the bmw 1 series

GTM said:
I really don't see the point of that much power in a road car to be honest, ( unless it weighs several tonnes), most people can't even handle 200bhp let alone 500+.
Click to expand...

The kind of people who cant handle that much power are not the kind of people who will buy such a car anyway.

Cars are getting heavier and heavier, and so are requiring more and more power.. 0-60 in 4.7 sec?? Pah !! .. 911s have been doing that for over a decade and with only around 300 Bhp on tap.
Click to expand...

Yes, but a 10 year old 911 will not have anywhere near as many creature comforts or safety features as an M5. Not only that, but the M5 is probably just as much, if not more fuel efficient than an older engine.

I can see your point in many respects - cars are becoming too lardy, but ultimately people demand creature comforts and safety, so they will be heavy. If you want a lightweight stripped out racer, then there are still plenty of cars from the likes of Noble, TVR and Lotus to do that. I think you are missing the point of the Beemer TBH.

Oh, and to be fair, while 100 bhp / litre is nothing new, its still an impressive figure, by and large.
 
GTM, whether anyone can handle that sort power or needs that level of performance is a different argument altogether. and I do agree with you.

100BHP per litre is not exactly common and it really does depend on whether it's a screamer or has some low down pull as well. Comparing M5 to 911 is not fair, 911 is a 2 seater (I hate the +2 bit) and a lot lighter whereas the M5 is a full 4 (if not 5) seater with all the comfort levels one needs. The toys and safety requirements will inevitably lead to heavier weight.

In my view there's never been a bad M5, I'd not be surprised if BMW have already sold all of their first year's production.

BTW, so sorry you aren't impressed, I'll ask BMW to try harder:D

Edit, beaten by Paul :( , should have ignored that phone :mad:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For a naturally aspirated engine 100bhp/litre whilst maintaining good low-end torque isn't easy to achieve. Yes, you can push further, like the 120bhp/litre Honda S2000, but you have to rev it hard to get anywhere, just like a motorbike engine.

With turbocharging it's easy... mitsubishi get 170bhp/litre from the evo VIII FQ340.
 
daihatsu got 100bhp from 900cc's for gods sake DAIHATSU!!!!
it's quite impressive for a 5.0l engine though - but the gaddamn thing still hit every branch of the ugly tree bangle chucked it out of. ;)

dev - i drive a rusty silver p-reg rover 400 now so i'm imune to all ridicule. (or i wouldn't have bought it) so do your worst!
 
julian2002 said:
daihatsu got 100bhp from 900cc's for gods sake DAIHATSU!!!!
Click to expand...
The smaller the capacity of an engine, the easier it is to get a high specific output. 100bhp+ from a 900cc engine is nothing and pretty common in bike engines which often have specific outputs much higher than 100bhp per litre. I don't know which Daihatsu engine you're referring to but it was probably a motorbike type engine. Very high revving and almost no torque.

There are still very few normally aspirated road car engines with 100bhp/litre or more. The ones I know of are:
- McLaren F1 V12 (basically two BMW M3 engines bolted together)
- BMW M3 (current and previous model)
- new BMW M5
- Honda S2000
- Ferrari 360
- maybe the new Lambo and the odd Porsche, not sure.

Of those, only the BMW engines have a good deal of low down torque, the others are just race tuned screamers :rolleyes:

Michael.
 
michael,
actually i think it was turbocharged! - the daihatsu charade gtti.. iirc.
i've always been impressed by bmw's engines it's the rest of the package that sours it for me.

dev / isaac
pity / ridicule me if you like but i'm happy with 48 - 60+ mpg which was the main reason for buying it.
cheers

julian
 
As a rule, the problem with BMW's is not the cars, but the drivers.

I quite like the cars, but I'd never buy one - as I'd immediatly get associated with the 'typical' BMW driver. I don't mean to offend any BMW drivers here - as I realise not all are the same, but none the less, I'd not want one.


