|
|
10-06-2009, 02:11 AM | #89 | |
Banned
121
Rep 2,097
Posts |
Quote:
BTW your data is wrong to begin with thats probably the worst acceleration data I've seen for an E9x M3. 0-60 in 4.9? ORLY? Ya with my mom driving in the rain maybe. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 02:13 AM | #90 | |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Quote:
But I return to the fact that 99% of people don't drive their cars at the limit 99% of the time. Sugarcoat it all you will but I bet when the new M3 comes out with it's FI engine you will be chewing at the bit to get one, such a difference all that in-gear performance will being to the party. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 02:17 AM | #91 |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
For a start, there is no rollout so you could knock 0.3s off that time, and secondly the surface used provides the sort of grip you find on a public road and not a dragstrip or race track that is nothing like a public road. Sure you can improve those times but what's the point in that if you can never repeat it on the road.
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 02:24 AM | #92 | |
Banned
121
Rep 2,097
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 05:16 AM | #93 | |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Quote:
Though I much prefer our official comparisons (EVO, Autocar, Sportauto, etc) as they are less bias either way and driven by skilled drivers. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 09:28 AM | #94 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
I personally feel that in an all-out race over some distance at or perhaps greater than a quarter mile, the M3 will prevail, but my references to lazy speed are not without merit. I'm not worried about cops, but just love that effortless feel coming out of a corner in third or fourth and just motoring off with little or no sturm and drang. Is this somehow hard for you to understand? I'm not putting down anyone's love for the M3's transition from mild to wild as the tach passes 12 noon, so why are you having this reaction to my love of effortless grunt with little noise? Bruce PS - When I said "value judgement". I was trying to indicate that I wasn't putting down anyone with differing values on what makes a car fun to drive. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 09:43 AM | #95 | |
Colonel
35
Rep 2,406
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 09:51 AM | #96 |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Well then look to Audi for your next thrills because the RS5 has been confirmed to be getting an improved version of their 4.2FSI with (get this) over 8500rpm and possibly higher.
They won't be getting my business because I didn't buy into the M3's lack of grunt due to it's incredible highs so I doubt Audi will have improved on that experience. |
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 09:51 AM | #97 | |
Colonel
35
Rep 2,406
Posts |
Quote:
btw, no one put down car with load of torque. i'm just saying they don't offer anything special and your post doesn't make any sense. bmw can easily put a 5L v8 into the m3. but they didn't. why? because they wanted us to rev it all the time to truly experience what M is about. just like e46 m3, I love to rev this thing anywhere anytime. don't forget the new m stock exaust is so quiet. probably the quietest compare to the competition. even if you rev the hell of out it, i bet you can't hear it that much. So your complain about noise doesn't apply in this case either. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 10:18 AM | #98 | |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 10:33 AM | #99 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
Seriously, if you have a way to actually figure this out, I'd like to know about it, since I personally am at a loss to figure where cars are in relation to each other based on time to speed. If you don't have a way to figure this out, don't bother answering and we'll realize you're just blathering. Bruce |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 10:46 AM | #100 | |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Quote:
Based on the data you could make a stab and say the TT would be one maybe one and a half car lengths ahead (maybe) up to 80-90mph with the M3 pulling level at the 130mph mark and slowly pulling clear there after. My point to Jonmartin was how over only the space of 9 seconds could the M3 crave out a 5 car lengths lead. It's simply impossible. If the 5 car lengths was at the 175mph mark I would say for definite because there would have been enough time elapsed to allow the M3 to open such a gap and probably more if truth be told. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 10:52 AM | #101 | |
First Lieutenant
10
Rep 378
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 12:01 PM | #102 | |
Colonel
35
Rep 2,406
Posts |
Quote:
unless M is marketing or environmental friendly which trigger the move to turbo in next gen m3, then well I have nothing to say. how many current m3 owner would go c63amg or isf if the m3 has a similar big displacement engine with rev max out at 7k rpm? I'm sure many would choose the other two instead or the rs4. bmw knows that, so that is why they stick with a 4L v8 instead of 5-6L v8 with a 7k rpm redline. or if bmw thinks like you, then why bother with the new v8. just shove the old m5 v8 and call it a day and save ton of development cost on the process. but seriously that is not how the m3 supposed to be. doesn't matter what suspension or mness you have in the m3, but it won't be a complete m3 without a proper high rev N/A engine. In this case, bmw give us both and that what makes it so special compare to the competitor. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 01:22 PM | #103 | |||
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Right. Thank you for your agreement.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I personally like the effortless feel you get from not having to use big numbers on the tach to whip down the road smartly. The low-noise, under-the-radar aspect appeals to me. You're perfectly welcome to like a lot of exciting sturm and drang with your speed, but try and understand another viewpoint. Sneaky speed just flat works for me, and your intolerance of this viewpoint is baffling. Bruce PS - Big loud speed works for me too - when I'm in the mood. |
|||
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 02:17 PM | #104 | |
Colonel
35
Rep 2,406
Posts |
Quote:
at near 100K in price, it must be somehow special. but is it the most special, no? there are ton of other car that people would choose over the viper even it has the huge low end grunt that you described. I wouldn't be surprise people even choose the less torque m3 over the viper. not sure what you are trying to get at. everyone understand low, quiet, effortless speed. but that is not what you buy the m3 or any performance car for. it seems you can't get that or just can't understand the fact. I have no problem you want the effortless feel in car like viper, c63 amg, etc.., but those are not what most people who want performance car look for.if you are correct, then the gt3, ferrari, rs-4, m3, etc don't exist today. I'm just saying your complain for effortless speed in the m3 doesn't make sense because that is not how bmw intended it to be use...like keep it in low 2-3k rpm on acceleration. if you can't do that, then clearly it is not the car for you. simple as that. let take your acura tl for an example. i'm sure it is way more effortless than the m3 at low rpm. tap that and it goes, no need to press anything hard. but that is not what people buy the m3 for. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 02:35 PM | #105 |
Banned
0
Rep 4
Posts |
This has all been done before: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...highlight=audi
For some reason this person continues to force blind Audi loyalty down BMW throats. Every criticism of the TT made has held true and it is clear to anyone that it is barely an N54 Z4 rival. Comparing it to the M3 is only something a blind Audi loyalist would do, as it is not on the M3's performance level, period. No one with a diesel should be talking about performance cars anyway, because they don't know what one is. |
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 02:43 PM | #106 | |
Brigadier General
126
Rep 4,145
Posts |
Quote:
I think footie said it best when he says that it's all about the experience and thrill of the drive. The engine is certainly a large part of that but if the rest of the car isn't up to the task, ... well, ... you might as well just get a 335.
__________________
2017 F80 YMB.
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 02:53 PM | #107 | |
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
Your point that nobody buys high performance cars and likes sneaky speed (in addition to all-out speed) is childish. It implies that there is something "wrong" with an opinion that you don't share. Nonsense. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 03:01 PM | #108 | |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Quote:
If you understood Ferrari's history you would know that what he raced the day before he sold to the public the day after, he basically built up a reputation of producing road going racing cars. Likewise the same sort of history is present with Porsche, but at least they have seen that highly strung engines aren't for the masses and now most of there stuff only revs south of 7K. Guess which is the most successful brand of these two. Is there a market for high revving engines......definitely, but is it practical in a family car......definitely not. High revs don't even bring any advantage in either acceleration or trackwork as currently most of the quickest stock cars around the ring are lower revving, torque laden big blocks or turbo units. Sorry but if you want to use the racing card to justify a high rev limit on your car then make sure the car in question has a roll cage, full 5point harness and stripped interior or at the very least have only two doors, two seats and be as practical as an ash tray on a motorbike. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 03:15 PM | #109 | |
Major General
1109
Rep 8,014
Posts |
Quote:
Because I own a diesel means I should know nothing about performance cars. Do I know nothing about car ...............? Mate you clearly don't know anything about me because if you did you wouldn't be making that statement. Am I an Audi loyalist..........? I certainly like their cars, but then I like most quality products which includes some BMWs, some Mercs, all Porsche, most Lambos, not a Ferrari fan but then there's enough of them already, only getting into Jags now I'm passed forty and are designing decent looking cars, love Astons, adore Bentleys and get all wet at the thought of Corbas. The question you should be asking is whether I rate the M3 the greatest car in the world because anything else in your opinion proves I'm anti-BMW. I've owned a few BMWs through the years so either I've a bad memory and keep forgetting I hate them or I like them but no more than anything else. Personally I think it option number two. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-06-2009, 03:17 PM | #110 | |
Colonel
35
Rep 2,406
Posts |
Quote:
for example, i said you can hit speed limit in the m3 effortlessly in one of my previous post. but to you it seems you want fast speed at low 2-3k rpm. I just point out to you that the m3 doesn't work like that. if you want fast, you punch it. if you want effortless at posted speed limit, then the m3 can definitely provide that as well as many current m3 owner can confirm here. But not brutally fast at 2-3k rpm. If you want brutally fast like the viper at low rpm, then the m3 is not for you. That's all I'm saying. I think your lack of reading comprehension, fault assumption, too sensitive, calling people childish because I don't agree with your opinion. well... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|