Wasted a Z3 3.0 on the highway...
#11
Originally Posted by LiQiCE,Apr 18 2005, 05:16 AM
Well, I'm not an expert on the Z3 models, but it sounds like there are two I-6 engines. (The Z3's don't use V-6s), the earlier year models (1996 - 2000) had a 2.8 liter engine which seems to be quite a bit slower than our S2000s, like a high 14 second, low 15 second car in the 1/4 mile. While the later year models (2001 - 2002) had a 3.0 liter engine which is a lot closer to the S2000 as far as straight line performance goes.
When I was actually on the road and making the original post, I didn't realize there was a 2.8 / 3.0 model and I just knew the stats for the 2.8 model ... So I just assumed my pulling away from him easily was "normal" for that car. Looking at the times now, I'd probably agree that it was poor driver, especially the 2nd run where I got caught out of VTEC.
In any case, it was fun ...
When I was actually on the road and making the original post, I didn't realize there was a 2.8 / 3.0 model and I just knew the stats for the 2.8 model ... So I just assumed my pulling away from him easily was "normal" for that car. Looking at the times now, I'd probably agree that it was poor driver, especially the 2nd run where I got caught out of VTEC.
In any case, it was fun ...
There's the 2.3, & 2.5, and also the 1.9 liter; all of these are much slower cars.
And then of course there's the M versions that's got either 240HP or 315HP.
#13
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Potomac Falls, VA
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Z4EC,Apr 18 2005, 10:14 AM
Actually, there's 3 more other engines for the Z3's, besides 3.0 & 2.8.
There's the 2.3, & 2.5, and also the 1.9 liter; all of these are much slower cars.
And then of course there's the M versions that's got either 240HP or 315HP.
There's the 2.3, & 2.5, and also the 1.9 liter; all of these are much slower cars.
And then of course there's the M versions that's got either 240HP or 315HP.
And yeah, the M Roadsters are sweet, I know enough not to mess with them, especially the 315hp version
#14
Originally Posted by LiQiCE,Apr 18 2005, 07:59 AM
Those are also I6's? ... I knew they always had the smaller displacement engines but I thought they were 4 bangers just because of the displacement size. Just an assumption on my part, and probably a poor one at that.
And yeah, the M Roadsters are sweet, I know enough not to mess with them, especially the 315hp version
And yeah, the M Roadsters are sweet, I know enough not to mess with them, especially the 315hp version
1.9 is an I4. I think in other parts othe world, there's also an I6 2.2 liter, and I4 2 liter.
#16
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Potomac Falls, VA
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just realized the Z3 3.0i that I raced on the highway could have also been an automatic. I really couldn't hear his car over my exhaust/intake.
Not sure how much slower the autos are, but that might explain it.
Not sure how much slower the autos are, but that might explain it.
#17
Originally Posted by steve c,Apr 18 2005, 09:05 AM
You are right, I forgot they replaced the 2.8 with the 3.0 in 01. Brainfart.
Sorry I came off as sarcastic as I did. My apologies.
#19
Registered User
Originally Posted by LiQiCE,Apr 18 2005, 10:30 AM
Not sure how much slower the autos are, but that might explain it.
#20
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Potomac Falls, VA
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Warren J. Dew,Apr 19 2005, 01:16 AM
Reading over your original post, it seems to me the explanation is that he wasn't racing. He was driving a little more spiritedly than the rest of the traffic, but didn't bother to try to keep up with you when you went all out.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post