BMW z3 2.8i turbo conversion.....?
Discussion
aka_kerrly said:
Have you considered the supercharger route?
There are off the shelf kits available from VF engineering & Rotrex or other people have used Eaton M62s which can be found on Mercedes Kompressor models.
+1There are off the shelf kits available from VF engineering & Rotrex or other people have used Eaton M62s which can be found on Mercedes Kompressor models.
I also recommend using the US spec M3 cams (if you haven't already done so). These are a instant 10bhp add on (European spec M3 cams wont fit).
NiceCupOfTea said:
The Smart Roadster is a sports car irrespective of what you may think of its power output or gearbox.
Plenty of turbocharged sports cars: 911 turbo, 944 turbo, MR2 turbo,200sx, F40, well-trodden t/charged MX-5 upgrade path, etc., etc.
I have driven a tuned roadster and it was bloody awful. The gearbox isn't fit for a taxi and the performance is very ordinary. It felt like a kit car generally does. An mx5 is light years ahead, fantastic car and it amuses me greatly that people like yourself and 300 defend abject rubbish just because they are RWD when in reality something like a Mini cooper would be a better car in any given situation. As ever there is a distinction between cars and platforms, seems obvious. Plenty of turbocharged sports cars: 911 turbo, 944 turbo, MR2 turbo,200sx, F40, well-trodden t/charged MX-5 upgrade path, etc., etc.
You talk about missing the point but then use supercars to reinforce your point, irrelevant...absolutely. The Smart therefore is a Sports car concept but not a very good car, I think all sports cars need to be a decent drive, otherwise what's the point of hanging the title on them?
Back OT Z3M or chip and manifold. To spend much more on the 2.8 unless you fancy a project fir the sake of it doesnt add up.
Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 6th April 07:21
I've got a 'rubbish' 2.8 Z3, since new. At 12 months I had an ESS vortech v2 blower running low/safe boost. It's a keeper, not an investment and it has humbled many 'superior' cars. An Exige S around Cadwell Park proof enough it's a 'sports car'?
As said, start with zorst, manifold & chip. All good resources already posted.
Ignore the ignorant handbags & do your thing.
As said, start with zorst, manifold & chip. All good resources already posted.
Ignore the ignorant handbags & do your thing.
yonex said:
NiceCupOfTea said:
The Smart Roadster is a sports car irrespective of what you may think of its power output or gearbox.
Plenty of turbocharged sports cars: 911 turbo, 944 turbo, MR2 turbo,200sx, F40, well-trodden t/charged MX-5 upgrade path, etc., etc.
I have driven a tuned roadster and it was bloody awful. The gearbox isn't fit for a taxi and the performance is very ordinary. It felt like a kit car generally does. An mx5 is light years ahead, fantastic car and it amuses me greatly that people like yourself and 300 defend abject rubbish just because they are RWD when in reality something like a Mini cooper would be a better car in any given situation. As ever there is a distinction between cars and platforms, seems obvious. Plenty of turbocharged sports cars: 911 turbo, 944 turbo, MR2 turbo,200sx, F40, well-trodden t/charged MX-5 upgrade path, etc., etc.
I'm defending it because I think it's a good sports car and you have maligned it unfairly in my opinion.yonex said:
You talk about missing the point but then use supercars to reinforce your point, irrelevant...absolutely. The Smart therefore is a Sports car concept but not a very good car, I think all sports cars need to be a decent drive, otherwise what's the point of hanging the title on them?
Nope, my points were 1) a sports car is a sports car, no matter what its gearbox/performance, and 2) turbocharged cars can be perfectly entertaining and characterful to drive. I was using the list of t/c cars to illustrate 2)Sports cars being an entertaining drive: absolutely. And that's why Frogeye Sprites, MX-5s, Fiat Barchettas, Lotus Elises, Smart Roadsters, Caterham R500s and BMW Z4M Roadsters are all sports cars. Gearbox/performance irrelevant!
yonex said:
NiceCupOfTea said:
The Smart Roadster is a sports car irrespective of what you may think of its power output or gearbox.
Plenty of turbocharged sports cars: 911 turbo, 944 turbo, MR2 turbo,200sx, F40, well-trodden t/charged MX-5 upgrade path, etc., etc.
I have driven a tuned roadster and it was bloody awful. The gearbox isn't fit for a taxi and the performance is very ordinary. It felt like a kit car generally does. An mx5 is light years ahead, fantastic car and it amuses me greatly that people like yourself and 300 defend abject rubbish just because they are RWD when in reality something like a Mini cooper would be a better car in any given situation. As ever there is a distinction between cars and platforms, seems obvious. Plenty of turbocharged sports cars: 911 turbo, 944 turbo, MR2 turbo,200sx, F40, well-trodden t/charged MX-5 upgrade path, etc., etc.
You talk about missing the point but then use supercars to reinforce your point, irrelevant...absolutely. The Smart therefore is a Sports car concept but not a very good car, I think all sports cars need to be a decent drive, otherwise what's the point of hanging the title on them?
Back OT Z3M or chip and manifold. To spend much more on the 2.8 unless you fancy a project fir the sake of it doesnt add up.
Edited by yonex on Friday 6th April 07:21
you plainly are talking out of your arse and lying 100% as they are a million miles away from feeling kit car like. In fact I've driven farm tractors that are more kit car like than the smart. 
XitUp said:
Most of those are GTs. I'd say the F40 is a supercar, not a sports car.
Smart Roadster and MR2 turbo count though.
I think it's quite a broad line between GT and sports cars sometimes, I mean was a 964 911 really not a sports car? Yet how is a Honda S2k any lighter?Smart Roadster and MR2 turbo count though.
