PDA

View Full Version : how fast is my 540i 6spd



phillytouch
11-15-2004, 09:34 PM
i would like to knw who i cn woop at stop light and who i cant...i do hv a dinan cold air intke..please dont laugh i knw tht dsnt mk big difference it just cm wth car ddnt even knw it til my buddy pointed it out

awahl63
11-15-2004, 09:36 PM
ahnda cvc nd a tyota ceho

The Beastmaster
11-15-2004, 09:41 PM
u cnt tch ths!

awahl63
11-15-2004, 09:42 PM
icn tch watvr iwnt i pwn u

Greco540
11-15-2004, 10:00 PM
wht d fck r u gys tkn abut?

amdspitfire
11-15-2004, 10:28 PM
thye r tkin buot kars he cn own

JAlfredPrufrock
11-15-2004, 10:31 PM
I lk th pnt bttr n jly sndwchs n sht.

awahl63
11-15-2004, 10:33 PM
I lk th pnt bttr n jly sndwchs n sht.
m to bt lke em n txs tst gd jb ks jjfa

JAlfredPrufrock
11-15-2004, 10:36 PM
I dnt rly lk pnt btr n jly i jst wntd t tp lk ths

323I Junkie
11-15-2004, 11:08 PM
Vowles are your friends. English alphabetation wasnt intended to be written Hebrew style

Mini4x
11-16-2004, 06:54 AM
u cn pwn hrd!

0-60 5.8 sec
1/4 mile 14.4 @ 102 mph..

PWN away!

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 08:07 AM
u cn pwn hrd!

0-60 5.8 sec
1/4 mile 14.4 @ 102 mph..

PWN away!


102 my freind?
My TA put 314whp, weighed 3500 pounds, and pulled 103 to 105 consistantly
I doubt a stock 540 wighing in at 400 pounds with 275 whp will run 102
Maybe at dead sea leel with a tailwind

Mini4x
11-16-2004, 08:17 AM
Thats the specs man..

A 540i 6 speed weighs 3700 lb..
290 hp
325 lb/ft

The BMW is SO technologically superior to a 79 TA it's not even funny.. you can't see it hitting a 100 in the 1/4?? With 24 less HP?? I dunno I say drive one then.. and then drive your TA and we'll see.

Lscman
11-16-2004, 08:28 AM
102 my freind?
My TA put 314whp, weighed 3500 pounds, and pulled 103 to 105 consistantly
I doubt a stock 540 wighing in at 400 pounds with 275 whp will run 102
Maybe at dead sea leel with a tailwind

Several controlled, instrumented tests by independent magazines of 540i/6 placed it in the range of 14.0s to 14.2s at 101 to 102 MPH. This is right smack in E36 M3 territory. The E39 V8 produces 45 HP more than an E36 M3 (with it's typical 100lb factory sunroof option) and the 5er's superior gearbox helps it carry 450 lbs of additional girth.

I frankly think the Getrag 6spd has a slight advantage over your THM400 3 spd & the extra 16 valves don't hurt powerband over 3K either.

Peak HP dyno numbers produced by your old hot rod with it's 4bbl Quadrajet & ancient HEI distributor don't mean didley....I learned that long ago. It's power under the curve that pushes the car. This is how the 200 HP SEFI 1986 Ford Mustang ran 14.3's & crushed muscle cars with 75% more dyno-measured horsepower. The previous year factory Holley-equpped 4bbl Ford Mustang ran 1/2 sec slower, despite having MORE dyno HP and running the SAME exact roller cam!

Response & powerband do good things! You can bet that BMW's E39 fuel injection, quad overhead cams, knock sensors & advanced engine mgmt controls are doing a better job than Ford & GM did 20 years ago. Don't forget benefits associated with 52/48 weight distribution, compared to a noseheavy classic ponycar. If new technology is worthless, why deal with it?

Greco540
11-16-2004, 09:41 AM
Another "Post of Year" candidate from LSCMAN!!!

tjn182
11-16-2004, 09:47 AM
why r u gys tlkng lke dis?

I frankly think the Getrag 6spd has a slight advantage over your THM400 3 spd & the extra 16 valves don't hurt powerband over 3K either.
i cnt ndrstnd u

Oak
11-16-2004, 11:19 AM
Published car magazine stats on the long road test for an e39 had the 0-60 at 5.4 and the quarter at 13.9. Go ahead and make those older Corvettes and Boxsters weep!

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 11:36 AM
Thats the specs man..

A 540i 6 speed weighs 3700 lb..
290 hp
325 lb/ft

The BMW is SO technologically superior to a 79 TA it's not even funny.. you can't see it hitting a 100 in the 1/4?? With 24 less HP?? I dunno I say drive one then.. and then drive your TA and we'll see.

I knoiw it would seem that way, but WHp and vehcile weight are 2 things that tecnology cant overcome..PS..look at my quarter times...the 79 TA wouldnt have a problem even with a supercharged 540, seeing how that time is calculated with street radials that cost $70 a piece :biglaughb:

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 11:46 AM
Several controlled, instrumented tests by independent magazines of 540i/6 placed it in the range of 14.0s to 14.2s at 101 to 102 MPH. This is right smack in E36 M3 territory. The E39 V8 produces 45 HP more than an E36 M3 (with it's typical 100lb factory sunroof option) and the 5er's superior gearbox helps it carry 450 lbs of additional girth.

I frankly think the Getrag 6spd has a slight advantage over your THM400 3 spd & the extra 16 valves don't hurt powerband over 3K either.

Peak HP dyno numbers produced by your old hot rod with it's 4bbl Quadrajet & ancient HEI distributor don't mean didley....I learned that long ago. It's power under the curve that pushes the car. This is how the 200 HP SEFI 1986 Ford Mustang ran 14.3's & crushed muscle cars with 75% more dyno-measured horsepower. The previous year factory Holley-equpped 4bbl Ford Mustang ran 1/2 sec slower, despite having MORE dyno HP and running the SAME exact roller cam!

Response & powerband do good things! You can bet that BMW's E39 fuel injection, quad overhead cams, knock sensors & advanced engine mgmt controls are doing a better job than Ford & GM did 20 years ago. Don't forget benefits associated with 52/48 weight distribution, compared to a noseheavy classic ponycar. If new technology is worthless, why deal with it?

You are jumping to conlcusions..
A: The time si posted were with a WS6 2000 trans am with manbdrel bent three inch exhasut and K&N filter, prted throttle body, at 3700 feet density altitude. The times those posted are that, magazine times, probably dont 100 passes at sea level.

You are right about old technology, but 425 WHP through a race built B&M TH350 tranny running through a 3.42 podi will never be threatened, now, with ported manifold and exhaust ports, and the kinks taken out of the $600 dollar set of headers, I am betting she better than that.


Now that you are done insulting my knowledge, and the fact I actauuly have owned 2 LS1 cars and the cllassic tas, 4 BMW's and have worked on in performance areas no doubt more cars than you have ever sat in, I would hope you reconsider before being so jumpy and condescending


Smokes has a lot of new technology, blueprinted dsitributors, modern carbs, roller mechanical cam with .700 lift...a 4.4 will never touch that car ina drag race...

PS..knock sensors slow you down, silly, they pull 12 degrees of timing out for over 30 seconds..Quad cams are nice, but remeber the LS1's 405 HP through factory equipment

You also forgot to mention the main reason the 1/4 times are different...the SAE vs. NET HP measurements

Thank you for your time,


The Junkie

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 11:47 AM
Another "Post of Year" candidate from LSCMAN!!!


Dont tell me that ignorant statement makes this guy some kind of hero, he doesnt know who or what he's talking about :rolleyes:

Mini4x
11-16-2004, 11:54 AM
You also forgot to mention the main reason the 1/4 times are different...the SAE vs. NET HP measurements

The Junkie

:lol

What the??

1/4 mile times are 1/4 mile times dude.. SAE vs. NET have nothing to do with it.

Does your trans am have heated seats??

Lscman
11-16-2004, 11:55 AM
WHp and vehcile weight are 2 things that tecnology cant overcome..

Yes they can, read my post. Power under the curve determines acceleration, not peak. Peak HP numbers are totally meaningless, unless you have a CVT transmission that allows the engine to maintain a specific RPM under acceleration.

Weight is offset by better brakes, chassis, tires and engine. This is why a Ferrari can outrun a Neon on a road race track.

Mini4x
11-16-2004, 11:59 AM
I knoiw it would seem that way, but WHp and vehcile weight are 2 things that tecnology cant overcome..PS..look at my quarter times...the 79 TA wouldnt have a problem even with a supercharged 540, seeing how that time is calculated with street radials that cost $70 a piece :biglaughb:

I guess all the magazines lie then..

Every test of the 540/6 has put the 1/4 mile times between 13.9 and 14.4 and 102-104 mph. Guess they are full of crap then.

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 12:00 PM
Dude, why dont you contribute something positive...I already had these discussions ten years ago

You referrred to the 86 mustang's 1/4 times opposed to 60's muscle cars...I referred you to SAE VS NET...

Power under the curve? I wrote more than one college paper on those algorithms to determine a true measurement of power..I teach it in driavability class everyday
Peak HP in any properly built engine is a huge indicator of performance, dude. You dont have to always get into power under the curve..

Tell you what...

Ill get Smokes
You supercharge your 540, and well go for titles, little man

Lscman
11-16-2004, 12:01 PM
You are jumping to conlcusions..the fact I actauuly have.......worked on in performance areas no doubt more cars than you have ever sat in........he doesnt know who or what he's talking about..I teach....I wrote...Tell you what...I knoiw...why don't you contribute something....the fact I actauuly have....

Well I think it's fair to conclude that you have no clue about my background, schooling or experience in this area. You are not qualified to rate the accuracy or value of anyone's posts.

I was stating my opinion about vehicles, not forum members. To avoid degrading the thread, please do the same. Your assessment of me and/or my knowledge was not solicited, & frankly, it's irrelevant. You are surely encouraged to post differing technical opinion. Let it stand on it's own merits.

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 12:02 PM
I guess all the magazines lie then..

Every test of the 540/6 has put the 1/4 mile times between 13.9 and 14.4 and 102-104 mph. Guess they are full of crap then.

Ididnt say they are menaingless, I said they are probably at sea level

Do you relaize how fast 102 is for a 13.9 second quarter, have you ever been to the strip? Do you realize how many unhappy 540 owners are out there getting killed by LS1 cars? even mach 1 mustangs?

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 12:04 PM
Yes they can, read my post. Power under the curve determines acceleration, not peak. Peak HP numbers are totally meaningless, unless you have a CVT transmission that allows the engine to maintain a specific RPM under acceleration.

Weight is offset by better brakes, chassis, tires and engine. This is why a Ferrari can outrun a Neon on a road race track.


Your last staement is meanbignless...we are talking 1/4 mile times, not handling, of course a 540 is a dynamic overall driving machine, and if I wasnt building a shop next summer, Id have got one instead of the 535


Your talking drag racing, the thread is about it, dont weasle your way out by talking "twisties"

Mini4x
11-16-2004, 12:09 PM
Actually I have..

I have owned several cars that I dragged raced. I DO know how fast a 14.0 is.. my 455 powered 79 cutlass would run mid 14's and would own anything on the highway I ever raced, my friends 455 powered Buick runs mid 12's. I know EXACTLY how fast a 14.0 @ 100.

This is one of the reasons I am buying a 540..

If they are gettting owned by Mustangs then maybe they need to learn how to drive..

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 12:23 PM
They arent that fast...I drove one and decided it wasnt worth the money...
Now, on the other hand, if you can handle something bidrectionaly-dog-butt ugly, the 545 e60..you wanna talk power curves on that car, I am impressed


Besides, we are talking sedans anyway....the e39 540 is rediculously fast for a passenger sedan that isnt m or AMG...but highway leviathan or dragstrip superstar it isnt, its competitive, not the hero of the night

and for the other guy civility, you knock sensor comment gave me a damn good idea of just how much you know...
Im upfront with whom I am...an automtive instructor with 11 years of expereince, an original Ford tech form ASSET school, and 2 years experience with an aftermarket turbo company, AETC member and contributor, and casual drag racer

Mini4x
11-16-2004, 12:28 PM
Besides, we are talking sedans anyway....the e39 540 is rediculously fast for a passenger sedan that isnt m or AMG...but highway leviathan or dragstrip superstar it isnt, its competitive, not the hero of the night

Agreed.. but I'll try mine when I get it and see what she runs, just for fun! They are fast, and nice to drive. I'd be willing to bet mid-hi 14's real world, if I'm lucky..

Greco540
11-16-2004, 01:05 PM
Dont tell me that ignorant statement makes this guy some kind of hero, he doesnt know who or what he's talking about :rolleyes:
No not a hero, but I know alittle more about LSCMAN than you do to actually try and attempt to debate with him, and if I may say so, he does know what he is talking about.

No need to go on the defensive when some voices their opinion either, and no one cares for your schooling or background either. Make your point, refute others, but no one called you a honkey tonk man and you shouldn't do the same to others. The point is hold an intelligent conversation without getting panties in a twist.

For the record, Peak hp numbers ARE meaningless in acceleration. The curve is what determines the level of acceleration. Such as a 250hp car will out accelerate a 300hp car of equal weight if the 250hp car makes 90% of its power from 2500-5500 and the 300hp car only makes it from 4500-5500.

PS: I did run 14.0@101.2 at the track with horrible 60ft and spin in 2nd, so sub 14's are very possible, and I haven't found a stock stang that couldn't beat me. My best friend in his 96 5.0 had to do an SVO intake, pulleys, h-pipe, flowmasters, K&N just to get low 14's.

Mr Project
11-16-2004, 01:40 PM
...and I haven't found a stock stang that couldn't beat me. My best friend in his 96 5.0 had to do an SVO intake, pulleys, h-pipe, flowmasters, K&N just to get low 14's.


Do you mean that you haven't found a stock Mustang that could beat you? I'm confused.

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 01:52 PM
I spent two years of my life hanging with some insane mustang guys. I have seen bone stock 5.0s get a 13.9

that much aside, peak HP means a lot...unless you are talking about turbos, like the infamous 1000 hp supras...where they are no faster than thier 500 HP little brothers

there are two basic styles of HP development, broad, cam controlled torque curves like VANOS motors have, and straightline, arithmatic development of the pushrod motors. Theoretically, torque never changes, we all know it does, inertial forces and VE affect it, but a paper engine has X torque, always

Knowing the development of torque in an engine, we can assume we are speaking of efficient motors, and understanding BMW power curves, and the other engines we speak of, (454's arent peaky power motors, they are stump pullers, the fact that mine wont float the valves until 7200 is a nice plust), we can make an educated summation of the performance to be expected.

