Article (Evo) - MC vs E30 M3

[Kiwi]

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh183/azumaj/m3articlep02.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh183/azumaj/m3articlep03.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh183/azumaj/m3articlep04.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh183/azumaj/m3articlep05.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh183/azumaj/m3articlep06.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh183/azumaj/m3articlep07.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh183/azumaj/m3articlep08.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh183/azumaj/m3articlep09.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh183/azumaj/m3articlep10.jpg

[MGR]

Has anyone on this forum previously owned an E30 M3 ? I just cannot believe a 20 year old car with 200 bhp can be as good as recent reviews incl this one say it is. Evo mag even had it beating an E46csl and the new M3 recently - this is surely ridiculous.

[steveH]

Has anyone on this forum previously owned an E30 M3 ? I just cannot believe a 20 year old car with 200 bhp can be as good as recent reviews incl this one say it is. Evo mag even had it beating an E46csl and the new M3 recently - this is surely ridiculous.


Actually not. I have owned quite a few E30 M3s incl. SportEvo and also the CSL. The E30 M3 is a legend and not thro. hype it really is that good a drivers car even if only available LHD. Obviously the CSL is way ahead in terms of power, braking, steering, suspension etc but the E30 M3 has shovels full of Spirit. You can only drive most performance cars at 8/10s whereas the M3 can take the lot on road and track.

This said Iam now onto the Z3MC which on the brief encounter so far is more akin to the E30 M3 than recent M3 incarnations which quite frankly are pandering to the masses rather than the few looking for real driving.

[MGR]

Actually not. I have owned quite a few E30 M3s incl. SportEvo and also the CSL. The E30 M3 is a legend and not thro. hype it really is that good a drivers car even if only available LHD. Obviously the CSL is way ahead in terms of power, braking, steering, suspension etc but the E30 M3 has shovels full of Spirit. You can only drive most performance cars at 8/10s whereas the M3 can take the lot on road and track.

This said Iam now onto the Z3MC which on the brief encounter so far is more akin to the E30 M3 than recent M3 incarnations which quite frankly are pandering to the masses rather than the few looking for real driving.

Fair enough then ! must get myself a drive in one somehow and decide for myself ! I think I'd get bored with the performance quite quickly though if I was to own one. 0-100 in 18 secs is pretty poor nowadays warm hatch spec really and whilst its not all about power it is a bit and thats slow. however the proof is in the driving and i've not even been in one much less driven one.


Has anyone else noticed how wrong the suspension spec is on the M coupe in this article !

[Joezm]

Has anyone on this forum previously owned an E30 M3 ? I just cannot believe a 20 year old car with 200 bhp can be as good as recent reviews incl this one say it is. Evo mag even had it beating an E46csl and the new M3 recently - this is surely ridiculous.

I currently own a ZM but have owned an E30 M3 and selling it was possibly the worst decision ever. It beats the ZM in the most departments.

1. The chassis and steering give more feel and feedback on the E30 M3.
2. The E30 M3 doesn't feel larger than it is. The ZM seems to.
3. Although the M3 lacks the ZM's power the M3's combination of shorter gearing coupled to that S14 engine (that is just absolutely awesome) makes the M3 a more exciting drive.

There is nothing negative I can say with regard to the E30 M3. It's near perfect if you are looking for a drivers car that will put a smile on your face every time you fire it up.

And just a quick word to those E36 M3 owners. I owned an 1996 evo for a while and I can put hand on heart and tell you that it is no match for the E30.

I would exchange my ZM coupe for another excellent example of an E30 M3 if there are any decent examples left....again awesome

[MGR]

I currently own a ZM but have owned an E30 M3 and selling it was possibly the worst decision ever. It beats the ZM in the most departments.


2. The E30 M3 doesn't feel larger than it is. The ZM seems to.



I think this may be due to the unstable nature of the cars suspension at speed, plus the fact that you are sitting nearly over the rear wheels so further back than usual plus the long bonnet.

[shogg]

i came from a m3 e30 also.believe the hype, awesome car. IMHO steering feel is better than the MC (though that could be due to the big steering wheel on the mc), the engine noise is to die for when its on cam and you don't find yourself doing stupid speeds everytime you cane it, something i'm still shocked by in the MC..
That said, mine was beginning to cost a fortune to run (it went up in value though) and i seemed to spend more time worrying about it rusting beneath me than enjoying it.....
Great car but make sure its a good 'un, frankly when i looked into how much a vanos would cost to replace i wondered what all the fuss was about, i regularly spent that and more on my sport evo...
got to love em

[MGR]

Well if thats the case maybe BMW should just start producing them again - lol if they are that good then I'd have one new - in RHD of course :lol:

[Spooks]

Is that article in this months Evo?

