Shown up by a 330d saloon

Shown up by a 330d saloon

Author
Discussion

knoxville

138 posts

214 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
off_again said:
Cool, turbo laaaaag to die for.... hehe
Nope, hardly any

m12_nathan

5,138 posts

260 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
I have driven one, can I knock them?

Let the petrol teams compete on equal terms at Le Mans and wipe the smugness off Audi's corporate face They would be absolutely murdered.

off_again

12,339 posts

235 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
knoxville said:
off_again said:
Cool, turbo laaaaag to die for.... hehe
Nope, hardly any


.... and neither has a modern turbo diesel.....

knoxville

138 posts

214 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
off_again said:
knoxville said:
off_again said:
Cool, turbo laaaaag to die for.... hehe
Nope, hardly any


.... and neither has a modern turbo diesel.....
Hardly surprising in a car that slow...

PJR

2,616 posts

213 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
Knoxville, your opinions would be spot on if we were in the 1980's. Over here in foggy ol England however, we're knocking on the door of 2007 and things are just peachy.
Try p!ssing on something relevant over here instead.. Fuel prices, speed trap camera's, tony blair, anything!

minimax

11,984 posts

257 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
knoxville said:
euroboy said:
Just been looking at the BMW USA corporate site, and it doesnt look like BMW sell any car in the USA with a diesel engine.

Same for Jaguar (2.7 TT unit I believe??)

So there you go, some performance diesels yanks cant get their hands on
0-60 in 6.5 seconds is not fast. What do they run the 1/4 mile in? Maybe 14.5 seconds? Shit slow.



jesus dude, they are quick cars, not bloody race cars! calm down!

heebeegeetee

28,776 posts

249 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
off_again said:
dont knock modern Euro-diesels unless you have driven one.....


With an open mind and a regard to engineering.

minimax

11,984 posts

257 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
mackie1 said:
knoxville said:
0-60 in 6.5 seconds is not fast. What do they run the 1/4 mile in? Maybe 14.5 seconds? Shit slow.


I think you're just being obstreperous.



you're just trying to fool him aren't you? hehe

heebeegeetee

28,776 posts

249 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
off_again said:
In the US they dont have the potentially carcenogenic particulates but tool around in cars that struggle to get 20+MPG.

Who's right?



But they do have the actually carcinogenioc problem of petrol, consumed at an extraordinarly selfish rate.

Er, America wouldn't be an oil producer, would it?

heebeegeetee

28,776 posts

249 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
knoxville said:
? No. And the only reason the R10 wins races is because the LMP1 rules are massively in favor of diesel engines. Run it against an equivalent car with a 5.5L bi-turbo petrol engine and see what happens.

There are no stock diesel productions cars with performance worth talking about.





The difference in the lmp1 rules isn't massive, and will change. There will be parity soon, and yes, we will see what will happen. BMW have won 2 euro 24 hour races with diesels, I believe with parity. Indeed, for some reason the rules were immediatley changed to stop them doing it again.

The BMW 330d is a terrific car. Didn't one Brit car mag dub it the 'best car in the real world'.

A mate of mine did a euro haul with his, and driving normally did 600 odd miles before he had to stop for fuel, running at normal autoroute speeds. You'll need a quick petrol to make up for that, and if you value your licence you simply won't make up for it.

if I want to drive for fun, of course I jump in one of my petrol cars, but if I want to get somewhere as quickly, efficiently and comfortably as poss, then its the 110 brake auto dag-dag. Its ridiculous how quickly I can make progress in that thing with only 110 brake, we're overtaking stuff all the time. If I went any quicker I'd be in risk of losing my licence and thus livelihood.

I HATE GATSO

Original Poster:

2,152 posts

218 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
DasChin said:
hardly surprising when you drive an over weight and under powered audi TT!



so what to you drive then?

steve bowen

1,268 posts

225 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
pentoman said:

More depressing stories:
A woman I work with (who does track days so is a decent driver) has a new Fabia vRS which she says is not chipped. She followed me out of work the other day onto a dual carriageway, and I floored it as the road opened up - she floored it too. Even though I was redlining it through every gear and making quick changes, I was shocked how well it kept with me. Only at the top of 3rd gear and going into 4th (0.9 speed units or so) and almost giving up, did I pull out any sort of gap between us.


