Trout

iTrader: (1)

...only if Zippy is driving

SPIDERWRX

i would beat zippy in my van ;-)

zip106

You're all correct of course - for the one reason my car won't be anywhere near a track.

Well, not the turbo anyway

Ding, I can understand what you're saying about a Bm beating a Porsche, but so what?
I'd say many people buy the Porsche because it's a Porsche and wouldn't have a clue how fast it is against other cars - that or they just don't give a $hit.

Why would anyone spend a fortune on a Lambo/Ferrari etc, when a Caterfield that's just as quick, if not quicker around a track, costs 8 times less?
Perhaps it's because they don't care?

BMW's really aren't all that.
I know, I've had 3 and we're about to order another

I'm just happy knowing that nearly all of you on here have a slower car than me, but I'm not so insecure that I have to prove it

MMT WRX

Just don't stub your fecking toe today before you drive the purple throbber. I bet you've been climbing the walls not being able to drive.

Mind you, after 6 weeks, hope you've had that conditioner plugged in.

zip106

Well, last of the bandages came off yesterday so today I'm going to fire it up and go for a steady drive. (well steady until it's warmed up ).
Then I'll go and bait some BM drivers on the A46.....

Conditioners been on constantly so I *shouldn't* have any problems starting it.

MMT WRX

Ha ha...good man, don't forget to post the results.

zip106

SPIDERWRX

We did 3 tests today

(Round 1) 60mph to 100mph (3rd gear)

(Round 2) 20mph to top speed

(Round 3) 0mph to 100mph

(Round 4) looks and sound


Round 1 Bmw wins, more power at wheels + alot more torque in gear (he was shocked) Dry

Round 2 Bmw wins again, 5/6 car lengths ahead by 120mph, gps hit *175mph* he hit *170mph* Dry

Round 3 Porsche c4s wins , by 1 car length (it started to rain after round 2) i could not put the power down in the wet, but he could

Round 4 Porsche C4s wins , it looks FAB, and sounds much better then my 335i

Porsche C4s 2 Bmw 335i 2

Dingdongler

Edited for a laugh

ps, you can't count

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Crickey! Thats about as heavy as a 928

Are they really that heavy these days? No wonder it lost; Torque (to shift mass) was never the flat-6's strongest point (Its more of a revver - the in-gear test show this) - but this issue was always offset by a lightweight chassis. How times change....

To think some 911 snobs sneered at my old man's Supersports because it was a wee bit heavier (due to the wide arches). It was 1220kg....and that was considered heavy for a 911 back in the day.

Trout

iTrader: (1)

Early 911s were under 1000kgs!

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

Iwas thinking the BMW in this instance, I had some muppet in a C4s, pull out on me without indicating, beeped him, he put his foot down and wondered why there was still an eight year old Saab stuck to his bumper, might not have been going for it but it made a racket, just didnt seem that fast 30 to about 90, suspect it would have started dissapearing pretty soon and that a turbo helps as mine is similar weight and torque, but 100 bhp less, I think they need to get into their stride wheras a turbo with low end grunt flatters it a bit, similar reason to why a lot of middling diesels can give you a shock despite having a lot more power.

Trout

iTrader: (1)

A healthy C4S is pretty nippy. It was neck and neck with my old STI V which had around 340bhp and weighed 1250kgs.

It's main problem is extra weight and drag due to having the incorrect number of driven wheels for people who want a 911, but for all the wrong reasons

MMT WRX

Yea, and two big **** off turbos

zip106

You ain't seen me, roight.

jeremy

"My idea of perfection:

Front mid engined aluminium supercharged V8 (probably LSx) with AWD, low weight, good aero with some downforce, massive brakes, proper rear diff, 2 seats, big boot, non-RFT, electronically adjustable suspension and a rear mounted automatic gearbox (not dual clutch)."

Well said John. Couldn't agree any more. Indeed I think what you propose REALLY should be what the next Lotus Elite should be but sadly won't.

Your description sounds closest to the possible upcoming light-weight UrQuattro remake.
Actually I think a lighter 5 cyl with 400 hp is a better engine choice for light weight and agility. Unless you could find a super light weight 8? Of course the main problem with the Audi is that they don't really specialize in handling or steering feel.

So the bottom line is like some sort of Artega or Noble, your vision (similar to mine) will have to be custom built- which as the years pass will actually become more and more likely at least for those with a few million to invest. At least its not 100 million. One day. j

john banks

I don't have the weights to hand, but in comparing LSx and VR38 for example, there isn't much difference in weight or if anything it might be in favour of the LSx when you consider the ancillaries needed on the small engine to bring it up to the power of the big (although I'd be ruining that with a supercharger ). The V8 is shorter than a straight six, isn't very tall because of the simple valvetrain, weight can be down quite low and can be quite economical as well as unstressed.

jeremy

John,

Maybe that new UrQ with an audi v8 engine swap. Then figure a way to get the Trw- as used by the evora, hydraulic steering rack switched in. would be epic if only a bit wide. j

tony de wonderful

The 11 sec BMW pictured above had a fair few bolt on mods, plus a seat ripped out and high profile slicks on the back.

Japs car are built well even if they are not luxo inside. They are easy to mod because of the way they are built and old engines like RB's and 2JZ's still hold their own.

How many BMW 333i or 4S owners actually track their cars anyway? I'd say a very small % indeed. If you bought these cars to track you probably wouldn't leave them totally unmodified anyway.

Dingdongler

Not sure what you mean, I was talking about Spider's car which afaik only has a remap. No seat ripped out or slicks