RE: Touring Car Battle: E30 Vs E90
Discussion
Chippy17 said
"I think Mr Priaux might know what he is talking about..."
He might, but I stated a fact for a circuit which is over 60 seconds a lap. Don't think it needs a genius to work out that what he said may have been overstated.
Please note that the privately owned E30 M3 may not have been in the peak form that it may have been in works form and the WTCC car will be. As we all know a works car can be significantly faster than a private entry.
"I think Mr Priaux might know what he is talking about..."
He might, but I stated a fact for a circuit which is over 60 seconds a lap. Don't think it needs a genius to work out that what he said may have been overstated.
Please note that the privately owned E30 M3 may not have been in the peak form that it may have been in works form and the WTCC car will be. As we all know a works car can be significantly faster than a private entry.
E90 doesn't interest me in the slightest but a liveried E30 gunning around the track. Yum yum. 
No, but I am reasonably knowlegeble about E30 M3 laptimes and therefore can spot a throw away comment about tem which the less informed may not.
My old E30 M3 road car albeit stripped out and tuned to 220 to 230 bhp can lap Brands Indy in the 57 second bracket on road legal tyres with no cage, not on coil overs etc and with me behind the wheel.
If what AP is saying is correct, then I would be faster than him in a WTCC in my Gr A E30...... a nice thought, but I'm pretty confident he'd kick my arse!!
Biased? Undoubtedly, but correct.
But hey, AP drives for BMW so if the new car wasn't substantially quicker than an old shed, that would be annoying!
My old E30 M3 road car albeit stripped out and tuned to 220 to 230 bhp can lap Brands Indy in the 57 second bracket on road legal tyres with no cage, not on coil overs etc and with me behind the wheel.
If what AP is saying is correct, then I would be faster than him in a WTCC in my Gr A E30...... a nice thought, but I'm pretty confident he'd kick my arse!!
Biased? Undoubtedly, but correct.
But hey, AP drives for BMW so if the new car wasn't substantially quicker than an old shed, that would be annoying!
SLightly differnt example...
I have driven both an E46 ETCC and a E30 2.5DTM. I know different models etc. from the examples in this article; however it was clear that the E46 could carry more speed and was very go kart esque, you could stand on the brakes in a moment then be back on it where as the E30 wasn't as supple yet the engine in that version (2.5) was brutle and sounded the nuts... also had to be driven more smoothly.
I have driven both an E46 ETCC and a E30 2.5DTM. I know different models etc. from the examples in this article; however it was clear that the E46 could carry more speed and was very go kart esque, you could stand on the brakes in a moment then be back on it where as the E30 wasn't as supple yet the engine in that version (2.5) was brutle and sounded the nuts... also had to be driven more smoothly.
Edited by wilbo on Monday 14th July 20:47
i every much doubt the e30m3 in any guise would be as stiff as e90
the e30 though used, is not being maintained and used as a race car
with racing budgets, i doubt it is really pulling 320BHP being 17 years old
and will probably be well down on torque over the newer car
with advances in suspension, braking and aerodynamics
it is hardly likely the e30 could really complete
17 years ago these guys used to have budgets of £250k per season and that was
running 2 cars, the e90 is probably in excess of £300k, just for the car
the e30 though used, is not being maintained and used as a race car
with racing budgets, i doubt it is really pulling 320BHP being 17 years old
and will probably be well down on torque over the newer car
with advances in suspension, braking and aerodynamics
it is hardly likely the e30 could really complete
17 years ago these guys used to have budgets of £250k per season and that was
running 2 cars, the e90 is probably in excess of £300k, just for the car
Fatbloke said:
i every much doubt the e30m3 in any guise would be as stiff as e90
the e30 though used, is not being maintained and used as a race car
with racing budgets, i doubt it is really pulling 320BHP being 17 years old
and will probably be well down on torque over the newer car
with advances in suspension, braking and aerodynamics
it is hardly likely the e30 could really complete
