[Max Well]

Ran the F95 X5MC in the Sim vs F97 X3MC with IND's dyno #s, Nate's 1/4 mile, and onfireX5's Drag data. Ignore the Sim's handling of the 0-60mph range.

As onfireX5 and others have suggested, unless BMW is undercutting the HP and torque numbers on the F95 (as it appears to have done with the F97), seems difficult to envision a situation in which a stock F95 will outperform a similarly loaded stock F97. Again, suspect those purchasing F95/96 are far more interested in the improved cabin appointments and ride quality than whether or not it can outperform the smaller F97/98. Will have to see how the real world numbers pan out.

[Max Well]

Updating with the time slips and intervals analysis from my runs at Gainesville Raceway on 23 Nov 2019, https://x3.xbimmers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1672345 .

As I had Dragy there I’m also including a comparison of it’s eighth and qtr mile data with the actual slips. On average it’s about 0.02 sec slower than actual in both distances, and 0.16 mph and 0.38 mph faster than actual in the eighth and qtr (although quite a bit of variance individually). Appears to be a useful tool for those who can’t make it to a strip to evaluate their performance.

Would be interested to read what others think about the Eff vs Sport mode data and if it can be reproduced on multiple F97/98s. If I knew at the Strip it was opposite to what we expect I would’ve run a few more Sport and Eff to try to confirm but unfortunately I didn’t have time to analyze while there.

[Edit 28 Nov 2019 - Note the tire psi for these runs - BMW's recs of 33 Front, 38 Rear (will try lowering next trip to see if traction can be improved at launch)]

[Max Well]

Updating this compilation thread by adding slips and interval times from my recent runs at Gainesville Raceway, as discussed at: https://x3.xbimmers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1672345

[RoyB]

I purchased a dragy and made 2 runs last night.

12.65@112.41
12.57@113.87

I appreciate the data you posted because it's in line with what my car is running.

@450 miles I did not want to use launch control yet, so I just launched off idle in S2. The good news is that the numbers appear to match what you ran with your stop light method. 60' was 2.2. I assume with LC that should drop to the 1.8 range.

I do not have a competition model, so I assume this car would be in the 11.9 range with a good launch.

For giggles, here is what my Golf did at the track with LC vs the X3M Dragy. When the weather warms up I will take the Golf out and see how it does on the street with Dragy in comparison.

60': 1.73______2.20
1/8: 7.67______8.26
mph: 90.15____90.70
1000':10.02___10.60
1/4: 12.031____12.57
mph: 113.13___113.87

[Young04]

Originally Posted by RoyB

I purchased a dragy and made 2 runs last night.

12.65@112.41
12.57@113.87

I appreciate the data you posted because it's in line with what my car is running.

@450 miles I did not want to use launch control yet, so I just launched off idle in S2. The good news is that the numbers appear to match what you ran with your stop light method. 60' was 2.2. I assume with LC that should drop to the 1.8 range.

I do not have a competition model, so I assume this car would be in the 11.9 range with a good launch.

For giggles, here is what my Golf did at the track with LC vs the X3M Dragy. When the weather warms up I will take the Golf out and see how it does on the street with Dragy in comparison.

60': 1.73______2.20
1/8: 7.67______8.26
mph: 90.15____90.70
1000':10.02___10.60
1/4: 12.031____12.57
mph: 113.13___113.87

Good stuff. Did you record a 0-60mph time?

[RoyB]

Originally Posted by Young04

Good stuff. Did you record a 0-60mph time?

A leisurely 4.62 I am getting anxious to launch this thing. Only 700 more miles to go, maybe 2 weeks.

[Young04]

Originally Posted by RoyB

A leisurely 4.62 I am getting anxious to launch this thing. Only 700 more miles to go, maybe 2 weeks.

Did you brake torque at all or just simply stomp on it? If the latter, that's actually pretty impressive.

[AlexFL]

Originally Posted by Young04

Did you brake torque at all or just simply stomp on it? If the latter, that's actually pretty impressive.

Brake boost gives you 3.9 (my best so far) 0-60. Simple stomp 4.4. My best LC so far was 3.7, but I haven't tried too many. Others reported LC of 3.5 and even lower.

[RoyB]

Originally Posted by Young04

Did you brake torque at all or just simply stomp on it? If the latter, that's actually pretty impressive.

Just mashed the gas. Much like the OP did in his comparisons above. The numbers are nearly identical to his which is promising. I apologize for the lack of launch control data at the moment. I am a bit leery of beating on the car too much until RIS is done

In the mean time, it's snowing out now. This will give me a chance to run the Dragy on my Cummins and V8 4runner now.

