Hurry up before they are gone

[sdiver68]

Originally Posted by lucid

However, I disagree that modded 335s are doing damage to the M3. Yes, on paper it might appear so, but I'd say that a turbo charged 3.0 liter engine is no substitute for a 4.0 liter engine that revs up to 8400 rpms when it comes to experiencing the engine. I understand that turbolag is well managed in the 335, but technically it is still there. And the additional power strokes of the M3 engine--8 vs 6 cylinders--cannot be substituted/chipped/modded for when it comes to responsiveness and smoothness. In that sense, the engine is clearly the most attractive feature of the M3.

You do realize that turbocharged engines are by far the choice of road racing engine builders except in Series where they have been banned, do you not?

[lucid]

Originally Posted by sdiver68

You do realize that turbocharged engines are by far the choice of road racing engine builders except in Series where they have been banned, do you not?

If you read I wrote earlier you'll see that I am not questioning their performance in terms of their output--their power/displacement characteristics. That's why they are used in racing. Are you saying a turbo charged engine will have the same response characteristics as a NA engine and will be as smooth as a NA engine of similar power output but with more cylinders?

[southlight]

Originally Posted by lucid

South,

What kind of BMW is that--the one you're drivin'? This just occured to me...

You're kinda curious and insistent, aren't you?
It's said to have a marble steering.


Best regards, south

[southlight]

Originally Posted by ruff

You do know, too much drinking is bad for your health. Thanks for the link. Just what I needed, more niceties to blow my money on. I am surprised you haven't flamed me on this thread. I gave you the perfect opportunity. And where is your buddy Epacy, on a date?

Yeah, maybe I use that specific smiley too often.

I'm not in the mood to flame you. You're just wanting to arouse reactions from the guys here, that's legitimate (here could be a drinking smiley but I'm giving that up).

Best regards, south

[lucid]

Originally Posted by southlight

You're kinda curious and insistent, aren't you?
It's said to have a marble steering.

Well, I thought I'd give it one more shot. I'm sure Swamp was just as curious.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by lucid

Well, you are right, the 335 is the closest thing to meeting the requirements I stated--and I assume many on this board have a similar set of requirements for their next purchase. I also agree that lack of LSD is a major issue in the 335, and it is indeed a bit suspicious for BMW to weld the stock differential in place (didn't know that).

However, I disagree that modded 335s are doing damage to the M3. Yes, on paper it might appear so, but I'd say that a turbo charged 3.0 liter engine is no substitute for a 4.0 liter engine that revs up to 8400 rpms when it comes to experiencing the engine. I understand that turbolag is well managed in the 335, but technically it is still there. And the additional power strokes of the M3 engine--8 vs 6 cylinders--cannot be substituted/chipped/modded for when it comes to responsiveness and smoothness. In that sense, the engine is clearly the most attractive feature of the M3. I am not going to race this car, so it doesn't matter if a chipped 335 is 0.2 sec faster. What matters is how the car responds and feels when I step on it getting on a ramp or something or when I toss it around a track once a month.

Moreover, I really do not have the interest or the time to try to upgrade the engine, suspension, transmission of a 335 just to bring it up to stock M standards--at least on paper. (We beat that one to death on various threads).

I am sure the M3 will have its issues, but based on what I've read/heard so far, I don't get the feeling that the potential issues will keep me from buying it--especially in the absence of any financially viable alternatives that meet my requirements.

When I first read your original post, I wasn't sure if this thread would turn out to be interesting or not, but based on the responses you've got so far, it seems that it seeded a good discussion. I guess it doesn't hurt to revisit the beaten horse every once in a while to keep things check...

I would agree with you, I have never been an FI fan, though I guess I will slowly be forced to warm up to it at some point. I do understand the many benefits of FI but normally aspirated powerplants will always be the reason why I got into this business to begin with. I love everything about the 4 litre, the horsepower numbers and the flat torque numbers but surprised it isn't more economical. Maybe BMW's 8% more efficient marketing ploy elavated my hopes too much. I am a Mopar fan but the the chevy small block has proven to be the real deal and continues to smoke the competition with power and economy and all with it's archaic technology. Kudos to Chevrolet.

Oil will probably be 100 dollars a barrel before the end of the month. 5 years from now, gas will be how much? I may be able to afford a 15 mile per premium gallon then, but I am not going to be without hesitation when I drive the car for a significant amount of miles. One must also remeber the insurance premiums keeps ticking away whether we drive the car or not.