17 years ago these guys used to have budgets of £250k per season and that was
running 2 cars, the e90 is probably in excess of £300k, just for the car
Yeah, I agree that an E30 M3 of the same power would be slower, just no where near 10 seconds plus slower round a 60 second lap.the e30 though used, is not being maintained and used as a race car
with racing budgets, i doubt it is really pulling 320BHP being 17 years old
and will probably be well down on torque over the newer car
with advances in suspension, braking and aerodynamics
it is hardly likely the e30 could really complete
17 years ago these guys used to have budgets of £250k per season and that was
running 2 cars, the e90 is probably in excess of £300k, just for the car
MarkM3Evoplus said:
Fatbloke said:
i every much doubt the e30m3 in any guise would be as stiff as e90
the e30 though used, is not being maintained and used as a race car
with racing budgets, i doubt it is really pulling 320BHP being 17 years old
and will probably be well down on torque over the newer car
with advances in suspension, braking and aerodynamics
it is hardly likely the e30 could really complete
17 years ago these guys used to have budgets of £250k per season and that was
running 2 cars, the e90 is probably in excess of £300k, just for the car
Yeah, I agree that an E30 M3 of the same power would be slower, just no where near 10 seconds plus slower round a 60 second lap.the e30 though used, is not being maintained and used as a race car
with racing budgets, i doubt it is really pulling 320BHP being 17 years old
and will probably be well down on torque over the newer car
with advances in suspension, braking and aerodynamics
it is hardly likely the e30 could really complete
17 years ago these guys used to have budgets of £250k per season and that was
running 2 cars, the e90 is probably in excess of £300k, just for the car
Well, Tim Sugdens pole (49.11) was quicker than the quali effort by Matt Jackson in 2007 who was running Andy's prior year WTCC car as a privateer. He qualified 6th with a 49.750 - 0.218 off the pole time. He led one of the races and was very competitive. He is currently 3rd in the 2008 championship in Andy's newer, old car.
However Graham Hill bend is now slower than before, but the circuit has been re-surfaced and is smoother. Still, prob slower now.
Note the E30 M3 that Sugden raced was a 2.0 litre BTCC version - much slower than a 1991 full on 2.5 DTM M3.
Throw in 17 years of tyre technology......
However Graham Hill bend is now slower than before, but the circuit has been re-surfaced and is smoother. Still, prob slower now.
Note the E30 M3 that Sugden raced was a 2.0 litre BTCC version - much slower than a 1991 full on 2.5 DTM M3.
Throw in 17 years of tyre technology......
So.....
We've got a 950Kg E30 with 320 BHP = 337 BHP/ton.
And we've got a 1200 Kg E90 with 280 BHP = 233 BHP/ton.
Also we've got a 1.5 mile Pembrey with 60 second laps.
The car with 104 BHP less per ton (more than 30% power to weight disadvantage), is more than 10 seconds per lap (more than 16%) faster.
Horse5hit.
We've got a 950Kg E30 with 320 BHP = 337 BHP/ton.
And we've got a 1200 Kg E90 with 280 BHP = 233 BHP/ton.
Also we've got a 1.5 mile Pembrey with 60 second laps.
The car with 104 BHP less per ton (more than 30% power to weight disadvantage), is more than 10 seconds per lap (more than 16%) faster.
Horse5hit.
I've been looking into the lap time argument a little and found a bit of data from Spa. Current WTCC cars are about a second quicker than 1991 24-hour spec Evo 2 E30 M3s around Spa, but bear in mind that 24-hour spec E30s used 1000rpm less than usual and would've been detuned and somewhat podgy in comparison with sprint spec.
The 1992 Sport Evo, still in endurance spec, was 3 seconds quicker around Spa than a WTCC car. Tyre technology has come on a long way since then, so a WTCC car would be completely blitzed by a fully lit sprint spec Sport Evo on modern tyres. BMW would never admit that though, of course...
Modern touring cars are just ghastly things.
The 1992 Sport Evo, still in endurance spec, was 3 seconds quicker around Spa than a WTCC car. Tyre technology has come on a long way since then, so a WTCC car would be completely blitzed by a fully lit sprint spec Sport Evo on modern tyres. BMW would never admit that though, of course...
Modern touring cars are just ghastly things.
tGassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff