Comments by "Golden Croc" (@GoldenCroc) on "AutoTopNL" channel.

  1. Wasnt that many years ago that 0-200 this fast was supercar performance. Very nice.
    208
  2. I realise the opportunity doesnt come around often, but I just want to say how great it is to see a car taken to its TRUE top speed for once. Love seeing the meter sitting around and bouncing between 313-314 kmh.
    158
  3. They should remove the limiter. Yeah, 311 indicated might be "fast enough" but they should let it stretch out.
    124
  4. Yeah those Mercedes V12 cargospeciale aint no joke... of course, compared to a multipla SV, it was dead meat.
    121
  5. Its true. Even worse because almost every digital speedo out there updates so damn slowly! From one number to the next can be a 30kmh gap when accelerating!
    77
  6. 8.83s 100-200 for the ones that are wondering.
    67
  7. The 100-200 time seems to line up pretty well with 210hp if you ask me, I dont think its missing much or any power to speak of. Its AWD after all, robbing a bit of power.
    52
  8.  @t1n638  Fuel comsumption has very little to do with hp/l max power of an engine.
    31
  9. Has to be one of the most gearing-gap top speed limited cars I ever heard of.
    23
  10. Well weight doesnt affect top speed much, but yeah. Its the V12 diesel thats the cool part.
    20
  11. 100-200km/h in 10.61 seconds for the ones that are interested.
    16
  12. Never driven one, but I seriously think Leon Cupra of this generation seem the car to get if you are in europe and want a car that can do most everything well, for not too much money. VAG quality issues aside, its hard to beat that price/performance ratio. Most people and families fit just fine in a hatchback of that size as well. Civic typer R has got to be quite a bit more money? Dont think a renault Megane can get you the tuning potential the VW lump has.
    15
  13. I mean, you are right, but a <10 sec 1/4 mile has been possible with normal, factory stock 1000cc sportsbike for 35 (yes, 35) years. So its not any faster in that regard compared to others.
    14
  14. Yeah, too bad about the enourmous step between 5th and 6th though. It really should have been 7th with that ratio.
    13
  15.  Gustav Gamer  Doubt they are that incompetent over at ford regarding the stability, more than likely there just isnt a good 7 speed gearbox to buy that fits for a reasonable price. And they needed that super high ratio for EPA compliance or some such.
    12
  16. Cool car, and pretty quick! Loses a lot of time 100 -200 relative to its power/weight by that narrow powerband though.
    10
  17. I guess its to give the owner a good feeling :)
    9
  18.  @BVZTIII  Contrary to popular opinion, a sports car has nothing to do with neither acceleration, top speed or horsepower figures. In short, a sports car is a 1,2 or if one wants to be charitable, max 2+2 seater car that is built to be as fun to drive as possible, foremost by being as light as possible. As you can see the cars I mentioned above fit it nicely. As you can also see, there is no mention of acceleration in this definition, and certainly no fixed numbers for anything except the number of seats. There are a lot of fast accelerating, high power cars and a lot of them have their own named and defined category without being sport cars. Muscle cars. Pony cars. Super sedans. GT cars. Hot hatches etc etc. Tesla Models S would be akin to something like a modern muscle car/super sedan category. Taycan more like super sedan/GT category. Cheers.
    9
  19.  @wiskymo9687  Diesel, gas, electric or fairy dust, doesnt matter, horsepower is always the same factor.
    8
  20.  @raiinydayz1889  Yes, I know about the AWD system. Still has more hardware to spin, which robs some power. Regarding torque, revs and power delivery, those factors are as good as irrelevant to the acceleration numbers. Only average power in between gearshifts count, and that number is often very closely correlated to the peak power number. In as good as every petrol powered car, shifting earlier, "using the torque", or power delivery rpm mattering at all, are sadly all just effectively long-lived myths that for some reason became popular, but have no basis in reality.
    8
  21. Honestly its a bit slow for a medium size 2wd sedan/coupe, dont know if its the aerodynamics or misplaced gearing for top speed or a combination that is the problem. I was hoping for 290 speedo or so, at least 275 real speed. Ah well, 265 real speed is good enough for most people. Maybe it could have done 275 with better gearing, doesnt look entirely impossible.
    8
  22.  @johnathandow5376  If it really is 823hp, it would easily do 350km/h with the right gearing.
    8
  23.  @babic12009  I kind of misread, I thought he was talking about this specific example when he said "this model", and that he had deduced so from something he saw in the video. My bad, I should have thought about it a bit more.
    8
  24.  @RS-xx8gz  Hes probably not lying, he just got taken for a ride by the tuning company, as so many others, and doesnt know better.
    7
  25. It will surely hit a rev limit, but if it didnt (via taller gearing), power to drag certainly would suggest 400 is quite possible.
    7
  26. Dont think they made their system for launching, at all. That makes an enormous difference, up to 2 seconds.
    7
  27.  @radostinangelov9193  215, but its not too bad.
    7
  28. Luckily that doesnt matter, since it isnt a sports car, and never was. Neither is the Porsche, btw. A miata, Boxster or lotus elise, those are sports cars.
    7
  29.  @Saif0412  Dont agree. Its got a bit less. Maybe more than 450, but for sure less than 500.
    7
  30.  @Roddy_Zeh  Sure it has, but its still a bit too slow for 500hp.
    7
  31.  @noevanesse  Look up definition of sleeper, no such thing as too much horsepower.
    6
  32. Nice car, but it honestly seems a bit slow for 600hp, at least at high speed. A bit over 500 perhaps? Edit: Just found it in the 100-200 document. 8.82 seconds. That is about the same as the M5 E60, with its 507hp. And its SMG isnt that fast compared to a manual. Seems like my guess of "a bit over 500" was just about bang on.
    6
  33. What? There is no rule you have to space gears like this, it depends entirely on what cogs you got in the box. And you gain a heck of a lot of usability at higher speed with more gears, for a relatively minimal weight gain on a street car.
