RE: Porsche 718 Boxster - full details
Discussion
A.G. said:
RoverP6B said:
An E46 M3 is a coupé, not a saloon, and might reasonably be called a sports car, perhaps, but an M5 is definitely a 4-door GT. I'd say the E9x M3 is also a big-engined GT.
12 hours ago you were tirelessly banging on about the virtues of a straight six BMW engine.(BECAUSE YOU HAPPEN TO OWN ONE)
You informed the world of the virtues of the alloy blocked e30 6 cylinder Alpina 3 series (that didn't exist) and how it was superior to the e30 M3, (that you have obviously never driven).
You then continue to spout utter sh!te, ignoring your obvious factual errors and then continue to post further nonsense.
Straight 6 may be the mathematically optimum route and primary and seconday balance may have been an issue in the 70's but most of us have have moved on because it is a non-issue anymore. While you are at it, check the comparible BHP/engine weight of other engines in that era against BMW. Get back to me on how BMW faired.
Do you live at home with your parents or are you just simple?
I loved Pistonheads until weapons grade retards like you signed up.
Edited by A.G. on Friday 5th February 23:53
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Fair point. A few years ago they were sub-£50k and rather unloved.
This one looks nice though, and could be landed in the UK for less than the (list, not retail) cost of a new Cayman GT4...
http://www.goo-net-exchange.com/usedcars/HONDA/NSX...
Or this Type-S...a little leggier but newer and that mileage is nothing in an NSX.
http://torque-gt.co.uk/auction/honda-nsx-na2-type-...
havoc said:
Fair point. A few years ago they were sub-£50k and rather unloved.
This one looks nice though, and could be landed in the UK for less than the (list, not retail) cost of a new Cayman GT4...
http://www.goo-net-exchange.com/usedcars/HONDA/NSX...
Or this Type-S...a little leggier but newer and that mileage is nothing in an NSX.
http://torque-gt.co.uk/auction/honda-nsx-na2-type-...
Of course, by the time I was in a position to fantasise with any prospect of irresponsible borrowing, the £20-35k market was long gone. Typical!
SidewaysSi said:
So by your reckoning the M4 is a sports car but the M3 is not?
I would also argue the E46 is really a 2 door saloon as it is not a purpose built coupe.
M4 is more a big heavy GT like the E92.I would also argue the E46 is really a 2 door saloon as it is not a purpose built coupe.
The E46 2-door shell shares very little with the 4-door. The floorpan and front bulkhead are the same, but that's about it...
Wills2 said:
WTF has a DC2 and M3 got to do with the new boxster 718? Well done P6B another thread ruined by you!
I didn't introduce either car to this discussion.A.G. said:
12 hours ago you were tirelessly banging on about the virtues of a straight six BMW engine (BECAUSE YOU HAPPEN TO OWN ONE).
You informed the world of the virtues of the alloy blocked e30 6 cylinder Alpina 3 series (that didn't exist) and how it was superior to the e30 M3, (that you have obviously never driven).
You then continue to spout utter sh!te, ignoring your obvious factual errors and then continue to post further nonsense.
Straight 6 may be the mathematically optimum route and primary and secondary balance may have been an issue in the 70's but most of us have have moved on because it is a non-issue anymore. While you are at it, check the comparable BHP/engine weight of other engines in that era against BMW. Get back to me on how BMW fared.
Do you live at home with your parents or are you just simple?
I happen to have one (in a heavy 1680kg estate), but I thought the I6 was the optimal sports car engine long before I bought my own I6 car. I admitted my error over the construction material of the M20 block. I prefer a straight-six to a straight-four. The E30 M3 doesn't interest me because it has a four-cylinder engine. Balance is still an important consideration in both refinement and ability to make power - which is why Mercedes-Benz and Jaguar are both developing new I6s to replace their V6s, and the former continues to produce V12s (as do Toyota, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Aston Martin and Rolls-Royce). Engine weight figures are notoriously unreliable - there's no consistency in how they're measured. Dry, wet, with or without manifolds, accessories etc... FYI I'm 58, my parents died 22 and 32 years ago respectively.You informed the world of the virtues of the alloy blocked e30 6 cylinder Alpina 3 series (that didn't exist) and how it was superior to the e30 M3, (that you have obviously never driven).
You then continue to spout utter sh!te, ignoring your obvious factual errors and then continue to post further nonsense.
Straight 6 may be the mathematically optimum route and primary and secondary balance may have been an issue in the 70's but most of us have have moved on because it is a non-issue anymore. While you are at it, check the comparable BHP/engine weight of other engines in that era against BMW. Get back to me on how BMW fared.
Do you live at home with your parents or are you just simple?
RoverP6B said:
I happen to have one (in a heavy 1680kg estate), but I thought the I6 was the optimal sports car engine long before I bought my own I6 car. I admitted my error over the construction material of the M20 block. I prefer a straight-six to a straight-four. The E30 M3 doesn't interest me because it has a four-cylinder engine. Balance is still an important consideration in both refinement and ability to make power - which is why Mercedes-Benz and Jaguar are both developing new I6s to replace their V6s, and the former continues to produce V12s (as do Toyota, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Aston Martin and Rolls-Royce).
You might quite like the I6 but the V8 is more widely used in sports cars, as is the I4. Porsche being the obvious anomaly. Interesting that you raise the question of balance yet choose to ignore everything that has been said re: smaller, lighter engines along with improved packaging.RoverP6B said:
Balance is still an important consideration in both refinement and ability to make power - which is why Mercedes-Benz and Jaguar are both developing new I6s to replace their V6s
No, modularity is why they're both moving to I-6 engines (more component commonality with I-4 and potentially I-3 units), and both manufacturers have said so. The innate balance of the I-6 vs the V-6 is a side-benefit, but given the lower-revving nature of modern (mainly FI) engines is actually less-relevant now than it would have been 10-20 years ago.Haha! P6B is back. RIP thread, sanity has left the building.
