• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Sigh...240hp ain't what it use to be

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Gimli43Orcs
0-60 in about 6.1 sec
Click to expand...

do you have an auto? all of the rags tested the e36 manual m3 at ~5.5 secs 0-60, and 14.0 in the 1/4 mile. People have run as low as 13.7 with only mods like lowered tire pressure and weight reduction ( passenger seat, back seat, spare, jack, etc. ) This is still faster than almost all the cars you can buy stock for under 20k except maybe the neon srt-4, but the M3 is still a lot nicer and handles a lot better than that car.

The M3 has a lot more torque lower in the RPM band than cars like the TL, G35, accords, maximas, etc which is why it is faster.

I am <3's with mine

link to C/D article
 
Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
The 4.7+5 speed Dakotas pull mid-low 15s, the RSX S+6 speed pulls high 14's to low 15's. (by automag testing methods)
Click to expand...

heh, a .5 to 1 second spread isn't "keeping up". That's more like getting your ass handed to you every time.
 
heh, you think your car is boring? Try an '86 6.9L Diesel Ford with a 4 speed stickshift, yeah all 175 horses of it... well, at least I can pull a loaded trailer up the coquihalla highway without too much trouble...
 
Originally posted by: Apex
Originally posted by: psteng19
Originally posted by: LS20
per original question: supercars and luxury cars have been getting really really juiced up. normal cars, though, have only incremental power increases to compensate for their heavier weights. i dont think you can name 5 sedans under 40k that can pull off a 14.0 quartermile. and besides, 300hp means nothing in the handling department
Click to expand...

1. WRX STi
2. Evo 8
3. Neon SRT-4
4. Altima 3.5SE(R)
5. .......
Click to expand...

5. Chrysler 300C Hemi

13.9
Click to expand...

My list:
1) G35 sedan 6-spd (I think its under 40k..might be wrong)
2) Maxima 6-spd
3) Altima 3.5SE 5-spd ..ok so it might be 14.1 or 14.2..but its definately possible. One guy got a 13.9 stock..but he was the only one I think.
4) Pontiac Grand Prix GTP
5) 300C if it is under 40K
 
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: titansfan098
Excuse me? Subaru's are known for their all wheel drive and AWESOME handling!
Click to expand...

AWD != handling.
Click to expand...

They're known for their ability to put power to the ground (grip under acceleration), as well as reasonably high cornering and braking grip. Their handling is good, but not spectacular. Scubby's have always understeered too much for balanced handling, much more so than their main competitor, the Lancer EVO.
 
Originally posted by: jteef
Originally posted by: Gimli43Orcs
0-60 in about 6.1 sec
Click to expand...

do you have an auto? all of the rags tested the e36 manual m3 at ~5.5 secs 0-60, and 14.0 in the 1/4 mile. People have run as low as 13.7 with only mods like lowered tire pressure and weight reduction ( passenger seat, back seat, spare, jack, etc. ) This is still faster than almost all the cars you can buy stock for under 20k except maybe the neon srt-4, but the M3 is still a lot nicer and handles a lot better than that car.

The M3 has a lot more torque lower in the RPM band than cars like the TL, G35, accords, maximas, etc which is why it is faster.

I am <3's with mine

link to C/D article
Click to expand...


no,its a 5sp manual. But this was a time i actually got at a dragstrip, not a magazine time that was corrected for altitude,wind speed,etc....
 
"its a lot less impressive once you factor in emissions standards."

PFFFTTTTttttt, making excuses are we? The remarkable progress in technology of today's cars VS 35 year old technology = BFD! Normally aspirated carb, bias ply tires, and 2 tons of mass. Low initial cost, easily obtainable and accessible parts, with elbow room, legroom, and trunk room. Yeah, I can see where slapping EFI and catalytic converters on there would ruin the whole thing. :roll:
 
its no excuse. not being able to beltch out pollution like theres no tommorow makes engineering much harder.
go ahead, u try making that engine pass emissions. the engineers back then couldn't, just look at the hp drop after emissions regulations. u make it sound like they were holding one hand behind their back for sh*ts and giggles. and just look into the development of the catylitic converter alone, that was thought to be not possible.

