motor

666fast · 08-12-2003, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by fedezyl

I have yet to see an american car to be better than an european one, please be objective and don't throw the tuning argument in, or this would be an endless discussion..

M3 at .87 on the skidpad, M3's base cost for a 2003 coupe is $43,000
Grand Prix Comp G is at .83 g's with a base price of $29,000. the M3 is most likely much faster than the Grand Prix in a straight line. Looks like Americans aren't the only ones who care about straight line speed.

The 2004 lincoln LS V8 is aimed at BMW 5 series. It's much cheaper with better performance as well. At $35,225 as the base price, it's a better deal. The 530i is $41,100. About a $6000 savings and a better vehicle.

Here is a small snippet from a review

"Thankfully, the LS's considerable power is well harnessed by its suspension and braking systems. Due to its nearly perfect 52/48 front-to-rear weight distribution, stiff chassis and improved toning of the four-wheel independent suspension, handling is superb and the car responds well to driver input. The suspension on the LS V8 Sport is also stiffer for sharper response and feel than that of the V6 model's. The net result is that there is very little body roll or unwanted movement around corners. Really, you can chuck the LS around like a sport coupe. And you can sense what the car's doing through the seat of your pants — a desirable attribute for any vehicle with sporting aspirations"

The Lincoln LS V8 does O-60mph in 6.42 seconds versus a 530i's 6.9 seconds. The Lincoln has 280bhp and 286 ft/lbs of torque, whereas the BMW 530i has 225bhp and 214 ft/lbs of torque. The top of the line 5 series (540i) is not much faster than the Lincoln.
On Lincoln's official site
http://www.lincolnvehicles.com/vehic...r.asp?sVehi=LS
they have something about surprising BMW, but the link won't work for me.

fedezyl · 08-12-2003, 08:51 PM

The price difference is probably influenced by the import taxes....
as for the LS, I read about it too, that it handles pretty well and has a good engine, but well, isn't it a Jaguar engine and a Mitsubishi body? I think it's based on the Galant or the bigger one that looks the same...Diamante? maybe??

666fast · 08-12-2003, 09:18 PM

Definately not the Diamante, the LS is much cmaller than it.

I highly doubt import taxes are what caused the $6000 difference. It would be a waste if BMW had to pay that much for every car they bring over.
I'm sure the Lincoln is much cheaper to have serviced than the BMW too.

ShadowLvr · 08-12-2003, 10:32 PM

LS and Jag... S or X type have the same chassis. The two cars started with the same motor, but Jag recently made changes of one type, and Lincoln took the changes another way. And I found a Car and Driver with the 00 Z28 Camaro pulling a .84 on michelin tires. (I happen to run the same type of tires, and the ride's nice, the traction stinks.) The SS was a step above the Z28. As to your statement that the M3 is better quality? I've heard plenty of complaints about the M3 motor. Only complaints on the LS1 is that it's not easy to tune higher. The rest of the Camaro may lack the plushness of the BMW, but you're taking a luxo sport sedan vs a sports coupe. As for prices, BMW is selling it's name as much as the actual car. And, once again, you're taking the sports team version (SVT, AMG, M, etc) vs a mass production.

Back to this, SVT Mustang Cobra .90 G on the lateral skidpad.
M3 I had was a .87? yea, .87

SVT Cobra, $35,000 390 horse s/c-V8 0-60 in 4.9 0-100 in 11.1 1/4 mile 13.3 @ 108.1 Top speed 155 (Gov)
BMW M3 $45,000 333 Horse I6 0-60 in 4.7 0-100 11.6 1/4 13.3 @106.8 Top speed 155 (Gov)

And since you are determined to use the late Camaro SS, (I couldn't find as many stats for it easily)
$30,000 325 Horse V8 0-60 in 5.5 Top speed of 160 (Gov)

Not too bad, a main production vehicle keeping up quite well with a pair of sports manufacturers. (As a side note, I have heard a number of SS boys say 13.8 in the 1/4 stock, but I don't have that down anywhere, so I won't quote it.)