    6
  34.  @hoedemakerbart  If they got the same aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance, it will be the same. Just as I said. It really comes down to quite simply physics, simple enough that everyone learns it in compulsary school. Now, the fact that most people forget what they learn in school is another matter, and I dont blame you, its perfectly normal. But thats the long and short of it, yes.
    5
  35.  @SvenTheSveed  Meh, front wheel spin isnt very dramatic if you ask me. Easily handled.
    5
  36. I am guessing its not BMW fans saying that, but the opposite: people looking to put any BMW down?
    5
  37. In another review they state Porsche themselves say they do nothing. If that is the case, your argument falls flat. And please stop citing racing, every manufacturer has a wind tunnel, its not rocket science...
    5
  38.  @andreacristoforetti2061  Hello. I understand, but you can also do a rough calculation yourself. A petrol engine uses about 0.3l fuel per horsepower and hour. A normal sized car such as a golf needs about 120hp to do 200kmh. 120x0.3 is 36 liter. Divide by 2 (since 200kmh) to get consumption per 100km, and we get 18l/100km steady speed. Plug in general drag and rolling resistance formula to correct for different speeds. Cheers.
    5
  39. I believe you have been had, man. Its fine preferring the E46. but what part of the E46 is made of aluminium.... that isnt (or composite) on an e92. I dont think there is any, rather its the opposite if anything as far as I know. I think you have fallen for some kind of myth.
    5
  40. Dont know if its that impressive with 276 km/h but yeah, its a nice car.
    5
  41. @MarcTrump Neither does the price though, to be fair.
    5
  42. Why would you?
    5
  43.  Jonas Jonaitis  I know, I own a similar car. :)
    4
  44.  @anderson-milan  I guess "not top speed pulls though" was what you were trying to say. Which is what I also said earlier, yes.
    4
  45.  @hoedemakerbart  No, and no. Neither of the things you wrote directly affect top speed. Not weight, not torque. What does is rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag, and power.
    4
  46.  @Morten54  Sorry for letting people (who stated something themselves) know it how really is, so they are better informed about something they presumably care about, since they commented. A sin in your eyes, I take it? If you ask me, the car hobby needs less baseless myths, not more.
    4
  47.  @MA-mp4ov  Eh sorry man, no lying. Its just physics and natural laws. No way around that fact, unless you have a nobel physics prize guaranteed and totally will change everything we humans know. Power is what accelerates a car, no ifs or buts about it. And power is measured in horsepower or kilowatts for cars. All other numbers by themselves are totally irrelevant for acceleration and yes, that includes torque.
    4
  48. Its normal as in factory stock.
    4
  49.  @dylanhall509  No it doesnt have that much effect. This hasnt got 500hp as tested.
    4
  50. Indeed, performance car numbers from a cheap-ish small estate with some reasonable tuning wasnt bad.
    4
  51. Its possible to see in the video of you look closely; 299 is max reached.
    4
  52.  @mausermann7918  Not necessary with such a big error to avoid fines, normal 3 series is lots more exact than this.
    4
  53. Yes. Horsepower has nothing to do with it.
    4
  54.  @stevebrymer3106  Not many cars have such a big gap, this is about the biggest I have seen. Some cars actually have a 6th that is still too low, believe it or not.
    4
  55.  @Islam_is_the_truth.4  Thats because they lack horsepower. No normal diesel sedan has over 400hp. My comparison was explicitly with a similar car with the exact same stated horsepower. If the diesel got similar horsepower and correct gearing, it will be as fast, or faster than a petrol car. Its just physics.
    4
  56.  @valerystoichkov7429  You might want to read again. I simply answered if it was a sports car or not. Other considerations werent part of it. That being said, there certainly are quite a few vehicles running around that has got a worse motive energy to braking power quota.
    4
  57. Are you sure about that? Lots of people think shifting earlier is faster because it might feel so, but it very, very seldom is, the power has to really, really fall off like almost no car (never seen it in a petrol pwered car) does for that to be the case,
    4
  58. Its a tradeoff between the strengths of the different models I think. On balance, you may well be right.
    4
  59.  @Dokepredator  DCT M3 is usually about a bit over 10s 100-200. 11,5 is too slow. Its down on power if that is the case (with DCT)
    4
  60.  @stirbiuliu8048  Quite right, but front wheel spin isnt the same as torque steer, far from it. Just a small FYI. Cheers.
    3
  61. I think its some kind of regulation (at least in EU) or manufacturer agreement. Every street legal vehicle does is, more or less.
    3
  62.  @gstar12334  Not true, same horsepower, same speed. This doesnt have the stated figure, thats why.
    3
  63. Hard to do unless they go at night... Too much traffic.
    3
  64. E90 with manual has low drivetrain losses compared to many other cars I think, and has pretty good aero. Also, it seems to be real 400hp, not dream horsepower.
    3
  65. What is real consumtion though? I often see people asking for this, the problem is that the only consistent way to compare is just quoting the eu cycle numbers, all other numbers are too subjective and therefore useless.
    3
  66. No way. Sorry.
    3
  67.  @swansmeister  Well, it certainly was supercar numbers some 15 years ago, not sure they are these days. Dont really think it is much, if any at all lighter than those old supercars as well when put on a scale. I would say it is pretty comparable to an F430, which was my point.
    3
  68. Dream numbers on this one, as usual.
    3
  69.  @_brunomarii_19  Emissions and consumption compliance gear, yeah.
    3
  70. Well, its a bit tuned... But yeah, top speed isnt bad for the power.
    3
  71. BMW calls it "fox red", and that rings pretty true.
    3
  72. Yeah, people underestimate the top speed of small/old cars. 60hp is enough for 160kmh, if you got the uncongested road.
    3
  73. 276. Yeah its a bit clickbaitish.
    3
  74. Just a note many dont know, its not the E9x or E6x speedo per se. Normal non-M models got more normal errors... BMW likely calibrated the M models like this because it would look cool in most customers eyes.