During the seventies power outputs declined to meet the emission regulations. A 1970 Z28 Camaro that had the Chevy 350cu. in. LT-1 Corvette engine and 360bhp was capable of 0-60mph in 6.5 seconds. By 1972 the output was down to 255bhp and continued to decline. In the early 1980s there were fitted with a 305 V8 producing a mere 180bhp.http://www.yanktanks.co.uk/bg-files/bg-fbodies.htm

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/generations/articles/100444/article.html
 
Originally posted by: Ornery
The "technology" to meet those emissions regulations has been available for decades now. No big deal. Fact is, there is still no replacement for displacement. After 35 years, that's finally hitting home!
Click to expand...

err..that "clean" enough hemi supposedly wasn't possible until newer computer models allowed them to tweak it clean. the hemi was dumped for being horribly polluting, more or less proving my point that it wasn't something perfectly obvious and easy holding back engineers from uber tech from the 70's😛.

The Hemi design combustion chamber is one of the poorest designs for emissions - why do you think it took so long to get it into production? It almost did NOT make emissions test requirements even with the modifications. NOx is the problem due to the cool temp flame front inherent in the design (also why it builds so much torque). There is also a little problem called "flame quench" (which causes additional NOx) with a true Hemi design, as was used on the V16 aircraft engine and the automotive engines produced in the 1950s. Today's Hemi is that (a "Hemi") in name only. [Editor's note: Bob is referring to the head design. It is not a true hemispherical head, but looks vaguely like a hemispherical head with parts filled in.]http://www.allpar.com/mopar/new-mopar-hemi.html
 
Doesn't matter if it's 8 or 10 cylinder, 16 or 32 valve, the point is that the trend is finally back toward BIGGER!

Big Engines Make Comeback
  • Automakers installed eight-cylinder engines in 29.1 percent of passenger vehicles built in North America for the U.S. market last year, the highest rate since 1985, according to Ward's Automotive Reports. The rate has risen every year since 2000.
 
Originally posted by: Ornery
Doesn't matter if it's 8 or 10 cylinder, 16 or 32 valve, the point is that the trend is finally back toward BIGGER!

Big Engines Make Comeback
  • Automakers installed eight-cylinder engines in 29.1 percent of passenger vehicles built in North America for the U.S. market last year, the highest rate since 1985, according to Ward's Automotive Reports. The rate has risen every year since 2000.
Click to expand...

I might would guess the increase could easily be attributed to SUVs...you know...
 
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
Originally posted by: Triumph
Your 240 hp M3 is still one of the most coveted vehicles in the last 10 years.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but the 200x ones are even better.
Click to expand...

Actually, a lot of people still believe that you can't beat the original E30 M3 as a raw sports car if you're talking M3. They only had 190ish... but they did weigh next to nothing and had a purpose-built chassis and suspension. I've been looking at prices for them steadily climb. Our wonderful USDM E36 M3 is unfortunately just a bored &amp; stroked 3series mostly...

And adding turbos to that powertrain is currently very expensive since only Active Autowerke seems to be able to do it well. I find that really silly so I've been thinking very seriously about getting an E36 M3 myself and redoing the engine to make it capable of handling boost and turbocharging better than those overpriced hacks at AA. 10grand (no labor!) to turbocharge an M3 that can't even friggin rev to 7 grand?? PITIFUL.

I actually see more and more hybrids entering the consumer market... and performance models will continue to use more and more bleeding edge technology. I'd love to drop my 4G63T into an M3. It's been done to a 911... why not an M3? Bimmerbishi! I'm also running around 240hp-ish... it's plenty for a daily driver but I need to save some money fix the rust on my $h1tee Mitsu 9yr old POS.
 
Originally posted by: RagingBITCH
Originally posted by: thomsbrain
Originally posted by: vshah
Originally posted by: Gimli43Orcs
0-60 in about 6.1 sec
Click to expand...

none of the family cars is that fast....IIRC the altima is like 6.7 or something. Not to mention RWD and handling. i envy you :beer:

-Vivan
Click to expand...

no, the accord coupe hits 60 in 5.9 seconds, according to car and driver.

but don't get me wrong, i'd rather have the M3.
Click to expand...

They were smoking crack when they got 5.9 seconds.
Click to expand...

yeah, unlike the competetion, they actually test their cars. pretty wild, i know. but if it's too scary, you can always go back to reading road and track's "tests." 😉
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top