$10,000 difference between the two specialty cars. $5000 less on the SS

fedezyl · 08-13-2003, 03:55 AM

As far as that, since I haven't driven any of either the M3 or Camaro SS, i'm just basing myself on what people say about them...but well...
Let's be objective about it, no more of I love european car's, I love American car's stuff, let's get to the people that drove it, I remember a guy from 5th gear ( i'm sure that jabba has that episode) testing the mustang bullit, and said it's fast but still get it's ass kicked by a clio RS on a B road in the U.K. not my word's, his, he actually drove both, now, since the mustang is one of the class leaders in it's segment it's fair to assume the comparison between the clio and the mustang on a B road..
I think the guy's name was Jason, he is Irish I think...I don't know...
Let's take Clarkson, still thinks the M3 is superior to the RS6, don't remember wich top gear episode though, and finally Tiff Needell, professional race car driver, still thinks that the BMW M product's are the best in overall performance, now what does that say about the mustang, camaro, firebird, take all of those car's stock against an M3 and they WILL get their ass kicked, try it for yourself if you want if you have the money or connections and open your eyes finally that the american atempt to a sports car is only suited to it's own internal market where they do not know better because they've never been in contact with a trully good sport's car, only car's that will go fast in a straight line...
Yes they are expensive, but I still think they are worth the price...
And as far as the 6000 dollar difference, i'm sure at least 3000 is taxes, and for the servicing, you can't ever compare a domestic service with an import servicing, because they are import's, think about logistics and you will get the picture.
As for the LS, it is a Galant then, I'm pretty sure it's a mitsubishi underneath, it would be to much of a coincidence if they looked so much the same, now would I pay 35.000 dollars for a mitsubishi galant lookalike?? I woulda have to be on crack....

fedezyl · 08-13-2003, 04:09 AM

Forgot a couple of things, the SS is the equivalent to an M3, the X-Type and S-Type do not have the same platform, the X-type is a Mondeo platform..
The M3 engine is a 3.2 liter 343 BHP engine, the SVT Mustang is a supercharged 4.6 liter 390 BHP engine, now, supercharging an engine and still not breaking the 100bhp/liter barrier sounds to me ridiculous, still a very fast car, just a half ass fast car though, not realising it's full potential...
I don't like the idea of american car's being fast because they supercharge and make a huge v-8 and get a stiffer suspension, a fast or quick car requires a little bit more than a bigger engine, bigger tires and stiffer suspension, there's no clever thinking in american sport's car making, just the idea of bigger is better, and that's why they get their arses kicked....

And again as far as pricing is concerned....well..look at a Camaro SS interior and an M3 interior and see for yourself....
I've seen both and well I haven't really been impressed by the Camaro's interior...
I have this great police chase video of a police Camaro chasing an E36 M3 I think, the old one, they are both doing 150 mph on the highway when the guy on the M3 swerves to the left lane to scare the cop who was right next to him, the cop makes a quick reflex turn with the steering wheel and inmediately the Camaro just looses control while the M3 just keeps on going....look for it on Kazaa and you'll see what i'm talking about, handling is the key, anyone with enough money can go fast in a straight line, the real challenge is to do so and be able to be fast on turn's at the same time...
oh well...this is endless, anyone who may wan't to contribute with argument's to this discussion is more than welcome, i'm more than willing to change my mind if proven wrong, but for what i've seen I still hold my position of american sport's cars coming short of the objective of being a true overall sport's car..

draak666 · 08-13-2003, 04:29 AM

Originally Posted by 666fast

"Thankfully, the LS's considerable power is well harnessed by its suspension and braking systems. Due to its nearly perfect 52/48 front-to-rear weight distribution, ..., handling is superb and the car responds well to driver input.

The BMW has perfect 50/50 weight distribution.

draak666 · 08-13-2003, 04:37 AM

Originally Posted by ShadowLvr

Audi. One thing first. Try some friggin names!!! A letter and a number do NOT equal a name for a car. A option package, sure, like Z06, or RT/10, SRT-4, GT, Those descripe the specific package. A4, A6, S4, TT. Those don't tell me shit.

OK, now you're just talking crap. Sorry. 8)

draak666 · 08-13-2003, 05:01 AM

Originally Posted by ShadowLvr

I've heard plenty of complaints about the M3 motor.

As for prices, BMW is selling it's name as much as the actual car.

I've read the complaints too. It's about some guy, who heard that some guy had problems with it. Other people pick it up, and then you have several guys who know a story about a guy that wasn't too pleased on his m3 engine...

All I know is, the m3 engine has won several prices, is state of the art and is as reliable as any other BMW engine.

And finally, if you're tuning your engine and buying yourself a new suspension that's gonna cost you the same amount as at what BMW sells it's name for. Plus, a car maker spends years of time and tons of money in R&D, so don't think that you can match their performance if you buy some stiffer suspension in the stores. I admit, you can choose the suspension you like best, but the difference will still be huge if you try to copy e.g. the m3 or Lotus suspension.

Sinister Angel · 08-13-2003, 05:18 AM

Originally Posted by fedezyl

Forgot a couple of things, the SS is the equivalent to an M3, the X-Type and S-Type do not have the same platform, the X-type is a Mondeo platform..
The M3 engine is a 3.2 liter 343 BHP engine, the SVT Mustang is a supercharged 4.6 liter 390 BHP engine, now, supercharging an engine and still not breaking the 100bhp/liter barrier sounds to me ridiculous, still a very fast car, just a half ass fast car though, not realising it's full potential...