    3
  75. Dont know what it weighs, but it seems like maybe... 400-420 hp? Somewhere around there?
    3
  76.  @TH-qq2lb  AWD powerloss at these relatively low levels is a bitch at high speed, that is all there is to it.
    3
  77.  @TH-qq2lb  VAG group seems to have some special sauce, maybe they decouple their 4WD system some extra way above what the haldex system can do, maybe their Dual clutch has lower power loss or maybe they just plain give more power than they state. Or some combination of all of the above. But many of their cars are faster 100-200 compared to rivals with similar stated power to weight. Note: edited for clarity.
    3
  78.  @arturmd1642  Yep, and its on the revlimiter in top gear, if they havent changed the gearing. It could do a bit more with taller gearing.
    3
  79.  @hexagonosaurus5848  Yeah, it doesnt have to be at all. Manufacturers program them as they wish.
    3
  80. My old six gear cayenne never uses sixth gear when in sport mode, even at top speed. Dont exactly remember when it shifts into fifth though, but its got a whole lot of revrange and, as said, another gear left at the true top speed.
    3
  81. Nice car, great sound. Too bad about the speedo error which is enormous, almost as bad as a Golf GTI ;) Dont know why, it is the same speedo error in my E92 335d, a bit of free tuning for those who fall for it I guess :) . On the other hand, My 335d is almost 10 kmh faster than this, soooo... Not too impressed by the 276 GPS speed this did. Probably my 335d has a bit better aerodynamics, or this car is missing a few ponies... To be fair, it still did accelerate quite a bit.
    3
  82. There is no way that amount of power is enough for 300kmh unfortunately.
    3
  83.  @henksjoerdson9729  The fastest bikes have been possible to coax under 11 seconds since the 1970s, yes indeed. It wasnt until the updated GSXR 1100 and Yamaha FZR 1000 of 1989 that somewhat regularly below 10 second runs were being achieved with factory stock bikes though in my estimation. Just another note, Your dads bike wasnt a 1974 since they werent produced then, but it might well have been a 1977-78 or so. Cheers mate.
    3
  84. Lambo, especially old ones, got "Italian calibration"
    3
  85. True. But its rare in comparison to a standard mk5 gti.
    3
  86. ​​​ @MrMk82  Never mind "many times", please name a single video this happened in? I would like to see it. Because it seems unlikely, to put it mildly.
    3
  87.  @hquwx6027  I am as big a fan of carwow as the next guy, but their test doesnt always bring out 100% out of the machines for various reasons. Case in point: When they dragrace high power rwd cars on a very low grip runway, and often wet as well to boot. So when cars are reasonably matched, its hard to draw conclusions from it. I think the trackhawk is a bit better than it looked in that test.
    3
  88.  @Maarten_vd  Eeeeh? This is a Dutch channel that tests acceleration performance on the autobahn.... 100-200 is the end all, be all for that. 10-11s for a M3P is an enormous difference compared to the 7.2 of this car, easily 100hp, and a very big percentage. Also, the Golf has a much higher top speed than a M3P, dont know where you got the inverse from? Generally, you seem to have gotten bad info allround, for some reason? Especially since you said "cherry picked", when this Golf is faster and quicker in everything, yes, even 0-100kmh. Hope you can find better sources next time?
    3
  89.  @Islam_is_the_truth.4  Well, horsepower is horsepower, doesnt matter if its petrol, diesel or electric. But I guess this could be geared too short for top speed, putting it into a unfavorable rev range with less power. Maybe thats what you are thinking of, diesel cars that are geared too short, because if they are in the correct revrange, top speed is identical to anything else, in fact it might even be a bit better with the diesel compared to petrol since it needs less cooling which in turn could enable better aero. Hard to tell from the video, but it doesnt look too bad, about 4000 rpm which should be ok...I should think.
    3
  90. Many cars can do that speed, but relatively few owners do. Glad to someone doing 200+ these days.
    3
  91.  @madslundgaard6625  No, it is correct, why shouldnt it be? Power difference is proportional to time difference.
    3
  92. Way more planted, way less steering feel. Its a tradeoff.
    3
  93. Nah, its about right for 450hp.
    3
  94. I dont think it had many issues of note, what makes you think it does?
    3
  95. Nice car, but come on Seat, did you tune the speedometer as well?
    3
  96. E-series BMW M speedometer strikes again. 299 km/h (Max in this video) = 332 km/h on speedo. 299 isnt bad, but come on... I guess buyers loved it though. A bit of old school italian flair ;) Also glad to see a car driven to the max of its capacity... yes I mean the Opel of course. :)
    3
  97.  @zlover7777  Just a datapoint, according to people that code the gearbox software, My BMW 335d with a "modern" ZF torque converter automatic is about 9,5% drivetrain loss. Old truths have changed a bit in recent years. Cheers mate.
    2
  98.  @domtoretto3280  Yep, EPA compliance gear probably.
    2
  99.  @HybridBoy0  They are that fast, just nobody cares enough to test it. "Nobody" drives cars fast that are this expensive. That goes for all brands. The performance is necessary to sell it, but people buy it as an investment or for bragging rights, not to drive it. A 15k dollar rolex watch keeps the time worse than a 2 dollar chinese watch, you dont buy it to know the time. You dont buy a 10 million dollar car to drive fast in it. Thats just the reality, unfortunately.
    2
  100.  @stirbiuliu8048  I just want to say that with this latest post you made, everything is 100% correct, as far as I know. Cheers.
    2
  101. Its almost like there is a formula to calculate power from acceleration... hmmm.... Nah, you are right, has to be wizardry.
    2
  102. Funny enough, 2 minutes at 300km/h is already 10km, presumably with a very high consumption, so its much more than 20km of range when driving "normally" that is lost, I would say something like 30-70km depending on your "normal" speed.