I had a vRS skoda try to prevent me overtaking out of a two lane roundabout that 50 yards late merged to one lane when I had my old normally aspirated MR2, I still passed it. The bloke was really trying to prevent me getting past as glanced across at me laughing when I was level, I just dropped it a cog and continued past, they are not that quick at all. Even though he obviously thought it was.

I've been out in a 535d its was 9 months old when I went out in it last month so the "new" one. It was quick but still nothing to write home about, my mate had taken delivery 2 weeks previously so was booting it between roundabouts on the dual carriageway showing me how quick it was. True it was impressive -- for a diesel. It did gain speed well and effortlessly, was very quiet. I had the distinct impression most petrol cars i'd call fast would leave it easily enough however.

Edited by steve bowen on Wednesday 18th October 21:06

DasChin

609 posts

217 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
Das Chin drives an M3 CSL.

they seriously got it wrong with the 3.2 at audi.

my 3.2 puts out 360 glorious ponies and BM got it right.

there could be so much more in that audi engine and at the weight it is it don't stand a chance out there really.

slap a super charger on it or a blower!

steve bowen

1,268 posts

225 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
mackie1 said:


PS. What have you done to it to get those wheel horsepower readings? It must be pushing out well over 400bhp at the flywheel.


Simple, dyno'd it the US the figures are always noticeably higher. There's an american on the uk MR2 forum and he admits cars with identical spec, running identical boost, seem to make 10% more power in the US, yet also run virtually identical 1/4 mile times when running on road tyres (most US 1/4 cars will run radials)

p.s. Just googled the TT 3.2 dsg specs and its not impressive reading, I can imaging the BMW being as quick.

If googles to be believed the TT 3.2 DSg gives 247bhp & weights 1520KG so only 163bhp per ton.

Edited by steve bowen on Wednesday 18th October 21:29

I HATE GATSO

Original Poster:

2,152 posts

218 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
steve bowen said:
mackie1 said:


PS. What have you done to it to get those wheel horsepower readings? It must be pushing out well over 400bhp at the flywheel.


Simple, dyno'd it the US the figures are always noticeably higher. There's an american on the uk MR2 forum and he admits cars with identical spec, running identical boost, seem to make 10% more power in the US, yet also run virtually identical 1/4 mile times when running on road tyres (most US 1/4 cars will run radials)

p.s. Just googled the TT 3.2 dsg specs and its not impressive reading, I can imaging the BMW being as quick.

If googles to be believed the TT 3.2 DSg gives 247bhp & weights 1520KG so only 163bhp per ton.

Edited by steve bowen on Wednesday 18th October 21:29


cry 163 per tonne OMG

DennisTheMenace

15,603 posts

269 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
Im happy with my tractor fuel vectra and tuning box plus K&N , trots on quite nicely , diesels are about midrange power , thevec does shove you in the seat when you floor it in 3rd and 4th , overtaking is piss easy , petrol engines are all revs whereas diesels have all those little torques to shove you forwards .

steve bowen

1,268 posts

225 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
I HATE GATSO said:

cry 163 per tonne OMG


yeah,.. must admit my own rule for calling a car "fast" is over 200bhp per ton, over 200 a ton your always thrown in you seat.

CatherineJ

9,586 posts

244 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
Our Boxster is only about 171 bhp per ton.

I HATE GATSO

Original Poster:

2,152 posts

218 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
What the bhp per tonne on the z4m?

mackie1

8,153 posts

234 months

Wednesday 18th October 2006
quotequote all
Mine makes around 220bhp/ton so I guess qualifies as fast

To the fair to the Audi it's not really aimed at the M3, the Z4 3.0 is more it's rival and that makes about 166bhp/ton too.