Close

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 182
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    90
    Rep Points
    118.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    There is still lag. It takes time to pressurize the piping running from the turbocharger to the engine's inletports.
    So there's basically always lag as long as you don't keep the piping pressurized.
    Reducing the volume of the piping (as the engine of the new m3 will have: the piping runs directly from the turbo on the exhaustside over the engine to the inlet with an heat exchanger between it) reduces this lag. (normal systems with intercoolers in the front have more piping volume of course)
    E85 Z4 3.0i | ESS TS2+ | Quaife ATB LSD | Custom Brembo BBK front/rear | Schrick cams | Schmiedmann headers/cats | Powerflex/strongflex/PSB PU bushings | Vibra-technics engine mounts | H&R anti rollbars

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Rep Points
    2,017.3
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    2 out of 4 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    you fail to understand the reasons for these cars. You can throw a blown LS1 in your 335i,
    Huh? Why would I put a supercharger into a turbo charged car?

    Oh my dear, I think you should really, really read a bit more about car mechanics before you post here. It's quite embarassing, even for me to only read this.

    HOLY $#@!. YOU ARE A COMPLETE FOOL.

    You literally just discredited yourself so badly with this statement, it's ... well, it makes me smile. And you tell me I need to learn about "car mechanics" after saying this. Unbelievable. No hope for some people I guess? Click here to enlarge

    You can spend years writing a ridiculous/sesquipedalian post, and nothing (and I mean nothing) will allow you to recover from the sheer stupidity of the above/quoted statement. I literally cannot believe you are even serious.

    You literally posted about nothing - but again, that comment will stick with you forever... If you only understood the irony of it.

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    79
    Rep Points
    47.0
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    HOLY $#@!. YOU ARE A COMPLETE FOOL.

    You literally just discredited yourself so badly with this statement, it's ... well, it makes me smile. And you tell me I need to learn about "car mechanics" after saying this. Unbelievable. No hope for some people I guess? Click here to enlarge

    You can spend years writing a ridiculous/sesquipedalian post, and nothing (and I mean nothing) will allow you to recover from the sheer stupidity of the above/quoted statement. I literally cannot believe you are even serious.

    You literally posted about nothing - but again, that comment will stick with you forever... If you only understood the irony of it.
    Time for some serious medication my friend? Or just not spend enough attention during reading classes?

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    2,449
    Rep Points
    1,750.8
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    18


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by GuidoK Click here to enlarge
    There is still lag. It takes time to pressurize the piping running from the turbocharger to the engine's inletports.
    So there's basically always lag as long as you don't keep the piping pressurized.
    Reducing the volume of the piping (as the engine of the new m3 will have: the piping runs directly from the turbo on the exhaustside over the engine to the inlet with an heat exchanger between it) reduces this lag. (normal systems with intercoolers in the front have more piping volume of course)
    true but a combination of the above would reduce it drastically imo. at the end of the day we all know smaller displacement + technology will win out vs.a large NA engine.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Mike@VAC Click here to enlarge
    The S5X US engines get a lot of $#@! from enthusiasts, but it's the most reliable 'M' engine by far. For severe track use, a S52 E36M3 is really hard to beat.

    That said, I am a sucker for:
    S38
    S14
    S54
    S65

    All legends. The V10 is cool, but the S65 impresses me more. S65 is the ultimate M engine IMO. This new stuff will probably work well, but it's def not the same. That said, I'm sure these new cars will rip.
    All legends and all motors we will never see again.

    Why does the S65 impress you more than the S85? IMO it's the reverse.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Autobahn335i Click here to enlarge
    The 63 AMG is considered to be the last remaining dinosaur.

    How many SLS does Mercedes sell compared to the M3 sales? How many GT3s by Porsche? How many 458s? How many Gallardos/Aventadors?

    The sale figures of these cars/companies are so MARGINAL that the manufacturers can deal with the higher taxes related to the emissions. But even Lamborghini has to think about ways to reduce emissions on future engines e.g. turbo charging...
    Um, it's a dinosaur? Yep, this looks like a dinosaur:

    Click here to enlarge

    Marginal? The Mustang is Marginal? They sell more of those than all of these cars combined we're talking about. How is that possible by your logic?

