BMW Werkz banner

41 - 60 of 83 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
636 Posts
Originally posted by BMDubya+Nov 18 2004, 07:26 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BMDubya @ Nov 18 2004, 07:26 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-SHAHABM3@Nov 13 2004, 08:39 AM
Does Mclaren f1 lm count as non BMW,  that is my dream car
[snapback]229973[/snapback]​
why would it? it has a Mercedes motor...
[snapback]233017[/snapback]​
[/b][/quote]

No, the McLaren F1 has a BMW motor. It has a 6.0L V-12 that's related to the 5.6L V-12 in the 850CSi; a similar form of the same engine with a bit less horsepower was meant for the semi-mythical M8.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,665 Posts
is correct. F1 is bmw v12
SLR is merc.
 

·
Crazy Fabricatin' Admin
Joined
·
9,355 Posts
i caught myself on that one already late last night...my deeeeeeepest appologies...i must have been on crank lmao (not really just lots of redbull i work graveyards...) :banghead
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,297 Posts
Originally posted by 24valve@Nov 10 2004, 08:38 PM
I think that the 240SX is the most overrated car ever. I don't see what's great about them at all. That said...

- Porsche 944 Turbo S (or, much less likely, a Porsche 968 Turbo S - there's like four of them, and the last one for sale sold for about $45,000, not exactly affordable but still pretty reasonable for an ultra-rare supercar)
- Porsche 924 Carrera GTR (or, more likely, one tuned to GTR status. 450hp out of a 2.5L four-banger is my kind of energy, and you could do it for cheap)
- a DeLorean DMC-12 (there's a famous one around the 'Net with a 911 Carrera 2 6-speed transmission and a tuned twin-rotor out of the 3rd generation RX-7. It's fast. Very fast. Although that kind of work might be a little pricey.)
- Lancia Delta HF Integrale 16V Turbo (there was one in the US on eBay not long ago for about $9,000)
- Alfa Romeo 164 Cloverleaf (ultimate 4WD sleeper if you could get one here, it'd be probably be about $12,000)
- Alfa Romeo GTV-6 Callaway Turbo (rare, but quite fast)
- Audi S6 (the original one from the mid-90s with the I-5 turbo. ultimate sleeper, something like 0-60 in 4.9 seconds with a boost controller, and a rich man's sound system. They go for about $14,000)
- Mercedes Benz 190 E 2.3-16 and 2.5-16 (Benz's answer to the E30 M3, fast, pleasant to drive, and a yardburner with tuning. Cheap too at $6-7,000)

I could probably go on for hours. When I was first looking at cars to get I made a "dream list" of affordable cars 2 pages long. Almost none of them were feasible, haha.
[snapback]228385[/snapback]​
How is the 240SX an overrated car?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
636 Posts
There's just nothing captivating about it. The styling's bland, the usual engine isn't particularly novel or powerful and the only thing really going for it is that it's RWD and cheap.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,297 Posts
It's RWD, light, and has very appealing lines. The 89-94 models look like mini-300ZXs.

The transmission is a beast, but, yeah, it is hooked up to a wimpy motor.

It just screams "potential."

Then again, what doesn't?
 

·
Retired administrator
Joined
·
5,996 Posts
Originally posted by 24valve@Nov 22 2004, 09:18 PM
There's just nothing captivating about it. The styling's bland, the usual engine isn't particularly novel or powerful and the only thing really going for it is that it's RWD and cheap.
[snapback]235652[/snapback]​
1. it sucks in the US spec

2. in the japanese spec, it's got a wonderful turbo motor and a very playful chassis.

just some things to think about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
636 Posts
Originally posted by triggrhaapi+Nov 22 2004, 11:45 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(triggrhaapi @ Nov 22 2004, 11:45 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-24valve@Nov 22 2004, 09:18 PM
There's just nothing captivating about it. The styling's bland, the usual engine isn't particularly novel or powerful and the only thing really going for it is that it's RWD and cheap.
[snapback]235652[/snapback]​
1. it sucks in the US spec

2. in the japanese spec, it's got a wonderful turbo motor and a very playful chassis.

just some things to think about.
[snapback]235729[/snapback]​
[/b][/quote]

I just think it doesn't hold half a candle to anything that I've listed. For the price of a 240SX you could get an old 944 - I don't think there's any question between those two.
 

·
Retired administrator
Joined
·
5,996 Posts
That's not true. You can find a BAD 944 for the price of a good S14. The Porsche is way more problematic, way more expensive to maintain, and while it's a great handling car, it's way down on power. For the price of owning and maintaining a 944 turbo, for example, you can have a heavily modded SR20 powered, 300+ hp, Silvia converted S14 with suspension, big brakes and the whole nine. On top of that, when you look at the 944 compared to it's rival, the E30 M3, the M3 wins every time.

Imho, the 944 is the best handling failure porsche ever made. It's not that the car is awful, it's a lovely car, it's just that it's shadowed by it's contemporaries. The N/A 944 is no E30 M3, the turbo 944 is no 911. It was horribly unreliable, believe me on this I was considering getting one for quite a long time and did a lot of research. The shape on the outside is great, but unless you get a 90s example (forgot what they changed the name to, but it's the same chassis and they added more power and an "S" badge) the interior is butt ass ugly. The interior of a modern pontiac is better. It's about as 80s as it gets.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
636 Posts
Originally posted by triggrhaapi@Nov 23 2004, 11:14 AM
That's not true. You can find a BAD 944 for the price of a good S14. The Porsche is way more problematic, way more expensive to maintain, and while it's a great handling car, it's way down on power. For the price of owning and maintaining a 944 turbo, for example, you can have a heavily modded SR20 powered, 300+ hp, Silvia converted S14 with suspension, big brakes and the whole nine. On top of that, when you look at the 944 compared to it's rival, the E30 M3, the M3 wins every time.

Imho, the 944 is the best handling failure porsche ever made. It's not that the car is awful, it's a lovely car, it's just that it's shadowed by it's contemporaries. The N/A 944 is no E30 M3, the turbo 944 is no 911. It was horribly unreliable, believe me on this I was considering getting one for quite a long time and did a lot of research. The shape on the outside is great, but unless you get a 90s example (forgot what they changed the name to, but it's the same chassis and they added more power and an "S" badge) the interior is butt ass ugly. The interior of a modern pontiac is better. It's about as 80s as it gets.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.
[snapback]235934[/snapback]​

I would not at all consider the E30 M3 the rival of the 944. The 944 was introduced in 1982; the E30 M3 would not arrive until five years later. And of course the 944 turbo is no 911, and it was never designed to be. Neither of these cars can be compared well to the 944, they just don't fit, it's like saying "Yeah, the 944 was great, but it was no Audi S4."

I also really considered a 944 before the BMW (almost bought an S2, actually), and from the research I've done, I came to the conclusion that the car was not horribly unreliable to maintain at all as long as routine maintenance is performed (the most important of that being timing belt and water pump replacement). It is expensive to maintain - I wouldn't say horribly expensive - but people should know that when they buy one.

They did uprate the models later on - the S model you're talking about (87-88), with a 16-valve head, had 188hp but didn't get the facelift on the outside. The S2 ('89-91, 208hp), turbo ('86-'88, 217hp) and turbo S ('88-89, 247hp) were all sufficiently powerful and would have easily matched the E30 M3 no questions asked. I agree with your point about the 80s interior - at least up until the 1985 1/2 models, where they made a complete interior facelift that I think looks pretty good.

The 944 is a good car, and I don't think it should be maligned like it is by so many people. It handles like it's on rails and the later models are quite fast (the turbo S is a budget supercar), and has this pure appeal that your typical 240SX just can't match.
 

·
Retired administrator
Joined
·
5,996 Posts
It doesn't handle better than the E30 M3 first of all. I've driven both.

Second, you can't compare a turbo 944 to an N/A E30 M3. I would, however take the pepsi challenge with an S2 versus an M3 EVO 2.5L. You can't compare the two, the M3 will kick it's ass, just like it did in Touring car racing in the 80s.

Don't get me wrong dude, I love the 944. I think it's an icon and if it had come around at the right time, it would be a legend. It was just overshadowed by the E30 M3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
636 Posts
How can you say that the E30 M3 overshadowed the 944 despite the fact that it came five or six years later, but then say it's not right to compare it to a 944 turbo? That doesn't make any sense.
 

·
Retired administrator
Joined
·
5,996 Posts
If you know anything about the history of either vehicle, you'd know that the E30 M3 and the 944 were rivals in touring car racing in the 80s.

I say it's not fair to compare an M3 Evo to the 944 turbo because the E30 M3 is a 2.5L I4 N/A and the 944 is a turbo four pot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
636 Posts
Originally posted by triggrhaapi@Nov 23 2004, 02:40 PM
If you know anything about the history of either vehicle, you'd know that the E30 M3 and the 944 were rivals in touring car racing in the 80s.

I say it's not fair to compare an M3 Evo to the 944 turbo because the E30 M3 is a 2.5L I4 N/A and the 944 is a turbo four pot.
[snapback]236081[/snapback]​
Even when the 944 racers fielded by Porsche in the late '80s were all turbocharged? From 1980 on any 924 or 944 based racing car fielded by Porsche had a turbocharger. (Read: '79 924 Rallye Turbo, '81 924 Carrera GTR Le Mans, '87 944 Turbo Cup)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
i really don't have it out for many import cars besides for the new GTO, thats about as much importing I like after the bmw, dream cars being
1. 94 357is
2. 05 GTO, just to race with notches stang
3. 01 Cobra R, which would kinda take the fun out of every other car i guess.
4. 70 GTO or 442, updated with trans am drivetrain, lowered and running 17s
5. 93 383ss Silverado, again to race notches lightning
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
Originally posted by Ding@Nov 25 2004, 11:53 PM
i really don't have it out for many import cars besides for the new GTO, thats about as much importing I like after the bmw, dream cars being
1. 94 357is
2. 05 GTO, just to race with notches stang
3. 01 Cobra R, which would kinda take the fun out of every other car i guess.
4. 70 GTO or 442, updated with trans am drivetrain, lowered and running 17s
5. 93 383ss Silverado, again to race notches lightning
[snapback]237536[/snapback]​
yeah i say my old lightning today. god i miss that truck looks bas A$$. performed even better.

sounds pretty close to my line up.
1. 91 notch street/road race setup
2. 93 lightning
3. E36 346is to race steves 94
4. 05 stang the slow car for the time being if i can even say that at all

:driving then life is complete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
310 Posts
-S2K
-97' VR4
-STi
-worked too hell 66' mustang

I agree the S13/S14 is way overrated car.

A fun project would be a 4 banger Supra. (96 preferably)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,253 Posts
996 GT2
996 GT3 RS
993 GT2
McLaren F1 (maybe)
 
41 - 60 of 83 Posts
Top