The last thread he derailed was about sports cars too. He defined the Cobra as "not a sports car" because it had a V8 not a straight 6. The MX5 wasn't a sportscar either, because it had an I4. Now, he's defining a sporty variant of a family saloon as as sportscar? The same chap who's definition of a sportscar was so narrow that it excluded virtually every TVR ever built, as well as over 3/4 of all cars listed under the category "Sportscars" in Top Marques. I'd love to understand the thought processes scurrying about in that 70's British Leyland head of his.
The last thread he derailed was about sports cars too. He defined the Cobra as "not a sports car" because it had a V8 not a straight 6. The MX5 wasn't a sportscar either, because it had an I4. Now, he's defining a sporty variant of a family saloon as as sportscar? The same chap who's definition of a sportscar was so narrow that it excluded virtually every TVR ever built, as well as over 3/4 of all cars listed under the category "Sportscars" in Top Marques. I'd love to understand the thought processes scurrying about in that 70's British Leyland head of his.
The only good things about I6 is dynamic balance and part sharing as mentioned. It takes a 'special' kind of thought process to claim it as ideal for a sports car, to long so bad for packaging and polar moment, to tall so bad for centre of gravity. I don't know how many times it has to be said that there are simple reasons why pure race cars (such as F1) have tended to have V engines but it just never seems to sink in through the thick skulls of some.
NJH said:
The only good things about I6 is dynamic balance and part sharing as mentioned. It takes a 'special' kind of thought process to claim it as ideal for a sports car, to long so bad for packaging and polar moment, to tall so bad for centre of gravity. I don't know how many times it has to be said that there are simple reasons why pure race cars (such as F1) have tended to have V engines but it just never seems to sink in through the thick skulls of some.
This is true BUT there have certainly been some cracking straight sixes over the years in some very decent cars, despite the inherent cons you mention. Various BMW's over the years culminating in the S54, the RB26 in the Skyline GT-Rs and the TVR speed six are just a few I could mention off the top of my head. I'm not saying they are the best\only option for a sports car as that would be silly and blinkered but you have to admit that some manufacturers seem to have done OK using such a "compromised" configuration so the pro's\cons aren't as black and white as some may think.Guvernator said:
This is true BUT there have certainly been some cracking straight sixes over the years in some very decent cars, despite the inherent cons you mention. Various BMW's over the years culminating in the S54, the RB26 in the Skyline GT-Rs and the TVR speed six are just a few I could mention off the top of my head. I'm not saying they are the best\only option for a sports car as that would be silly and blinkered but you have to admit that some manufacturers seem to have done OK using such a "compromised" configuration so the pro's\cons aren't as black and white as some may think.
I think it's more that some of the best drivers cars ever made are being dismissed by someone who drives around in old barge purely because they don't have the 'right' engine configuration. He once debated at length that an I6 was actually a stronger engine than a V8 and when I started listing examples of Top Fuel motors plus various mavericks like Ron Bohn and his project I6, he came up with a comparable 10,000HP I6, completely fictional, that he believed was 'possible'. Total nutter. It's largely to do with packaging and compromises.
In a larger FR sports-car, where a long-bonnet actually helps the proportions and rear legroom/boot-space are secondary, an I-6 can make a fair case for itself.
In a smaller FR sports-car, the engine is almost certainly too long and an I-4 is often all that is required.
In a saloon where packaging matters, a shorter engine makes a lot of sense, so usually a V for larger capacities.
In a mid-engine'd car, where packaging really matters, it's almost always a V (or H/Boxer) unless it's a transverse I-4.
...which is why Jag and Merc's decisions surprise me a little, regardless of component commonisation and the cost-benefits that come with it.
In a larger FR sports-car, where a long-bonnet actually helps the proportions and rear legroom/boot-space are secondary, an I-6 can make a fair case for itself.
In a smaller FR sports-car, the engine is almost certainly too long and an I-4 is often all that is required.
In a saloon where packaging matters, a shorter engine makes a lot of sense, so usually a V for larger capacities.
In a mid-engine'd car, where packaging really matters, it's almost always a V (or H/Boxer) unless it's a transverse I-4.
...which is why Jag and Merc's decisions surprise me a little, regardless of component commonisation and the cost-benefits that come with it.
If you stick a big crossplane V8 in what is otherwise a sports car, whether it's a Cobra or a Griffith, it becomes a muscle car. The MX5 is really too slow and soft to be a sports car.
I6s are no taller than other inline engines and are frequently canted over somewhat, like half of a V12. And yes, they're inherently very strong.
I6s are no taller than other inline engines and are frequently canted over somewhat, like half of a V12. And yes, they're inherently very strong.
RoverP6B said:
If you stick a big crossplane V8 in what is otherwise a sports car, whether it's a Cobra or a Griffith, it becomes a muscle car. The MX5 is really too slow and soft to be a sports car.
I6s are no taller than other inline engines and are frequently canted over somewhat, like half of a V12. And yes, they're inherently very strong.
The MX5 is the quintessential sports car and as you know, the format of light, rwd and I4 has been used throughout the industry for a very long time. Is the Elan too slow to be a sports car, Caterham 160 too slow to be a sports car, what utter nonsense. I6s are no taller than other inline engines and are frequently canted over somewhat, like half of a V12. And yes, they're inherently very strong.
I6's are longer and heavier than I4's, fairly obviously. They are not as strong as V8's which was the context, if you choose to quote it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff