Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2
- The largest expansion due to CTE of an exhaust is along its length and this is the one that must be designed for fairly carefully.
- Fake is fake, most folks agree.
- Lucid intial impressions are here and I think you misread them. Actually I think you did dream it as you mentioned. Do keep us all posted (not just lucid) on this re-engineering of the M3 for better low rpm throttle response. We are all very anxious for a "fix".
- Autos more reliable than sticks? I'll take your data to back up that claim and I am not interested in anecdotal nor preferences from drag racers. I mean real evidence about regular production vehicles. I seriously doubt your claim.
|
I'll not discuss the exhaust anymore. We disagree on whether or not this is good engineering, and agree that the tips are bling. Of course, I think the M tips are bling as well.
OK, I PM'd lucid, and he remembers posting somehting to the effect that his M3 has a significant disparity between just driving it and chasing after it modes, but I can't find it, and won't chase after it any more. (Of course, he loves the car.) In any event, unless you're a fanboy, there are records all over the net pointing to a comparative shortfall in the mid range, the latest of which was recently posted in this forum wherein the testers said the car was short of torque compared to the RS4.
Of course, it really
isn't short of torque compared to the RS4, and we know that in high gear the car pulls really well from low speeds when you boot it. Better than the RS4, in fact - but it just
feels less lively when you're not booting it.
I have no tested, off the shelf fix, but remembered corresponding with Mark Kibort a few years back in regard to an in-line fan he had developed, so a cursory net check came up with
this.
This isn't the answer, because it's designed to activate at full (or at least major) throttle, and therefore rapid spinup is mandatory. The device thus has a more powerful fan motor than you need (more than one HP), providing a semi-instant one psi of boost. Under those conditions, a temporary 62 amp drain on the battery is fine, but obviously not supportable as a full-time amp draw.
I think a 150 to 200 watt unit would supply that additional one psi of boost at part throttle and low to medium rpm, fading to something considerably less than that at full throttle and high rpm. But of course nobody is complaining about how the M3 runs when you're banging on it, are they?
A device such as this would provide sharpened throttle response, but also more torque at part throttle, just driving around. If it were me, I'd probably start with the as-delivered unit, but seek to replace the electric motor with one of a more suitable reduced capacity.
In regard to automatic transmission reliability, it's common knowledge. Enough so that nobody is writing about it any more. I read about this more than 20 years ago in some SAE papers by Ford and GM guys.
Generally speaking, an auto is good for at least 150 to 200 thousand miles with normal fluid and filter changes. You can get more than 100K miles out of a clutch, but you're on borrowed time - especially in a high-performance car. The other bogey with a stick car (especially a high performance model) is the synchros. Not that I've ever missed a shift in my life, but I hear other people have.
That old saw about more parts (and more moving parts) leads to less reliability turns out not to be the case (he said, diplomatically). If that were true, a dohc V8 would have perhaps a third of the MTBF enjoyed by an ohv four cylinder.
Bruce