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DavidV Click here to enlarge
    The Netherlands as an example (tax and other car disencouraging rues) are irrelevant.
    The CO2 rules and future overall CO2 reduction demands are set by the EU and apply thrue the European Union to all in Europe situated car manufacturers.
    And thus are a global affair.
    You might not like it, but that is just the way it is.
    Does not mean you can't make an NA motor that meets emissions standards by any means.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    0 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    That does not qualify you for anything. Lots of people are running sites about topics they don't quite understand. That's the internet for you.
    No I think it qualifies me far more than yourself considering I have owned more M vehicles, read more about M vehicles, modified M vehicles, and also that my knowledge of the platform is enough to carry a site about it. Yours isn't. Hence why you are on my site and I'm not on yours, get it? That's the internet for you.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    Yes I tried to, but apparently you're not capable of reading anything properly.

    For your benefit, once again: Of course they could do it. They just won't, because it's too expensive to re-engineer an old engine, and NA motors in general are too inefficient emissions wise.
    The example is not that they need to go get the S54 and re-do it but that they COULD do it. They COULD make a modern NA M motor but they CHOOSE not to because they would rather line their pockets. Get it now?

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    See above. McFly, somebody home? Of course you can. It's just not possible to do it and sell the 1M at a competitive price. That and the time constraints were the reasons they didn't do it. You always seem to insinuate bad intentions on their part, but I can see no sign for this except in your imagination.
    What is a competitive price to you? And secondly, you suddenly know what BMW's cost is for these cars? How? You have access to what they pay for everything?

    They make so many S65 V8's what is the cost increase really going to be? Any different than putting an N54 into it? Why? They both are mass produced. And this isn't a cheap car to begin with anyway.

    What time constraints were necessary? The N54 and S65 were BOTH available at the time. So what the hell are you talking about?

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    Others have already tried to explain this to you in more detail. If you're still not capable of understanding it, I can't help you.
    The problem is you are not capable of seeing that BMW could produce an NA motor that is competitive as many of their competitors do. Porsche increased horsepower, displacement, redline, AND lowered emissions. Care to tell me how they did that? OMG and with an NA motor too? Witchcraft!

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    See above. Read a bit more about emissions (worldwide) and then come back, hopefully more educated.
    Don't sit here and tell me about education when you barely even grasp BMW history or what this means. Additionally, read about CARB and come back and talk to me. Who do you think has the strictest emission rules? Why do you think we don't have diesels here? You read up because you don't know what you're talking about and it's quite annoying to hear you preach when you barely have a grasp on the emissions topic or who has what emissions standards.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    Each project at BMW has to comply with the current emission rules in the markets where they want to sell it. Not only in the US. No offsetting possible there, unfortunately.
    Really? So regions don't get special editions? I could have sworn China recently got one, Europe got some special M3's, an M3 GTR was made for limited markets, what are you talking about again?

    And this changes what regarding BMW being able to produce an NA motor that meets todays emissions standards? Because it isn't the impossibility you are making it out to be.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    Yes, apparently. At least that's the only conclusion possible from what you're writing.
    I think the more likely conclusion is you blindly applauding BMW as they continue to dilute their product line across the board. It's right there from the head of M himself, the M motors will be MORE like standard motors not LESS. Get it through your head.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    And you still don't see that you've fallen yourself big-time for the M marketing strategy. It's just you're 20 years too late...
    That M should stand for Motorsport instead of marketing? You actually defend them straying from Motorsport? Really? That's about the stupidest thing I've ever read on this site and I've read some stupid things from some stupid posters.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    If they had called it S54 and put it into the E9x M3 instead of the V8 - which was a real option while they were deciding on the engine of the M3 - you would have loved it and called it a true M engine. Seems quite hypocrite to me. You're more attached to a letter then than to any real performance of an engine. That's rather sad.
    No I would have said it's absurd to simply change a letter in the naming convention and call something an M motor just as I am saying its absurd to build an M car without an M motor. I'm able to critically analyze what BMW is doing, you blindly follow.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    Nothing wrong in using good and tested (suspension) parts from the M3 in a 1 series. Why not if it works? If you want something bespoke, you have to go to a non-mass-market manufacturer like McLaren. Because even Aston Martin uses the same platform and engine on all their cars, and Lamborghini shares one with Audi, and so on and so forth.
    An M car isn't supposed to just be a mildly massaged 135i. That isn't the purpose. You might as well just call it a 135is and call it a day. They are selling the badge here, don't you get it? Selling people on having an M car that isn't really an M car. It's a 135 on mild steroids borrowing bits from a real M car that were designed FOR THAT M CAR.

