Utilising the power on a VERY powerful car...

Utilising the power on a VERY powerful car...

Author
Discussion

MC Bodge

21,628 posts

175 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
FrankUnderwood said:
If cars cost 50p and we spent 5 minutes a day in one I would agree.

But that's not the case.

We tend to spend significant amounts of time in cars and for most people they're the second most expensive purchase.

Hence if you could afford to then you would take something like a performance orientated V8 over a diesel.
That may well be the case, but the bizarre hyperbole and emotion about the subject is quite amusing.

Maybe the requirement for a 12 cylinder engine of at least 6 litres should be written into the convention on human rights?

Edited by MC Bodge on Friday 28th November 18:40

Renovation

1,763 posts

121 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
ArnieVXR said:
Losing the Monaro on a patch of oil:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FagIAFwOUzE
PS I would have beaten that Yank. My 60-ft times were rubbish due to the lack of a trans-brake.

Test run from inside the Audi (9-second pass roughly speaking):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79M8t7UEKk8
Witness the tatty tax disc hanging off the screen.

Me and the Audi losing this year's SuperCup championship by 0.1 seconds to John Sleath's diesel truck (oh the indignity):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XnJ25vvlM8
4-minutes 32-seconds in, though you should watch the rest
Whilst I'm sure many know that a 9 second pass is very quick - to make it easier to understand:

The pick up did 0-155.7mph in 8.72 seconds eek

RDMcG

19,161 posts

207 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
E65Ross said:
Are you for real? How come?

Before going for the M6 my dad test drove a 640d, which is basically as economical as the 30/35d variants yet more powerful, and he still ended up with the M6.

The M5 has a very decent range, it's faster, sounds nicer, and rides every bit as good as a normal 5er due to no run flats....I can't think of any reason why you'd rather the slower, less refined and more industrial engine over the M5; other than the save money?

Is it because the diesel can go further without stopping? Guessing the M5 is going to be all but identical but my old can can easily top 400+ miles to a tank, which seems perfectly fine. on a long drive you could nudge 500 miles. So why else would you prefer a less refined diesel to the V8 petrol, other than to save money?
My old M6 was delimited at Hartge in Germany, and it was surprisingly quick..none of that 155MPH limiter nonsense:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTMKkPxei0I

ArnieVXR

2,449 posts

183 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
Renovation said:
Whilst I'm sure many know that a 9 second pass is very quick - to make it easier to understand:

The pick up did 0-155.7mph in 8.72 seconds eek
The Audi has done 0-193mph in 7.63 seconds at the Pod. In street trim on 97-Ron fuel.

007 VXR

64,187 posts

187 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
ArnieVXR said:
The Audi has done 0-193mph in 7.63 seconds at the Pod. In street trim on 97-Ron fuel.
now that's fast thumbup

DonkeyApple

55,311 posts

169 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
The V10 M5 is a pretty good example for this thread.

I recall driving from Germany into France in an estate one a few years back. It was a total barn stormer of a car. A genuinely phenomenal bit of kit. You could sling it into corners at any attitude and the computer just covered your errors. It was so much faster than the Tiv through Alsace. It soaked up bad surfaces, stuck to the road and was monumentally silent and comfortable. It was the most impressive generic modern car I've driven.

When I came back to the UK I was pretty convinced that if go and buy one. Just a few days back on out smaller and tighter roads I rapidly came to the conclusion that it would be pointless and no fun. That doesn't mean a lesser 5 series would score better, it wouldn't. If I was going to buy a 5 then I'd still buy the M or a 540 at worst (if there is one?).

Some cars are too good to be fun, others are so bad you end up pissing yourself laughing at 30 mph.

Truckosaurus

11,299 posts

284 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
DonkeyApple said:
... and was monumentally silent ...
Mine must be broken biggrin

ORD

18,120 posts

127 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
MC Bodge said:
FrankUnderwood said:
If cars cost 50p and we spent 5 minutes a day in one I would agree.

But that's not the case.

We tend to spend significant amounts of time in cars and for most people they're the second most expensive purchase.

Hence if you could afford to then you would take something like a performance orientated V8 over a diesel.
That may well be the case, but the bizarre hyperbole and emotion about the subject is quite amusing.

Maybe the requirement for a 12 cylinder engine of at least 6 litres should be written into the convention on human rights?

Edited by MC Bodge on Friday 28th November 18:40
Nah. Six cylinders are fine as long as they are configured flat or straight :-)

There are even pleasant 3 and 4 cylinder engines (only petrol, to be fair), but they are rare and aren't as pleasant as nice bigger engines. Examples of pleasant small engines - Mazda's current petrol engines; the 3 in the Mini; the 2.0 Ecoboost (I am told - haven't driven a car with it). Most are turds, though, in terms of feel, sound and enjoyment (see, e.g., the unbearable small tc petrol engines in VW and Merc offerings).

God bless the Germans for still producing big petrol engine, although they are on the way out! No interest in a current M3 for example, but I love the V8 one just for the engine note!



CrutyRammers

13,735 posts

198 months

Saturday 29th November 2014
quotequote all
007 VXR said:
ArnieVXR said:
The Audi has done 0-193mph in 7.63 seconds at the Pod. In street trim on 97-Ron fuel.
now that's fast thumbup
And that's an understatement!

deadslow

8,000 posts

223 months

Saturday 29th November 2014
quotequote all
MC Bodge said:
Maybe the requirement for a 12 cylinder engine of at least 6 litres should be written into the convention on human rights?
Great, I've had one, I am a human so I must be 'right'. hehe

XJ Flyer

5,526 posts

130 months

Saturday 29th November 2014
quotequote all
deadslow said:
MC Bodge said:
Maybe the requirement for a 12 cylinder engine of at least 6 litres should be written into the convention on human rights?
Great, I've had one, I am a human so I must be 'right'. hehe
To be fair 8 cylinders at that capacity will be allowed on special request subject to strict quota.Assuming that quota runs out 12 cylinders will then be the default no extra cost choice.

007 VXR

64,187 posts

187 months

Saturday 29th November 2014
quotequote all
FrankUnderwood said:
Hence if you could afford to then you would take something like a performance orientated V8 over a diesel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9Y-dmRGAkE