M3
Thread Starter
1st Gear Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 62
From:
RE: M3
no im not a ***** but there no point in calling people out over there opinions espacally when they said nothing from the beginging of my post .. i just thinks its dumb no im not a *****, i like it tough but if you meet me im the farthest from that im just consideret of others feelings thast all call it what ytou want
Thread Starter
1st Gear Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 62
From:
RE: M3
should i yell and argue that he is right about the m3 whats the debate ??? i have a friend with and m3 that will DESTROY my mustang its a high 11s car and even though its 1/4 mile it will still smoke me on the race track so whats your point it is a better car i love my mustang but it not better so sorry im a ***** for agring with him... does that make you feel better!!
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10
From: Charleston, S.C.
RE: M3
What's all the Commotion?
Let me just say first:
Congratulations on the kill, Connor.
Secondly, have you dyno'd your mustang yet? I am willing to bet that you are pushing more WHP than you think. Definitely more than 215 at the crank. I am interested in seeing your torque curves. Are you runnning the stock final drive, or is it modified? Another thing to bring up is your solid rear-axle compared to his IRS.
On to the M3:
As I am looking, I only see the intake as a true "mod" for the M3. The cat-back does crap and the "short-shifter" doesn't help with our "notchy" ZF units. If your buddy doesn't know already, he has an OBDII S52 (3.2) under the hood. They are NOT very responding to mods. All the OBDII guys are converting to OBDI to get their HP.
Tell you buddy to dyno his 3.2. If your buddy isn't putting down atleast 205-215 hp at the wheels, then he needs to get a compression check. I am putting down 227RWP with just my S50 (3.0)
LWT flywheels are great if you track your car (Not to be confused with the drag strip) when you need the weight savings and RPMs to fall faster for the heel&toe's (down-shifts). As someone said, the loss of rotational mass makes launching and keeping your rev's in the "sweetspot" more complicated. I never have understood why people put LWT flywheels in their daily drivers.
Anyways, good race. Driver accounts for more than people realize. There are so many variables that come into play; tires, condition, gearing,weight,etc.. You out drove your buddy.
Let me just say first:
Congratulations on the kill, Connor.
Secondly, have you dyno'd your mustang yet? I am willing to bet that you are pushing more WHP than you think. Definitely more than 215 at the crank. I am interested in seeing your torque curves. Are you runnning the stock final drive, or is it modified? Another thing to bring up is your solid rear-axle compared to his IRS.
On to the M3:
As I am looking, I only see the intake as a true "mod" for the M3. The cat-back does crap and the "short-shifter" doesn't help with our "notchy" ZF units. If your buddy doesn't know already, he has an OBDII S52 (3.2) under the hood. They are NOT very responding to mods. All the OBDII guys are converting to OBDI to get their HP.
Tell you buddy to dyno his 3.2. If your buddy isn't putting down atleast 205-215 hp at the wheels, then he needs to get a compression check. I am putting down 227RWP with just my S50 (3.0)
LWT flywheels are great if you track your car (Not to be confused with the drag strip) when you need the weight savings and RPMs to fall faster for the heel&toe's (down-shifts). As someone said, the loss of rotational mass makes launching and keeping your rev's in the "sweetspot" more complicated. I never have understood why people put LWT flywheels in their daily drivers.
Anyways, good race. Driver accounts for more than people realize. There are so many variables that come into play; tires, condition, gearing,weight,etc.. You out drove your buddy.
Thread Starter
1st Gear Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 62
From:
RE: M3
when we raced it was completley syock with the cia only.. and sytech oil if that counts......
ive since then put power pullys on and that made a noticable diffrence.. i bought an h pipe and mac cat back but there still not on it yet and a stedda shorty sifter. .. thats in the mail i also have tokico race shocks and springs there not on eather i also bought a kenny brown subframe conector not eather why you say i live in an apartment and your not allowed to work on cars and all the mechanics say they dont have them time to MESS with after market products... I would love to get it dynoed but i live in jersey and i cant seem to find a place but my friends have agreed its closer to 250 they think... as for the M3 he has the shifter the intake the flywheel and coilovers he also has a dinan chip... hes slowly make it into a track car and as you probably know bmw aftermarket products are about 25%to 50% more exspensive then my car.....
what does your car weigh? have you ever taken it down the quarter?
ive since then put power pullys on and that made a noticable diffrence.. i bought an h pipe and mac cat back but there still not on it yet and a stedda shorty sifter. .. thats in the mail i also have tokico race shocks and springs there not on eather i also bought a kenny brown subframe conector not eather why you say i live in an apartment and your not allowed to work on cars and all the mechanics say they dont have them time to MESS with after market products... I would love to get it dynoed but i live in jersey and i cant seem to find a place but my friends have agreed its closer to 250 they think... as for the M3 he has the shifter the intake the flywheel and coilovers he also has a dinan chip... hes slowly make it into a track car and as you probably know bmw aftermarket products are about 25%to 50% more exspensive then my car.....
what does your car weigh? have you ever taken it down the quarter?
I ♥ Acer
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 990
From: United States
RE: M3
ORIGINAL: connor
My friend and I race alot he has a 98 M3 with cat backs, lightend fly wheel,power shifter and cold air intake.... Bmw rates it at 255 stock. I have a 95 GT with a cold air intake only...
its rated at 215 stock. why do i beat him by half a car length all the way to 100..??
(thats the speed we stop)
My friend and I race alot he has a 98 M3 with cat backs, lightend fly wheel,power shifter and cold air intake.... Bmw rates it at 255 stock. I have a 95 GT with a cold air intake only...
its rated at 215 stock. why do i beat him by half a car length all the way to 100..??
(thats the speed we stop)
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 10
From: Charleston, S.C.
RE: M3
Whether or not you are making 250 crank HP, your torque is what seals the deal against 6-cyl. Nothing like flat-plateau-like torque of a V-8!!![sm=smiley27.gif]
You aren't kidding about the BMW aftermarket ($$$)[sm=smiley21.gif] After having 3 of them, I can tell you that there are only a few things worth waisting your money on when it comes to BMWs:
1. The euro HFM kit
2. Coil-overs
3. Atleast a 40% lock-up LSD
4. Tires
Other than that, just save your money for a nice second-hand turbo-kit from AA.
Ehh....I don't actually know what my car weighs. A "stock" 318ti weighs 2750. With the added weight of the 6-cyl, M-suspension/brakes, radiator,etc., I am probably around 2900lbs. I haven't taken it down the 1/4 yet. I did, however, go up to a 1/8th mile track a month ago. I was spinning all through 1st and 2nd and didin't like it at all, mostly due to my open-differential (hence why I have LSD listed above
). Most modded M3's (bolt-ons, no cams) are running high-13's. I figure with my weight, and lower final drive ratio, my car will drop a few tenths off of that.
But, like they always say--BMW's are not drag cars, so I am focused more on my car's strong points (handling, braking, top-end)
ORIGINAL: connor
... hes slowly make it into a track car and as you probably know bmw aftermarket products are about 25%to 50% more exspensive then my car.....
what does your car weigh? have you ever taken it down the quarter?
... hes slowly make it into a track car and as you probably know bmw aftermarket products are about 25%to 50% more exspensive then my car.....
what does your car weigh? have you ever taken it down the quarter?
You aren't kidding about the BMW aftermarket ($$$)[sm=smiley21.gif] After having 3 of them, I can tell you that there are only a few things worth waisting your money on when it comes to BMWs:
1. The euro HFM kit
2. Coil-overs
3. Atleast a 40% lock-up LSD
4. Tires
Other than that, just save your money for a nice second-hand turbo-kit from AA.
Ehh....I don't actually know what my car weighs. A "stock" 318ti weighs 2750. With the added weight of the 6-cyl, M-suspension/brakes, radiator,etc., I am probably around 2900lbs. I haven't taken it down the 1/4 yet. I did, however, go up to a 1/8th mile track a month ago. I was spinning all through 1st and 2nd and didin't like it at all, mostly due to my open-differential (hence why I have LSD listed above
). Most modded M3's (bolt-ons, no cams) are running high-13's. I figure with my weight, and lower final drive ratio, my car will drop a few tenths off of that. But, like they always say--BMW's are not drag cars, so I am focused more on my car's strong points (handling, braking, top-end)
I ♥ Acer
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 990
From: United States
RE: M3
ORIGINAL: SilverBullet5.0
BMW's do ave some sick top end i will give that to them. stupid inline configuration....
BMW's do ave some sick top end i will give that to them. stupid inline configuration....
I ♥ Acer
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 990
From: United States
RE: M3
ORIGINAL: 95LT1
You rang?
Edit: although a lot of what you say is true, especially about lots of ppl on here spewing out incorrect information, hardly anyone here gives a rats *** about track racing, including me. To most of these guys, there are some exceptions, if it isn't a Ford Mustang it = POS. Just for future reference.
ORIGINAL: E30 M3
How much crack is smoked on this forum? Holy crap. Firstly, you guys are all over the map in terms of stats for the M3(most being completely incorrect). It is by no means a straight-line performer, that is secondary in nature, actually, it's at the end of the list of performance). These are track cars, with proven track performance, PERIOD! It just so happens that they're in the field of low 14 second cars at the track, so you compare them with your low 14 second car. They are both quick, low 14 second performers, it's that simple, unfortunately, that's where all comparisons end. To say that you BLEW away an M3 with a stock GT is ludicrous, or it wasn't a true all-out race. They are both fast cars, as is any 14 second automobile. The ultimate difference is that the M3 can do EVERYTHING very well, not so with the GT, NOT REMOTELY! I've driven both cars, and truthfully, they are both very quick, and would be hard to tell which is faster because of the inifinite factors involved(driver, temperature, weight etc...) Ultimately, it's CRYSTAL CLEAR which is a better car, the choice isn't as clear when you're talking about which is faster stock to stock straight-line. It's just funny how some of you characters throw out these words/stats/comments, and you have absolutely NO CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT! Go to a non-quarter mile track, and learn to drive before you start posting absurd and often incoherent comments giving the other mature stang drivers a bad rep. Christ.
How much crack is smoked on this forum? Holy crap. Firstly, you guys are all over the map in terms of stats for the M3(most being completely incorrect). It is by no means a straight-line performer, that is secondary in nature, actually, it's at the end of the list of performance). These are track cars, with proven track performance, PERIOD! It just so happens that they're in the field of low 14 second cars at the track, so you compare them with your low 14 second car. They are both quick, low 14 second performers, it's that simple, unfortunately, that's where all comparisons end. To say that you BLEW away an M3 with a stock GT is ludicrous, or it wasn't a true all-out race. They are both fast cars, as is any 14 second automobile. The ultimate difference is that the M3 can do EVERYTHING very well, not so with the GT, NOT REMOTELY! I've driven both cars, and truthfully, they are both very quick, and would be hard to tell which is faster because of the inifinite factors involved(driver, temperature, weight etc...) Ultimately, it's CRYSTAL CLEAR which is a better car, the choice isn't as clear when you're talking about which is faster stock to stock straight-line. It's just funny how some of you characters throw out these words/stats/comments, and you have absolutely NO CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT! Go to a non-quarter mile track, and learn to drive before you start posting absurd and often incoherent comments giving the other mature stang drivers a bad rep. Christ.
Edit: although a lot of what you say is true, especially about lots of ppl on here spewing out incorrect information, hardly anyone here gives a rats *** about track racing, including me. To most of these guys, there are some exceptions, if it isn't a Ford Mustang it = POS. Just for future reference.
My Stock GT performance was so bad that i was ashamed to race anybody on the street. Simply put a 94-98 Mustang GT are amongst the slowest Mustang GT's ever produced. Most of them only run low 15's. Heck there's minivans out with that kind of performance now. 2004 Toyota Sienna and 2004 Nissian Quest out performs those mustangs.
