Top Gear on 23/12/08

[_g_]

Bumcrack said:

I watched and found it interesting, but my loathing of that nob jockey Clarkson is reaching new heights.

For a serious petrol head the only concern that matters is how the car drives.

Erm, so is 'new' top gear about cars, then .
I always took it as a chat show where they occasionally have some motoring related content.

As a biker I wasn't too impressed when Clarkson suggested that people should put wire across roads to catch bikers. People in the 'real world' have been killed in this way and not really a topic for humour to my mind.
However, he is paid to make fun of things in a stereotypical manner to amuse your average tabloid reader. How much of this is him and how much the image the script writers want to put forward, I don't know.


I have to see, regardless of Clarkson, the 'image' of the M3 did actually put me off a little bit - but as suggested, I'm buying the car for what it does, not how some random person in a traffic jam will perceive me.

[obes]

housemaster said:

I speak from experience as I have an RS4 but I don't have the rose tinted glasses or a need to make out my car is the best there is like many people with an RS4 seem to want to in my experience..

Agreed , see that a lot on the forums, both ways! Lots of posts based almost almost entirely on someone else's opinion. He can call me a cock all day long, I'll gladly try the new M3 and if I like it i'll get one!

One thing, I wish the TG test had been with the saloon and not the coupe M3. It should still be fastest, but it would have been a much more even test! Can't help thinking the coupe is more of a used 911 competitior. Not sure which other cars would be "Direct" competition for the M3 Coupe ?

[_g_]

Having actually watched it now (thank you finalgear.com), I thought it was fairly balanced.

Top Gear always tries to slag off the stuff it likes it seems; presumably for a sense of drama or something.

[MarkM3Evoplus]

Evo track time for the M3 was from memory 1M 26.3, Merc 1m 29.5 and VXR8 Supercharged 1M 30 (may have got Merc & VX thing mixed up tho).

BMW certainly appears the better track car if that is what floats your boat and one was at a recent Brands Trackday and was impressively fast.

[waremark]

Well, if the M3 really is faster round the track than the C63, as well as apparently riding better and being a bit quieter, that's quite an impressive combination.

Played today at Bruntingthorpe in my E46. Amazing how much power you can put down and how quickly you can go in the streaming wet even with rwd - it really is a great car, and the new one is obviously even better.

[JOHNC74]

It always amazes me how people can not just take Top Gear and Clarkson just as pure entertainment. I can remember old Top Gear with William Woollard and it was monumentally boring old cock.

We need to lighten up a bit as car lovers or we will end up as car bores!

[squeezebm]

JOHNC74 said:

It always amazes me how people can not just take Top Gear and Clarkson just as pure entertainment. I can remember old Top Gear with William Woollard and it was monumentally boring old cock.

We need to lighten up a bit as car lovers or we will end up as car bores!

To be fair most on ph are just nob jockeys who just like to slag anything and everything off which is very amusing as it used to be a good source of info,now its just full of very jealous dickheads.

[tyre_tread]

squeezebm said:

JOHNC74 said:

It always amazes me how people can not just take Top Gear and Clarkson just as pure entertainment. I can remember old Top Gear with William Woollard and it was monumentally boring old cock.

We need to lighten up a bit as car lovers or we will end up as car bores!

To be fair most on ph are just nob jockeys who just like to slag anything and everything off which is very amusing as it used to be a good source of info,now its just full of very jealous dickheads.

Does that include you then

[Bumcrack]

JOHNC74 said:

It always amazes me how people can not just take Top Gear and Clarkson just as pure entertainment. I can remember old Top Gear with William Woollard and it was monumentally boring old cock.

We need to lighten up a bit as car lovers or we will end up as car bores!

It's not that entertaining though is it?

Clarkson’s a fool with a massive ego and generally undermines the other two, who can be quite funny but still offer a balance opinion without all the boocks uttered by Jezza, the “car news” bit when they sit round the table and try and be funny is just dull, I suppose you might find it funny if you’re about 13, Hammond being the only one with any sort of comedy timing and at least James may car reviews are interesting and not the typical Clarkson fodder.
Its still not as bad at 5th gear, I’ll sky plus it and just fast forward ii until the end of the show to see the 3 minute review of the 997 GT3.

[housemaster]

tyre_tread said:

squeezebm said:

JOHNC74 said:

It always amazes me how people can not just take Top Gear and Clarkson just as pure entertainment. I can remember old Top Gear with William Woollard and it was monumentally boring old cock.

We need to lighten up a bit as car lovers or we will end up as car bores!