Overall power production in an engine IS important, however, while it is beneficial to have a nice broad torque curve, it doesnt cover everything, my wifes 325 e46 car had an awesomely flat power curve, but with 189 overall HP or something like that, it just didnt "get it"

Affecting acceleration also are where the power points of the engine fall on the gearing, the drag coefficient, etc. For your 540's to be pulling 102 mph with such relatively low times, i have to assume you are not only running at shallow altitudes, but are alsorunning cars with hella good gearing matches


What I call people or dont call people in these threads should only be construed to be what I actually say..when someone comes in a nd starts attempting to correct over 50% of one of myposts, I have to laugh

When Isit down at AETC and have breakfast with Myron form TPIS or Kenny Dutweiler himself, I shut my mouth listen up like an eager 12 year old boy, I dirngk my coffee and keep my mouth shut. When I eat lunch with guys running 9 second quartes on radials, I ask often, listen much. When someone comes onthe internet attacking my cars, making incorrect assumptions about one opf my statements, and vaults and engine safety (knock) sensor as something that improve performance, I obviously get alittle irritated. There are people on this forum that can take me to schoo. He is not one of them
That fact that none of you have given me a density altitude or track altitude for your times shows me you merely want to argue, DA affects everything, dramaticly..my TA ran 109 mph at sea level (the WS6)..I certainly dont claim that as its real perfromance, it s not diff than the 102 to 105 it pulled at 3500 feet

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 01:56 PM
Although, someone should teach me to type

Lscman
11-16-2004, 02:13 PM
Your last staement [heavy Ferrari versus light Neon] is meanbignless...we are talking 1/4 mile times....you knock sensor comment gave me a damn good idea of just how much you know...


OK, let me clarify...forget road racing...the typical Ferrari will handily beat a lighter Neon in a drag race TOO. Is that the proper venue? Much like the 540i, the Ferrari's added girth offers a few other benefits & I see no need to apologize for mentioning these points.

Once again, you are rating my posts for accuracy & content. This is not appropriate. :nono

If you feel my opinion is wrong, flawed or has no value, that's fine. Please keep it to yourself instead of flaming.

If you really want to debate the value/purpose of knock sensor technology, I will accommodate you. Please check with a moderator first, to give them heads-up & to see which forum section is most appropriate for such a topic and then PM me. You should probably start the new thread where everyone can watch & draw their own conclusions. I don't want anyone thinking I started anything when you go down like a low-flying skeeter in a forest fire. It's not too late to suppress your ego, lighten up and shake hands (lol). Last call.......

:beer

Thanks, Rick

Greco540
11-16-2004, 02:16 PM
Do you mean that you haven't found a stock Mustang that could beat you? I'm confused.

Yes that's what I meant.

Cacatfish
11-16-2004, 02:22 PM
Very interesting thread. I dont have the knowledge that you guys seem to have, but I will say that power under the curve is not as meaningful in all out acceleration tests as it would be in everyday driving.
Why? because in an acceleration test, the car will probably be kept between 5k and 6.5k rpms (give or take) for the enitre duration save the launch.
Thus, the fat torque curve a motor maqkes from 2k to 6k rpms will be of little consequence.
For this reason, many a torque-less 240hp S2000 will outrun a 240hp M3 with much better torque numbers. I know it's more complex than that, but IMO a high HP motor is a high HP motor first and foremost.

Greco540
11-16-2004, 02:25 PM
That fact that none of you have given me a density altitude or track altitude for your times shows me you merely want to argue, DA affects everything, dramaticly..my TA ran 109 mph at sea level (the WS6)..I certainly dont claim that as its real perfromance, it s not diff than the 102 to 105 it pulled at 3500 feet

http://www.napiervilledragway.com
Elevation: 100ft

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 02:43 PM
THANK YOU>>>100 feet....case in point..thats all I wanted to know in the first place

Lscman
11-16-2004, 02:44 PM
Very interesting thread.....I will say that power under the curve is not as meaningful in all out acceleration tests as it would be in everyday driving.

I wholeheartedly agree, but I need to clarify more. Area under the "used portion of the HP curve" will determine acceleration. Of course, any unused portions of the curve are not exploited and will have no effect on acceleration. Two cars that see engine speeds between 4K and 6K RPM will accelerate at approximately the same rate if they have the same area under the HP curve between 4K and 6K. A "spike here" or "dip there" has little effect, aside from bragging rights (peak HP).

Perhaps a simplistic example would help:

car #1 (with a broad, flat power output & 6K RPM rev limiter) produces exactly 300 HP between 4K and 6K RPM.

car #2 (with a linearly increasing output & 6K RPM rev limiter) produces exactly 200 HP at 4K RPM, 300 HP at 5K RPM and 400 HP at 6K RPM. This cam is more radical, but the rev limiter remains stock so the flimsy rods stay inside the block (lol).

The transmission ratios used for this exercise cause a 2K RPM drop on upshift (assuming upshifts at 6K RPM). In this case, both cars will accelerate at approximately the same rate even though the peak HP differs by 100 HP.

Car#3 can also be made where power rises and falls again within the 4K to 6K band. This car will also show peak power >300 HP around 5K or maybe 5500 RPM, but the same acceleration may result.

Area under the curve would seem to apply in all cases.

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 02:51 PM
OK, let me clarify...forget road racing...the typical Ferrari will handily beat a lighter Neon in a drag race TOO. Is that the proper venue? Much like the 540i, the Ferrari's added girth offers a few other benefits & I see no need to apologize for mentioning these points.

Once again, you are rating my posts for accuracy & content. This is not appropriate. :nono

If you feel my opinion is wrong, flawed or has no value, that's fine. Please keep it to yourself instead of flaming.

If you really want to debate the value/purpose of knock sensor technology, I will accommodate you. Please check with a moderator first, to give them heads-up & to see which forum section is most appropriate for such a topic and then PM me. You should probably start the new thread where everyone can watch & draw their own conclusions. I don't want anyone thinking I started anything when you go down like a low-flying skeeter in a forest fire. It's not too late to suppress your ego, lighten up and shake hands (lol). Last call.......

:beer

Thanks, Rick


It doesnt sound like its my ego that needs suppressing....I dont care if you have PhD in engine design, thats not going to make you win a debate...if someone knows their stuff, then they know it...I learned that lesson a long time ago...you corrected my posts, even using using bold type, you were trying to be a know ti all, and your posts seemed to me that, by my hasty typing and , well, low class user handle that I am some redneck driving a ta whose rich uncle gave him a bimmer one time.

Im not going to start a thread in another section about knock sensors,l becasue I had a two day discussion with an engineer 2 years ago form germany who builds modules for Ducatti, his company is silent-hectic or something. ANyway, knock sensors allow timing to be ran at the limit, however, programming protocol errs on the safe side.


Knock sensors are old news anyway. Several companies, Superflow for one, have done extensive testing in modern ionic sensing, processing speeds allow it. So knock sensors=dull, old and boring. Kind of like Thin film mass air flow.


Talk about something that actually intrigues me, like carmen vortex sensors, or surge flow through the manifold in turbo applications, otherwise, this is getting tiring

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 02:57 PM
I wholeheartedly agree, but I need to clarify more. Area under the "used portion of the HP curve" will determine acceleration. Of course, any unused portions of the curve are not exploited and will have no effect on acceleration. Two cars that see engine speeds between 4K and 6K RPM will accelerate at approximately the same rate if they have the same area under the HP curve between 4K and 6K. A "spike here" or "dip there" has little effect, aside from bragging rights (peak HP).

Perhaps a simplistic example would help:

car #1 (with a broad, flat power output & 6K RPM rev limiter) produces exactly 300 HP between 4K and 6K RPM.

car #2 (with a linearly increasing output & 6K RPM rev limiter) produces exactly 200 HP at 4K RPM, 300 HP at 5K RPM and 400 HP at 6K RPM. This cam is more radical, but the rev limiter remains stock so the flimsy rods stay inside the block (lol).

The transmission ratios used for this exercise cause a 2K RPM drop on upshift (assuming upshifts at 6K RPM). In this case, both cars will accelerate at approximately the same rate even though the peak HP differs by 100 HP.

Car#3 can also be made where power rises and falls again within the 4K to 6K band. This car will also show peak power >300 HP around 5K or maybe 5500 RPM, but the same acceleration may result.

Area under the curve would seem to apply in all cases.

