August 23, 2006

BMW M Coupe vs Porsche 997s @ Pocono

I've put side by side CG' best lap and mine. He had a smoking 1:44.3 vs my 1:45.9 but what's interesting his how the time is made up.
Obviously neither car is stock and both are on R-compund tires, Pirelli Corsa for the MCoupe and Toyo RA-1 for the Porker.
If you look at the cornering speeds they are essentially the same. What's striking is how much more stable the 997 is suggesting even higher corner speeds might be achieved. The M Coupe is like a bucking bronco, bitching and yelling as it gets the job done...somehow.
Now to the obvious, the 997s just LEAPS out of the tight turns. In the tight right before the back straight it must pull a 3 car length advantage before the MC is even out of second gear....stunning, what a car!




right/opt.-click here to download

11 comments:

  1. Nice, but you have the wrong LSD ratio in the MCoupe.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, I have the one that BMW in all its wisdom decided to saddle the s54MC with....

    ReplyDelete
  3. You also need to play along with shocks and setup. Smooth means faster and unstable is not good. It's all about nailing that smooth drift and gentle transitions. most of the time less work in the cockpit is the faster way around

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well, BMW wanted you to have both efficiency and performance. You just want performance, so you have the wrong ratio! Stop acting like a Roadfly user and blaming BMW (oops!). Change your diff! :-)

    ReplyDelete
  5. OK, I think you just put yourself in line right behind Jacques Villeneuve for an Assie with that remark. Put the kool-aid down and let's ask the marketing guys why they made sure the MCoupe was slower than the M3....;O)

    ReplyDelete
  6. I saw you using the "Kool Aid" excuse on Roadfly (oops) too... it doesn't help anything to focus on a decision made 6 years ago, because you still have the wrong LSD ratio for best performance! I bet the 997-S is geared much better! Out of curiosity, how do the power-weight ratios of these two cars compare?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Tell you what, come over for BBQ next week end and bring that 3.38 rear end you have gathering dust in your garage and let's see if I can bitchslap the 997 with it installed! How's that for marketing?

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think the performance envelope of the MCoupe at that track is a bit tighter... and for sure the car was smoother without the rear swaybar. It would have been interesting to drive the North course and compare the times. I'm guessing the "twitchy" setup is a bit faster if you get it just right.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Do you have any times to determine whether the car was faster or slower without the rear swaybar?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I don't really know if the previous times were set with NO swaybar (fully broken) or just a soft sway due to the tab flexing....I guess I'll never know for sure. certainly the last TT on Pocono north was with NO sway attached. That was slower by almost a second from my previous best, but it was different tires too, so it is not a fair test.
    If I go to LRP maybe something might be learned, though I wonder if the reason why the car was so good over the downhill turn bumps was in fact that it had a soft roll rear...

    ReplyDelete
  11. LRP has gotten so bumpy I would be tempted to disconnect the rear swaybar altogether, a-la TC Kline.

    ReplyDelete

nRelate Posts Only