To be fair most on ph are just nob jockeys who just like to slag anything and everything off which is very amusing as it used to be a good source of info,now its just full of very jealous dickheads.

Does that include you then

The irony of his post was not lost on me.

[kayc]

taffyracer said:

andyuk911 said:

Hope all the cocks enjoy watching it again, LOL

http://www.dpccars.com/car-videos/12-25-07page-BMW...

Loved to have seen this on a wet day .... bye bye .....

Why, the reason the M3 is so much faster is due to its better weight distribution and lower weight than the heavyweight RS4 and the downright lardy merc, the wet would be the same story, 4wd cars are known for being understeery and lacking feel, RS4 is better than previous 4wd fast audi's but still lacks feel and precision which is exactly what you don't need in the wet

The M3 was so much faster because it was dry and on a track(i dont know many 4wd track cars),alternatively a M3 in the wet is very difficult to drive quickly on the road as the car just cant get the power down whereas the 4wd car can(most rally cars that are used mainly in poor conditions and probably more closely linked to road use are 4wd) ..with reference to the weight situation the m3 is actually quoted as 5 kilos heavier than the rs4 .

[Pugsey]

kayc said:

taffyracer said:

andyuk911 said:

Hope all the cocks enjoy watching it again, LOL

http://www.dpccars.com/car-videos/12-25-07page-BMW...

Loved to have seen this on a wet day .... bye bye .....

Why, the reason the M3 is so much faster is due to its better weight distribution and lower weight than the heavyweight RS4 and the downright lardy merc, the wet would be the same story, 4wd cars are known for being understeery and lacking feel, RS4 is better than previous 4wd fast audi's but still lacks feel and precision which is exactly what you don't need in the wet

The M3 was so much faster because it was dry and on a track(i dont know many 4wd track cars),alternatively a M3 in the wet is very difficult to drive quickly on the road as the car just cant get the power down whereas the 4wd car can(most rally cars that are used mainly in poor conditions and probably more closely linked to road use are 4wd) ..with reference to the weight situation the m3 is actually quoted as 5 kilos heavier than the rs4 .

Can't agree re the wet kayc. Drove nearly 1500 miles over the Christmas/New year period in truly vile conditions and a variety of roads and am now deeply impressed by my M3. I found that it puts it's power down very well indeed on even extremely wet roads - yes it'll slip and slide like a powerful Caterham if you insist on nailing it out of a roundabout in second but it's got the grunt to disappear up the road at an unholy rate in third or even fourth which is surely how you drive in those conditions anyway if you're trying to make quick progress. I've back to backed it with an RS4 and in the wet the Audi was hampered as much by understeer as the BMW was by oversteer and two totally different driving styles seemed to see both cars going equally fast although I might just put my money on the BMW being a tad faster in the wet than the Audi since the M3 actually seems to find more grip and inspire more confidence through quicker corners (where any supposed fwd traction advantage is negated anyway) in the wet. Tyres maybe the reason on that one I guess.

Edited by Pugsey on Wednesday 2nd January 12:51

[kayc]

Pugsey said:

kayc said:

taffyracer said:

andyuk911 said:

Hope all the cocks enjoy watching it again, LOL

http://www.dpccars.com/car-videos/12-25-07page-BMW...

Loved to have seen this on a wet day .... bye bye .....

Why, the reason the M3 is so much faster is due to its better weight distribution and lower weight than the heavyweight RS4 and the downright lardy merc, the wet would be the same story, 4wd cars are known for being understeery and lacking feel, RS4 is better than previous 4wd fast audi's but still lacks feel and precision which is exactly what you don't need in the wet

The M3 was so much faster because it was dry and on a track(i dont know many 4wd track cars),alternatively a M3 in the wet is very difficult to drive quickly on the road as the car just cant get the power down whereas the 4wd car can(most rally cars that are used mainly in poor conditions and probably more closely linked to road use are 4wd) ..with reference to the weight situation the m3 is actually quoted as 5 kilos heavier than the rs4 .

Can't agree re the wet kayc. Drove nearly 1500 miles over the Christmas/New year period in truly vile conditions and a variety of roads and am now deeply impressed by my M3. I found that it puts it's power down very well indeed on even extremely wet roads - yes it'll slip and slide like a powerful Caterham if you insist on nailing it out of a roundabout in second but it's got the grunt to disappear up the road at an unholy rate in third or even fourth which is surely how you drive in those conditions anyway if you're trying to make quick progress. I've back to backed it with an RS4 and in the wet the Audi was hampered as much by understeer as the BMW was by oversteer and two totally different driving styles seemed to see both cars going equally fast although I might just put my money on the BMW being a tad faster in the wet than the Audi since the M3 actually seems to find more grip and inspire more confidence through quicker corners (where any supposed fwd traction advantage is negated anyway) in the wet. Tyres maybe the reason on that one I guess.