Well, a, if HP remains same when RPM's increase, then Torque is dropping, but I assume torque is what you were referring to. Those are nice paper cars, and I would tend to agree with you, but track time has proven otherwise...with standards. Autos, yes. A good 6 speed drive can amazing things....anyway, the answers been give...I thought in the original post they were saying the cars were equivelant to LS1 cars.....whic they arenttheyd probably hit 90mph up here, still damn good, but no sports car material



From my exoperience, bimmer own at high speeds, I could kill 540's with my 03 GT, but after 85 or so, it was over. I attriube this to their ezxcelelnt torque, and drag coefficient, plus, they seem to be geared a little lightly

SehrSchnell
11-16-2004, 03:22 PM
wow, this is deep, but cool.


I will say however, I drove my first 540i/6 yesterday, um, wow! More wood in the wood shop. Very impressive and I didn't even "really" get on it (as the salesman was with me).

I am afraid the time has come for the sale of the E34. :devillook

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 03:32 PM
wow, this is deep, but cool.


I will say however, I drove my first 540i/6 yesterday, um, wow! More wood in the wood shop. Very impressive and I didn't even "really" get on it (as the salesman was with me).

I am afraid the time has come for the sale of the E34. :devillook

at the average price of 22K, I would tend to agree...

But....a turboed and front intercooled e34 would destroy the 540, and still maintain really good highway mpg

You have such a nice e34.... :redspot

but if you do sell it, sell me your M-P's

Cacatfish
11-16-2004, 03:38 PM
I wholeheartedly agree, but I need to clarify more. Area under the "used portion of the HP curve" will determine acceleration. Of course, any unused portions of the curve are not exploited and will have no effect on acceleration. Two cars that see engine speeds between 4K and 6K RPM will accelerate at approximately the same rate if they have the same area under the HP curve between 4K and 6K. A "spike here" or "dip there" has little effect, aside from bragging rights (peak HP).

Perhaps a simplistic example would help:

car #1 (with a broad, flat power output & 6K RPM rev limiter) produces exactly 300 HP between 4K and 6K RPM.

car #2 (with a linearly increasing output & 6K RPM rev limiter) produces exactly 200 HP at 4K RPM, 300 HP at 5K RPM and 400 HP at 6K RPM. This cam is more radical, but the rev limiter remains stock so the flimsy rods stay inside the block (lol).

The transmission ratios used for this exercise cause a 2K RPM drop on upshift (assuming upshifts at 6K RPM). In this case, both cars will accelerate at approximately the same rate even though the peak HP differs by 100 HP.

Car#3 can also be made where power rises and falls again within the 4K to 6K band. This car will also show peak power >300 HP around 5K or maybe 5500 RPM, but the same acceleration may result.

Area under the curve would seem to apply in all cases.

Yeah I see your point. It seems that the typical American V8 would fare just as well as a BMW V8 in this case, though. In fact, if anything the American muscle car V8 would make it's peak HP at a lower rpm (pushrods), and at a higher torque value (since it is larger displacement). I think comparing V8s to 6 cylinders (and smaller) is where you will see some real advantages in the "under the curve" numbers, even in the peak HP area.

Lscman
11-16-2004, 04:28 PM
Well, a, if HP remains same when RPM's increase, then Torque is dropping, but I assume torque is what you were referring to. Those are nice paper cars, and I would tend to agree with you, but track time has proven otherwise...with standards.

Please read and comprehend what is written. I was not referring to torque when I wrote about power. It does not matter if torque is dropping or rising...it is a static measure & it can not perform work. Crank torque is a measurement of static twisting force useful for sizing a driveshaft, diff gear or clutch assy, but not helpful for predicting performance.

I was referring to horsepower with respect to RPM. A car with twice the motor torque will not accelerate any better, if it produces the same HP. :)

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 05:41 PM
HP=(torque*RPM)/5250


It is the rate at which work can be done

And you just quanitifed my original hp claim :D

F'n with you there...

Thank you.....................................and its been a good day

HP vs. Torque.....I like HP , some like torque, but torque is what the dyno measures, it then measures rate of change of the load dynamic

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 05:44 PM
And the only way a car with 2X the torque will have the same HP is if the engine turns half the speed...go look at the 11 second cummins diesels if you think 450 HP and 1200 foot pounds of torque wont get you anywhere..now take a 450 HP gas motor and make a 1 ton 4*4 go 11's....

E34nication
11-16-2004, 05:51 PM
102 my freind?
My TA put 314whp, weighed 3500 pounds, and pulled 103 to 105 consistantly
I doubt a stock 540 wighing in at 400 pounds with 275 whp will run 102
Maybe at dead sea leel with a tailwind

my 1995 e34 540i 6-speed dyno'd 254WHP 258 WTQ and I managed 14.065 @ 101.75. 3 runs in a row over 101MPH. This was in Florida.

323I Junkie
11-16-2004, 05:56 PM
The see level thing again
Even at 3500 feet, you are looking at 15's with 94 mph or so


Damn good time though, that things hauling ass on the top end :buttrock:

Phat Ham
11-16-2004, 08:13 PM
The see level thing again
Even at 3500 feet, you are looking at 15's with 94 mph or so
But hardly any of us are at 3500 feet. Why are you using 3500 feet as the measuring stick? Someone said the 540 is capable of running 14.0 @ 101-102mph and you said that's not possible. The fact is there are 540s that have run those times at those speeds. There's nothing to argue about here.

Paradoxish
11-16-2004, 08:50 PM
The see level thing again
Even at 3500 feet, you are looking at 15's with 94 mph or so

Exactly what point are you trying to make?

There's really no reason to bring up anything technical in this thread. Personal experience on the part of 540i/6 owners points to a quarter mile ET of low 14 seconds at between 100-103mph. It just so happens that the experiences of most seem to line up with magazine testing, which should just lend more credence to the anecdotal evidence. There's nothing to debate: these are the times people are running.

Elevation also seems like a weak argument. Low 14s @ 102mph isn't "at sea level with a tailwind", it's an average result. A poor driver or a person at a much higher elevation will have worse results, an excellent driver or someone at sea level will probably fare better. And, of course, 3,500 feet is a ridiculous measuring stick since most people here are probably far from that. 1,000 feet seems like a much fairer elevation to use as an average.

As for your more powerful, lighter TA running similiar times... so what? As lscman already pointed out, there are numerous factors that can influence quarter mile times besides peak horsepower. Traction issues? Gearing? Weight distribution? Aerodynamics? Are you honestly saying that none of these factors are enough to overcome what amounts to a fairly slight power difference?

Lscman
11-16-2004, 11:07 PM
Hey if Junkie says 540i 6spd cars run 15's at 94 MPH (same as 530i 5spd), you'd better believe it. He owns a Trans Am, so he should know!

Christ...I have two extra cylinders that do nothing but waste fuel. Where's the classified ads dept, so I can dump this car before the word gets out?

323I Junkie
11-17-2004, 12:01 AM
But hardly any of us are at 3500 feet. Why are you using 3500 feet as the measuring stick? Someone said the 540 is capable of running 14.0 @ 101-102mph and you said that's not possible. The fact is there are 540s that have run those times at those speeds. There's nothing to argue about here.


Jeez...I didnt say it was a measuring stick, I was comparing it to the times out our upper wouthwestern 3500 to 5500 feet tracks


Havent you ever heard of altitude correction?


You are right, all I was asking is that when comparing times, we give the altitude..it can be a 50 or more HP difference

323I Junkie
11-17-2004, 12:03 AM
Hey if Junkie says 540i 6spd cars run 15's at 94 MPH (same as 530i 5spd), you'd better believe it. He owns a Trans Am, so he should know!

Christ...I have two extra cylinders that do nothing but waste fuel. Where's the classified ads dept, so I can dump this car before the word gets out?


You are being funny, right?

We just got done talking altitude...
Up here, a 535 would run probably a high 16 at best
Amodded 535 is not in the same comparison, so mine doesnt count

323I Junkie
11-17-2004, 12:15 AM
One more thing, LSC man, as others have brought out in other forums

we go to too many motorsports challenges, 1/4 mile, and track, and see cmaros, mustangs, and transams regularly destroying BMW's...I wouldnt talk to much about the ill-reputed TA..its a social paradigm about those cars

I remember a race up in canada a couple years ago where a basically stock (relatively)Formula Firebird was giving widebody Saleen cars a run for their money


Anyway, you obviously, when coming up against anyone who challenges the intelligence you so greedily cloak in cynycsm and sarcasm, revert to even more sarcasm and inferred name calling.

I have an 84 TA with modified 1LE suspension, and soson to be relocated turbocharged small block ford and 6 speed set 6 inches rearward. Its notmy deisgn, Im building it, using the templates of over 1 g cars I have seen before. I own a 79 TA, which you if get in a pissing contest with 425 whp and 500 ft/lb of torque and get enough boost on your precious 540 to give me a worry, I have to merely dust off my nitrous bottle and end all disputes. Or port the gaping maw iron heads that flow numbers street cars never dreamed of. What I am saying here is the cheap POS cars I am building/have built will outperform the 540 in every respect but one: streetability and style/class.

So go turn on your heated seats and enjoy a powerful vaunt down the freeway, meanwhile, you can think of sarcastic and belittling things to say, stewing in your pretentious secrecy of some career or degree whch makes you so much wiser


WHile you're cruising in style, dont race any tas, or even turboed m50 cars for that matter, and keep driving a long, long way

Mini4x
11-17-2004, 07:14 AM
What I am saying here is the cheap POS cars I am building/have built will outperform the 540 in every respect but one: streetability and style/class.

So go turn on your heated seats and enjoy a powerful vaunt down the freeway, meanwhile, you can think of sarcastic and belittling things to say, stewing in your pretentious secrecy of some career or degree whch makes you so much wiser


WHile you're cruising in style, dont race any tas, or even turboed m50 cars for that matter, and keep driving a long, long way

Hear, Hear!..

I love pony cars too, and FAST cars. I wasn't really trying to be sarcastic (ok maybe i was) but not belittling. I can appriciate anything someone builds, except maybe a few of them too far gone ricers. Good Luck with the TA! They are fun cars, I helped a buddy swap a 455 into his 78 T/A last summer, car was a beast with the 4 speed.. never did get it to the drags though..

323I Junkie
11-17-2004, 08:05 AM
Mini4x, we're cool :D

Lscman
11-17-2004, 08:45 AM
Junkie,

If you're wondering why everyone is against you, you might want to reflect on your posts. You are not a 540i owner, so you visit the 5 series forum & proceed to tout how favorable your fleet of cars compares. Your strategy was to downplay & minimize 540i attributes while telling us how powerful & fast your Trans Am is. In closing, you challenge me to a fantasy race with your nitrous bottle & pretend ported heads while reminding me your car will outperform mine. You have a real hard-on for 540i owners...and I'm not that kind of guy.

This is classic case of "trolling". You really should expect to be called on the carpet, & yet, I think good progress has been made. Spelling has improved...your ego needs some work.

A few more sessions should do it. :)

323I Junkie
11-17-2004, 10:45 AM
I am a 5 series owner


And you attacked me, end of story

my pretend race was a challenge...


I never minimized its attributes, I was confused as to the times

And not everybody is agianst me, from what I can see, its only you, buddy.


PS. I dont see 540's listed in your sig, just more smartass gibberish, which has consitutied the majority of your posts. Youve defeined yourself well, your character, and constitution. Your ego I percieve actually as lack thereof,


I never touted anything about my TA, you attacked my car lineup, did I say anything about the alleged Yugo in your sig? What BMW's do you own? What makes you not a troll, youve replied more to an argumentative post than basically anything in your history
IN this entire thread, you have made one technically competent post

Lscman
11-17-2004, 12:48 PM
PS. I dont see 540's listed in your sig........
So? I think sig's and avatars are silly. Have you no sense of humor?

..you have made one technically competent post.
Thanks.

my pretend race was a challenge

Seriously? You want to race with pretend NOS bottles or ported heads, as you so vividly described? I'm not sure whether to bring a car or just my imagination & some crayons and paper. If I accept your challenge, will you be driving your Trans Am here for this event? Just curious...I think it's around 4K miles. I can't communicate on your level any longer, cya.

323I Junkie
11-17-2004, 01:44 PM
I figured youd go away

And Id race you just the way I am ...you come out here, your the one with the road car thats so great. But I sincerely hope you never reply again :awink:













































My a sense of humor has been here all along dude...I havent been upset, and I drew pretty picture with my crayons just a while ago, if you bring yours, we could do mural of the roundel on the school wall...just for comraderie

Speedfreak
11-17-2004, 02:21 PM
Back to the subject. How much slower is the 540ia than the 540i/6?

323I Junkie
11-17-2004, 02:22 PM
bout tree fiddy

Greco540
11-17-2004, 04:12 PM
Back to the subject. How much slower is the 540ia than the 540i/6?
BMW claims about 1/2 a second.

323I Junkie
11-17-2004, 04:16 PM
The 540 Automatic is still fun, it "feels" faster, actually. Id like to see one with good aftermarket , like even DINAN maybe tuning on transmission shift and stall points

Speedfreak
11-17-2004, 04:26 PM
Thanks, That sounds OK.

marinakorp
11-17-2004, 04:38 PM
Back to the subject. How much slower is the 540ia than the 540i/6?


not much... comparing sport to sport auto

the sport Auto gets the advantage of a 3:15 Differential (as opposed to a 2:89 I believe) ... this will give a little better off the line (which the AUTO NEEDS) and looses a bit on the top end (in theory... above 155 - who really cares!)

With the manual... you get the more blast effect (can spin tires, etc) ... with the auto, it is a little harder to do...


that being said... my 540iT (sport auto) is REALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLY fast for a station wagon... but not as fast as some of the exotic supercars... faster than most cars for certain ... but not as fast as a S55 (02+) or a CTSV, M5, Corvette c5 , etc

jimmyz2
11-17-2004, 07:13 PM
not much... comparing sport to sport auto

the sport Auto gets the advantage of a 3:15 Differential (as opposed to a 2:89 I believe) ... this will give a little better off the line (which the AUTO NEEDS) and looses a bit on the top end (in theory... above 155 - who really cares!)

With the manual... you get the more blast effect (can spin tires, etc) ... with the auto, it is a little harder to do...


that being said... my 540iT (sport auto) is REALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLY fast for a station wagon... but not as fast as some of the exotic supercars... faster than most cars for certain ... but not as fast as a S55 (02+) or a CTSV, M5, Corvette c5 , etc
Did you ever take out your Powerchip?

Paradoxish
11-18-2004, 01:38 AM
we go to too many motorsports challenges, 1/4 mile, and track, and see cmaros, mustangs, and transams regularly destroying BMW's...I wouldnt talk to much about the ill-reputed TA..its a social paradigm about those cars

Not to be a total jerk, but what the hell are you talking about?

An f-body Camaro or Trans Am would devastate a 540i on a drag strip, I don't think there's any sane person here disputing that. You know why? Because they run ETs in the 13 second or lower range. It stands to reason that a 13 second car would be quicker than a 14 second car, right?

Meanwhile, you seem to be arguing that the collective experience of numerous 540i owners is somehow wrong because you say so. If your TA runs quarter mile times quicker than 14 flat, you can be reasonably sure you're faster than any stock 540. If not, then there ya go. Considering the massive differences between the two cars, it doesn't even seem like a comparison worth making.

I'd challenge you to a race or something, but I think internet e-penis competitions are kind of silly.

edit-

To contribute something meaningful: I concur that 540iAs 'feel' a bit faster than 540i/6s. I test drove a few automatics before settling on my 6-speed, and the uninterrupted power is nice. I like the feel of the 6-speed more, though, and running up through 1st and 2nd gear will throw your head back into the seat a lot more forcefully than just flooring it in the automatic. :)

Lscman
11-18-2004, 08:02 AM
An f-body Camaro or Trans Am would devastate a 540i on a drag strip, I don't think there's any sane person here disputing that.

In comparison with BMW 5 series acceleration potential, some "forgotten years" of ponycar/sports car history may be worth reviewing.....

The 1979 and 1984 Trans Am cars (owned by Junkie) ran magazine-best times of high 15's in stock form...corrected to sea level. I have a dozen major magazines in my library I can quote from...including a couple pre-production ringer prototype tests. That's assuming the optional performance V8 was chosen, of course.

The rare 1986-1/2 F-body L98 5.7L/350 cu in automatic was GM's first "quick ponycar" of the post big block era. It was not available with a manual, but it was "finally" capable of running mid 14's & hanging with the 5spd 5L HO Mustang in a straight line. The '75-'84 Corvettes were 15 sec slugs...in fact most ran high 15's. Improvements began when L98 Corvette ('85) was running mid 14's. Corvette did not break into 13's until the '92 LT1 ZF 6spd(13.5sec). Ford had the upper hand in the ponycar acceleration category from 1983 thru early '86 & GM took over in '87. Still, it wasn't until '93 when LT1 & Cobra powered ponycars with manual transmissions began running 14 flat (same as E39 540i/6). The best-of-the-best strippo L98 5.7L 1LE "angular bodystyle" Camaro ran was low 14's. During this '87-'92 era, it was the preferred choice for Pro Solo and drag racing. Mustang 5L handled worse, but it was close enough to be preferred by many folks who wanted a manual tranny for road racing. The L98 was quickly supplanted by the newer bodystyle with it's LT1 series motor (later upgraded to LS) and welcome T56 6spd.

To the point, the 1984 Trans Am came with a sub-200 HP 305 HO & the '79 GM ponycar 350 and 403 "Delta 88" sedan motor offerings were slightly more powerful, but not any quicker. These early EPA era cars were not fast by today's standards. A stock 540i automatic would take these stock cars down in a heartbeat....from any stoplight.

In fact, an E39 530i 6cyl 5spd (that runs 15 flat at sea level) can match acceleration with any stock ponycar produced from 1975 thru 1984. There are NO exceptions. The '85 Mustang 5L HO with new roller cam and carryover 600 Holley 4bbl finally tipped the scales, producing 14.9's.

Obviously any car in modified form will run faster.......

Mini4x
11-18-2004, 08:15 AM
[QUOTE=Lscman}Obviously any car in modified form will run faster.......[/QUOTE]


I got a Civic wit da NAAAWZZZ, wanna race ?

Scott528iM
11-18-2004, 08:57 AM
I think safe to say, if you have enough money you can pretty much make any car fast in a straight line....big deal. Some are just better starting grounds than others.

323I Junkie
11-18-2004, 11:26 AM
In comparison with BMW 5 series acceleration potential, some "forgotten years" of ponycar/sports car history may be worth reviewing.....

The 1979 and 1984 Trans Am cars (owned by Junkie) ran magazine-best times of high 15's in stock form...corrected to sea level. I have a dozen major magazines in my library I can quote from...including a couple pre-production ringer prototype tests. That's assuming the optional performance V8 was chosen, of course.

The rare 1986-1/2 F-body L98 5.7L/350 cu in automatic was GM's first "quick ponycar" of the post big block era. It was not available with a manual, but it was "finally" capable of running mid 14's & hanging with the 5spd 5L HO Mustang in a straight line. The '75-'84 Corvettes were 15 sec slugs...in fact most ran high 15's. Improvements began when L98 Corvette ('85) was running mid 14's. Corvette did not break into 13's until the '92 LT1 ZF 6spd(13.5sec). Ford had the upper hand in the ponycar acceleration category from 1983 thru early '86 & GM took over in '87. Still, it wasn't until '93 when LT1 & Cobra powered ponycars with manual transmissions began running 14 flat (same as E39 540i/6). The best-of-the-best strippo L98 5.7L 1LE "angular bodystyle" Camaro ran was low 14's. During this '87-'92 era, it was the preferred choice for Pro Solo and drag racing. Mustang 5L handled worse, but it was close enough to be preferred by many folks who wanted a manual tranny for road racing. The L98 was quickly supplanted by the newer bodystyle with it's LT1 series motor (later upgraded to LS) and welcome T56 6spd.

To the point, the 1984 Trans Am came with a sub-200 HP 305 HO & the '79 GM ponycar 350 and 403 "Delta 88" sedan motor offerings were slightly more powerful, but not any quicker. These early EPA era cars were not fast by today's standards. A stock 540i automatic would take these stock cars down in a heartbeat....from any stoplight.

In fact, an E39 530i 6cyl 5spd (that runs 15 flat at sea level) can match acceleration with any stock ponycar produced from 1975 thru 1984. There are NO exceptions. The '85 Mustang 5L HO with new roller cam and carryover 600 Holley 4bbl finally tipped the scales, producing 14.9's.

Obviously any car in modified form will run faster.......

:lol: :rofl: :lol:


Thank you for motortrending me to death...

But I would have to be some kind of f***tard to leave the anemic factory engines in those rolling piles of american manufacturing fauxpas in factory form

Do you guys ever read public profiles?


America was in the trailertrash phase in the 70's and 80's. Beautiful body but everything else was worthless. Their engineers, no dumber than german engineers, would come up with these awesome suspensions, etc, only to have them hacked to peices by the bottom dollar just stay alive bean counters

You wanna pick on FACTORY american cars..count me in,

I still dont get it. I didnt start this thread, I didnt compare , some guy grazed over my info and extrapolated the whole thing, the only thing I said was "I doubt"...the whole thing started by people giving sea level motortrend numbers


Guys this is BFC, I wasnt aware we magazine raced

Thanks to all the people who posted their own times,

And one more time of rthe trolls,

I would have bought a 540/6 if I wanted a payment

323I Junkie
11-18-2004, 11:28 AM
I think safe to say, if you have enough money you can pretty much make any car fast in a straight line....big deal. Some are just better starting grounds than others.


YEs, it IS a big deal, it supports a multibillion dollar aftermarket, gives thousands of americans jobs, and is a worthwile hobby that build creativity and inteleligence, and drives technical interest in the United States youths

Oak
11-18-2004, 12:33 PM
[QUOTE=323I Junkie
I would have bought a 540/6 if I wanted a payment[/QUOTE]

Actually, I paid cash...now, can you guys slow down? I keep running out of popcorn, and it's getting hard to keep notes.

Greco540
11-18-2004, 01:03 PM
^^^ Mmmm popcorn... Orville Reddenbocker extra butter pass it down...

mikemaster
11-18-2004, 01:29 PM
I am afraid the time has come for the sale of the E34. :devillook


Nah, keep both!! :D :D :D :D :D :cool

323I Junkie
11-18-2004, 01:32 PM
^^^^Nice^^^^

but nothing beats movie salt popcorn


PS....I didnt have 22K laying around, I jsut bought a house and started a renovation, one of which includes my 36 by 56 finished shop :buttrock:

Dark Helmet
11-18-2004, 01:37 PM
Everybody Breathe!!!!!!!!!!

Dark Helmet
11-18-2004, 01:42 PM
psssssh, 36x56.... 54x110!!!!!! :D:D:D

323I Junkie
11-18-2004, 02:43 PM
Im not made of money!..54*110=69K dollars before finshing!