Erm, the whole HP/liter thing is such a ricer excuse it's not even funny. There's a tuner saturn running around with 300 hp on a 1.9 litre motor. Whoopde fuck. I could care less

Originally Posted by fedezyl

And again as far as pricing is concerned....well..look at a Camaro SS interior and an M3 interior and see for yourself....
I've seen both and well I haven't really been impressed by the Camaro's interior...

Um, yeah, as we mentioned before, the M3 is more of a Luxury Sports Coupe. The Camaro is more designed just for performance.

Originally Posted by fedezyl

I have this great police chase video of a police Camaro chasing an E36 M3 I think, the old one, they are both doing 150 mph on the highway when the guy on the M3 swerves to the left lane to scare the cop who was right next to him, the cop makes a quick reflex turn with the steering wheel and inmediately the Camaro just looses control while the M3 just keeps on going....look for it on Kazaa and you'll see what i'm talking about, handling is the key, anyone with enough money can go fast in a straight line, the real challenge is to do so and be able to be fast on turn's at the same time...

The chump in the M3 is obviously going to be more controlled in his little maneuver. The cop wasn't going to expect it, he obviously over corrected. You can switch cars and I guarantee you unless you had a professional driver, the same thing would have happened.

ShadowLvr · 08-13-2003, 10:48 AM

On the Jag vs the LS, I had said the LS is on the same platform as one of the two jags. S-type or the X-type. One of those two Jags shares the Lincoln LS Platform.
And why the focus on horsepower per liter? Ever hear of torque? If you want to see torque in action take the M3, and the SS, stop at a red light, and start both cars in 2nd gear. See which one goes forward, and which one stalls. You're also thinking of peak horsepower vs sustained. I've had this lesson shown to me recently by a fellow domestic. He has a 96 Caprice with the LT1, 260 horse, 330 torque. My caddy has 275 stock horse, probably more like 295 as it stands now, and 315 torque. But my power curve is far more of a curve than the Caprice. He has me in 1/4 mile currently by .2 seconds. 14.5 in a 4200 lbs car, with 260 horse. I had a 14.7 in the 1/4 4100 lbs of car. The M3 has to be wound up to 5 and 6 k to get any of it's power. The Camaro hits peak torque at 3200, (Has over 200 ft lbs on tap since about 1800) and the peak horse I think at 5000. But it keeps over 75% of it's horsepower through a large portion of it's revs. The M3 spikes.
And once again, you're forgetting that the size of American motors is partly because they see usage in cars and trucks. (GM puts a slightly bigger version of the LS1 in the trucks.) Displacement was brought up to 6.0L. The LS1 does not currently run in any big sedans, but GM does have it slated to return to the new RWD sedans coming out. (Pontiac GTO also seeing the LS1 and LS6 I believe, but it's a coupe.) For those outside the states, think Holden HSV Coupe with some revisions for US bumper laws.
And Fed, you mentioed a guy who drove a Mustang. Which Mustang with which motor? There's base Mustang 200 horse 3.8 V6. Mustang GT, with OHV 4.6 at 260 horse, Mach 1 with DOHC 4.6 at 305? 300? somethig in there... and then Mustang Cobra with S/C DOHC 4.6 with 390 horse. And, maybe I'm forgetting something about motor sizes, but Doesn't BMW use a 5.0L V8 in the M5?
And to come to the SVT's defense on the power marks. Part of the reason it stands at 390 is the supercharger Ford used. To save money, they outsourced to a supercharger company. Either Garrett, or Eaton. I forget which, though I'm leaning towards Eaton. Well, whichever company it was, Roots style blowers isn't their best product. The centrifugal is the style they're better at. But, because of pricing, Ford outsourced to them. A sizable portion of SVT owners made the jump to some of the other s/c makers who make more efficient Roots style blowers. And they picked up some ponies doing it.
But, back to the efficiencies of US motors again. The automakers deliberately leave more potential in their motors for their consumers. Especially in certain cars like the Mustang, Camaro, Focus, Cavalier, etc. The tuner cars are being built so they can be tuned easily. Pop the hood of a Camaro, even the SS with a 5.7 in it, and you'll still have room to climb in the engine bay and close the hood on yourself. The car is easy to work on, and is supposed to be. Mustang is a little tighter in engine space, but still roomy. And Ford practically forces the computer programs on various aftermarket companies. You pick a year Mustang (that uses computers in it's motor) and I can find you 4 companies that make at least 1 chip or programmer for it. Chevy is nearly as easy. (Companies like Superchips inc. Hypertech, Jet performance, and Diablo) Extra space is built into the cars for the tuner markets. Ford, Chevy, and DC (Dodge/Chrysler conglomerate) each run their own shops designed for performance. GM Performance Parts, Powered By Ford, and Mopar Performance Parts. All 3 segments offer crate motors, exhausts, chips themselves, suspension upgrades, etc. How much space is in the M3 engine bay?
Thinking of which, a new house is going up across the street. Resident is coming in with an 00 Lightning. Farther in the devlopment is 3 Camaros of various years, an 87 Monte Carlo SS, Gen 1 Mustang ('65) a C3 Vette, guy with Chevy Silverado with work done on his Duramax deisel, and a Viper. Also have some show vehicles, an old Nomad, a 59 Chevy truck, a Plymouth Fury, a low ride hopper truck (the ones that jump up and down), some riced out accord with stereo so powerful it blows women's clothes off. Hehe I think that nearly 1/3rd of the 200 homes has a tuner of some sort in the garage. I may have to make a list of all the custom cars in the development. It's actually pretty interesting.
But this is in Florida mind you, lot of old people here, and a lot of young college students as well. (Kind of an interesting state. It's a lot of one or the other... Either old, or young.) The older gen tends to have the restored classics, mostly for show. The young gen does the newer cars, or restored and souped up old muscle cars.

Damn, gotta cut this off, one of the dogs has made an escape. Bleh.

Sinister Angel · 08-13-2003, 12:06 PM

The 03 Cobras use an Eaton. The model is what I'm not exactly sure of, but I *think* it's an M112.

ShadowLvr · 08-13-2003, 01:15 PM

Thanks Sin. Either way, it's a model that a lot of the Cobra boys don't like, so they're making a switch to some more efficient, and more controlled blowers. Many, doing the work at home in their own garage. Information on how to do it is in many of the Mustang forums.

fedezyl · 08-13-2003, 03:06 PM

I don't like japanese car's, so i'm not a "ricer", about your torque thing, engine is not as big as the gearing is, torque at the wheel is what matters and that can be changed with gearing, a flat torque curve is more suited to everyday use, and I hate drag racing so I don't even care about wich car goes faster in a straight line, anyone can do that....I still want to see the camaro and an M3 in a racetrack and see who wins...same driver and conditions...

And of course again we on to the tuning thing....tuning is endless, I mean just look at race cars, and you will see what I mean, you can do a million things to a car and get more horsepower, you can turbocharge jabba's Lambo and get 2000 hp out of it, again I am talking about STOCK, out of the factory cars, not tuned or anything, and if you say Ford cut some costs on a supercharger who knows on what else they cut cost's on, interior quality for sure...not only it's ugly to look at but it also shakes and rattles like an old fiat....

I don't know why people in the U.S. focus so much on torque, do you what it is anyways? did you know that BHP is a product of torque? what's the use of having so much torque if you have to change gears at 5500 rpm's, well while you are in your camaro changing gears guess what, i'll be still accelerating harder until my 8000 rpm redline....after all, changing gears is when you loose most of your time...
Oh well...

If I may request the opinion of ST-ANGER, I beleive he worked at Porsche and is an automobile engineer, so he probably has the knowledge to see who's right or wrong or whatever the point of this discussion is..

Sinister Angel · 08-13-2003, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by fedezyl

I don't know why people in the U.S. focus so much on torque, do you what it is anyways? did you know that BHP is a product of torque? what's the use of having so much torque if you have to change gears at 5500 rpm's, well while you are in your camaro changing gears guess what, i'll be still accelerating harder until my 8000 rpm redline....after all, changing gears is when you loose most of your time...
Oh well...
.

Umm, it's common sense that horsepower is a product of torque. In fact I can tell you the equation if you want. As for saying having a HP peak at higher RPM is better because you are still "accelerating" is a really ignorant and simple minded idea. While you are "accelerating", I'll be halfway down the straight. Brute torque kind of allows stuff like that to happen. Going on your reasoning, you would basicly say that a car with a motor that could rev 1 million RPM be better than lets say... my 85 HP saturn. This car has to be better because it also pushes 950 HP. Of course it is, right, more than 10 times the horsepower and all, but then we look at the torque rating, and this is assuming a flat rating. We would have 5 ft-lbs. That "awesome car" would take off like a fucking dog tied to a tree. That's what torque does, it gives you the initial get up and go, which is good if you want to have longer gears for the straight stretches for top speed, and some grunt to get out of those turns w/o having to constantly be at redline.

Oh yeah, your 8000 RPM motor isn't going to develop any power untill at least 5k anyway.