    That means the 1M... simply isn't special. And it simply isn't an M car either. It's marketing, eat it up if you like but no real M purist respects that car.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    The E36 M3 started to sell in 1992, as others have tried to explain to you. So of course a major part of its development was made in the 1980s.

    I know it's a real challenge for you to admit you're wrong anywhere. One can see that in any discussion you're involved. Not really a sign of a very flexible mindset, but if it makes you happy...
    No, it's a challenge for you to read and comprehend. The E30 M3 continued racing competitively until 1993 and even in non-sanctioned events after that. The E36 M3 being "developed" in the 80's makes how much sense when the S50B32 didn't even hit the car until when? And what, you think development just stopped beccause the E36 was a replacement for the E30 was penned in the 80's?

    This is completely idiotic to think, oh, the E36 M3 came out in 1992 that must mean the 1995 M3 that the US got was developed in the 80's. By default, that development took place in the 90's as a brand new motor was created for that car. Then those motors were also updated. The vast majority of EVERYTHING related to the E36 M3 took place in the 90's. I don't see how anyone can so oblivious to not get this. So not only am I right, you have no clue what you're saying.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    You're just making yourself look worse by arguing where there's really no argument at all behind it. It's still funny to observe, though.
    No I'm picking you apart quite easily. Frankly, it's amusing to see someone defend a company whose products have gotten worse, the cars have gotten heavier (efficient dynamic what?), and are now completely just making the M division into a joke. Yeah you keep that up! Soooo cool to see BMW just use the same everything in every car. So unique, so... M (marketing).

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    I'm having trouble with you calling everything that is not natural aspirated and not completely bespoke "not worthy" of being called an M car. That is quite a ridiculous notion and seems to point to some kind of complex you have.

    I don't like many of the new M models either, in particular the SUVs. But taking it out on the 1M Coupé which in my opinion was a great idea is not justified.
    I never said an M car had to have a naturally aspirated motor I'm saying the 1M is not worthy of being called an M car. If they did an S55 motor based on a tweaked N55, then we can talk. They could have at least done SOMETHING. They did nothing, they sold you a letter and people ate it up.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    I'm not contradicting myself at all, if you took the trouble to read my sentences carefully (not one of your strong points, I know, but try to make an effort here). Having a successful M car is not only about the engine.
    My statement was, "So you admit the engine is part of the M package?" You agreed, meaning the motor is part of the M car experience. No M motor = No M car.

    You're telling me an S62 V8 is to the M62 V8 as the N54 in the 1M is to the N54 ins the 335i? L O L. Which one was touched by the M division, completely reworked, and which one is the same junk with some different software? Which one took more engineering, parts, labor, testing, you think? Which one deserves an M badge? Well, probably the motor BMW M themselves labeled as an M motor.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    Of course it doesn't. Just as anything you write here has no impact at all.
    On the contrary what I wrote is being linked to on several other sites and points out how far BMW has fallen. Nobody cares about what you wrote whereas I'm highlighting a major change in BMW philosophy. One of these is more important than the other, you figure it out.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    I'm simply trying to explain some rather simple points to you. But this seems to overcharge you, unfortunately.
    The simple conclusion is that M is dead and we will no longer have the special motors we once did. This is a fact, BMW states it themselves, let it sink in.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    That the V10 was based on some F1 engine was always just a cleverly placed rumour. It seems you also fell for that one and I feel a bit sorry for you. Apparently BMW marketing is quite ingenious!
    Oh you poor thing, you don't get it. The V10 in the S85 was made as a link to the Formula 1 program that was racing V10's at the time. BMW marketed as Formula 1 derived which isn't a rumor. The fact is the block did feature the same material as the block used in the racing program made of silicon-aluminum composite that is also used in the S65 V8 which is probably why the S65 V8 weighs less than the S54 it replaced despite having more power, torque, and displacement.

    I'm sorry, you don't know your stuff and aren't on a level to be speaking to me when you don't know the basics even. Do some reading, educate yourself, and come back.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    Sure they do the racing. Just as with other companies. That doesn't mean that any parts are used in street cars or that the race cars are even based on street cars.

    I agree that it should be that way, Audi and Porsche or Ferrari certainly do it. BMW does not have a real sports car in their portfolio any more, which is why they need to conceive some cars as the Z4 that look somewhat like street cars but have almost nothing in common with them.
    See this is where you are wrong as the S14 was raced and that is why the E30 M3 got that motor. The E92 M3 got an S65 V8 because they intended to race with a V8 after the inline-6 was maxed out. Have you not followed BMW Motorsport history whatsoever? How do you not know any of this? This is kids stuff.

    BMW is getting away with bending the rules currently with the Z4. I'm sure you support that as well. Rather than stand up and say BMW should develop a Z4M you probably pat them on the back for cheating. Once again, M has fallen.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    That was in the past. Nowadays for BMW it's different.
    So BMW put in more effort in the past and now only cares about money at the enthusiast expense? Ultimate Marketing Machine.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    I never argued about the E46. Why do you bring that up?
    Because of this thing called Motorsport which you seem to miss the E46 and E92 having a direct link to? The 1M having a direct link... to nothing.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    As for the N54 in an M car, why not, it could have happened with the E9x M3 already except that due to not having done a turbo petrol engine since a long time they thought it too big a risk and put it off to the next generation.
    I don't know why you are speaking for BMW as if you knew what they wanted to do and secondly when you are so wrong. BMW didn't put the N54 in the M3 because it isn't an M motor it was designed for emissions purposes. BMW all along was going to put a V8 in the M3 since they did it way back in 2001. The whole plan was that the S85 was 5.0 liters and modular meaning the M3 would get a 4.0 liter S65 V8 and BMW could go racing again. That's reality, what you just wrote is made up juink.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    It's not nonsense at all, it's reality actually. The M3 GTS was a ridiculously overpriced attempt to slam some carbon fiber parts and a roll cage into a car and call it a day. It's slow, too expensive and only a handful of cars were built anyway, so I'd never compare it to the CSL or the 1M Coupé which were cars for real racing enthusiasts.
    The M3 GTS is some carbon fiber parts and a roll cage calling it a day huh? How much weight does it save over the standard E92 M3? Does it just re-use the M3 motor or does it get a special 4.4 liter version? The 1M isn't a car for a real racing enthusiast, it's for posers. The real enthusiasts aren't those counting pennies as you seem to be they are the ones getting the best drivers car BMW has to offer. And that would be the M3 GTS or M3 CSL, the best drivers cars BMW has ever made. The 1M can go ahead and limp home, as you should.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Mike@VAC Click here to enlarge
    BTW the 1M is amazing. Never heard anyone not LOVE it after driving it (and most of our clients drive on track)
    It's a parts bin wannabe M.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    If there was ever a car with a worse value for money I haven't seen it yet. Not that it's bad as such, but the improvement over a standard M3 is marginal at best and it still costs double the price - for which you could buy cars that are much, much faster.

    Had they offered it like the CSL or a Black Series for a reasonable upgrade price, it would have been a nice idea. But like this...they're really asking their customers to bend over basically.
    Pay to play. You're the one talking about cost? I'm curious, is money a huge deal for you? They built the best M car, if you can't afford it, that's your problem.

    Marginal improvement over a standard M3?

    4.4 liter motor, M crank, power up to 444 horses all motor and max torque up to 325 pound-feed from 295 pound-feet and the torque peak comes earlier at 3750 rpm.

    Huge weight loss with deleted rear seats, deleted center console, removed door trim, back window and rear side glass replaced with polycarbonite, titanium exhaust system, sound insulation deleted, and audio system deleted.

    Front and rear track widened, 255/285 tires. Suspension revised for the roadcourse and adjustable.

    Revised and adjustable aerodynamics.

    Revised larger brakes with 6 piston up front and 4 piston in back.

    Track tuned dynamic stability control.

    Revised ABS.