Scott528iM
11-18-2004, 02:49 PM
YEs, it IS a big deal, it supports a multibillion dollar aftermarket, gives thousands of americans jobs, and is a worthwile hobby that build creativity and inteleligence, and drives technical interest in the United States youths

Exactly...that I don't refute. But my point is, if you have the money to make your car fast (whatever it may be), there will always be something faster so big deal. Just like there is always going to be someone bigger, badder, etc. It seems that it just starts becoming a pissing match for egos. "well, my tuner can beat up your tuner" mentality. Just like everyone gets caught up on the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times as the be all end all for automotive dominance. There are so many other factors (at least SHOULD be) in giving any particular vehicle it's due credit, but most of us overlook them.
It's like me saying, tell ya what....bring your 540 to a chicken contest with my 740iL and let's see who wins!
Rather than encouraging each other, offering corrective critisism or helping one another to become all around better educated enthusiasts (not just numbers jocks) we beat each other up.

BTW - This isn't directed to you, it's just a good place to put my response.

....but then again, what do I know? I only have a slow ass 528.

323I Junkie
11-18-2004, 03:15 PM
Exactly...that I don't refute. But my point is, if you have the money to make your car fast (whatever it may be), there will always be something faster so big deal. Just like there is always going to be someone bigger, badder, etc. It seems that it just starts becoming a pissing match for egos. "well, my tuner can beat up your tuner" mentality. Just like everyone gets caught up on the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times as the be all end all for automotive dominance. There are so many other factors (at least SHOULD be) in giving any particular vehicle it's due credit, but most of us overlook them.
It's like me saying, tell ya what....bring your 540 to a chicken contest with my 740iL and let's see who wins!
Rather than encouraging each other, offering corrective critisism or helping one another to become all around better educated enthusiasts (not just numbers jocks) we beat each other up.

BTW - This isn't directed to you, it's just a good place to put my response.

....but then again, what do I know? I only have a slow ass 528.

I agree completely :handshake:

Lscman
11-18-2004, 08:19 PM
Thank you for motortrending me to death...

Touche'....I simply thought it was worth noting that "a decade of stock ponycars were virtual slugs", when Paradoxish conceded to you that ponycars will devastate 540i's under drag conditions.

Please realize I was not replying to you and not badmouthing your stable. I will give you a tidbit of personal data...I own a 1985 Mustang & I've owned (& enjoyed) several other highly modified track-duty ponycars since 1979. I prefer SCCA Trans Am, CART & NASCAR tracks well over a mile long. We have some things in common, but spelling skills and track type are not in the mix.:)

Quite a few stock ponycars...Pantera's, NSX's and Ferrari's etc run slower than 14 flat....not the one's we see at the track with mods (lol).

323I Junkie
11-19-2004, 07:23 AM
Ever get into standing mile racing?
Kind of a cool mix, alittle dangerous still though.

I've gotten away from the dragstrip as I get older, I generally go there to get a good mph reading, as that gives me something to work with, I am familiar with it.

Ive done a little road racing,my first racing was offroad, Baja style rnach road storming, picked up most of my skills there.

I year I drive the silverstate highway...hoping one day to get onto it in competitive times. SCCA and Trans Am are hard to get into around here. We have a nice track, but the NASCAR guys dominate it. SInce they are so anal about modified rules, non of my cars are elegiable. I thought it would be funny to take a bone stock e34 M5 down there :biglaughbL

Dark Helmet
11-19-2004, 12:52 PM
Junkie.... ahh, but when your uncle owns the metal-building business and your dad's client is doing the concrete.... teh bad part is its dad's building and its 15 miles SSW of town... but no matter, it will be put to good use.

323I Junkie
11-19-2004, 02:06 PM
I want it out side my door, I want to wake up in the morning and go work on my cars with crappy hair and boxers, kind of like some people who click on the tube

brahtw8
11-19-2004, 02:30 PM
Quite a few stock ponycars...Pantera's, NSX's and Ferrari's etc run slower than 14 flat....not the one's we see at the track with mods (lol).

Very few stock NSXs run in the 14s, save automatics. A poor driver might (or at excessive altitude), but anybody with the skill to pull off a 2.2 60' (1.9 is good for an NSX) should be able to run in the high 13s without trouble.

I ran a 13.8 as a first-timer, in sub-optimal conditions (full tank of gas, full trunk, spare, tool kit, 50 degree weather-bad for traction but good for engines, etc.), at about 800 feet above sea level, with an essentially stock car (K&N drop in filter and RSR exhaust). 13.7 is the generally accepted quarter mile time for an NA1 5 speed (1991-1994) based on a survey of many publications. The fastest I have seen a stock NA1 NSX trap at was 106, and the quickest time I have seen was a 13.4. (Not the same car)

323I Junkie
11-19-2004, 02:56 PM
NSX's are pretty sweet, gotta respect the titanium rods

brahtw8
11-19-2004, 03:22 PM
NSX's are pretty sweet, gotta respect the titanium rods

Thanks for the NSX Love. :)

Here is your reward:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/brahtw8/108_0834.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/brahtw8/108_0836.jpg

323I Junkie
11-19-2004, 03:48 PM
:eek:

I know of a company doing a TT KIT for those, the car is sick!

brahtw8
11-19-2004, 03:51 PM
:eek:

I know of a company doing a TT KIT for those, the car is sick!

FactorX Motorsports in Vegas?

See their car do a 138 mph pass with some mechanical problems here:

http://www.stlnsx.com/downloads/fx1.mpeg

This is what the FactorX folks said about the run:

As far as power and traction, we had issues with both. The Exedy would not consistently hold 3rd or 4th gear. An example to illustrate this is on our 138mph run our 1/8 was 101mph or so, on our 134mph run our 1/8 was 106mph. We also had some traction issues do to lack of seat time with this Twin Turbo set-up. We have the FX500 suspension system pretty well sorted but, this is a total different animal in terms of weight and power delivery. Making the power is the easy part, making everything else work is the challenge.

:buttrock

323I Junkie
11-19-2004, 03:59 PM
No, actually, this is a different group of guys, it will be their first deviation from domestics

atl93fd
11-19-2004, 04:17 PM
Let's hear it for that CYM FD3S with the FMIC. :buttrock

brahtw8
11-19-2004, 04:21 PM
No, actually, this is a different group of guys, it will be their first deviation from domestics

Interesting. Can you provide any additional information? I know these guys would love to hear more about it:

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=28

323I Junkie
11-19-2004, 04:22 PM
Ill let you know after thanksgiving

brahtw8
11-19-2004, 04:25 PM
Let's hear it for that CYM FD3S with the FMIC. :buttrock

Too bad he sold that car . . .

The car had 380 hp. to the wheels. I drove it once and it was a monster when the boost kicked in.

He could never get any traction at the strip. He was running high 12s, but a 118 trap with a 2.3 60'. My NSX walked all over him in the 1/8th, but then he would go by me like I was standing still.

Mr Project
11-19-2004, 05:20 PM
CYM FD

Yeah, nice NSX, but I have to admit when I saw that pic the first car I would grab the keys for would be the FD. I have a real problem when it comes to rotaries. :D

brahtw8
11-19-2004, 06:46 PM
Yeah, nice NSX, but I have to admit when I saw that pic the first car I would grab the keys for would be the FD. I have a real problem when it comes to rotaries. :D

Having driven both cars in the picture, I prefer the NSX despite that particular FD's 150 hp. advantage.

Have you ever driven an NSX?

Mr Project
11-20-2004, 08:58 AM
No, I've never driven an NSX. I've purposely never driven an FD, either, because with my attachment to SAs and FBs, I'm afraid I wouldn't be able to live without an FD, and I don't need that kind of expense in my life. :)

I don't mean to take anything away from the NSX, the FD just appeals to me more as a rotary fan.

brahtw8
11-20-2004, 10:23 AM
No, I've never driven an NSX. I've purposely never driven an FD, either, because with my attachment to SAs and FBs, I'm afraid I wouldn't be able to live without an FD, and I don't need that kind of expense in my life. :)

I don't mean to take anything away from the NSX, the FD just appeals to me more as a rotary fan.