[Max Well]

Originally Posted by RoyB

Just mashed the gas. Much like the OP did in his comparisons above. The numbers are nearly identical to his which is promising. I apologize for the lack of launch control data at the moment. I am a bit leery of beating on the car too much until RIS is done

In the mean time, it's snowing out now. This will give me a chance to run the Dragy on my Cummins and V8 4runner now.

Thanks for posting, RoyB. Great to see Drivers enjoying the X3MC's abilities and sharing their results! And appreciate you referencing my runs, as I've tried to provide the necessary information surrounding each trial to allow reasonable comparisons. It'll be helpful to also share Dragy's temperature and estimated altitude, slope, and DA numbers when posting data if you can, as these all have a profound influence on a vehicle's performance. That way others can get a sense as to why their numbers may be better or worse than what others have shared.

Thanks again for sharing.

[GT500R]

Originally Posted by RoyB

@450 miles I did not want to use launch control yet, so I just launched off idle in S2. The good news is that the numbers appear to match what you ran with your stop light method. 60' was 2.2. I assume with LC that should drop to the 1.8 range.

Why S2?

And 1.8 will net you a 11.8 or so in the 1/4 based on your time provided.

[RoyB]

I did 2 more runs today. If you don't want me cluttering your post, please let me know. I figured it would be easier than 30 people making their own post.

X3M *non comp
Just filled up full tank 93 octane

Actual DA was -56'
Ran in Sport+, sport suspension, D3, DSC off 4WD

850 miles on the car
No LC, just brake boosted a bit. I still don't know how to LC. From what I have read you need to be in S3, push the gas down to the floor while on the brake and it enables LC and will shift automatically even though it's in S3? Jeeze, talk about complicated.



It appears on my 12.0 run that I let off the gas Surely would had been a 11.9 if I stayed in it.



If I ever figure out LC it may be closer to 11.7-11.8s.

[trey100]

Big difference between just hitting the gas and LC. But interesting that the above post shows 12.0 with just a little brake boost and the others further up have leisurely 60' times and almost 1 second slower in the 1/4 mile. Oddly inconsistent.

[RoyB]

My golf is the same way. If I don't use launch control (which builds boost) it will run 12.7s all day at the track. With LC its running 12.0-12.1s.

[Max Well]

Originally Posted by RoyB

I did 2 more runs today. If you don't want me cluttering your post, please let me know. I figured it would be easier than 30 people making their own post. X3M *non comp. Just filled up full tank 93 octane. Actual DA was -56'. Ran in Sport+, sport suspension, D3, DSC off 4WD. 850 miles on the car. No LC, just brake boosted a bit. I still don't know how to LC. From what I have read you need to be in S3, push the gas down to the floor while on the brake and it enables LC and will shift automatically even though it's in S3? Jeeze, talk about complicated. ... If I ever figure out LC it may be closer to 11.7-11.8s.

Thanks for sharing, RoyB. Your data entry isn't cluttering this thread - its exactly the reason I started it - to provide a single reference where all times can be viewed without having to search through pages of older single threads. It makes sense for some to start their own thread to share more details (as I did with my Gainesville Raceway runs), but I've tried to go back and capture the data from those who haven't also posted here and then link to their original threads.

Regarding the LC, it's straightforward if you follow onfireX5's suggestions to simply make it your M2 setting: https://x3.xbimmers.com/forums/showp...9&postcount=14 .

Originally Posted by trey100

Big difference between just hitting the gas and LC. But interesting that the above post shows 12.0 with just a little brake boost and the others further up have leisurely 60' times and almost 1 second slower in the 1/4 mile. Oddly inconsistent.

Multiple causes for the ‘inconsistency’ if I’m understanding your point correctly, trey100. Simple ‘stoplight’ digs with right foot on the brake, then mash on accelerator limits issues mainly to DA, track, octane, weight, tires – but not on the process. That should easily be reproducible globally. Example – look at my data in post 68 from Nov 25th - Sp+ stoplight – with DA 978 – ET 12.655s, 115.92mph, and 0-60 foot interval 2.335s. Then my run in post 69 with the same settings 8 Feb 2020 – DA now -361, yet ET 12.615s, 116.09mph and 0-60 foot interval 2.333s. Almost identical.

The problem comes when comparing ‘brake boost’ (and I’d suggest even LC) across runs, even by the same Driver on the same day. Brake boost is just a modification of LC, right? Building boost so that ‘lag’ (I’m using that term loosely here) isn’t there at the dig. But how long does one hold that? And to what RPM was it held at? And for LC, how long was it held for? And what tire pressures and surface type are the tires using to lay the power down? All of those variables become crucial for the end results. And add to that the slope errors in Dragy (if that is what is being used as the comparison as RoyB shared), and you realize quickly this is far from an exact science. Oddly inconsistent, perhaps. Understandable as to why, yes.

Still makes for interesting discussion, nonetheless.

[trey100]

Originally Posted by Max Well

Thanks for sharing, RoyB. Your data entry isn't cluttering this thread - its exactly the reason I started it - to provide a single reference where all times can be viewed without having to search through pages of older single threads. It makes sense for some to start their own thread to share more details (as I did with my Gainesville Raceway runs), but I've tried to go back and capture the data from those who haven't also posted here and then link to their original threads.

Regarding the LC, it's straightforward if you follow onfireX5's suggestions to simply make it your M2 setting: https://x3.xbimmers.com/forums/showp...8;postcount=14 .

Multiple causes for the ‘inconsistency’ if I’m understanding your point correctly, trey100. Simple ‘stoplight’ digs with right foot on the brake, then mash on accelerator limits issues mainly to DA, track, octane, weight, tires – but not on the process. That should easily be reproducible globally. Example – look at my data in post 68 from Nov 25th - Sp+ stoplight – with DA 978 – ET 12.655s, 115.92mph, and 0-60 foot interval 2.335s. Then my run in post 69 with the same settings 8 Feb 2020 – DA now -361, yet ET 12.615s, 116.09mph and 0-60 foot interval 2.333s. Almost identical.

The problem comes when comparing ‘brake boost’ (and I’d suggest even LC) across runs, even by the same Driver on the same day. Brake boost is just a modification of LC, right? Building boost so that ‘lag’ (I’m using that term loosely here) isn’t there at the dig. But how long does one hold that? And to what RPM was it held at? And for LC, how long was it held for? And what tire pressures and surface type are the tires using to lay the power down? All of those variables become crucial for the end results. And add to that the slope errors in Dragy (if that is what is being used as the comparison as RoyB shared), and you realize quickly this is far from an exact science. Oddly inconsistent, perhaps. Understandable as to why, yes.

Still makes for interesting discussion, nonetheless.

Appreciate all the data by the way. All good stuff.

I think my main point was that even with just brake boost or stomping on the gas, a 2.4ish 60' time isn't great for a high powered AWD vehicle. For reference, in the very poor launches of my F80 M3 6MT, I was hitting 2.2-2.3 60' times, and that is mostly rolling out at part throttle. I assume that the X3M 60' times without launch control are just highlighting the turbo lag down low in the rpm band with the S58 (by the way as a side note there is a video on YouTube comparisons "in gear" acceleration at low rpm of a X3 M40 and an X3M that supports this).

In any case, the real difference that stuck out for me was the post above from RoyB. He ran a 12 flat and a 1.85 second 60' time by just brake boosting which is a big difference from your non-LC runs. I did notice that RoyB had traction control off. I assume you too? Or could that be the difference?

[RoyB]

OK I figured out LC.

First couple runs were in 4wd sport. It spins hard in that mode and leaves lines. Something I was not expecting in an awd car Temp was approx 54 degrees. The 60' wasn't that great, but the 1/8 mile picked up .10 vs the above runs, with it being a higher DA. The difference appears that with LC it shifts way harder and seems to hold the RPM longer in each gear. That would explain the mediocre 60' but much better 1/8 mile run.



I then tried standard 4wd and it seems to go much better since it's not spinning as much. Unfortunately I couldn't get a full 1/8 run. Cops were out hard yesterday since it was the first day above 40 in 4 months. 60' was a lot better, and the 330' was as well. Oh, and it was a 2.39% slope uphill



Looking Max Well sheet above, this could had easily been an 11.7x run. Which has me wondering, are the non comp models really that much slower than the competition model? Off the cuff they appear to run very similar.

I am really looking forward to when the track opens so I can get some clean runs. Living in the suburbs it's hard to find 1/2 mile straight road which is safe for running a full pass.

[AlexFL]

Originally Posted by RoyB

OK I figured out LC.

First couple runs were in 4wd sport. It spins hard in that mode and leaves lines. Something I was not expecting in an awd car Temp was approx 54 degrees. The 60' wasn't that great, but the 1/8 mile picked up .10 vs the above runs, with it being a higher DA. The difference appears that with LC it shifts way harder and seems to hold the RPM longer in each gear. That would explain the mediocre 60' but much better 1/8 mile run.

