Manhart Racing BMW M6 vs: 911 Turbo PDK, MTM RS6, 430 Scuderia, 458 Italia 23. May

[m-ch]

Originally Posted by simon_MHR

- Absolutely no problem with being critical, its your right. But what you do is bashing in my personal opinion. Why? Cause you alway mention the problem we had with the M3 ONCE and the sepration of Günther which has nothing to do with any of the threads you are posting in. By now i feel personally offended to be honest as i am the one tuning, dynoing, testing, and datalogging the cars here. So nobody knows better then me what kind of power can be expected.

- the reason why there are no advertisements on the m-forum is because we are not a sponsor and have no advertising rights there, as simple as that! On a side note, we havent started the thread here as also here we have no advertising rights so i am just commenting here without any kind of advertising.


- What does it matter if WE seperated from Günther? It seems like you think that you know sooo much.. but in fact you dont know anything except things that some people may write on the forums.

- of course you woulndnt pass by as you are afraid to be prooven wrong and then you wouldnt have any ammunition to bash every single thread anymore.

- get your facts straight please. The link to the gearbox you have sent is the one for the e 9x M3 DCT which is rated 700NM. Yes basically the gearbox is the same, except some very essential things! A stock M5/M6 has 680NM and they do more on the dyno whereas the press cars are rated 720NM and do around 750NM, sometimes even more on the dyno. That doesnt make sense, does it? You think that BMW would use a Gearbox that in stock condition of the car is already at and even over its limit?

- What do you have to say about the Race against the RS6 MTM? Soon there will also be a race published regarding a 458 and a 430 scuderia, as well as an M5 F10 vs a C63 Black Series. I am keen to hear your comments to that.


- the Manhart M5 has covered over 30.000 Kilometers by now and the M6 was just finished before the event. So 1500 kilometers to sweden, around 25 races almost back to back on that day and another 1500 kilometers back.

BTW, i have no clue why that Porsche Turbo PDK was so fast as it was faster then other even lighter cars with more hp...

Dario, i am not here to argue or anything i just would like you to start respecting our work and if things are black on white then accepting it.

Btw, you have PM.

pm answered

if this porsche pdk wasnt stock, then i take it all back (and maybe it wasnt i have just the info of the vid from the titel). I am refering to this special race, and if there is 200hp difference the gap must be bigger, 200hp more is huge, and pulls massiv over the 500hp car, special on those high speed runs, when we have to overcome this kind of drag..

rest per pm

[m-ch]

Originally Posted by Zlaatan

why are we discussing acceleration from 150km/h when the cars in the videos start their runs at 50km/h? (A speed where I hope even m-ch would say weight has a big effect on acceleration)
Considering that the Porsche gets the jump and pulls ahead during the first part of the race, the M6 must pack a pretty serious punch to be able to real it in and eventually pass it. Especially when you see how badly the stock M6 got beaten by the TT.


It's not really fair to compare a stock M6 and a tuned M6 based on two different videos racing two different cars, but we can conclude that the Manhart M6 clearly is faster than a stock one.

Hi Zlaatan, to discuss the performance at higher speed, helps to avoid different level off traction and shows mutch more the real power of the car.
i never denied the power of the m6, but i said in my eyes and trugh my experience with high power cars a 700hp m6 version should let the 911 pkd (stock) more in the dust then he did, because 200hp more is massiv..
those 50-150kmh takes in Gustavs vids about 5 secs (depending on cars,) the longer part ist above those speeds maybee up to 270kmh, but for various reason it is more intresting for me to see the performance on hihgspeed.
(admitting if you do not have unrestrictet highways or Airfield it is completly non sense)

off course the tuned m5/6 is clearly faster than the stock no single question, and agree it is not faire to compaire 2 cars over multiple vids..

[Boss330]

Updated first post with this video of MHR M6 vs Ferrari 430 Scuderia

Compare it with this race between the 430 Scuderia and the M3 ESS VT-625 decat (see the second race - the Ferrari started in 3rd gear in the first race instead of in 2nd):

The ESS M3 has 625hp and weighs 250-300kg less than the MHR M6. In my book that means the MHR M6 has to have some decent power to leave the 430 behind...

[Hunter5179]

Awesome vids. The manhart M6 is killing them. Definitely a huge difference for the Ferrari starting in second vs 3rd. Thanks for Posting.

[Boss330]

Updated with Ferrari 458 Italia

The Manhart M6 is really impressive!

Ferrari 458 Italia

458 = 570HP on 1430 KG which means 2,5KG per HP

M6 = 700HP on 1925KG which means 2.75KG per HP

[m-ch]

Originally Posted by m-ch

Stock M6 f12 vs Mtm rs6 702 hp is a draw
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TGZfC3KlM4c

So the so called manhard 700 hp should fly away...

post 12 of mine (first one where i speak about the mtm rs6), above, says all. No change in minde after, "so called manhard 700 hp should fly away", 1 day later on the vid, he (m6 manhard) past him as he should Turn it as you wish, it is black on white..

Originally Posted by Boss330

Post # 17 is where you say that we should hope that the MHR M6 flies away from the RS6 (clearly indicating that you feel it should be able to beat it).

Post # 18 is Franz Simon's reply to you that you will be surprised when you see the video between the RS6 and the MHR M6

Post # 19 is where you suddenly changes your mind and states that the RS6 is not any competition after all...

So, in post # 19 you have knowledge of what Simon has said about the race between the MHR M6 and the MTM RS6. A bit strange that the RS6 then all of a sudden isn't any competition anymore... Why didn't you say that before?

sorry folks for beeing off topic

[m-ch]

Originally Posted by Boss330

Acceleration from 80km/h:

80% engine power (F) is used to accelerate the mass
20% engine power is used to overcome aerodynamic drag (Fnegative)

Acceleration from 160km/h:

40% engine power (F) is used to accelerate the mass
60% engine power is used to overcome aerodynamic drag (Fnegative)

Acceleration from 250km/h:

20% engine power (F) is used to accelerate the mass
80% engine power is used to overcome aerodynamic drag (Fnegative)

i see we getting slowly there

just that above 200kmh, 90-95% of the engine power is used to overcome drag (not mention internal engine friction etc) and somewhere 5-10% is mass (maybe some one can calculate it to get the exact figure of power needed for overcome drag on acceleration between 200-300kmh.

It shows more and more power is used vs drag, less and less power remains for mass, therefor our main factor in hihgspeed is drag

assuming the acceleration 200-300kmh takes about 17-20 secs for the 700hp coupe, it is ovious that this time is mainly build by the drag resistance, and not by weight or aditional weight

Put your v-box in your car and try it out yourself, you couldnt notice the time diff without box for your additional load in your car

it would be wrong to compare just the cw figure of the 911 turbo vs the m6, as i think in this figure the drag of downforce isnt included (induced drag), and the turbo wing surly doesnt help on drag reduction..

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by m-ch

i see we getting slowly there

just that above 200kmh, 90-95% of the engine power is used to overcome drag (not mention internal engine friction etc) and somewhere 5-10% is mass (maybe some one can calculate it to get the exact figure of power needed for overcome drag on acceleration between 200-300kmh.

It shows more and more power is used vs drag, less and less power remains for mass, therefor our main factor in hihgspeed is drag

assuming the acceleration 200-300kmh takes about 17-20 secs for the 700hp coupe, it is ovious that this time is mainly build by the drag resistance, and not by weight or aditional weight

Put your v-box in your car and try it out yourself, you couldnt notice the time diff without box for your additional load in your car

it would be wrong to compare just the cw figure of the 911 turbo vs the m6, as i think in this figure the drag of downforce isnt included (induced drag), and the turbo wing surly doesnt help on drag reduction..

You really haven't read any of my previous posts have you (or understood them). I have several times explained that aerodynamic drag is a major factor and that aero drag represents a negative Force (F) that the engine has to overcome and that this is the reason acceleration get's smaler and smaller as speed increases. There is nothing new in that. I have said that all along.

But, Newtons laws still apply even at high speeds. It doesn't matter if you are allready accelerating when you reach that "magical" 150km/h...

The example above shows that since aero drag "eats up" more and more of the engines available power, there is less and less left to overcome the cars weight.

If you have 100hp left to overcome the weight of the car. A difference of 300kg makes a BIG impact. Just try to accelerate with a 100hp car that weighs 1000kg and then load an extra 300kg in the car and you will see that the added weight makes a difference.

And, why is it that weight to power ratio actually has relevance in all of the races the MHR M6 has raced against here?

Unless you possibly can explain how Newtons laws doesn't apply at speed...???

[m-ch]

Originally Posted by Boss330

You really haven't read any of my previous posts have you (or understood them). I have several times explained that aerodynamic drag is a major factor and that aero drag represents a negative Force (F) that the engine has to overcome and that this is the reason acceleration get's smaler and smaller as speed increases. There is nothing new in that. I have said that all along.

But, Newtons laws still apply even at high speeds. It doesn't matter if you are allready accelerating when you reach that "magical" 150km/h...

The example above shows that since aero drag "eats up" more and more of the engines available power, there is less and less left to overcome the cars weight.

If you have 100hp left to overcome the weight of the car. A difference of 300kg makes a BIG impact. Just try to accelerate with a 100hp car that weighs 1000kg and then load an extra 300kg in the car and you will see that the added weight makes a difference.

And, why is it that weight to power ratio actually has relevance in all of the races the MHR M6 has raced against here?

Unless you possibly can explain how Newtons laws doesn't apply at speed...???

i am saying additonal weight doesnt play a big factor on high speed acceleration, based on my experience on high speed runs by v-box.
since we both agree that we mainly fight against drag on higher runs additional weight is less and less un- important bassed on the overall acceleration time (for example 200-300KmH), or do you disagree on that.

on a 200-300kmh run additonal 150kg gives me round about 1 sec more. (fact based)
That is really nothing on a total off 15 secs acceleration. (7%)
I dont get it, do you want to prof that my data logging wasnt incorrect, have you ever tried it yourself.
Well formulas are nice to have, but we have to considerat so mutch factors, that is gonna be endless, unless here are some physicist or specialist on aerodynamic. ( total drag, induced and parasit to overcome between 200-300km vs available engine power, drivertrain lost etc)
but i do have my data logs witch i do believe.

off cours you can say 1 sec is a lot off distance at 300kmh, but your feeling without test equipement couldnt say the difference.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by m-ch

i am saying additonal weight doesnt play a big factor on high speed acceleration, based on my experience on high speed runs by v-box.
since we both agree that we mainly fight against drag on higher runs additional weight is less and less un- important bassed on the overall acceleration time (for example 200-300KmH), or do you disagree on that.

on a 200-300kmh run additonal 150kg gives me round about 1 sec more. (fact based)
That is really nothing on a total off 15 secs acceleration. (7%)
I dont get it, do you want to prof that my data logging wasnt incorrect, have you ever tried it yourself.
Well formulas are nice to have, but we have to considerat so mutch factors, that is gonna be endless, unless here are some physicist or specialist on aerodynamic. ( total drag, induced and parasit to overcome between 200-300km vs available engine power, drivertrain lost etc)
but i do have my data logs witch i do believe.

off cours you can say 1 sec is a lot off distance at 300kmh, but your feeling without test equipement couldnt say the difference.

That is an improvement from what you said first, when weight didn't matter at all after 150km/h... At least you are finally agreeing that weight do matter

I'm not saying your datalogging is incorrect. In fact your datalogging confirms that weight makes a difference. And if 150kg is 1 sec, then 300kg is at least 2 sec. Power to weight do make a difference, regardless of speed.

Formulas and laws of nature are not just "nice to have". They actually describe realities of physics. There is no way around that...

I have also said earlier that you (or the human body) will not be able to feel the difference between an acceleration of, say 0,85G and 0,9G. Don't confuse what you can feel with what actually happens.

And 1 sec at 300km/h is 84 meters, 2 seconds is 167 meters

(A football (soccer) field is 105 meters long, a football field (American football) is 109.7 meters, you agree that that is quite a substantial difference)

Regardless of what you can feel the difference is substantial if those two cars are racing each other down a runway. No one would be in doubt about who has won the race...

[m-ch]

Originally Posted by Boss330

That is an improvement from what you said first, when weight didn't matter at all after 150km/h... At least you are finally agreeing that weight do matter

I'm not saying your datalogging is incorrect. In fact your datalogging confirms that weight makes a difference. And if 150kg is 1 sec, then 300kg is at least 2 sec. Power to weight do make a difference, regardless of speed.

Formulas and laws of nature are not just "nice to have". They actually describe realities of physics. There is no way around that...

I have also said earlier that you (or the human body) will not be able to feel the difference between an acceleration of, say 0,85G and 0,9G. Don't confuse what you can feel with what actually happens.

And 1 sec at 300km/h is 84 meters, 2 seconds is 167 meters

(A football (soccer) field is 105 meters long, a football field (American football) is 109.7 meters, you agree that that is quite a substantial difference)

Regardless of what you can feel the difference is substantial if those two cars are racing each other down a runway. No one would be in doubt about who has won the race...

i do think a corrected my self before somewhere in this tread about the weight issue.
You are correct if you compare 2 cars starting at the same time at 200kmh then it is visibel. Yes. But in reallity you hardly drive side by side at 200kmh and start your race, isnt it more on our Highways, that we are driving behind each other and hit the trottle to max when traffic permits (german unrestrictet highways).
At the end to be relativly safe and to not bring someone else stupidly in danger i can just do the v-box messurement on highspeed runs, and therefor have just the time indication.. Unless you go to Nardo or an other highspeed course, were sutch heads up could be safely done.
For my understanding a time increase off 7% for aditional 150kg or 14% for 300kg (if calculation is correct, additonel time increase is equal to the additonal weight incresae, based on my v-box datas 200-300kmh), was or is not a big issue for me, given that the acceleration time is already around 20 secs.

[Hunter5179]

Can we put this argument to rest or you guys PM each other??? It's very informative nonetheless but killing this thread. Thanks for all the info.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Hunter5179

Can we put this argument to rest or you guys PM each other??? It's very informative nonetheless but killing this thread. Thanks for all the info.

Agreed