I see you suffer from a similar affliction. I recommend staying away from the NSX as well. Nothing I have driven gives me the same driving enjoyment.

IMHO, once you go MR, you never go back. If I can avoid the Elise and the F355, I should be fine for a while.

A gorgeous, 3.8 stroker, caged E28 M5 with 386 hp just showed up on autotrader. If I get rid of the TL and buy a winter beater, I could daily drive that M5 . . . :devillook

323I Junkie
11-20-2004, 11:34 AM
Most hijacked thread ever :biglaughb:

E34nication
11-20-2004, 07:41 PM
omg that e28 is hot!

brahtw8
11-20-2004, 08:02 PM
Most hijacked thread ever :biglaughb:

At least it has taken a turn for the better.

Here is the link to that insane E28:

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=173462695&dealer_id=&car_year=1988&make=BMW&distance=100&max_price=&model=M5&advcd_on=n&end_year=1988&min_price=&certified=n&address=53072&search_type=used&advanced=n&start_year=1988&color=&cardist=69

DiscoZ
11-26-2004, 04:44 AM
I think that the distinction between a peaky and a flat torque curve/resulting powerband is the higher average horsepower that a flatter torque curve would provide over the effective rev range that the motor would be run at, gear ratios withstanding.

That is, the rev range that any car will always travel though (when being raced) until the next shift which will land it once again at the beginning of said range. In such a situation; when looking at two cars with equal weight, an equal rev range and equal horsepower, but one with peaky power deliery and one with a flatter power curve; it is mathetmatically safe to assume that the one with the flatter curve will produce a higher average horsepower and thus be faster in this circumstance.

C1apton
11-26-2004, 01:41 PM
But can yours do this?

onutsguy
11-27-2004, 02:36 AM
Holy smoke. You guys destroyed this poor man's question with some of the most useless, "what if", and imaginary info I have ever heard. Trans Am guy needs a mental enema.

To answer your original question, you should have no problems at all with 4 out of every 5 cars you get into it with. On the highway is where your bread is buttered. Watch out for anything that says Z06 or AMG on the ass though.... :eyecrazy

I'm not sure which is worse, the evo / sti is the fastest / baddest car ever produced, or the Trans Am / Camero / Firebirds RULE club. We have both on our fine forum, and most are actually really cool. It's just fun to listen to some of these guys explain how badly they'll whoop your 5's ass on the drag strip. That's great. Wow. ;) I'll remember that and slow down the next time I'm handing some azz to a mullet punk in his Mustang GT or Camero who thinks my 540 is slow and an easy mark....... :alright

Jeesshh

Scott

MaloventEvil
11-27-2004, 05:02 AM
But can yours do this?

dude only 136mph? you took that pic too soon!

323I Junkie
11-27-2004, 09:29 AM
Holy smoke. You guys destroyed this poor man's question with some of the most useless, "what if", and imaginary info I have ever heard. Trans Am guy needs a mental enema.

To answer your original question, you should have no problems at all with 4 out of every 5 cars you get into it with. On the highway is where your bread is buttered. Watch out for anything that says Z06 or AMG on the ass though.... :eyecrazy

I'm not sure which is worse, the evo / sti is the fastest / baddest car ever produced, or the Trans Am / Camero / Firebirds RULE club. We have both on our fine forum, and most are actually really cool. It's just fun to listen to some of these guys explain how badly they'll whoop your 5's ass on the drag strip. That's great. Wow. ;) I'll remember that and slow down the next time I'm handing some azz to a mullet punk in his Mustang GT or Camero who thinks my 540 is slow and an easy mark....... :alright

Jeesshh

Scott


Why dont you go back to your cave, troll?
Weve all laughed and shook hands and moved on sine then.

PS..Beware of ANYTHING with an LS1 in it..GTO, F-body.vetter, etc on the freeway. I just dorve (4 days ago) a 98 540/6. My wife liked it, so we checked it out. Had some very nice exhaust too. It was EXACTLY what I had remembered. The fastest sedan without little ///'s on it Id ever driven and without a supercharger (Supercharged Jags are a kick, I worked on one a few years back, something else, POS though.). And you are right, faster than 4 out 5 of anything I meet. Somehow, once again, 22 grand was to much for 80%. The obviously had acres of potential, and I want it, BADLY :( .
Your name calling is pathetic, and your timing is lame. Go copulate with whatever species you are or have a drink or something. The rest of us already did

jimmyz2
11-27-2004, 02:05 PM
dude only 136mph? you took that pic too soon!
:lol :lol I thought the same thing.

phillytouch
11-28-2004, 12:24 PM
Holy smoke. You guys destroyed this poor man's question with some of the most useless, "what if", and imaginary info I have ever heard. Trans Am guy needs a mental enema.

To answer your original question, you should have no problems at all with 4 out of every 5 cars you get into it with. On the highway is where your bread is buttered. Watch out for anything that says Z06 or AMG on the ass though.... :eyecrazy

I'm not sure which is worse, the evo / sti is the fastest / baddest car ever produced, or the Trans Am / Camero / Firebirds RULE club. We have both on our fine forum, and most are actually really cool. It's just fun to listen to some of these guys explain how badly they'll whoop your 5's ass on the drag strip. That's great. Wow. ;) I'll remember that and slow down the next time I'm handing some azz to a mullet punk in his Mustang GT or Camero who thinks my 540 is slow and an easy mark....... :alright

Jeesshh

Scott
after sorting through the trash i was able to get some sort of idea of where my joyride's place is in this cold...cold world

E34nication
11-28-2004, 06:59 PM
http://www.tamparacing.com/gallery/data/500/9366speedo-med.jpg
had to shut it down a little early.. not enough room. fasted indicated i have rocked it a hair past 160. that is in 6th gear btw.

jimmyz2
11-28-2004, 07:08 PM
Very nice MPH shot :eek: .I wonder how fast now my car is with an additional 150hp.I am too chicken sh*t to find out.LOL :evil2

SehrSchnell
11-28-2004, 08:14 PM
had to shut it down a little early.. not enough room. fasted indicated i have rocked it a hair past 160. that is in 6th gear btw.

You mean cause you were out of gas right? :stickoutt :D

E34nication
11-28-2004, 10:33 PM
You mean cause you were out of gas right? :stickoutt :D

why not get her as light as possible for high speed runs? :stickoutt i was out trying to find some gumballers on their way to miami.

Speedfreak
11-29-2004, 08:45 AM
You mean cause you were out of gas right? :stickoutt :D

Less gas means less fire when something goes wrong at that speed. :D

323I Junkie
11-29-2004, 08:48 AM
Less gas means less fire when something goes wrong at that speed. :D


Ahhhhhk


Just go down in a screaming ball of fury 160 mph fireball ending in a detonation so loud it knocks windows out

E34nication
11-29-2004, 11:23 AM
Less gas means less fire when something goes wrong at that speed. :D

indeed... my biggest worry is tires... that was 3 days after putting on new t1-s'... however, on my 162mph run (race vs. 02 mustang with some bolt-on's i'm guessing) i did lose my front windshield trim..

323I Junkie
11-29-2004, 11:32 AM
My front windshield starts too howl like satan at 110...due to my tires, its all I want to push it now

Speedfreak
11-29-2004, 01:26 PM
indeed... my biggest worry is tires... that was 3 days after putting on new t1-s'... however, on my 162mph run (race vs. 02 mustang with some bolt-on's i'm guessing) i did lose my front windshield trim..

I'd have messed myself if I saw something break loose at that speed.
I had a friend who had his hood blow up at about 100. :eek:

323I Junkie
11-29-2004, 01:31 PM
Thats why e34's hoods open up backwards