    Track tuned MDM mode.

    Limited edition, exclusive, not for poor people or like the 1M that anyone can have especially those whining about money.

    All this versus the 1M that simply gets an N54 they have laying around and some parts off the M3. Yeah, the 1M definitely is the better road racer and had as much M engineering effort go into it. Are you high?


  11. #161
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
    Why can other manufacturers produce NA sports cars?
    Exactly. How is Porsche doing it, I'm curious?

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    It has the 4.4 liter engine from the GTS (reason enough to dismiss your theory on anything cars), and a BUNCH of other things that do not come on the standard M3 (titanium exhaust, much better brakes, independent rear seats, etc.) - but yeah, just a few carbon pieces for an outrageous price.
    This guy has no idea what he is talking about. He is more impressed with an M car without an M motor than the best M car to be made.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    Unfortunately, yes. The 30hp more don't make a real difference,
    Oh this is comedy, the HP and torque make no difference eh? In a lighter car? With a lower torque peak too? Stop talking.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    And yes, the M3 GTS costs double the price of a normal M3 and only offers a marginally better performance, unfortunately. And far less performance than cars in the same price range.
    It is an exlusive car built to take the M3 to the next level. It gets more and more expensive to lighten it, extract power, reprogram, change the brakes, etc. How much does a GT3 cost versus a Carrera? Is that worth it? Is it marginally better performance?

    Stop talking, you have no idea what you're saying.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    Also, a CRT - again - has a GTS engine in it. It's not 30 horsepower - you are looking a PEAK POWER again. I don't understand why this is so difficult for you to understand. It's TOTAL AREA under the power curve.
    Yep, I'm the one with reading comprehension issues. Yep, must be me.

    Marginal? They gave it a 4.4 liter... marginal. Yeah... marginal.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    Here is the "small difference" between both cars:

    CRT is 1.2 SECONDS faster to 120 MPH; .8 seconds faster to 124 MPH - around Hockenheim, 1.13,6 min - stock M3 is 1:15.20 - that's not a "small" difference by any means.

    It's kinda like the "small difference" between the 335i and M3 to 100 MPH that you just couldn't understand in relation to torque. I am sure you will just reply back saying "no no, you got it all wrong, you can't read, you are an elitist". However, I just can't stand it when people talk out of their ass, people correct them - they don't say "oh, my misunderstanding" - then continue to spew absolute BULL$#@! all over this forum.

    You SAID the CRT WAS JUST A BUNCH OF CARBON FIBER PARTS "slapped" on the M3. This was not true, but you continue to make it look like nothing you said was wrong, so I will continue to make you look like a jagmaster, because that's what you are acting like.

    It's fine to agree or not agree on a forum, however - this is a whole different level... You say things that are completely made up - and then wait until someone replies, then "forget" to address everything you said wrong.
    Well at least I was spared some time having to re-iterate all of this.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    I'm not backtracking at all. I don't know where you get this idea - apparently your reading skills are quite lacking.
    He just quoted where your reading skills are lacking. As in, supported it with a quote. You saying others can't read doesn't change the fact your statements show you are having definite comprehension issues. You can type whatever you like it won't change that.

    Yeah.. the M3 GTS is just a car with some carbon fiber slapped on it and a roll cage. What is more accurate though is taht the 1M is just a 1 series with a bodykit and some M3 pieces.

  16. #166
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    I never mentioned any 0-100mph figures. Then why do you bring this up? I don't care about 0-100mph figures.
    It was brought up because you said the difference is marginal. Now all of a sudden you don't care about the real world figures, unbelievable.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    If you want a car with good 0-100 mph figures, you'd never buy an M3 GTS. The car isn't conceived for this at all. If you haven't understood this, then better stop posting about it because then you really don't understand anything. Sad, but true.
    You are changing the subject and backtracking after looking foolish. You said 30 hp doesn't matter. Well, clearly it does. Nobody is claiming the car is a dragster. Using figures to support the difference the 4.4 liter motor provides is sad to you? Um, I find it sad you can't just admit you were wrong.