Edited by Pugsey on Wednesday 2nd January 12:51

Well i have to say Pugsey ive had 3 m3's and a Csl,a variety of Scooby's,evo's ,etc and a few 911's..i wouldnt put an M3 up against any of them on wet slippery roads..maybe the new m3 is far better sorted but 420bp in a rear wheel drive-front engine car rarely offers confidence that the others could..imo (996tt was the best of course!)

Edited by kayc on Wednesday 2nd January 14:08

[taffyracer]

kayc said:

taffyracer said:

andyuk911 said:

Hope all the cocks enjoy watching it again, LOL

http://www.dpccars.com/car-videos/12-25-07page-BMW...

Loved to have seen this on a wet day .... bye bye .....

Why, the reason the M3 is so much faster is due to its better weight distribution and lower weight than the heavyweight RS4 and the downright lardy merc, the wet would be the same story, 4wd cars are known for being understeery and lacking feel, RS4 is better than previous 4wd fast audi's but still lacks feel and precision which is exactly what you don't need in the wet

The M3 was so much faster because it was dry and on a track(i dont know many 4wd track cars),alternatively a M3 in the wet is very difficult to drive quickly on the road as the car just cant get the power down whereas the 4wd car can(most rally cars that are used mainly in poor conditions and probably more closely linked to road use are 4wd) ..with reference to the weight situation the m3 is actually quoted as 5 kilos heavier than the rs4 .

That's EU weights mind you, which means it allows for a passenger and tank of fuel and some luggage, not sure on the specifics but it's about 150kgs less when in nett weight, so is actually substantially lighter than the RS4, just because rally cars have 4wd does not mean that road cars with 4wd are any faster in the wet, the systems used in rally cars and not OEM by any stretch of the imagination, its more a question of knowing how to drive each car to get the best out of them, I have had quattros and M3's, IMHO if the M3 if driven properly by someone thatr knows how to drive RWD in the wet will be faster

[Pugsey]

kayc said:

Pugsey said:

kayc said:

taffyracer said:

andyuk911 said:

Hope all the cocks enjoy watching it again, LOL

http://www.dpccars.com/car-videos/12-25-07page-BMW...

Loved to have seen this on a wet day .... bye bye .....

Why, the reason the M3 is so much faster is due to its better weight distribution and lower weight than the heavyweight RS4 and the downright lardy merc, the wet would be the same story, 4wd cars are known for being understeery and lacking feel, RS4 is better than previous 4wd fast audi's but still lacks feel and precision which is exactly what you don't need in the wet

The M3 was so much faster because it was dry and on a track(i dont know many 4wd track cars),alternatively a M3 in the wet is very difficult to drive quickly on the road as the car just cant get the power down whereas the 4wd car can(most rally cars that are used mainly in poor conditions and probably more closely linked to road use are 4wd) ..with reference to the weight situation the m3 is actually quoted as 5 kilos heavier than the rs4 .

Can't agree re the wet kayc. Drove nearly 1500 miles over the Christmas/New year period in truly vile conditions and a variety of roads and am now deeply impressed by my M3. I found that it puts it's power down very well indeed on even extremely wet roads - yes it'll slip and slide like a powerful Caterham if you insist on nailing it out of a roundabout in second but it's got the grunt to disappear up the road at an unholy rate in third or even fourth which is surely how you drive in those conditions anyway if you're trying to make quick progress. I've back to backed it with an RS4 and in the wet the Audi was hampered as much by understeer as the BMW was by oversteer and two totally different driving styles seemed to see both cars going equally fast although I might just put my money on the BMW being a tad faster in the wet than the Audi since the M3 actually seems to find more grip and inspire more confidence through quicker corners (where any supposed fwd traction advantage is negated anyway) in the wet. Tyres maybe the reason on that one I guess.

Edited by Pugsey on Wednesday 2nd January 12:51

Well i have to say Pugsey ive had 3 m3's and a Csl,a variety of Scooby's,evo's ,etc and a few 911's..i wouldnt put an M3 up against any of them on wet slippery roads..maybe the new m3 is far better sorted but 420bp in a rear wheel drive-front engine car rarely offers confidence that the others could..imo (996tt was the best of course!)

Edited by kayc on Wednesday 2nd January 14:08

I'll have to bow to your own experiences with your personal list of cars kayc although my own experiences with both my E92 M3 and earlier versions compared to other cars I've owned have caused me to draw different conclusions to you. I'll also refer you to my previous post which makes it pretty clear that I have absolute confidence in the wet in my latest 400+bhp rwd front engined car - pretty much on a par with a 997S wet or dry I'd say. I can only speak for my own experience of course. For the record I'll just add that, as someone else has posted, on plain wet roads FWD doesn't confer much advantage IMO since grip is pretty much a function of suspension set up and tyres. Add gravel and snow to challenge traction and things are different - but we don't get much of either day to day on UK roads.

[waremark]

Have you seen the video on the Autocar site of Chris Harris in his new M3 in the pouring wet at the Ring? It was an RMA day, at which apparently more than 10 911's were crashed, some by reasonably competent drivers. Harris drove the M3 swiftly and very smoothly.

The video is at:

http://www.autocar.co.uk/VideosWallpapers/Videos.a...

[kayc]

waremark said:

Have you seen the video on the Autocar site of Chris Harris in his new M3 in the pouring wet at the Ring? It was an RMA day, at which apparently more than 10 911's were crashed, some by reasonably competent drivers. Harris drove the M3 swiftly and very smoothly.

The video is at:

http://www.autocar.co.uk/VideosWallpapers/Videos.a...

Once again we are talking about track driving in the wet..that is totally different to trying to drive quick on UK roads in the wet..on track you can drive consistently quicker to test the levels of grip,get heat into the tyres and brakes and in general get a fairly consistent surface to drive on to test the limit.Unless you go round and round in circles on the same 1 mile stretch of country road you continually come across totally different road surfaces,man hole covers,white lines,leaves,mud-on road,dogs,horses, etc which stops you ever committing the car 100% and finding consistent grip levels..thats where imo a 4wd car can be driven relatively poorly but still cover the ground quickly relative to high powered rear wheel drive car.What makes a car great on track often is its downfall on the road and vice versa..The old favourite GT3/tt argument is a perfect example that comes up on the Porsche forum..which is better?Its what you want the car for that dictates which is best to buy..track or road,all imo of course.

[Frik]

And now you're bringing the exact same argument over here kayc.

I'm happy you're happy with your car. Everyone's happy. Time to stop banging the drum eh?

[jonlwright]

taffyracer said:

andyuk911 said:

taffyracer said:

andyuk911 said:

Hope all the cocks enjoy watching it again, LOL

http://www.dpccars.com/car-videos/12-25-07page-BMW...

Loved to have seen this on a wet day .... bye bye .....

I am no expert round a track, but on a normal road the RS4 is very good, this is where the 4wd helps above 2wd cars IMO ... but I have not driven a new M3 that is the only way I would be able to agree or disagree with you.

Then why make such a comment in the 1st place then, 4WD is only any use to those that do not know how to drive a RWD, it does provide extra grip but at the expense of weight and feel and, RS4's are good cars, I nearly bought one and have had many audi's, not knocking them I just don't undertstand your comment and it seems neither do you!

Hmm, so all those group B rally drivers in the 80's in Audi Quattros, Metro 6R4s and RS200s only drove them because they were not capable of driving a RWD car properly??? What total tosh!

While in the dry I would agree with you, when it comes to wet and slippery roads you cannot ignore the physics of a 4wd having more traction and grip than a RWD car, not to mention their advanced technology nowadays of shifting power to whichever wheels have the grip.

Doesn't matter how skilled you are with a RWD car, you will not be able to keep up with a similar 4wd equivalent in slippery conditions, even if you do have a few seconds advantage in the dry.

[taffyracer]

Once again people not actually reading what is written and distorting it to try and enforce their own arguments. You should read my post again mate, it is quite clear what i said, the 4wd systems on rally cars are not OEM systems and the suspension, geometry and all other associated parts are very very different, don't think for 1 minute that an RS4 has anything in common with a WRC or Group B rally car, if you think otherwise then you need a reality check. I never once said that rally drivers drive 4wd because they don't know how to drive rwd cars, I said that if a rwd drive (road going) car is driven by someone that knows how to drive a RWD in the wet then that car will be faster than a similar powered 4wd RS4 road car, when we are talking 250k rally cars then the situation might be somewhat different, but in a relatively basic Audi road car it is not and the skill of the driver has far more to do with it

Edited by taffyracer on Thursday 3rd January 09:05

Edited by taffyracer on Thursday 3rd January 09:13