[coupe fan]

That's probably the best article I've read on the ZMC at the limit - you have to be very very aware and when the back goes, it can be very sudden and definite - no gradual slippy warning.

[don.juan]

Is that article in this months Evo?

No...this is an old article...it is still with the S50 version and not the S54.

[Joezm]

Hi all.
I know that this is almost an unbelievable comparison due to the age gap between the two cars, but the fact is cars today (including BMW) produce vehicles (including M powered cars) for the masses. They are more refined with more power now with gizmo's that help anyone to drive them fast and safely. Until my E30 M3 experience I looked at things very simply, power = excitement and in some ways it does, but if you speak to any performance tuning company, the chassis, steering and brakes come first.
For pure driver excitement I think you have to look at the way the car is set up.
1. Does the cars chassis deal with the power
2. What does the car tell you. (Feel and sensation through steering, chassis etc.)
3. What's the driving position like (does the car feel larger than it is)
4. Are you in complete control of the car. (does the car have stability/traction controls etc)

the answer to these questions in my opinion are:

1. The chassis of the E30 manages the S14 200bhp+ easily as it was developed to handle closer to 400bhp
The Z3M feels as though the engine is too powerful for the car.

2. Feedback on the E30 is unquestionable. The car was designed for the race track to win. the road car had those traits.
The Z3M in standard form feels "wollowy" (great word, I wonder if it's in the dictionary somewhere) and steering has less feel. The steering wheel is naff.

3. You feel part of the car in the E30 M3 and the Z3M isn't too bad either barring the fact there is knowhere to plant your left foot which makes an enormous difference. The ZM feels a larger car than it is.

4. The E30 M3 has no electronic trickery barring the ABS to use as a back up plan for numpty driving skills, as so with the S50 ZM, but due to the lack of feedback from the rear end of the ZM, you can end up flipping out without warning.
Guys don't get all defensive. These are one persons findings. great debate though.
Come on, lets here some comments.

[coupe fan]

Hi all.
I know that this is almost an unbelievable comparison due to the age gap between the two cars, but the fact is cars today (including BMW) produce vehicles (including M powered cars) for the masses. They are more refined with more power now with gizmo's that help anyone to drive them fast and safely. Until my E30 M3 experience I looked at things very simply, power = excitement and in some ways it does, but if you speak to any performance tuning company, the chassis, steering and brakes come first.
For pure driver excitement I think you have to look at the way the car is set up.
1. Does the cars chassis deal with the power
2. What does the car tell you. (Feel and sensation through steering, chassis etc.)
3. What's the driving position like (does the car feel larger than it is)
4. Are you in complete control of the car. (does the car have stability/traction controls etc)

the answer to these questions in my opinion are:

1. The chassis of the E30 manages the S14 200bhp+ easily as it was developed to handle closer to 400bhp
The Z3M feels as though the engine is too powerful for the car.

2. Feedback on the E30 is unquestionable. The car was designed for the race track to win. the road car had those traits.
The Z3M in standard form feels "wollowy" (great word, I wonder if it's in the dictionary somewhere) and steering has less feel. The steering wheel is naff.

3. You feel part of the car in the E30 M3 and the Z3M isn't too bad either barring the fact there is knowhere to plant your left foot which makes an enormous difference. The ZM feels a larger car than it is.

4. The E30 M3 has no electronic trickery barring the ABS to use as a back up plan for numpty driving skills, as so with the S50 ZM, but due to the lack of feedback from the rear end of the ZM, you can end up flipping out without warning.
Guys don't get all defensive. These are one persons findings. great debate though.
Come on, lets here some comments.

Okay, I think we have got the message. I had an E30 325i touring and that was wild. But the ZMC is a no compromise 2 seater with 50% more power. BMW 'underchassised' the car, hence, in OEM form, it cannot cope with 325bhp as well as the E30 can cope with 200bhp.

BTW, The word is wallow as in shit. The medium/long term owners of the ZMC know the car's rolling and rear end characteristics and have modded their cars to match the power.
You didn't have the patience or nous to do this with yours, and just sold it in frustration as it was not perfect 'out of the box'. And now you are trying to justify this by rubbishing the car after the event.

Your loss, someone else's gain.

[c_w]

It's worth pointing out that the Z3M shares pretty much identical suspension as an E30 M3 (the rear is identical down to the diff) so really it's just a question of spring and damper rates to give more body control IMO. Mine feels like it handles its power very well, and could handle more I reckon. Contrast this with a 325i Sport that had 167bhp (about half the power) and was considered a sideways eveywhere machine in it's heyday.

[fastdrive]

i meet on the track few m3 e30,and passed whiout problems....
for me is slow compared to an m coupe...
Probabily give more input to driver but now arrive to the ultimate track machine for me is wrong,naturally compared to the times when go out it's really fast!
My idea the m coupe stock isn't an track car,whit good mod become an track car,instead the m3 e30 stock seems ready to the track.

[MGR]

i meet on the track few m3 e30,and passed whiout problems....
for me is slow compared to an m coupe...
Probabily give more input to driver but now arrive to the ultimate track machine for me is wrong,naturally compared to the times when go out it's really fast!
My idea the m coupe stock isn't an track car,whit good mod become an track car,instead the m3 e30 stock seems ready to the track.

:iagree:

good post !

[indy]

a good old thread!!! :yesnod:
not found it before now, so thought id knock it up for others to see :thumbsup:
anyone know the date of the article?

MC seems to be a press car? (im guessing this from its S*** GAN reg)

just to add, the only bit of the article ive looked at so far is the pics, lol.
will read it when i get a chance!

[johnnyb]

Interesting article that I haven't seen before. As a new coupe owner magazine reviews are pretty rare due to the age of the car and my late entry into ownership.

Did evo really record a 4.3 to 60 time as mentioned?

[CLUBBER]

Very very nice write up.

I happen to own both of these species and although my MC is a blast, I can EASILY say that E30 is the better car in every sense. Telepathic chasis response, short wheel base, that screaming 4 cyl. race engine, dog leg trans. etc.etc.etc...

It is THE car that all other M cars are compared and evaluated with.. Yes, it is that good.

[dave p]

the tyre sizes are way out!

[MattH3764]

Very very nice write up.

I happen to own both of these species and although my MC is a blast, I can EASILY say that E30 is the better car in every sense. Telepathic chasis response, short wheel base, that screaming 4 cyl. race engine, dog leg trans. etc.etc.etc...

It is THE car that all other M cars are compared and evaluated with.. Yes, it is that good.

I am fortunate enough to own both right now, and I wholeheartedly agree withe this post. The E30 M3 quite simply "has it". I've never seen a robust definition of what "it" is but all the points above are right. I would add that (primarily due to its age) it is also a light car - and no amount of power can compensate for extra weight. The E30 M3 is just so involving to drive.

I still love the M Coupe. And I'm grateful to this forum for enlightening me (suspension, ARBs) on how to make it much better.

And both cars have that rarity that should ensure classic status.

[MattH3764]

I've read the article now, and it's pretty harsh on the M Coupe. I think it could have acknowledged that the M Coupe was an "afterthought" car and it rolled off the production line with a little more to do in terms of handling. What I love about the M Division is that they produced a car like this, so I can forgive them a couple of flaws. It's better to have the M Coupe in the state it is, than not at all.

I suppose everything is relative, and because the E30 M3 is a homologation classic, a disproportionate amount of love went into the chassis and handling of that car. And it shows. So I dont criticise BMW for not putting that same love into the M Coupe.

For those that have driven an E30 M3, and modded their M Coupe suspension (I assume with KW V3 and H&R ARBs) then I'd be interested to know the extent to which those mods fix the lack of progressiveness in the handling.

[MGR]

Interesting article that I haven't seen before. As a new coupe owner magazine reviews are pretty rare due to the age of the car and my late entry into ownership.

Did evo really record a 4.3 to 60 time as mentioned?

They did...... Its since been removed as it wasn't representative and they couldn't repeat it later on.

[danp]

I really wanted to buy an E30 M3 a few years ago, looked at a few, and travelled a long way to see a really tidy, low mileage one.. but it felt so slow I just couldn't do it.

Might have been that particular car, and I'd been used to a Z3MC... but I personally want something that can give me a buzz in a straight line as well as the corners.

Would still like to have one in the collection some day, and investment wise certainly wish I had bought one as they have rocketed in value since then!

[MGR]

I really wanted to buy an E30 M3 a few years ago, looked at a few, and travelled a long way to see a really tidy, low mileage one.. but it felt so slow I just couldn't do it.

Might have been that particular car, and I'd been used to a Z3MC... but I personally want something that can give me a buzz in a straight line as well as the corners.

Would still like to have one in the collection some day, and investment wise certainly wish I had bought one as they have rocketed in value since then!

I did exactly the same thing with a 3dr sierra cosworth about 4 years ago. Just couldn't deal with that level of performance.

[c_w]

Very very nice write up.

I happen to own both of these species and although my MC is a blast, I can EASILY say that E30 is the better car in every sense. Telepathic chasis response, short wheel base, that screaming 4 cyl. race engine, dog leg trans. etc.etc.etc...

It is THE car that all other M cars are compared and evaluated with.. Yes, it is that good.

The wheelbase on the M Coupe/Z3 is markedly shorter though, so it can't be that!

I think with the E30 M3 it's just a combination of factors that makes the package that works well, most notable the light weight and light engine. The suspension on the M Coupe is very similar but (well exact same setup at the back), I think a lot of the dull comes from the much heavier 3.2 engine.

It's similar to a 205 GTi I suppose, it was better to "drive" than the M Coupe down any b-road, it wasn't quicker in a straightline, was unrefined (even compared to M Coupe) but for a driver's car it's unbeaten in my experience.

[MattH3764]

Agree about the engine weight, and the engine location is also critical. Because the engine is shorter all the weight can sit well behind the front wheels. I am sure this leads to good weight distribution and sharp handling. Plenty of people who feel the M3 is underpowered have swapped in the S50 engine though, and most seem to think the handling isnt too adversely affected.

The wheelbase on the M Coupe/Z3 is markedly shorter though, so it can't be that!

I think with the E30 M3 it's just a combination of factors that makes the package that works well, most notable the light weight and light engine. The suspension on the M Coupe is very similar but (well exact same setup at the back), I think a lot of the dull comes from the much heavier 3.2 engine.

It's similar to a 205 GTi I suppose, it was better to "drive" than the M Coupe down any b-road, it wasn't quicker in a straightline, was unrefined (even compared to M Coupe) but for a driver's car it's unbeaten in my experience.

[wifipirate]

An engine is the equivalent of a third passenger, a fat one at that ;)

We all know what it is like with and without a passenger :D

[inside]

An engine is the equivalent of a third passenger, a fat one at that ;)

We all know what it is like with and without a passenger :D

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[fok]

Interesting thread and nice to hear opinions from people who actually own both cars so that a proper comparison can be made.

As much as I love MC, IMO they are not that good as a performance car......They aren't particularly quick and in stock trim the handling isn't the best either. They do have a certain charisma though I think.

I think if you drive some quick cars then get back into S50 / S54 powered stuff they feel a bit pedestrian...........V8 conversions should be compulsory for MC.

[Spooks]

Interesting thread and nice to hear opinions from people who actually own both cars so that a proper comparison can be made.

As much as I love MC, IMO they are not that good as a performance car......They aren't particularly quick and in stock trim the handling isn't the best either. They do have a certain charisma though I think.

I think if you drive some quick cars then get back into S50 / S54 powered stuff they feel a bit pedestrian...........V8 conversions should be compulsory for MC.

I think it completely depends on what you call quick. Unless you looking at turbo'd Jap stuff you would have to spend some serious money to beat the performance of a ZMC. I agree handling wise it lacking but out right performance would take some beating, especially on a £ basis, especially to make the ZMC feel slow.

[Wav]

I think it completely depends on what you call quick. Unless you looking at turbo'd Jap stuff you would have to spend some serious money to beat the performance of a ZMC. I agree handling wise it lacking but out right performance would take some beating, especially on a £ basis, especially to make the ZMC feel slow.

I agree, the mc isn't that quick compared to some stuff as you do have to rev it. However, the overall package is very nice once you've uprated the suspension etc. Personally I would not want to change the character of the MC by fitting a V8, a high revving straight six is what the mc is about imo.

Paul:cheers2:

[fok]

I think it completely depends on what you call quick. Unless you looking at turbo'd Jap stuff you would have to spend some serious money to beat the performance of a ZMC. I agree handling wise it lacking but out right performance would take some beating, especially on a £ basis, especially to make the ZMC feel slow.

Sorry Spooks I don't agree.......Don't kid yourself, ZMC is old and not quick, there are plenty of better performance cars out there to be had for similar money.

That said, as an all round package of looks, feel, exclusiveness and above all else "fun" it is hard to beat........I love mine.

Personally I would not want to change the character of the MC by fitting a V8, a high revving straight six is what the mc is about imo.


Granted S50/4 has character but if you drove an LS powered car of similar weight you'd find that performance in the real world for street use is night and day......E90 M3 isn't V8 for nothing!

I've owned and driven S50/54 M cars and think that whilst they sound nice, that engine develops it's power far too high up the rev range so is not ideal for road use and to be blunt is a bit shit slow!

When I drive an E36/46 M3 I feel like a jockey with a whip going "c'mon c'mon" waiting for it to make power....It never does.


Guy's you need to wake up to the world of lightweight, big power alloy V8's! :lol:

[wifipirate]

I bet Fok just leaves his car in 4th. All the time.

[Spooks]

Sorry Spooks I don't agree.......Don't kid yourself, ZMC is old and not quick, there are plenty of better performance cars out there to be had for similar money.

That said, as an all round package of looks, feel, exclusiveness and above all else "fun" it is hard to beat........I love mine.



Granted S50/4 has character but if you drove an LS powered car of similar weight you'd find that performance in the real world for street use is night and day......E90 M3 isn't V8 for nothing!

I've owned and driven S50/54 M cars and think that whilst they sound nice, that engine develops it's power far too high up the rev range so is not ideal for road use and to be blunt is a bit shit slow!

When I drive an E36/46 M3 I feel like a jockey with a whip going "c'mon c'mon" waiting for it to make power....It never does.


Guy's you need to wake up to the world of lightweight, big power alloy V8's! :lol:

I dont disagree that the ZMC is getting "old" but, say the average ZMC is worth £12k(?), what can you buy for £12k that would give you a vastly quicker car (excluding chav/Jap as I said before)?

The whole point of M cars is that they rev, that is what makes them an "M Car". The V8 in the E90 is no doubt an awesome engine but just like the S50/S54 you have to rev it to get the power, over 8000rpm in the V8 in fact!!

As you said though the whole package of the ZMC is unique which is why im sure we all bought them :thumbsup:!!

If your going to Gaydon would like to see and hear your V8 conversion!

[c_w]

Yea I think saying the M Coupes are not that quick is just showing off a bit, they are still 5 second to 60, 0-100 in about 11.5 seconds, depending on what mood it's in. Time always moves on and cars get quicker but they are still fairly brisk consider over 10 years old now. When new it was the quickest production BMW - anything getting down towards 11 seconds to 100 was very quick for the time. It's now easily beaten by most modern sports cars though.

Look at an F355, very tame performance for a Ferrari these days; look at how much quicker an F430 is, it's what would have been described as hypercar performance compared to the F355 in its day but the F355 is still "quick" today.

An R8 pulled 2 car lengths from me out of a hairpin at Croft last year, and on the Ring a new 997 pulled away gradually on the straights but they have more power and are lighter.

I think we'd all like more power to keep up with "progress" though!

[Wav]

I think we'd all like more power to keep up with "progress" though!

This is true, problem is extra power isn't cheap when it comes to getting more from the S50/S54 engine. As for engine swaps, I would still rather have a screaming turbo rotary than a v8 though:thumbsup:

Paul:driving:

[fok]

what can you buy for £12k that would give you a vastly quicker car (excluding chav/Jap as I said before)?

The whole point of M cars is that they rev, that is what makes them an "M Car". The V8 in the E90 is no doubt an awesome engine but just like the S50/S54 you have to rev it to get the power, over 8000rpm in the V8 in fact!!

If your going to Gaydon would like to see and hear your V8 conversion!

I think that £12K might buy some 20v Turbo VAG or AMG cars that might embarrass an MC........Also some N/A hot hatches wouldn't be far off for that either.

V8 E90 still makes fairly good power low down, as do AMG V8's so again, for me it's all about where the power is not just how much you've got..........It's like revvy bikes vs V Twins.

Happy to bring car to Gaydon and mix with other MC fans.

Yea I think saying the M Coupes are not that quick is just showing off a bit,............
An R8 pulled 2 car lengths from me out of a hairpin at Croft last year, and on the Ring a new 997 pulled away gradually on the straights but they have more power and are lighter.


The point I'm making really is that in my opinion S50/4 engines only make good power high up the rev range which isn't great for quick road work.

The Ring and tracks are a different story as the motor can be kept "on the boil".

I would still rather have a screaming turbo rotary than a v8 though:thumbsup:

Try an LS* powered RX7 FD3 before you decide. :thumbsup:

I must stress i'm not "Giving it the big'un"........I just really don't personally rate the S50/54 engine.

[exdos]

The point I'm making really is that in my opinion S50/4 engines only make good power high up the rev range which isn't great for quick road work.

In real world driving conditions, with the MC's OEM air intake, the S54 engine gets almost to peak torque at around 3000rpm and it increases slightly as the revs increase almost to max revs (unlike peaking at 4500rpm on a static dyno).

Is 3000rpm that high?

[fok]

In real world driving conditions, with the MC's OEM air intake, the S54 engine gets almost to peak torque at around 3000rpm and it increases slightly as the revs increase almost to max revs (unlike peaking at 4500rpm on a static dyno).

Is 3000rpm that high?

Granted, the S54 torque curve is very linear..........But it only makes about 235 ish ft/lbs at peak so it's hardly a torquey motor. Peak power of about 280 rwhp however is about 7500 revs.....Not exactly a powerhouse either. Sorry peeps but still not a fan!

Don't take me out of context though gents......S50/4 or not, the MC is a great car but I just hate to read posts about it being the mutts nuts......It's very average by today's standards. IMO

http://img861.imageshack.us/img861/5783/tmschipsdynos54m3.jpg

[quattro]

I also think that my mc feels a little gutless, especially up to around 6k. I think my remapped a4 tdi would give it a run around town!
For 12k you could buy a half decent rs4 now which when remapped would leave an mc standing from a standing start and are capable of well over 165
However theres just something about the mc, i'm not sure what, that wins me over when comparing to what else is available, even though its slower!

[Dr. N]

V8 conversions should be compulsory for MC.

They should also be free :lol: :thumbsup:

[c_w]

the MC is a great car but I just hate to read posts about it being the mutts nuts.....

Nobody has said ;)

You do read about it a lot that people find M3s/Z3Ms etc feeling slow, especially when they've come from something that was turbo'd, which in actual fact wasn't any quicker, it just "felt" quicker. With the V8 it feels quicker and it IS quicker as it has massive torque and power. But the often linear power band (not helped by the long gearing) make the M Coupe/M3 feel a bit flat compared with those with a spikier torque curve of cars with similar power and performance (eg some Lancer EVOs etc).

The lower diff on mine transforms the car to a more usable one, makes the engine feel more flexible but it never really feels slow low down if it's on a good day - it can't have won awards straight year after year for nothing.

It is, remember, 3.2 n/a, and not 6.3L(?) LS3 capacity, if it was we'd be looking at about 600bhp/500lb/ft with the same bhp/litre!

[fok]

That's really what I'm saying.....to drive a car with S50/4 isn't an event for me like it is to some, they just don't feel quick and I'm left wanting.

You're absolutley right, there are some cars, V8 or Turbo, that just feel quicker but in reality are similar, but there are also plenty that are quicker............time has moved on.

I also hear what you're saying about the accolades that the engine has had over the years but personally I'm left scratching my head as to why.

Your point about bhp per litre is spot on. LS* are very often 600bhp/500lb/ft with some easy tuning work. Mine, I hasten to add, is not that powerful.....I intentionally have a tune for longevity and reliability which won't rip chassis components from the car like some of my mates' silly power conversions.

I suppose I am biased really because I'm a V8 fan (I have 3) but if you look at BMW, AMG, Audi, Jag etc they now all use big power alloy V8's for their medium sized performance saloons so I must be right! :)

[c_w]

I also hear what you're saying about the accolades that the engine has had over the years but personally I'm left scratching my head as to why.


I think it IS because of it's specific power plus it's flexibility (the torque curve being flat so that it's always got over 200lb/ft available from under 2000rpm) and relative frugality. Don't forget this engine originally came out around 1995/6, a 3.2 with around 320bhp is still not often seen today. Most other 3.2 engines were/are in the low/mid 200s with similar fuel economy.

Two completely different engines so daft to try and compare a 3.2 to a near double capacity V8. The argument would be stronger if the V8 in question was a 3.2! It'd be like us criticising a Honda vtec which really has no guts at all compared to the 3.2 M engine. Of course it is as it's a highly strung small 4-pot!

[fok]

Two completely different engines so daft to try and compare a 3.2 to a near double capacity V8. The argument would be stronger if the V8 in question was a 3.2! It'd be like us criticising a Honda vtec which really has no guts at all compared to the 3.2 M engine. Of course it is as it's a highly strung small 4-pot!

Totally agreed.

However if someone started raving on about how great a 4-pot vtec was and how there was little to touch it then some 6 pot M owner may well chime in eh?

[c_w]

Totally agreed.

However if someone started raving on about how great a 4-pot vtec was and how there was little to touch it then some 6 pot M owner may well chime in eh?

Eggsactly ! It's like an engine food chain; V10 and V12 owners scoff at the thought of V8s etc :P :D

[Spooks]

Well im glad we've sorted that!

Unless someone owns a Red Bull F1 car then someone will always be quicker than you whatever you own - but that wouldnt be great on our pot-holed roads so id quite fancy my chances in the ZMC...!

As we all know though, performance isnt everything and certainly not on our crowded roads, the ZMC is a winner since its such a unique car in many aspects :thumbsup:

[fok]

Lets all have an MC group hug.:thumbsup:

:lol:(Still slow though):lol:

[c_w]

Lets all have an MC group hug.:thumbsup:

:lol:(Still slow though):lol:

Hehe. Post up your sub 8minute Ring laptime then :p

Actually are you booking that Donington trackday on 25th July? want to see this car, should go very well round Donington as big power can help round there. It's via Northloop forum.

[Spooks]

:lol:(Still slow though):lol:

Well you know there is only one way to sort this, :boxing_smiley: !!

[jrsmooth]

You do read about it a lot that people find M3s/Z3Ms etc feeling slow, especially when they've come from something that was turbo'd, which in actual fact wasn't any quicker, it just "felt" quicker.

Fully agree with this statement! I came from a stage 2 Leon TDi (dont laugh!), which was pushing 240 bhp. It was extremely torquey, and would light up the fronts in 3rd gear. It felt fast, and was pretty fast. When I drove the MC for the first time, it didn't feel quick, there was no turbo or as much torque. However after going through the gears, and then looking at the speedo expecting to be doing around 85 - 90, I was pushing 130! The bloke I ended up buying it off looked a little pale! To be honest, I still feel the same about it. Sounds much better though!

Although, I am in the boat with Fok, and if I had the funds I would be owning something with a big block V8 in. Not for the power you understand, just the spine tingling noise!

Joe :cheers2:

[Spooks]

just the spine tingling noise!

You need at least a V10 for that............!!

[fok]

Hehe. Post up your sub 8minute Ring laptime then :p

Actually are you booking that Donington trackday on 25th July? want to see this car, should go very well round Donington as big power can help round there. It's via Northloop forum.

Now who's showing off a bit, with his sub 8 minute ring time!:lol:

It's a Circuit Days event so I might book it if I can arrange some playmates as well. I like Donington from watching bike events but have never driven there.

You need at least a V10 for that............!!

There's that engine food chain c_w was on about!:lol:

I'm with you on that actually, E60 M5 on tuned pipes sound awesome. Then there's the V12 stuff which can really make your hair stand on end!

Hats off to Mercedes who with their V8 AMG range have for at least the past ten years, engineered in, an aggressive exhaust note as they understand that is part of the package. Jag have started too with their XK and XF range.....They sound very fruity as OEM.

[c_w]

Now who's showing off a bit, with his sub 8 minute ring time!:lol:

It's a Circuit Days event so I might book it if I can arrange some playmates as well. I like Donington from watching bike events but have never driven there.


Haha, that is an assumption based on a big cc V8 being in there! :D

Yea would be good if you can come, would be very interested in seeing/hearing your car! - don't think there are many places left though so book quick! It's £235 on the website but £195 via Northloop forum.

[jrsmooth]

You need at least a V10 for that............!!

Call me mad, but i prefer the noise of a V8!

[Spooks]

Call me mad, but i prefer the noise of a V8!

Well that all depends on what V8 were talking about! I would say my idea of a V8 is a low, rumbling, ground shaking sound whilst a V10 is more of a howl. I think that has changed somewhat nowadays, the new M3 V8 is more howl than rumble!

[snatch]

Lets get ready to RUUUUUMMMMMMMBLE

[fok]

Lets get ready to RUUUUUMMMMMMMBLE

I wouldn't be throwing too many gauntlets if I were you, Craig's car is up and running!

[snatch]

Well you know there is only one way to sort this, :boxing_smiley: !!

I think the gauntlet was thrown at you mate not me....... Go get em flash!!!:hurray:

[fok]

I think the gauntlet was thrown at you mate not me....... Go get em flash!!!:hurray:

Naa, the car may be fairly quick but I think challenging others to a race is never a good idea.....When racing bikes off road I always end up trying too hard and coming apart like a cheap watch.

When there's no pressure I can relax into a rythym at my own pace and can be quite smooth but as soon as a close race ensues I try too hard and make mistakes.

If you bin an enduro bike it's not the end of the world but with the kind of speeds the MC is capable of, getting carried away and shunting into armco at a hundred and plenty..........err, no you're alright thanks!

I think you know what I'm talking about snatch!.....You should probably stick to that straightlining willy waving 1/4 mile stuff! :lol:

What started that was me saying that S50/4 feel slow these days and I stand by that all day long............I never said that I was Jenson Button though!

[Alpinaman]

Hmmmm...

I dont really understand how you think the ZMC is slow,the figures speak for themselves..

I luckily had a 1990 M3,it had the 215 bhp engine and it was a great car to drive..But it was never really a rapid road car. And no way in the same hands could it keep with an M coupe...

I have owned Scoobs,Skylines,Intergrales,M3's and all kinds of cars,also have big jap sportbikes so i understand speed and what its all about..

Yes there are quicker cars out there,but to call a M coupe "slow" is absurd..

[fok]

Not absurd...........quoted performance figures aren't everything, real world road driving is.

Yeah, alright to say they are actually slow is probably a bit harsh and involves a certain degree of baiting, but genuinely I don't think they feel fast and some other members who own one also agree with me.

I don't like S50/54 powered cars and my opinion is that they're not the great road cars that many people think they are, due to how/where they make their power......However, put them on track where they can be kept revving and they come into their own more.

I also ride superbikes so, as you'll know if you do too, it's hard for cars to feel quick by comparison, but in the circles of LS* conversions, I have been in several cars that are superbike quick.....MC / M3 just feels very ordinary after that.

This isn't a bash MC post, I love them as an all round package. I acknowledge that they can be a great car when sorted and fully respect others views towards them, but for me they are just well over 10 years old and the game has moved on speed wise.

[Alpinaman]

I realise what your saying...Quoted figures arent everything,but they show what the car is capable of speed wise when in the right hands.

But what car out there(and lets keep budget similar) can significantly put an MC to shame?? Maybe its the way that you are driving it that makes it feel slow??

Irrelavant of whether you have to keep the engine reving,thats the only way it can produce power.. Its a 6 pot N/A engine,what else can it do ..lol...

My MC is having a bit of paintwork done at the moment,i have stripped off the front end...Its parked next to my other quick---ish thing ;)

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a369/alpinaman/003-1.jpg

[fok]

I can't believe you ride an RR6 (ish) Fireblade and still think MC feels fast???

"Quoted figures arent everything,but they show what the car is capable of speed wise when in the right hands." Yep and also in the right controlled conditions.......usually not a real world street scenario.

"Maybe its the way that you are driving it that makes it feel slow??" I know how to wring a car's neck and that's what S5* needs.........Mine is not S50 powered anymore.....I wasn't impressed by it and it now has a V8 conversion.

"Irrelavant of whether you have to keep the engine reving,thats the only way it can produce power.. Its a 6 pot N/A engine,what else can it do ..lol..." Absolutely, that's my whole point, S5* doesn't develop power in the right way for me.

I will reserve judgement on S54 powered MC as they are a tad lighter than the S54 powered M3's I've driven and was underwhelmed by!

[c_w]

Is this back running again :D Drive an S2000 then drive an M Coupe and it will feel like it has massive torque from idle hehe.

[Bruski_11]

Is this back running again :D Drive an S2000 then drive an M Coupe and it will feel like it has massive torque from idle hehe.

I must say, not sure on the theory that revving is the answer on an s50. The torque (in say 4th) allows you to short shift without too much bother and carry speed at that. The MC can run from what say 30mph to 140mph in 4th so I'd agree with CW there.
However, [sadly] FOK makes a very valid point...technology has moved on and new stuff is typically going to be an improvement on the old stuff. The debate will rage as to whether such an improvement really adds or detracts from the experience but I don't think that is his point.
This thread has been going some time, an impressive effort. I think we've almost run as far as the detailing is women's work thread. Speaking of which, I polished the car [by hand] on sunday...I'll stop now :Yawn:

[c_w]

It's all relative hence the S2000 comparison, that really do have no torque and is all revs. The S50B32 engine was actually recognised for it's broad spread of power, this in part with longish gears is the reason many people don't think they feel fast as there is no power surge or kick. The engine isn't that peaky really, just that a big capacity V8 will always have monster torque from idle.

Here's an S50 in action :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R15tcrLntVU

[fok]

Is this back running again :D

This thread has been going some time, an impressive effort. I think we've almost run as far as the detailing is women's work thread. Speaking of which, I polished the car [by hand] on sunday...I'll stop now :Yawn:

:lol: C'mon, it's quite a quiet forum......we've got to talk about something.

Alright, maybe I've laboured the point a bit :Yawn: but I was goaded into rekindling the argument, honest guv'!

Anyway, about those detailing gayboys..........

Here's an S50 in action :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R15tcrLntVU

That's brave! And talented.

[Alpinaman]

No.............Just just normal level of ability.

You falling short ?

[fok]

No.............Just just normal level of ability.

You falling short ?

:Yawn:
I don't think you've got room to question talent.....In that picture I can see dead flies on the inside of your Fireblade's screen!

[brg 990]

Hmmm I think I'm with fok on this one , I still say my s50 feels slow , maybe because it's a smooth 6 cyl where I've come from a lumpy 4 . Interesting that the bikers on here are split on this , compared to my zx10r anything feels slow :cornut:

[Alpinaman]

:Yawn:
I don't think you've got room to question talent.....In that picture I can see dead flies on the inside of your Fireblade's screen!

Ah....I can question whoever or whatever i chose to..

I know where my talents and inabilities lay... I dont blame the car.

[exdos]

I don't like S50/54 powered cars and my opinion is that they're not the great road cars that many people think they are, due to how/where they make their power

What made you choose a MC to be the victim for a LS1 transplant? What other cars did you consider converting?

[fok]

What made you choose a MC to be the victim for a LS1 transplant? What other cars did you consider converting?

BMW quality, exclusivity and I always loved the oddball looks.

I started with an FD3 shape RX7 which are actually fantastic LS* donor cars due to availability, light weight, balance and fully adjustable suspension geometry as OEM etc. To be fair a well sorted RX7 V8 is a serious weapon if you like big power RWD sports cars.

Dyno Torque has converted about 20 RX7's and can make a fantastic car for your money, but as the conversion started I realised that I was never going to be in love with a 90's Mazda, no matter how well it performed so it got sold on and I ended up by combining my love of large displacement engines and the MC "Presence".

[wifipirate]

fok - I seriously considred the rx-7 (and 350z) before getting the MC - at the end of the day.. jap just isn't as nice. the rx7 interior really isn't much better than a 200sx's.

[fok]

jap just isn't as nice.

Totally agree......Whilst there are some seriously good performers, IMO it's just not as nice place to be.