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux Click here to enlarge
    Putting natural aspirated cars on some kind of adulating pedestal just because of their throttle response is kind of one-sided, don't you think?
    Uh, no, I don't. That's one of the greatest things about the classic M motor with individual throttles bodies that makes it seem like your foot is linked directly to the damn throttle. It's one of those things... well, that we'll never have again. But you go right on talking about emissions.

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Torgus Click here to enlarge
    They can make them almost 100% lagless but it is complicated and expensive: http://jalopnik.com/5855317/will-bmw...-end-turbo-lag
    We'll have electric cars from BMW before they ever eliminate turbo lag.

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Points
    917.6
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    3 out of 3 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Oh this is comedy, the HP and torque make no difference eh? In a lighter car? With a lower torque peak too? Stop talking. It is an exlusive car built to take the M3 to the next level. It gets more and more expensive to lighten it, extract power, reprogram, change the brakes, etc. How much does a GT3 cost versus a Carrera? Is that worth it? Is it marginally better performance? Stop talking, you have no idea what you're saying.
    The GTS weighs 1530 kg. You get to that weight just by removing the rear seats and putting in bucket seats. Hardly an effort and ridiculous compared to a Gt3RS which weighs a bit less than 1400kgs. That's a HUGE difference on a racetrack and one of the main reasons the GTS gets eaten on the track by the RS. Sorry but the price is FAR from being justified.On the E46 CSL they changed suspension parts, cams, airbox, body panels, seats, interior, CF roof etc etc. It's 200kgs lighter, almost feels like a completely new car. For only like 10k Euro more. Not doubling the price... THAT's what M should be about. And that's why people are all over the 1M. The same spirit featuring an affordable and fun car!
    E92 335i SB / Black Leather / 6AT / Navi Prof / Sunroof / Active Steering
    Mods: Performance Seats / Performance Exhaust / RB Turbos / M3 CF Roof / Brembo GT BBK 355/345 / Rollcage / M3 Mirrors / Forge FMIC / QUAIFE LSD / Ohlins R&T / M3 Suspension Parts / Vorshlag Camberplates / Megan Toe Links / LeatherZ Gauges / Extended M3 DCT Paddles / ER Sports OC / AR OC / Aux Radiator / AR catted DP / COBB Pro-Tune
    Next: GTS Wing

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Autobahn335i Click here to enlarge
    The GTS weighs 1530 kg. You get to that weight just by removing the rear seats and putting in bucket seats. Hardly an effort and ridiculous compared to a Gt3RS which weighs a bit less than 1400kgs. That's a HUGE difference on a racetrack and one of the main reasons the GTS gets eaten on the track by the RS. Sorry but the price is FAR from being justified.On the E46 CSL they changed suspension parts, cams, airbox, body panels, seats, interior, CF roof etc etc. It's 200kgs lighter, almost feels like a completely new car. For only like 10k Euro more. Not doubling the price... THAT's what M should be about. And that's why people are all over the 1M. The same spirit featuring an affordable and fun car!
    Hardly a huge effort? Did you see everything I listed?

    It weighs 3278 pounds WITH a roll cage and fire extinguisher in it. Are you kidding me?

    The GTS weighs ~1490 kg don't know where you are getting your figures. That's 300 pounds less than the standard car. That doesn't impress you? Seriously? 300 pounds you get that by removing the rear seats and putting in bucked seats? On which planets gravitational pull are you basing this on?

    The GTS is an excellent car that is much stronger than the standard M3 and the strongest M car for the track. That is the point of it plus an exclusive car that is a limited edition for true M fans.

    The CSL wasn't cheap either.

    The 1M is just a 135i with a body kit and M3 suspension pieces. It isn't an M3 GTS, it isn't comparable, not even close. One is the M division pushing their best product further and the other is just slapping an M badge on what they already have and calling it a day.

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    2,449
    Rep Points
    1,750.8
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    18


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    We'll have electric cars from BMW before they ever eliminate turbo lag.
    They already have electric bmws...infact I see one around town and plugged in at the airport all the time.

  22. #172
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    708
    Rep Points
    566.8
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    So, just because the Z4M has the S54 and is quite similar to the 3.0si; does that mean it's not an M car? All it has is the S54. There's more to it than strapping parts to make them an M car sticky. Quoting lightning lap times, the 1M coupe does it in 3:06.6 and the 135i in 3:13.7. That's a huge difference using the same engine, different brakes, larger tires, wheels, etc. 7 seconds to me, means huge improvement, which also means to me, it's an M car. M cars are not and have not always been just about the engine. It's the total package that makes them phenominal.

