LateApex

[QUOTE]Originally posted by r6e36
[B]negcamber, you obviously don't know much about cars. You need torque down low to get the car off the line and moving, once you are moving and you are at higher RPM the horsepower takes over for top end performance. You should know this if you drive a S2k. Your motor don't have much torque, so getting the car moving at low rpm is not as quick, but once your engine is revving you are accelerating really fast because of the horsepower.

LateApex

The above analysis doesn't take into account other factors like available traction, drive wheel diameter, aerodynamics, weather, etc.. etc..

I realize this while hitting the submit button, so if you want to note that as a shortcoming, go ahead, but I doubt these variables will count for much in a comparative analysis, since they will apply to both cars and will not throw off the end results.. much.


-Apex

r6e36

Guys, Looks like I'll be getting a S2k to complement my M3 really soon. Is $29k for a stock red '01 S2k with 5k miles a good deal?

integrate

yes

Carlson

Not really. I heard that they are selling it (2002 model) for MSRP @ Stockton Honda. If I were you, I would pay $4000 more for a brand new 02'.

negcamber

Well, I wasn't at your dyno day, and you weren't at O'fest. So, lets go to the web:

'96 http://www.activeautowerke.com/dyno/96M3%2...3%20Exhaust.asp
'97 http://www.activeautowerke.com/dyno/97M3%2...s%2097%20M3.asp
'98 http://www.activeautowerke.com/dyno/98M3_s...kpipe-n-all.asp
'97 http://www.activeautowerke.com/dyno/97%20M...001%20330Ci.asp
'97 http://www.activeautowerke.com/dyno/97%20M...JimC%20Chip.asp
'96 http://www.activeautowerke.com/dyno/96%20M...0M3%20Stock.asp
'95 http://www.activeautowerke.com/dyno/OneLap...20vs%2095M3.asp
'95 http://www.activeautowerke.com/dyno/95M3%2...20w%2017psi.asp
'98 http://www.uucmotorwerks.com/html_product/...charts/98m3.pdf (at the crank)
'95 http://www.uucmotorwerks.com/html_product/...charts/95m3.pdf (at the crank)
'98 http://www.bmw-m.net/digest/archive%5F2001.../digest1196.htm
'97 http://forums.roadfly.com/m3/messages/arch...0w32/12968.html
'99 http://www.ecisbmw.com/dyno_files/99M3dyno.htm
'95 http://www.ecisbmw.com/dyno_files/95M3HFMdyno.htm

Where are the stock 250hp 3.2's? Granted these are from different dyno machines on different days at different altitudes and temps, but I would think that if 250hp at the crank was so common that we should see some in this group of 10 OBDII cars with 218rwhp.

Now lets consider another point: Why aren't the 3.2's significantly quicker than the 3.0's? If the 3.2's have more torque, more hp, and also shorter final drive (3.23 for the 3.2 vs 3.15 for the 3.0) they should be significantly quicker. Wanna go pull your old R&T's, C&D's and MTs. They don't indicate that they are significantly quicker. So what's up with that?

And what is the torque doing to get you off the line? It is overcoming inertia. Specifically, it is overcoming rotational inertia of the wheels. At rest, the wheels want to maintain the rotational velocity of 0 degrees per second until a force sets them into motion...the torque gets them turning. So what happens when you shift into second? Again torque is used to over come the inertia of the current rotational velocity. At above 5500rpm, which M3 is going to have the wheels with the higher rotational acceleration? The one with the higher torque at the rear wheels.

Now as to your comment about the S2000 in relation to torque vs hp...I think LateApex handled that quite nicely. (Thanks ///MC, well put)

So, apparently you don't know as much as you think I do. (think about it...it will dawn on you)

Whew! Trolls...gotta love'm I guess.

frayed

My stock 3.2L M3 dyno'd at 214.5 hp and 216.4 ft lbs at the rear wheels. Assuming 17% drivetrain loss that's well over 240 at the crank. A good friend dyno'd at very similar numbers.

Perhaps our cars were just freak examples. *shrug*

Zoran

[QUOTE]Originally posted by LateApex
[B]

r6e36

negcamber, I am not going to argue with you.
Just like the old saying goes: Arguing in the Internet is like competing in the special Olympic, even if you win you are still a retard

Here is the dyno chart of my car when it was still 100% stock:

negcamber

[QUOTE]Originally posted by frayed
[B]My stock 3.2L M3 dyno'd at 214.5 hp and 216.4 ft lbs at the rear wheels.