Steve
 
I agree GTM,the Audi TT is a fine example of a ridiculous lard bucket selling loads and it weighs 3 tonnes.The VX220 on the other hand,same money,but great brakes,lightweight,rwd and incredible ptw,in fact I want one,shame its not 250bhp though.Why would anyone buy a TT and not a VX? apart from badge snobbery?
 
Why would you want a TT over a VX?

4wd
comfort
the ability to get in and out without injuring oneself
the ability to carry something in addition to 2 people in the vehicle
Having an easy car to live with day in, day out

I wouldn't buy a TT. But I'd sooner a TT than a VX.

Edit: This is on the basis of it being the only car I had. If I were to keep my execwagon, then I'd get a super 7 for some fun.
 
I couldn't drive any car with handling as bad as the TT,or should I say deadly dull,regardless of practicality and comfort
 
I've not driven one... nearest I've driven is the company's X-reg A4 1.8, which is understeer city. Nothing like as good as my own car, and that's no handling demon.
 
TT is no better,the steering is duller than any anything I have ever driven,its as if they deliberately wanted to mask all feel away from the halfwits that will buy this car just in case they panic and try and drive properly.In fact the indersteer is so obvious they obviously expect the owners to lift off,even when driving around a pebble at 10mph.I liked the gearnob though.
 
Saab, you clearly know nothing about the Audi TT. For starters, it does not weigh 3 tonnes, it weighs about 1.5 tonnes. Still fairly heavy, but then you should probably excuse it given that it is a very safe, well equipped, and more importantly 4WD, which means that it does handle very well contrary to what you believe.

Edit: I am wondering whether you drove a 2WD version - something is seriously up if a 4WD Audi TT is understeering that badly. Although the ligh steering seems to be something of a VAG trait in general.

If you have VAG-COM you can adjust the weight and feel of the steering. Theres a thread on seatcupra.net about it at the moment.

Dont get me wrong, I dont really like the Audi TT, but some of your statements are just plain wrong.

I'd much rather have a Nissan 350Z... or even a tuned Skoda Fabia / Octavia vRS ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Paul i think he was being sarcastic re it's weight etc, Dave what you have to remember is that the TT and your car are pretty much the same under the skin, and from what I remember all the VW products with the golf chassis are not that far apart, if anything I found the TT better than the skoda but that could be down to the lower centre of gravity and lower seats. They all handle pretty well, with plenty grip, but they are underdamped and suffer from steering with a relative lack of feel, as do most VW group cars, the new A3 I drove the other day (sport TDi), seemed to handle better than the previous one but the steering was dreadful and lifeless, very very lifght with no weighting even artificial, the A$ is much better and has way better seats.
 
It does seem to be something of a VAG trait. The first thing I do to my Fabia vRS is get Eibach vRS springs and Koni adjustable dampers. That will sort it out. It does handle quite well though, but it definitely needs the traction control left on, and it is a little wallowy.

The TT handles better than any other VAG car, except the real high end Audi's and the likes of the Golf R32. I just dont like the look of them, they look too much of a hairdressers car. I love the stylish interior of them, though. I would much prefer one of the Skoda vRS's (which look far meaner), Golf R32 (excellent car), Golf GTI Mk5 (looking good), Leon and Ibiza Cupra, and I also like the Audi RS models which are really fast.
 
I actually worry when people complain about understeer on public roads. Unless one drives at insane speeds, it shouldn't really be an issue. I can understand how frustrating it can be on a race track, but on public roads surely it helps to stabilise the car.
 
Are most Audi's still front wheel drive? Is this true of the TT too? They seem to be the only 'prestige' manufacturer who use front wheel drive ... which is kinda odd.

I don't see the fascination with these Vauxhall/Audi sports cars ... I'd much rather get a TVR (despite reliability issues). In fact, I'd rather have an immaculate condition MGB V8, or perhaps the newer MG RV8. Not as much fun in terms of BHP, but ... it's not all about BHP at the end of the day. If I wanted BHP I'd probably get a GTO or similar ...

That's just my opinion though :)

<shrug>

Steve
 

Latest posts

Back
Top