    Let's also talk about the 6 second difference between the F13 M6 and the E62 M6. 6 second difference. That is an M car sticky. That shows huge improvement over the previous years. It may not be the fastest in its segment, but it delivers the best overall experience.

    I quoted these times because M cars homes should be on the track. We never got the 2.3l Evo in the E30, none of the Euro E36's, not the CSL, and definitely not the GTS nor the CRT. So what, they were all ridiculously expensive, and more than likely no one here would own one. Where's all the people here with M3 LTW's? Hm sure is a whole lot of those left around sitting in garages collecting dust. That was the last chance we had to own lightweight cars and they did generate not nearly enough revenue nor interest. That's why there is no GTS, CSL, etc etc. The amount of testing for crashes and emissions is ridiculous. It's the same reason the Skylines are not legally imported here. No one will step up and pay the major costs to make them compliant.
    Honda CBR 1000RR, Superbike Supply, Arrow, HRC, BMC, Lee's Cycle, Galfer, EBC, Revzilla, AXO, Dainese, Scorpion Helmets

    Honda Grom, most fun you'll ever have on 2 wheels.

  23. #173
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    977
    Rep Points
    779.1
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by StinkyM Click here to enlarge
    So, just because the Z4M has the S54 and is quite similar to the 3.0si; does that mean it's not an M car? All it has is the S54. There's more to it than strapping parts to make them an M car sticky. Quoting lightning lap times, the 1M coupe does it in 3:06.6 and the 135i in 3:13.7. That's a huge difference using the same engine, different brakes, larger tires, wheels, etc. 7 seconds to me, means huge improvement, which also means to me, it's an M car. M cars are not and have not always been just about the engine. It's the total package that makes them phenominal.

    Let's also talk about the 6 second difference between the F13 M6 and the E62 M6. 6 second difference. That is an M car sticky. That shows huge improvement over the previous years. It may not be the fastest in its segment, but it delivers the best overall experience.

    I quoted these times because M cars homes should be on the track. We never got the 2.3l Evo in the E30, none of the Euro E36's, not the CSL, and definitely not the GTS nor the CRT. So what, they were all ridiculously expensive, and more than likely no one here would own one. Where's all the people here with M3 LTW's? Hm sure is a whole lot of those left around sitting in garages collecting dust. That was the last chance we had to own lightweight cars and they did generate not nearly enough revenue nor interest. That's why there is no GTS, CSL, etc etc. The amount of testing for crashes and emissions is ridiculous. It's the same reason the Skylines are not legally imported here. No one will step up and pay the major costs to make them compliant.
    there are ways around this... we have two countries that border us who don't care and several hillbilly states that dunno $#@! when it comes to registration. and inevitably time is on our side when it comes to importing. it all comes down to how bad you want it. legal? kinda grey? yes!

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,914
    Rep Points
    1,353.5
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    EXACTLY.

    And the Corvette, Z06, Viper, Challenger, Charger, Jeep SRT-8, Mustang GT, Boss 302, etc. Let's stop making excuses for BMW.
    None of these cars are made in EU and have to meet the EU manufacturer fleet requirements.

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,914
    Rep Points
    1,353.5
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    The fleet average to be achieved by new cars is 130 grams of CO2 per kilometre (g/km) by 2015 and 95g/km by 2020. The EU fleet average target of 130g CO2 per km will be phased in between 2012 and 2015. In 2012, an average of 65% of each manufacturer's newly registered cars must comply with the limit value curve set by the legislation. This will rise to 75% in 2013, 80% in 2014 and 100% in 2015. So poease don't look at the cars that were released last year or this year. These limits get a lot more difficult each year.

    Moreover, due to the CO2 based taxation in many countries the customers need to get more and more efficient cars in order to be able to afford M3, i.e. hoping it to be less than $250 000 with all the CO2 taxes. This is not really a matter of choice. You will see that practicaclly all the cars will be either electric or turbocharged. Audi and Merdedes must follow the same way, there is no way around it.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •