vedjo01

Andreas,you lucky bastard..thats all what I can say..

dr Dunkel

A little teaser before someone brings the scans:

Bedford Autodrome - West Circuit
1.26,6 BMW M3
1.29,5 Mercedes C63
1.30,0 Vauxhall VXR8

Slightly damp conditions

Just_me

Thanks, now its only Sportauto left

PC Valkyrie

OK, that laptime for the C63 is pretty disappointing......almost 3 seconds slower than the E92 M3. No, let me rephrase.......that laptime for the C63 is HORRIBLE. Game over. Wonder how the C63 will do on the Nurburgring.

The C55 was only 0.3 seconds slower than the E46 M3 CS on Bedford Autodrome. (1.30,1 vs 1.29,8 minutes)

Sunny

Wow, 3 secs off? That is a big margin on a 1:30 track.

coolraoul

You're right; pretty disappointing time indeed for the C63. And/or a very good one for both M3 and Vauxhall.

However...I prefer a car that feels fast than a car that is fast but feels "slow" (like the C55)...

Keep in mind also that it is only one test, maybe the car was not broken, or was not in optimal conditions...

I wonder if a car with the limited slip differential of the Performance Package will be tested too, it could make a huge difference on a track time...

Sunny

Other interesting times in the same range by Evo on the same track. The fact that the track was damp makes a direct comparison impossible. I think the M3 time is really good. Wonder what it would have done with a dry track.

1:26.00 - Porsche 996 Turbo
1:26.10 - Mitsubishi EVO IX 320
1:26.40 - Subaru Impreza WRX STI
1:26.40 - BMW M6
1:26.75 - Aston Martin V8 Vantage
1:26.85 - Porsche Cayman S
1:27.10 - BMW Z4M Coupe
1:28.25 - Audi RS4
1:28.55 - Porsche 987 Boxster S
1:28.60 - Audi B7 RS4 -First Attempt
1:28.70 * Damp - Lamborghini Murcielago:
1:28.85 - Porsche 997 Carrera
1:28.90 - Porsche Cayman S:
1:29.20 * Damp - Lotus Elise 111R
1:29.30 - Mercedes-Benz SLK55 AMG:
1:29.80 - BMW M3 CS
1:29.95 - BMW E60 M5

PC Valkyrie

You're right that you can't compare the E92 M3's or C63's laptime to other car's times when track may have been more dry. But this test still shows that on that particular day, the M3 was almost 3 seconds faster than the C63, which is a HUGE amount on this relatively short track.

I think the M3 laptime is superb, especially if it was a bit damp. Have to wait until we see the article to get the details.

dr Dunkel

As said before, the track was damp and from what I gather non of the cars used r-tires. This leads to the conclusion that neither the M3 nor the C63 used their sport/driver package. I think this may have made more differece to the C63 - the things Evo points out are the brakes (a little more bite, not sure if this is affected by the sport package) and that the car loses posture at the limit (the sport package do feature more track biased suspension).

Hopefully the Sport Auto test will feature a C63 with that sport package. But then again, I think we need not worry about that. Sport Auto is a bit more focused on numbers than Evo - after all, this 10 page article has more descriptions of sound than it has figures (they have done an acceleration test but since the track was wet the numbers are rubbish).

Just_me

The most impressive laptime is the one the Vauxhall did, not what I expected. The M3 laptime is not really a surprise so nothing spectacular here.