What?! Ford bought out BMW? When?

 

Chui,
You gotta come with the goods. Where did you hear this? It looked like a while back BMW was considering selling itself to Ford after the Rover fiasco. However the Quandts swore they would remain independent and the rumors stopped. What happened? Was there too much fallout from the Rover fiasco to go it alone?

 

Chui, do tell.

y2ks2k,

The s2000 is a fine car. I liked mine. A lot. But read all those reviews on the M3 at www.thedoughouse.com. Sev says it all:

"Comparing 0-60 is never as good as comparing time to distance such as 1/4 mile.

A good s2000 driver will do a 14.0-14.2.
A good E46 M3 driver WILL do 13.2-13.4.

That is 6 to 10 car lengths . That is a ROYAL ass whipping."

Dude, don't be so insecure about your ride. There will always be cars that can outrun it. The new M3 is one of them.

adios.

 

I feel like I'm in the middle of the presidential election with both sides spouting off unsubstantiated claims without any facts.

How did the M3 numbers get down to 13.2? Are these your estimates (have your driven the car?)???

BMW's own claims say 13.5 itself! I've seen about 5 posts claiming 13.2. In fact, your numbers are all over the place (obviously because no 2nd source numbers have been posted). Besides the fact that you are once again making performance claims on a car that has not been tested. The car arrives in the US in January of 2001.

For the 4th time, I'm not arguing the fact that the M3 will be faster, yet a few people continue to argue like I am making this claim.

Indeed for example a quarter comparison of even 13.5 (I don

 

Please reference a source or is this inside information? I have not seen anything about it and was under the impression that it is Porsche that is on a tightrope, not BMW.

 

Dude,

I don't know what your reluctance to look at http://www.thedoughouse.com/m3stuff.htm is, but here is a page from one of the articles with their own test numbers: 13.2 at 108 mph. Yeah, the truth hurts. Now please stop calling my data unsubstantiated just because your too lazy to go view my reference link

 

<<Another note, the BMW M3 red lines at 8,000 RPM with will probably make it a "harder" car to launch in the same way Honda VTEC's are.>>

Good question, although I tend to doubt it will be hard to launch.

BMW makes relatively wide-range motors most of the time. Even my very peaky 4 cyl M3 easily launches at about 2500 RPM. The new M3 has lotsa torque down low although it's best go is up in the revs. I read that it has around 70% of peak torque just above idle. Torque everywhere, downshifts are nearly optional. It has only one cam lobe profile instead of two ala V-TEC. Among other things it advances and retards the relative timing of the intake and exhaust cams WRT the crank. This is sorta like automatically adjusting both cam gears as you drive. Not just versus RPM but also versus load. The prior 6 cyl M3 only did this for the intake cam. They also added individual throttles for each cylinder (like the E30 M3) which helps responsiveness. Honda is supposed to come out with a similar cam timing thing for some of the vtec motors but for the intake cam only. This should help the low / mid ranges noticeably.

Stan

 

!!!! "DUDE" !!!!

Not to belittle you or anything but you said "13.2 at 108 mph. Yeah, the truth hurts"

A few other of your posts have quoted "13.2"...

I think you better read the article you just posted, it clearly says "13.3 @ 108MPH"...

 

It's a little too aliased for me to tell on my monitor, but ok 13.3. That's still a bit quicker than the 13.5 speced by BMW, and even farther from 14.0, no?

 

geez i love the s2000 too, but i realize its not gonna be the fastest thing on the road. Get over it! man why don't you try to argue the 1/4 mile times of the z06.. doesn't matter if its different by .1 second.. its still enough car links that are stooks wouldn't stand a chance. just be glad you have a sweet looking car that can take out some pretty big adversaries.. but not all.