Anyhow, how about a 1975 TVR 3000M Turbo or 1976 TVR Taimar Turbo or the 1980 Lotus Esprit Turbo, the Lotus Elan Turbo M100, Porsche 924 and 944 Turbo's, reckon these are all "sports cars".
Even the American's got in on the act with their own flavour of sports cars with the the 4.9 litre Turbo T/A Macho and the Ford SVT 2.3 litre Turbo Mustang in the late 70's early 80's.
300bhp/ton said:
Didn't bother reading all your tosh, but calling a smart a kit car is simply hilarious you plainly are talking out of your arse and lying 100% as they are a million miles away from feeling kit car like. In fact I've driven farm tractors that are more kit car like than the smart.
I said it 'felt' like, which it did to me, not sure about tractors...but again you're the expert you plainly are talking out of your arse and lying 100% as they are a million miles away from feeling kit car like. In fact I've driven farm tractors that are more kit car like than the smart. 
Link to offending article above, I am sure you'll love the colour scheme of this one. Crack in the bonnet is from the shock coming through after hitting a hole in the road....obviously that never happened and neither did the sump rusting through...imagined it all including the gearbox lag and kit car feel and ride (apart from a Caterham rides better)
Call it whatever you want, a 'sports car' which will be shown up by the average hatch is what it is.
yonex said:
Crack in the bonnet is from the shock coming through after hitting a hole in the road....
Erm the bonnet is plastic, that looks to be the paint - that NON factory paint that has separated. Only a prat would then try and dress it up as a cracked bonnet 
yonex said:
obviously that never happened and neither did the sump rusting through...
What on the same test drive??? But you are right, no other cars, especially sports cars suffer rust do they.
yonex said:
imagined it all including the gearbox lag and kit car feel and ride (apart from a Caterham rides better)
Not sure what kit cars you've been in, but if you think the "feel" of the Roadster compares to a Caterham, it's either a complement if you are meaning handling. If you are meaning interior then you are being a complete idiot.Either way how would this have any bearing on it being a sports car?
yonex said:
Call it whatever you want, a 'sports car' which will be shown up by the average hatch is what it is.
If you say so.I am not trying to get into a debate on this one as I have been there before on the smart/300 topic but I have to agree that even though it may be classed as a "sports car", on paper and via reports it seems to lack any performance ability compared with other cars that fit in the same bracket.
The trouble with sports cars is that there doesn't seem to be any clear rules as to what it takes to be a sports car, half the time it just seems to be a matter of opinion!
Along the same vein, what would the likes of the Evo, Impreza, Skyline fall into for example, sports cars, performance cars, GT cars etc etc?????
The trouble with sports cars is that there doesn't seem to be any clear rules as to what it takes to be a sports car, half the time it just seems to be a matter of opinion!
Along the same vein, what would the likes of the Evo, Impreza, Skyline fall into for example, sports cars, performance cars, GT cars etc etc?????
XitUp said:
Evil.soup said:
I
Along the same vein, what would the likes of the Evo, Impreza, Skyline fall into for example, sports cars, performance cars, GT cars etc etc?????
Performance saloon car, saloon car (with performance derivatives), GT.Along the same vein, what would the likes of the Evo, Impreza, Skyline fall into for example, sports cars, performance cars, GT cars etc etc?????
Evil.soup said:
I am not trying to get into a debate on this one as I have been there before on the smart/300 topic but I have to agree that even though it may be classed as a "sports car", on paper and via reports it seems to lack any performance ability compared with other cars that fit in the same bracket.
The trouble with sports cars is that there doesn't seem to be any clear rules as to what it takes to be a sports car, half the time it just seems to be a matter of opinion!
If it's not a sports car, then neither is an MX-5, MGF, MGTF, MR2 MK1/3, Fiat x1/9 or anything classic like a Spridgit, TR, GT6, MGB, MGC, etc etc.The trouble with sports cars is that there doesn't seem to be any clear rules as to what it takes to be a sports car, half the time it just seems to be a matter of opinion!
I agree the smart Roadster isn't fast... but it feels a lot faster than it actually is. The 0-60mph time is also somewhat of a misnomer. As to perform 0-60mph in it you simply floor the throttle, it disengages the clutch builds the revs to 3500rpm and releases the clutch.
In a regular manual with a m/r or r/r layout you'd probably dial in 5000rpm+ and then ride the clutch to prevent it bogging or wheelspinning. You can' do this in the Roadster, so from a standing start the stats look worse than they are. The "in-gear" performance is certainly better than it's 0-60mph time would hint at.
That said it's still no rocket ship, but last time I looked neither is one of the worlds best sports cars the MX-5.
XitUp said:
Many sports cars will be shown up by hatchbacks.
Are you missing the point on purpose?
Sorry you don't agree but the gearbox, ride and feel of the car doesn't make it sporty in my eyes. The fact it's also pretty gutless just adds to the negatives. The point is a sports car should be 'better' than a warm hatch, it isn't. Are you missing the point on purpose?
yonex said:
XitUp said:
Many sports cars will be shown up by hatchbacks.
Are you missing the point on purpose?
Sorry you don't agree but the gearbox, ride and feel of the car doesn't make it sporty in my eyes. The fact it's also pretty gutless just adds to the negatives. The point is a sports car should be 'better' than a warm hatch, it isn't. Are you missing the point on purpose?
Whenever I get into a Smart Roadster it feels like an event - that offbeat warble from behind my head, low slung driving position, direct steering, driving something a bit different. You can keep your warm hatch
I remember one of these sports car threads a few years back when some guy was trying to argue that an MX-5 wasn't a sports car because it wasn't quick enough
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff