BMW S 1000 RR and M3 Comparison - Technology Cross Over

It's a different story these days. Performance automobiles have progressed a hundredfold since the '80s, and the majority of them now bristle with technology that puts even the most advanced motorcycle to shame. "Vehicle stability control" systems can sense what the driver is doing and intervene via brakes and engine detuning to make it nearly impossible to lose control in a corner. Many are equipped with headlights that will swivel into the direction of a turn. There are now systems that can keep the car in its lane if you drift outside the lines with the cruise control activated, or maintain a preset distance from the vehicle ahead of you-heck, one automobile will even parallel park the car for you!

Motorcycles are only now just beginning to enjoy some of the rapid technological development in performance that automobile drivers have already been playing with for years. For instance, even the most basic econo-box automobile has come standard with electronic fuel injection and ABS for decades. Traction control is now all the rage with sportbikes, but that feature has been a staple of automobile dynamic safety control systems for many years. Variable cam timing? Variable-length intakes? Ho hum...numerous production cars have been equipped with those setups since the '90s.

So just how capable is this technology? BMW has already caused quite a stir with its new S 1000 RR superbike. Anyone not living in a cave, however, also knows that the company has been one of the world's premier automobile manufacturers-especially when it comes to performance-for quite some time. We decided to compare the technology in the company's sportiest two- and four-wheel products to get an idea of how much it has advanced the state of motoring performance.

The M3 is a perfect example. Now in its fourth generation (it first came into being as a limited production racing homologation model in 1986), the latest M3 doesn't immediately strike you as a high performance car. Compared to the stereotypical sports car medium (low-slung profile, cramped cockpit, no creature comforts, etc.), the M3 appears almost pedestrian; based on the BMW 3-series sedans, the M3 seats four passengers comfortably and in surprising luxury (in fact, there are also four-door and convertible versions of the M3). Features such as fully contour-adjustable electric leather seats, a built-in GPS navigation system, climate control, a nice sound system, and a trunk with ample storage space are just a few of the M3's utilitarian attributes that belie the car's performance potential.

And with a 4.0-liter V8 pumping out a claimed 414 horsepower at a dizzying (for an automobile) 8300 rpm accelerating the car to a 0-60 mph time of 4.3 seconds, there's definitely no shortage of performance. Those types of numbers were considered in the elite "supercar" territory back in the '90s, yet BMW has managed to harness them into a package that serenely putts along in urban traffic as competently as it scythes down a mountain road-or racetrack, for that matter. Having the famed 12.8-mile Nürburgring Nordschleife circuit ("Riding the Green Hell", January '08) in its backyard allows the M division to put its engineering to the ultimate test on a daily basis. And the M3's performance there is anything but utilitarian; the latest version is said to be more than three seconds a lap quicker around the Nordschleife than its much more powerful M5 sibling boasting a Formula One-inspired 500-horsepower V10 engine.

Much of the M3's speed boils down to the same performance concepts that have become so prevalent in sportbikes. For example, in order to centralize mass for improved handling, the coupe version of the M3 is the first production car to come standard with a carbon fiber roof. The engine hood is aluminum, and the front fenders are made from a tough thermoplastic; most of the suspension components are also aluminum in construction. The new aluminum-alloy V8 engine is 33 pounds lighter than the much less powerful 3.2-liter six-cylinder it replaced. Granted, the new generation M3 is almost 300 pounds heavier overall than its predecessor, but that gain in performance along with the gain in weight can be correlated with today's literbikes (see Trevitt's "Stop Watch" column in this issue).

Driven By Technology
There's so much technology behind the M3's superb performance that you could fill a telephone book with all the details. For starters, the engine features BMW's "double VANOS" variable cam timing system. While variable cam timing has been seen on many automobile powerplants for years (and the only motorcycle currently sporting variable cam timing is Kawasaki's Concours 14 sport-tourer), a unique aspect of the double VANOS is that both the intake and exhaust camshaft timing are continuously variable by the ECU over a much wider range than previous applications. This allows early valve opening and short overlap for optimum low-end torque, smooth running, and fuel efficiency, along with late opening/abundant valve timing overlap for peak volumetric efficiency at high rpm to give maximum horsepower.

But even more important are the chassis components (or rather, electronics) that help the driver control that power. The M3 is equipped with what is called the "M Drive" system that allows electronic adjustments to various engine, suspension, and steering components so that the driver can custom-tailor the car's behavior for his particular driving style or need. And the settings go far beyond conventional adjustments.

One is the "Electronic Damper Control" option. Unlike the ESA on BMW's K-bikes or the electronically adjustable Öhlins suspension on Ducati's new Multistrada 1200S, the EDC isn't limited to static settings; instead, it uses various sensors to continuously adjust the shocks' damping according to driving conditions. By measuring aspects such as the car's speed, the front wheel steering angle, and the vertical acceleration of the front and rear axles, the EDC is able to continuously swap between three damping curves in split-second increments via magnetic valves in the shock bodies. The driver can also manually select one of the three damping curves (Comfort, Normal, or Sport) if desired.

The M3 is also equipped with "Servotronic" electronic steering assist. An electromagnetic valve controls the amount of force applied by the steering hydraulics in relation to the driving situation. The power assist progressively decreases as the vehicle speeds up, ostensibly allowing the driver better feel and more precise steering.

Unlike the S 1000 RR's system, the M3's electronic nannies are even more adjustable once you access the "M Drive" menu in the iDrive dash display. Not only are you able to separately adjust the EDC and Servotronic steering assist, but also the engine's throttle response, and the DSC as well. One similarity though, is setting the DSC to "M Dynamic Mode"; this allows the driver much more freedom to exceed traction limits before it reels everything back in-much like the Slick mode in the DTC/Race ABS on the S 1000 RR sportbike.

Our test venue was the Streets of Willow circuit in Rosamond, California. The tight and twisty 13-turn, 1.8-mile layout of the Streets course would put a premium on braking and cornering-not on acceleration or top-end speed, where the bike's obvious power-to-weight ratio advantage would skew the results.

An interesting observation by Emmerson was made after examining on-board camera footage from both the car and bike. "I never realized that the Streets of Willow was so bumpy," he said. "On sections where you could clearly see you dealing with major bumps on the bike, the car was smooth as silk. I never recalled any bumpy sections the whole time I was on the track."

Another interesting discussion point was how both Emmerson and Kunitsugu had to "work around" the traction/stability control systems in many sections of the circuit in order to generate the speed they wanted. For instance, Emmerson knew how much the DSC would let the M3's tail hang out, so he selected turn-in and throttle points that took "pre-advantage" of the system's control to put the car in the correct position. Kunitsugu had to do the same in some corners with the bike's DTC; because there are many corners where maximum lean angles exceed the Slick mode's 53-degree threshold point, he had to choose lines that enabled him to lift the bike up off the apex so that full power could be unleashed. Nonetheless, both agreed that the systems are better to have than not for those unexpected situations you may need them.

Just look at what it's done for BMW's M3 and S 1000 RR.

Lap times
Bike: 1:24.030
Car: 1:30.608

As shown by the stopwatch, overall performance on the racetrack is a bit lopsided in the bike's favor. While this result was not unexpected (sportbikes are obviously much closer to their racing brethren than automobiles), what did surprise us is how well the motorcycle compared with the car in terms of cornering performance; the S 1000 RR shows more speed not only on the two straights but also in many of the corners. Even though the car is much heavier, we figured that its contact patch/electronic chassis stabilization advantage would enable it to possess higher corner speeds everywhere. Note on the lap-time difference trace that it is almost always increasing, indicating that the bike is steadily pulling away from the car, even in many of the corners. The car shows higher apex speeds in seven of the track's 13 turns, with the bike faster in six corners.

Top speeds
Bike, front straight: 125.4 mph
Car, front straight: 98.4 mph
Bike, back straight: 127.5 mph
Car, back straight: 104.9 mph

Turn 6 segment time
Bike: 3.77 sec.
Car: 4.25 sec.

Turn 11 segment time
Bike: 3.38 sec.
Car: 3.98 sec.

These two segments account for another full second in the bike's favor, with the bike carrying more speed as can be seen clearly in the graph. Both these turns fall in the middle of a series of corners and show how the track is more open for the motorcycle than for the car. The width of the car means any chicane or switchback is correspondingly tighter for the car than for the bike, and the bike can take a straighter and faster line through the section. In the tighter Turn 11 section, the difference in speed between the car and bike is significant, but the slower speeds equate to a similar time gap as seen in the more open section that includes Turn 6.

The four quadrants of the traction circle show combinations of lateral and longitudinal g-forces. For example, the top right quadrant represents acceleration while turning right while the bottom left quadrant represents braking into a left-hand turn. Note that the car, in addition to braking harder than the bike, is able to combine more braking and cornering forces than the bike is capable of. In other words, the car trail brakes into corners better than the motorcycle. This is also seen on the lap-time difference graph, where the car gains more than a quarter-second on the bike entering most corners.

Specifications