck wanabes'
and taking them for a spin in the ''magic car''.

The other amusing thing is that we now have a
E46 GTR at approx 1250 kgs with around 480 BHP
almost being beaten on time over distance by a
stripped out Road car that is nearly 100kgs heavier with less
power.

Funny how with all the things that change in motorsport
that there are still 60 secs to a minute, well in most cases.

Regards,

The Gorilla.

Based on the following video of this 'close to stock' M3 GTS // with brakes, Nitron suspension, akrapovic exhaust and michelin cup tyres; it is so close to the E46 M3 GTR.

8:47 the E46 M3 GTR with slick tyres
9:13 the Schirmer close-to-stock M3 GTS

So the black car (with stock engine) in the picture is even faster (7:22 full lap instead of the 7:28 of this stock GTS).
I reckon they could claim that the Schirmer road-car E92 M3 with-stock-engine could be faster than the E92 M3 GT2, if ran on slicks.

Now is it just me that fails to understand how this could be realistic ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxlRTsnughI

PS: has anyone seen the laptimes of non-factory racing VLN cars ?

You can change mounting points, you can change arm lengths, I'd assume both of these are done if they have claimed to alter the kinematics which is effectively them saying they've altered the paths through which the wheel moves.