I then tried standard 4wd and it seems to go much better since it's not spinning as much. Unfortunately I couldn't get a full 1/8 run. Cops were out hard yesterday since it was the first day above 40 in 4 months. 60' was a lot better, and the 330' was as well. Oh, and it was a 2.39% slope uphill

Looking Max Well sheet above, this could had easily been an 11.7x run. Which has me wondering, are the non comp models really that much slower than the competition model? Off the cuff they appear to run very similar.

I am really looking forward to when the track opens so I can get some clean runs. Living in the suburbs it's hard to find 1/2 mile straight road which is safe for running a full pass.

RoyB, how long and at which rpms did you brake boost?

[RoyB]

Couple seconds. I ran it to the kickdown switch. It didn't try to overpower the brakes like when I brake boosted so I am not sure if it's actually building boost or just launching at higher RPMs. Is there a boost gauge on this car somewhere? Complicated car to launch!

[AlexFL]

Originally Posted by RoyB

Couple seconds. I ran it to the kickdown switch. It didn't try to overpower the brakes like when I brake boosted so I am not sure if it's actually building boost or just launching at higher RPMs. Is there a boost gauge on this car somewhere? Complicated car to launch!

I agree it's a bit tricky. I suspect that putting wider tires and potentially upgrading the brakes (so that they hold the boost) should do wonders for this car's times.

[new2the3]

Is launch control available in 4wd or only 4wd sport?

[Max Well]

Originally Posted by trey100

Appreciate all the data by the way. All good stuff. I think my main point was that even with just brake boost or stomping on the gas, a 2.4ish 60' time isn't great for a high powered AWD vehicle. For reference, in the very poor launches of my F80 M3 6MT, I was hitting 2.2-2.3 60' times, and that is mostly rolling out at part throttle. I assume that the X3M 60' times without launch control are just highlighting the turbo lag down low in the rpm band with the S58 … In any case, the real difference that stuck out for me was the post above from RoyB. He ran a 12 flat and a 1.85 second 60' time by just brake boosting which is a big difference from your non-LC runs. I did notice that RoyB had traction control off. I assume you too? Or could that be the difference?

Thanks, trey100. I think you’re spot on with the roughly 0.6s difference being due to the well-described 'lag', turbo delay, or whatever term best describes that issue. It's possible that traction control may have been playing some subtle role I guess, since I was using just regular Stoplight starts in Comfort/Sport/Sport+ with normal default traction, but my gut feeling is more in the ‘lag’, especially since I had lowered the tire pressures for my Feb runs which shouldn’t have been as much of an issue for traction control (and the times were similar on both days).

Originally Posted by RoyB

OK I figured out LC. ... I then tried standard 4wd and it seems to go much better since it's not spinning as much. ... Looking Max Well sheet above, this could had easily been an 11.7x run. Which has me wondering, are the non comp models really that much slower than the competition model? Off the cuff they appear to run very similar. I am really looking forward to when the track opens so I can get some clean runs. Living in the suburbs it's hard to find 1/2 mile straight road which is safe for running a full pass.

Not sure what your tire psi settings were, RoyB, but back in Nov my tires were spinning like a belt sander at 33 Front/38 Rear as BMW suggests. This time out I lowered to 32/35 and it made a huge difference – didn’t feel like they spun at all. Next time I’m planning on 32/32 just to see if that grabs even better for a lower 0-60 foot interval.

Looking at the Tech documents, it isn’t that surprising that they are pretty close as the only difference is 30HP (torque is the same). This translates to a Wt/HP for the X3M of 9.05 and 8.52 lbs./HP for the X3MC. And if you consider most non-Comps come with 20” wheels/tires, I suspect the unsprung weight is less (haven’t seen those weighed but would be helpful to know), so that might actually offset the slight HP advantage the X3MC has? Here are the numbers again -

X3M – 1970 (4343 lbs.)/2045 (4508) DIN/EU; CdxA = 0.36x2.69; 353kW or 480HP, torque 600Nm; Wt/Power ratio kg/kW 5.58, or 9.05 lbs./HP
X3MC – same as above except: 375kW or 510HP, Wt/Power ratio kg/kW 5.25, or 8.52 lbs./HP

And BMW claims a difference of only 0.1s (4.2s vs 4.1s) in the 0-62 km/h.

Originally Posted by new2the3

Is launch control available in 4wd or only 4wd sport?

Per the 'Complete Vehicle document' found in the 'Sticky' thread, p.24, the conditions for LC are: must be stationary and engine warm, M Dynamic Stability Control deactivated (4WD), and Manual mode with S3 selected. On p.25, indicates LC “automatically shifts up using the shortest possible gearshift times and performance-optimized shift points as long as the driver keeps the accelerator pedal full depressed.”