Clean burning diesels like the 335d are really the wave of the future. I don't know how clean burning the Audi Lemans cars are, but they have been making mince meat of their petrol fueled competition. If I was really smart, I would get the 335d when it's introduced in the States, probably fall 2008. The car has 428 lbs of blistering torque and gets 35 mpg on the combined cycle and is a autobahn racing champion. In addition, 300k miles should be a breeze for car if it is well maintained.

At the elevation where I live, a base 335 will definately stay with the M3 in the short run and a power modded 335 will definately out gun it in the straights. I am not planning on modding the car I choose, unless the car needs an LSD. I will be buying the stripper version of whatever car I choose. I know if I choose the DFI Cayman S, it will be relatively gutless in these parts but but so is almost everything not sporting FI. The Cayman is possibly the best handling daily driver on the planet. Base 60 k makes it a relative bargain when one prices other world class handling cars. Precision and tossability are it's forte and worth a lot in my book. The Cayman is not a better car than the M3 and the M3 is not a better car than the Cayman. Both are about the same price. One just does certain things better in certain areas than the other and vice versa. It is simple, it boils down to the driving experience one desires.

Living in Boston in the heart of Sox nation, I think the M3 is an easier choice over the 335. It is just difficult to pass on such a great bargain performer as the 335. BMW outdid themselves with this car making it tough on potential M3 buyers. As this forum thread states, I would suggest people get a stick version of whatever normally aspirated performance car they choose and hold on to it. This type of set up already has one foot in the grave. And if the winds of change are favorable, we may get lucky and end up with a true classic.

[swamp2]

Well once many of us got "over the hump" (the hump of generally gruff replies and responses) on this thread, somewhere around post #57 by UBMW, I will have to say I have honestly very much enjoyed it. Ruff, congratulations for stirring up a the pot and I do now mean that in a very positive way! Not sure if you could have "calculated" any of the replies but hats off if you even had an idea. Great discussion and great comments by many.

-ruff your point about the Caddy was quite solid, an almost perfect example about brand loyalty overwhelming objective analysis
-GregW - nice insight on brand loyalty as well, and that it is not always a bad thing
-sdiver68 - perfect addition of some clever humor to a thread that needed it
-mkoesel - right on the money about "carpe diem"
-Keto - great point about how folks make decisions - data vs. consensus

There were ceratinly other enjoyable points along the way as well.

to all (except south the m3post.com drunk (sarcasm))

[southlight]

Originally Posted by swamp2

to all (except south the m3post.com drunk (sarcasm))

As you want:

Best regards, south

[lucid]

Originally Posted by southlight

As you want:

Best regards, south

Wow, cool Guinness smiley. (Although it says coke on the file path!)

[southlight]

Originally Posted by lucid

Wow, cool Guinness smiley. (Although it says coke on the file path!)

Hmm, better?

Best regards, south

[lucid]

Originally Posted by ruff

I would agree with you, I have never been an FI fan, though I guess I will slowly be forced to warm up to it at some point. I do understand the many benefits of FI but normally aspirated powerplants will always be the reason why I got into this business to begin with. I love everything about the 4 litre, the horsepower numbers and the flat torque numbers but surprised it isn't more economical. Maybe BMW's 8% more efficient marketing ploy elavated my hopes too much. I am a Mopar fan but the the chevy small block has proven to be the real deal and continues to smoke the competition with power and economy and all with it's archaic technology. Kudos to Chevrolet.

Oil will probably be 100 dollars a barrel before the end of the month. 5 years from now, gas will be how much? I may be able to afford a 15 mile per premium gallon then, but I am not going to be without hesitation when I drive the car for a significant amount of miles. One must also remeber the insurance premiums keeps ticking away whether we drive the car or not.

Clean burning diesels like the 335d are really the wave of the future. I don't know how clean burning the Audi Lemans cars are, but they have been making mince meat of their petrol fueled competition. If I was really smart, I would get the 335d when it's introduced in the States, probably fall 2008. The car has 428 lbs of blistering torque and gets 35 mpg on the combined cycle and is a autobahn racing champion. In addition, 300k miles should be a breeze for car if it is well maintained.

At the elevation where I live, a base 335 will definately stay with the M3 in the short run and a power modded 335 will definately out gun it in the straights. I am not planning on modding the car I choose, unless the car needs an LSD. I will be buying the stripper version of whatever car I choose. I know if I choose the DFI Cayman S, it will be relatively gutless in these parts but but so is almost everything not sporting FI. The Cayman is possibly the best handling daily driver on the planet. Base 60 k makes it a relative bargain when one prices other world class handling cars. Precision and tossability are it's forte and worth a lot in my book. The Cayman is not a better car than the M3 and the M3 is not a better car than the Cayman. Both are about the same price. One just does certain things better in certain areas than the other and vice versa. It is simple, it boils down to the driving experience one desires.

Living in Boston in the heart of Sox nation, I think the M3 is an easier choice over the 335. It is just difficult to pass on such a great bargain performer as the 335. BMW outdid themselves with this car making it tough on potential M3 buyers. As this forum thread states, I would suggest people get a stick version of whatever normally aspirated performance car they choose and hold on to it. This type of set up already has one foot in the grave. And if the winds of change are favorable, we may get lucky and end up with a true classic.

I would have looked more seriously into the Cayman, but I decided a few weeks ago that I really wanted the 4-seater functionality. This will be my only car. I want to be able to drive people around.

The insurance thing is somewhat of an unknown. I have not owned a car in this risk category before, and I have no idea what will happen to my payments. Currently, I'm paying $1100/year for full 300/500 coverage. I expect that to at least double. I called up my insurance company and asked them to price me a policy--just in case they had the M3 in their database--but they knew nothing about it. I understand they can't possibly price the collision coverage without knowing the MSRP, but I was more interested in the liability numbers, which make up the most of the cost.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by southlight

Hmm, better?

Best regards, south

Nah, the other one was better.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Well once many of us got "over the hump" (the hump of generally gruff replies and responses) on this thread, somewhere around post #57 by UBMW, I will have to say I have honestly very much enjoyed it. Ruff, congratulations for stirring up a the pot and I do now mean that in a very positive way! Not sure if you could have "calculated" any of the replies but hats off if you even had an idea. Great discussion and great comments by many.

-ruff your point about the Caddy was quite solid, an almost perfect example about brand loyalty overwhelming objective analysis
-GregW - nice insight on brand loyalty as well, and that it is not always a bad thing
-sdiver68 - perfect addition of some clever humor to a thread that needed it
-mkoesel - right on the money about "carpe diem"
-Keto - great point about how folks make decisions - data vs. consensus

There were ceratinly other enjoyable points along the way as well.

to all (except south the m3post.com drunk (sarcasm))

Hey Swamp, you forget the rest of the posters on this forum who all made valid points, especially my only supporter, Mr. Garrett.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by ruff

Hey Swamp, you forget the rest of the posters on this forum who all made valid points, especially my only supporter, Mr. Garrett.

No...

Originally Posted by swamp2

There were ceratinly other enjoyable points along the way as well.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by southlight

As you want:

Best regards, south

Jeez South, now that is what I call falling off the wagon before ever getting both feet back on it. Your so called sobriety lasted a paltry 33 minutes. Not a good idea for me or anyone else to buy you a beer or mouthwash for that matter.

Cheers, Mate.

[sdiver68]

Originally Posted by lucid

If you read I wrote earlier you'll see that I am not questioning their performance in terms of their output--their power/displacement characteristics. That's why they are used in racing. Are you saying a turbo charged engine will have the same response characteristics as a NA engine and will be as smooth as a NA engine of similar power output but with more cylinders?

I'm saying the most successful race car in the history of road racing, the Porsche 962 and all of its predecessors and derivatives, used either single or twin turbos. F1 cars got so fast they had to ban FI...the same with some other series. And yes, both F1 cars and Prototypes need to be able to put the power to the pavement in controllable and smooth ways.

I'm saying yes, depending upon design, turbos can be every bit as tractable as NA cars, or simply high HP monsters with horrendous lag, or even make a diesel engine with respectable output for its size. Turbos have gotten a bad rap due to the ill-conceived designs out there, those manufacturers that just slapped a turbo onto an engine to raise HP with less concern for tractability.

I understand the some people love the "romance" of NA and/or conventional manual trannies. If that's your thing, great! When I want that raw, visceral, connected feeling I borrow my old GSXR600 race bike from the team mate I sold it to and drag my knees across the pavement at GIR. Different strokes for different folks....

I'm a turbo, semi-auto guy because I believe those are the superior technologies as proven at various level of auto road racing.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by sdiver68

I'm saying the most successful race car in the history of road racing, the Porsche 962 and all of its predecessors and derivatives, used either single or twin turbos. F1 cars got so fast they had to ban FI...the same with some other series. And yes, both F1 cars and Prototypes need to be able to put the power to the pavement in controllable and smooth ways.

I'm saying yes, depending upon design, turbos can be every bit as tractable as NA cars, or simply high HP monsters with horrendous lag, or even make a diesel engine with respectable output for its size. Turbos have gotten a bad rap due to the ill-conceived designs out there, those manufacturers that just slapped a turbo onto an engine to raise HP with less concern for tractability.

I understand the some people love the "romance" of NA and/or conventional manual trannies. If that's your thing, great! When I want that raw, visceral, connected feeling I borrow my old GSXR600 race bike from the team mate I sold it to and drag my knees across the pavement at GIR. Different strokes for different folks....

I'm a turbo, semi-auto guy because I believe those are the superior technologies as proven at various level of auto road racing.

I am not talking about traction or extracting lots of power from a relatively compact small displacement engine. A turbo engine does that. It trades off responsiveness and smoothness for power per displacement--a worthy trade-off in a racing application since the latter will improve your lap time more than the former, especially if there is a displacement cap. (An F1 or any other engine would be more responsive and smoother with a NA engine of larger displacement by the way. That's just a technical fact. The extra cylinders provide additional power strokes to even out the torque output further and compressors are powered by the exhaust gasses from the engine so there is a time constant there). What I am saying is that since I won't be racing the car I will be buying, I don't care about lap times, and I'd rather trade off some power for responsivenes and smoothness. So I don't care if a boosted 335 accelerates faster than my M3. It's that simple.

[paulyd]

The only thing that is funny in this entire thread is that ruff doesn't understand why members of an M3 forum are biased.

Even more hilarious is the fact that ruff doesn't realize that alot of people would derive more pleasure out of a BMW badge than they would a marginal increase in 'steering feel.'

[MI6]

Originally Posted by chitown08

The only thing that is funny in this entire thread is that ruff doesn't understand why members of an M3 forum are biased.

Even more hilarious is the fact that ruff doesn't realize that alot of people would derive more pleasure out of a BMW badge than they would a marginal increase in 'steering feel.'

Agreed.

Ruff is a strange one- passive aggressive and some other oddities as well. Bottom line he wants to stir up drama and get some attention. Look at the result............80 some odd replies and counting.

I wager a $5.00 dollar bet he'll never buy one.........

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by MI6

I wager a $5.00 dollar bet he'll never buy one.........

I would not place that bet, however, I would bet $50 that the majority talking the talk here do not.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by ruff

Jeez South, now that is what I call falling off the wagon before ever getting both feet back on it. Your so called sobriety lasted a paltry 33 minutes. Not a good idea for me or anyone else to buy you a beer or mouthwash for that matter.

Cheers, Mate.

Man, honestly I thought that's a coke!
Too bad there isn't something like a Pellegrino-smiley...

Best regards, south

[sdiver68]

Originally Posted by lucid

I am not talking about traction or extracting lots of power from a relatively compact small displacement engine. A turbo engine does that. It trades off responsiveness and smoothness for power per displacement--a worthy trade-off in a racing application since the latter will improve your lap time more than the former, especially if there is a displacement cap. (An F1 or any other engine would be more responsive and smoother with a NA engine of larger displacement by the way. That's just a technical fact. The extra cylinders provide additional power strokes to even out the torque output further and compressors are powered by the exhaust gasses from the engine so there is a time constant there). What I am saying is that since I won't be racing the car I will be buying, I don't care about lap times, and I'd rather trade off some power for responsivenes and smoothness. So I don't care if a boosted 335 accelerates faster than my M3. It's that simple.

OK, we'll agree to disagree. There is no inherent superiority of responsiveness or smoothness to an NA engine over an FI engine. There are only the engineering trade-offs the engine designer decided to build into that engine. I was trying to demonstrate that with examples from Road Racing where on tighter tracks responsiveness and smoothness are required for good lap times.