    2
  103. I would have one, perhaps with a G-power kit added though? Also, BMW E-series M cars infamous speedometer error and all that, but one has to admit for the guys that bought and enjoyed these new, it had to have felt awesome seeing that speedo going 330+ back in the mid 2000s...
    2
  104.  @ajstevens1652  There are ones that are supposed to, yes.
    2
  105. Nah, they are ok; just 6th gear is EPA gear, probably.
    2
  106.  @grimreaper5232  It should have 7 gears, with 7th as the ratio where 6 is now, yes.
    2
  107. This got awd which saps power, but yes, no way 440hp.
    2
  108. My 370hp 3 series diesel is almost as fast, and it is heavier for sure. No way this got 440hp
    2
  109. It would do 250 indicated at least if he had the space to keep the foot down, if the increase in speed doesnt totally die off unexpectedly.
    2
  110.  @animatedr0x  Yes, I have just learned this. But no doubt the power is enough if you remove the limiter.
    2
  111.  @lucasdamask  Yeah, I guess most probably go that route, its a bit hard to see when everyone you ever known do it themselves... I live in EU, My 335d is a bit special (only one in the world with its spec probably, as I said above) and in condition like new when I bought it, more or less..... thats why it was so expensive. But well worth it to me. I am well aware of prices of only a few thousand euros for a bit less special examples. Good luck, a wagon one will be nice for sure.
    2
  112. Looks cool. And dont have to change it if you put a supercharger on it.
    2
  113. Yep its a PHEV GT car. In that segment, it has no competition really.
    2
  114. Right you are.
    2
  115. Youre right, its not 460hp. Subtract at least 100.
    2
  116. Says who? In another review, they said Porsche themselves said they do nothing but look cool. So where did you get your info? It wouldnt be the first time parts are put on that does effectively nothing, after all.
    2
  117.  @TRX25EX  yep, for sure looking at the acceleration.
    2
  118.  @Vanderveenm  Eh, the things showed in this video dont cause any damage. Or even wear to speak of, I assure you. Perfectly within normal usage tolerances.
    2
  119. Golf might be a smidge faster. But it depends on how true those 250hp are. Probably the speed is close enough as to not matter.
    2
  120.  @klaspeppar5619  A very good reply, hope you dont mind if I explain some things about what I meant, dont take it the wrong way... Warning, long reply But I think you will find it worthwhile... Yes, 250hp is very believable, no doubt about that. But how is the number 250 reached? Most tuning companys dont have the resources to test engines the way manufacturers does. They also have an incentive to inflate the numbers, and little to no negatives in doing so. Many people will buy the tune that promises the most hp increase. But that also goes for the engine in the Golf of course, since it also is tuned by a tuning company. That doesnt mean the numbers are untrue per se, but that the variations could also potentially be larger. And if your Volvo makes 260 hp, and the Golf 230, that makes a really big difference in the race, but is still well in the variation, I would say even a 15hp swing per car would be, so potentially 225 vs 265 or 255 vs 235. As you say, there is also the condition of the car to factor in. A small leak or almost imperceptible misfire, some less than optimal old fuel, a slightly bad MAF and many other such things can sap 20 hp without being noticable, very true. There is also the definition of what kind of race it would be. Lower weight and power gives an advantage at low speeds, while higher weight and more power gives an advantage in higher speeds, were aerodynamic drag is most important. So it could well be possible to see the lead change several times in the race, as the speed goes up. The comment you made on the cylinders and torque is interesting, as I said dont take this the wrong way... Number of cylinders dont matter. At all. They only matter in in indirect way, as in, can the car produce mpre horsepower because it has more cylinders? If the cars have the same horsepower, it doesnt matter they got 1 cylinder vs 12 cylinders, when it comes to speed and acceleration. Same deal with torque, it matters only in an indirect way, as in can the car produce more horsepower becuase it got more Torque? Sometimes the answer is yes, sometimes the answer is no. But the "peak Torque number" in itself doesnt mean anything when it comes to maximum acceleration. Only "in gear mean horsepower" does, which is a number that is not availible from any manufacturer or tuner as far as I know. Yes, the DSG gives a big advantage, even though it saps sligtly more power and makes the car heavier than a normal box. But at very high speed, where the shifting is a smaller percentage of the time spent acceleratiing, then the advantage goes back to the manual box, for the reasons stated above (less weight and power loss). VAG themselves used a manual box in their Nurburgring lap record attempt with a Golf or was it a Seat leon Cupra, dont remember, but they are more or less the same car anyway. One or the other. Yes, indeed it would be very interesting race, too bad I dont have my old tuned BMW 120d diesel, which could have added an extra dimension. But with only about 215-220hp and more losses since it was rear wheel drive, it would surely lose against both this and your car. I also had a BMW 123d diesel with about 270 horsepower, and that would have also been interesting, maybe it would have been slitghly faster. Currently I have a BMW 335d, but it is tune to waay to much horsepower curerntly for it to be a worthy race for any one of us, though I suppose I could flash the software back to the factory standard of about 285-290 hp, and that would maybe be a bit competitive, since the 335d I have got is very heavy for being a coupe. Hit me up if you are interested, It could be a fun race. Since You own a Volvo and got the name you have, I take it you are based in Sweden just as me, or am I assuming too much?
    2
  121.  @MrCarGuy  I know. I was talking about if they changed the gearing between the motor and the wheels, in the drivetrain.
    2
  122. Constant power numbers between Certain rpm. Factory feature.
    2
  123.  @DashCamSerbia  No, power. Its quite common for cars with forced induction.
    2
  124.  @DashCamSerbia  Its quite possible I assure you. Obviously I meant in an interval, not the entire revrange, that would indeed be strange. Normal is about a 1000-1500rpm interval or so, for example 4700-5700 rpm isnt uncommon, which means constant power between shifts. It is possible this model isnt one of those that got constant power (I am hard pressed to dig up reliable specs on a car this old), as many later models of Volvo did, but if it didnt, it surely isnt far from it. Maybe the most famous car that got constant power is the VW golf Mk7 GTI, with constant 220hp from 4500-6200rpm according to spec sheet. Cheers.
    2
  125. Oh snap!
    2
  126. Its forgivabable, its downforce is so high that it leaves impressions in the tarmac from the tires....
    2
  127. Untuned you mean? No. Not at all.
    2
  128. It doesnt make that power. Dream numbers.
    2
  129.  @Nordlicht05  I doubt it. They just made the numbers up.
    2
  130. Always fools someone... I bet most buyers was glad it was. Ignorance is bliss.
    2
  131. A max Nm number doesnt mean anything for acceleration. For any vehicle. Thats not how acceleration works. Most people dont know this, though.
    2
  132.  @Alex-hv3ir  At that rpm yes, which is seldom stated (it isnt here, for example), and which is never correlated with the rpm which gives the best acceleration. Thusly, those numbers are meaningless for anything except calculating the BMEP of an engine, which most people wont even know what it is, and most certainly dont care about.
    2
  133.  @StefBelgium  I meant what I wrote, a max power unit (engine) Torque number isnt correlated to max acceleration for any ICE vehicle ever made. Thus, it is useless information.
    2
  134. 100-200 in about 16 seconds? Seems like another car with fantasy numbers, or it was not running right. My 335d e92 did about the same time (16.2) with stock 290hp!
    2
  135. Very different cars, not a suitable comparison really.
    2
  136. Not all BMWs, actually just the M cars of this generation have as much error. But you can bet the customers loved to see those numbers, so I guess everybody won?
    2
  137. Nice car, but not sold on those mods... 425hp? Hmmmm....
    2
  138.  @mehmetkalkan9807  Its possible I guess, in that case it seems like the weight and size vs an old E92 (mine) makes a bigger difference than what I thought.
    2
  139.  @Phantom-ni7jj  Draws in the crowds, cant blame them really. 300+ just sounds so much better than below 300...
    2
  140. Well its not more accurate in any meaningful way because the dragy is already very accurate, but the app interface of the dragy is horrible, and it cant do lap timing for some reasons.
    2
  141. Japanese rules, unless you were joking.
    2
  142.  @themondaydriver3670  It (The Dragy) is more or less exactly right actually. As another one wrote, this is common among this generation M cars. My E92 is a bit more exact than this, but still not good at all.
    2
  143.  @ThenameisOskar  It doesnt seem like 440, but I dont know about as low as maybe 350, it is AWD after all. My M135i did 11.8 or so with 360-370 hp and that was a RWD autobox car. Is this any lighter?
    2
  144.  @TH-qq2lb  One could debate if the term "AWD" has any specific meaning beyond all 4 wheels drives being driven. It seems to be mostly an American epression, which is somewhat antiquated in todays vehicles. Yes, I dont doubt that your car indeed does the time you stated, I just said VAG cars times compared to their competitors are often better than their specs would suggest. Compare a Golf R 8 to an A45 AMG forh example. Which would make them an outlier, when talking about this Ford Focus.
    2
  145.  @TH-qq2lb  Oh, and probably your car is at least 100, maybe 150kg lighter than this focus, no matter the stated weight. Those numbers are often wrong.
    2
  146.  @Hackerproo  Weight makes a difference, but is not that different all in all.
    2
  147.  @cannyscott  168 seems about right with that gearing. Possibly one could fit some other final drive to better get in the powerband for top speed.
    2
  148.  @Franc39A6DD  Those speed on the other hand seem a bit high... Certainly I very much doubt a M3 E36 3.2 will do a real 304kmh on a flat road with just camshaft swaps, that sounds unbelievable.
    2
  149.  @VB0120-u4z  Unless something is broken, its shouldnt lose power with age, unless you meant age as a component in things breaking?
    2
  150.  @frankdogg75  193 real speed (GPS) from a e46 with small mods? To be honest, thats sounds hard to believe, if there wasnt some extra things such as a downslope, nice tailwind or some kind of drafting at play. But I wont say its impossible, but not easy for sure.
    2
  151.  @MyRealName  I see the joke, but if anyone wonders: In a straight line is what he is referring to. But they are not that heavy (a lot lighter than an M3) so they can be made to be pretty competent budget track cars as well.
    2
  152.  @ivanraguz3103  Yeah, but most cars are a little bit more optimistic at high speed than is necessary for tire size tolerance. 15kmh is bang on and my 8kmh is actually a bit too little if one fits larger wheels. Cheers.
    2
  153. Time it 100-200, that will show if that really is the case.
    2
  154. Yeah not very expensive at all. Btw, nice surname.. 😅
    2
  155.  @DaveDVideoMaker  Its an M5, check out the "vent" on the front fender, dont think anyone else got those? So unless they changed the front fender, should be an M5.
    2
  156.  @Demidar665  Well, that depends on the speed the car is going at, but sure, you can interpret what he wrote that way. I thought he mistook the speedo for the gps speed. There have been many commenters making that mistake on earlier videos, which is what made me think this was another one. Both takes are equally valid from what he wrote, but yours is more charitable. Fair enough, why not.
    2
  157.  @spookyreaper1702  Even a bit more than 305 actually when fully delimited. But it takes time, as it does with any car, to reach the true top speed. A very fast car for its time, Its not still faster than the New M5 CS when delimited, as quite a few people think.
    2
  158.  @spookyreaper1702  Oh, for sure. Check out the G power Hurricane RR M5. which did a real 372 km/h. Cheers.
    2
  159. It could make this speed with multiple gears left probably, its just 276 kmh on GPS. A lot of speedo error on these cars it seems.
    2
  160. They didnt? A few hundred revs before revlimiter isnt that early, at least to me.
    2
  161. Same as almost every other car, give or take a meter.
    2
  162.  @haydarbentalis5642  Should be way over 300kmh, real gps speed. In the video it reached 258kmh real GPS speed.
    2
  163. Not a big issue, who goes over 280 regularly? Just about no one, thats who. Top speed over 270-280 is a nice number, thats it.
    2
  164. Its a nice car, but the new one is much faster, both acceleration and top speed. Thats just the way it is, because of so much more power. The only way they are similar is if the new one still has the top speed limiter.
    2
  165.  @lambertomainardi7933  Dont have the time or energy to calculate to formula while I am at work, but since I have owned one myself, I am a bit familiar with them and it should be 450-470 or so depending on the consistency of the powerband. Of course, outside temps and wind and other smaller factors makes a difference as well. But 505 when this video was made? No, thats not possible in normal conditions.
    2
  166. E90 has good aerodynamics.
    2
  167. Its a very large car... a lot of aerodynamic drag. Its not any slower than other same size SUVs, is it?
    2
  168.  @GabriCasas  Yep, thats exactly the intent of what I wrote above, more or less. So I agree.
    2
  169.  @Maarten_vd  No biggie, I like a M3P more than this Golf, but horses for courses and all that.
    2
  170.  @coolguy_2997  Almost, not BMW, but BMW M cars specifically. I guess they wanted customers to be happy.
    2
  171.  @zen7956  Not weight, all that much. Aero, yes indeed. Would have figured the difference between to very similar chassis cars to be less though. The diesel also reasonably should need less cooling since it is more efficient, making it possible to close up some venting, decreasing drag. But seeing is believing.
    2
  172.  @Saif0412  It was in gear, mostly the top one.. so a bit skewed comparison.
    2
  173. Dont think so. Seems unlikely.
    2
  174. And it was made as a daily driver. The weekend car BMW made at the time would have been the M coupe. Just goes to show how different things can be.
    2
  175. Well done noticing it.. presumably its to decrase drag one would think?
    2
  176. e9x got pretty good aerodynamics for a turbo car, downside is a bit lacking in cooling
    2
  177. We can forgive them, just think of it as a 5 ratio box. They need that 6th ratio for fuel consumption compliance probably.
    2
  178.  @FalconXE302  Seems a lot of people replying to you didnt get what you were saying. I agree fully with what you wrote: The cars Speedo appears to be incapable of showing more than 317kmh. For you other replyers: Speedo errors et al has nothing to do with what FalconXE302 wrote, its just an interesting phenomenon. Same as how all bikes speedo is supposed to stop no later than 299 because of the agreement manufacturers have. But this is probably because of some technical cause.
    2
  179.  @papugenas Absolutely true, and not too long ago, there were at least some who took them out of the garage, but these days the hypercars have increased so much in price, I guess everyone who buys them sees them just as a way to store money. So they are very well streetable for at least short trips, but it decreases the value. Its the same as a classic art piece painting and statues and so on.
    2
  180. Its what most people want, for a variety of reasons. Mostly whats percieved as more interior space and being safer. Keep in mind I said "percieved as".
    2
  181. Not sure who owns it, maybe the factory itself? Maybe a test car to give journalists a ride in?
    2
  182.  @fwebe2871  It could go a lot faster for sure with a more optimized 6th gear. I assure you of this. However, you are correct in that the second part of what you wrote, no one really needs a top speed over 280 anyway, no way to use that regularly.
    2
  183. Really cool car. Too bad about the 6th gear, but I guess 277 kmh top speed is good enough for almost everyone, certainly on every normal racetrack its enough. So its not a problem really. On the flipside, funny thing is my 13 year old standard SUV is faster in top speed, because of the gearing in this car.
    2
  184.  @oDoMastermind  I think its a bit more than that, but quite some way from 420, yeah.
    2
  185.  @JerainJezza  So a bit more power than an earlier car, then.
    2
  186. People love them, they dont love wagons.
    2
  187.  @whitegptjet  Exactly.
    2
  188. Same with every bike, just about.
    2
  189.  @basti2002xxx  Is it really? As I understood it from the video, it was a normal GTI with some Abt tuning software and badges, nothing else?
    2
  190. Dragy (app and gps sensor necessary)
    2
  191. Its like a swiss atomic watch compared to older supercars or motorcycles. And VW GTIs... and.. Yeah. Not that uncommon.
    2
  192. Yeah, its not very good looking, but way better than the normal e63 6 series.
    2
  193. 223km/h seems to be the real speed reached. Not bad, not too good either, just about right for the power its got. Whistle actually has little to do with aerodynamics, Its probably from the doors, and just about all cars have crap aero along the sides, its more like worn out or lacking seals around the door/window that is causing that.
    2
  194. Its a pretty serious car, one of the last ones. These days its more about the attention.
    2
  195.  @TheSuperProgrammerLB  What fueling do you have for 2.4 bar? (sorry if I missed it), e85?
    2
  196.  @jedenszesc  Indeed, and that light is always on when the engine isnt anyway (Since there is no pressure with the engine off), meaning no useful information can be had from it until the engine is started anyway. So Yeah. It doesnt matter.
    2
  197.  @gwspom  I think the AWD and auto box is holdding it back a lot because I agree it should be like 7.5 seconds in a modern car with rwd with that power to weight. So even if it is 550, a lot might be lost in the drivetrain.
    2
  198.  @AbdelhaQ_213  No way a 300hp Leon does 290 to 300 kph real speed (Not exagerrating speedometer). But yeah, this does not have 420hp.
    2
  199.  @AbdelhaQ_213  290 is not far off from what is possible mathematically, but is that GPS verified speed and a flat piece of road? What I can say is that 300hp just isnt enough for real speeds of 300kph normally without exceptional aerodynamics which no normal combustion engine car possess, as far as I know. 290 Might be within possible range if the engine gives a bit more than 300hp.
    2
  200.  @papa_pt  "psychos" ? A bit harsh if serious when thats the way all of europe does it...
    1
  201.  @papa_pt  Not literally all, but effectively. Over 95% in my estimation.
    1
  202.  @zlover7777  Even a torque converter automatic isnt close to those numbers these days... its more like 10%. Yes, really. But this is a manual gearbox with robotic control. So its got the same losses as a manual. Below 10% for sure.
    1
  203. Feels great for the owner to get such high speed reading, I am sure :)
    1
  204.  @Morten54  If they care enough to state their opinion in a comment, they should care enough to learn how it really is. And many times, they do, I have been thanked countless times. The ones who dont, generally are the ones who take being wrong in itself as a personal attack upon them. Its quite sad they feel this way, if you ask me. It benefits no one. Still, true enough, there are many of those as well. Less than the other ones, thankfully. Now regarding my wording, yes it was indeed not the best. But I make a lot of comments and it get tiresome sometimes hearing the same old myths perpetuated into infinity itself. Especially when people got the tools to understand this in school already as young teenagers, if they think about it a moment before they reply. Its not rocket science. Lastly: No one (presumably?) is forcing you to read, nor reply to the comments, so that annoyance is easily mitigated. Cheers mate.
    1
  205.  @Morten54  I figured as much. Better luck next time, bro.
    1
  206.  @drterrible8069  Depends on what norm you weigh after. Euro norm is probably about 2.8-2.9, when put on a scale I would think.
    1
  207. Well, yeah. I would say 100% but I guess someone, somewhere could disagree.
    1
  208. Q7 v12 has to be upwards of 2700kg, my cayenne turbo which has a shorter wheelbase and a gas engine with 4 cylinders less is already 2600kg. These older platform q7 are heavier than new ones, since they were built on a strong platform, able to do pretty good offroading with locking diffs and a low range gearbox.
    1
  209. Maybe the touring just sells too badly to release it now... a shame.
    1
  210.  @_nopestr  I think you misread my reply. Seems that way from your answer. I wasnt talking about any of the things in your reply.
    1
  211. Even my old one is pretty good :) Just close your eyes when paying after filling up at the gas station...
    1
  212.  @Deniz-tq4jt  Yep, thats correct.
    1
  213. Hard to get them much lower than 3 seconds on street tires with only rwd unfortunately . Physics says no.
    1
  214.  @HybridBoy0  It can do it in 3 seconds, just not in this video. Same as every other RWD super car, they are all within a few tenths of each other. Its a question of tires and track surface primarily.
    1
  215.  @HybridBoy0  You are not wrong, but Koenigsegg can do it as well. They just chose not to. Every car they make is already sold and paid for and the owners are not too keen on launching their cars, unfortunately. We must not forget that most people who car afford to buy cars of this price have no real interest in doing launches with them, or hardly even driving them for that matter.
    1
  216. Where did you see that? Sure, the M cars of this generation has quite the speedo error, probably intentional, but that much? Seems to much error to me. I would say its at least 280-285 normally.
    1
  217.  @AutofanTSI  Just hard to believe that much of a speedo error from the factory, with standard size wheels. That is old school italian errors, or dare I say VW. My own 335d is much more accurate. My only conclusion is that a previous owner have calibrated the speedo wrongly.
    1
  218.  DMD  Sorry, byt that car is defective. BMW museum car or not, that is just not the right times, far from it. Those are 320-340 hp in an M3 times, depending on which gearbox it has. My 360-370 hp 335d does 12.3 seconds 100-200 and it has a lot of heavy equipment (such as an electric foldable tow hitch) the M3 does not have. It also has a normal torque converter automatic which is heavier to spin and costs some power, on top of shifting slower than the DCT. Maybe BMW was a bit optimistic with their stated 420 hp from factory, but for sure no one which left the factory was under 400 hp. The fact that the car you saw was broken in some way brings the speedo also into question... Edit: I saw someone else had made a smiliar reply earlier.
    1
  219. If you tune it, it will be even faster, at least.
    1
  220. I got a 335d, 335i with N54 is better for tuning no doubt, more hp per $. But the diesel is better in other ways, and can still be pretty fast.
    1
  221.  @Arman-tm1kz  Yes, max torque figures are totally irrelevant. Its power and power only that matters. Torque myth is old as hell though, and still even many auto journalists quote it, who really should know better. So it probably wont go away any time soon.
    1
  222. Seems to be same as 0-250kmh, so 12.2. Not bad, I think.
    1
  223. 2 things: Its a large car. Secondly, question is if it still outputs 740hp at high speed?
    1
  224. Agree 100 percent
    1
  225.  @Josh-mw4bq  4wd transmission has greater losses for sure, but not this bad. Manual box is a minimal time loss between 100-200. It isnt very heavy compared to other cars. Acceleration and top speed are not opposites in any modern car with enough ratios in the gearbox, so I can only presume you are talking about aerodynamics, but that has minimal effect on the acceleration time between 100-200 kph for a modern road car. No, 390 hp or so is about right for this car.
    1
  226.  @lambertomainardi7933  Aero we can find from BMW spec sheet. Temperature we can see in the cars gauge cluster, its very normal (20.5 C). The other factors have a small influence in a 100-200 acceleration. Presumably the car works as it should, otherwise they should not quote power or even test it at all.
    1
  227. 320 or so, I would say. No chance more than 330, not enough power.
    1
  228. Its got pretty good aerodynamics for a turbo car, downside is a bit lacking in cooling.
    1
  229.  @DerTrollBr4mm3n  Yep.
    1
  230. Its the same in my Porsche Cayenne (same chassis) of similar age, they still have the key hole, even with keyless go. In the Porsche, you even get a small, fully plastic key to leave permanently inserted, since you still have to turn "something" in the key hole to start it....
    1
  231. If you can afford an x7 m60i, surely fuel is the least of your problems?
    1
  232.  @bikeomatic8005  Some 30% more than your m50d, probably.
    1
  233. Most customers loved it, I think...
    1
  234.  @claudiuclincu9114  That would be the general gist, I think.
    1
  235.  @jutjub22  I know, and indeed you are correct, thats why I wrote "in isolation". You only need the horsepower number to make a really good calculation, whereas the oft quoted max torque figure says just about nothing about acceleration.
    1
  236.  @Duskconqueror  theoretically true yes, but no vehicle would be produced with such dumb gearing and slim powerband.
    1
  237.  @maiwandsamiri8832  its a function of their limited, most often, fixed gearing and because of that fact, they dont make their claimed horsepower at high speed.
    1
  238. If you really appreciate what the V8 can do that not much else can, I agree. If you just need a BMW e9x with ample power, I think a 335i or even 335d is even better value in the same body styles.
    1
  239.  @lucasdamask  Yes the N54 can be a bit of a headache, but once the normal fixes are done it shouldnt be much worse than the S65 I would think. 335i with N55 was also availible if one is so inclined... Myself I have a 335d... But I think running it with a lot of power on track is a recipe for disaster, havent seen anyone do is succesfully. Still, if one is satisfied with almost stock M3 performance, I think it can hold up reasonably even on track. In normal driving, it is of course much more reliable than all the petrol engines as far as I am aware.
    1
  240.  @lucasdamask  Yeah, naturally it depends on the relative prices and so on. I always assume one makes all the mods oneself. Just a default assumption since thats what I do, but thats not always the case of course. My 335d is getting ridiculously expensive even though I have modified almost everything myself, but I am a weirdo that wanted a 335d more than any other car (Yes, even more than a brand new M3/M5/M8 for example.), it wasnt about price at all for me, it just does things that I need that the other cars cant do. I payed about 25k for my 335d, but it was probably the only one in the world with that spec, so to me it was worth it. Resell value wasnt a consideration since I will never sell it. Cheers.
    1
  241.  @matthewconnor6817  Yeah, but thats not a hybrid with quite a bit of EV range though, is it? Because thats the point. Apples and oranges.
    1
  242. Top speed reached here is exactly like the max possible with original gearing, but maybe thats just a coincidence?
    1
  243. Maybe the Golf is lighter and has lower drivetrain losses? But it certainly doesnt seem like all of 440hp, that I agree on.
    1
  244. This one has legitimate uses at least, so its not unnecessary in that regard.
    1
  245. Who knows about top speed, but 340-350 should be possible in theory with 650hp. Of course, the rear wing and the other changed aero stuff compared to a stock m3 might slow it down quite a bit.
    1
  246. Think about towing the rated 3500kg up a very steep hill without even having to use the throttle that much. Pretty cool and not wasted in that case.
    1
  247.  @robinw944  Sure, its easily good enough. This one was made to be the best, if you got money to splurge.
    1
  248.  @elsereno4  Its not, but 311 is nice. Not a suprise given the power of course, but still nice.
    1
  249. Getting to 285 kmh real speed didnt take long, well done!
    1
  250. Whats bad about the engine?
    1
  251. Turbos need more cooling, which means worse areo. Still the difference isnt very large at all. Its more that older cars without turbo were smaller, hence lower aero resistance to begin with. Of course, a turbo can heatsoak and lose power much more easily.
    1
  252.  @lemcakes32422  Yes? One should hope so. But how is that relevant to any of the posts here, including mine?
    1
  253. This modified version would win vs a standard trackhawk, if both are modified its all about whos got the biggest wallet, as usual.
    1
  254.  @thomasholdsworth2422  8.1? Which time in the video, I must have missed it.
    1
  255. Its a collectors car, most people dont drive these kind of special models much. But its a shame, yeah.
    1
  256. Why? I think its really good to see the real speed and acceleration.
    1
  257. Fantasy numbers sells tunes, thats the unfortunate reality, so I dont blame them.
    1
  258.  @asssiesgaming453  "Normal usage tolerances" are the key words, emphasis on "tolerances". In other words, this use falls well within specifications, and does not constitute abuse.
    1
  259.  @migsy1717  2.5 to 3? The testing times I have, says about 1 second? Which is not perfectly the same of course, but reasonably in the same ballpark. For this kind of quick comparison, it is similar enough I think. Where did you get the 2.5-3 seconds number, the ones I got is about 7.3 for the Golf, and 8.4 For the F430 from 100-200kph.
    1
  260. Should be a little bit faster than that, even at stock power. Probably something was slightly wrong with yours, unfortunately.
    1
  261. In this case its a bit excused since its a collectors car.
    1
  262.  @Smzxe  Yeah but he was speculating about max speed without any limiter, as I understood it.
    1
  263.  @jimboTTT  I could do the math, its not that hard. Problem is we dont have accurate data of all the factors, and I am not fully sure I trust the Cd number posted by Tesla. I dont really trust those numbers by any manufacturer these days, seems to have become a bit of marketing, just like nnurburgring lap times. Anyway, from the track video of the Plaid, even with its much better thermals than earlier model S version, it seems almost certain it will hit a thermal limit on power before it can reach its true, drag limited top speed, so you are quite right. People dont realise how thermally stressfull it really is to do a true top speed run, it is minute or so of full power...
    1
  264. ​​​ @PauloFernandesfitness Not really, not even BMW themselves of the same generation. My non-M of the same age has a normal error reading. This was a conscious calibration for the M models exclusively, most likely. And who can blame them, it certainly would look cool to most customers that wouldnt bother checking the real speed, which is almost every one of them.
    1
  265.  @dougie8010  Exactly, which is why they thought they could get away with it. And they did. Many older cars, especially italian supercars are even worse though, and by a lot. In modern times, various Golf Gtis etc are also quite a lot worse as well.
    1
  266. How did you measure that, If I may ask?
    1
  267. Strange comparison....
    1
  268. It isnt slower than a standard 280, butnit has far from 420hp, thats for sure.
    1
  269.  @jareknowak8712  gearbox doesn make any big difference 100-200, which is where you can see the engine power. It just doesnt have 420hp. I doubt top speed is limited already at 250 by gearing.
    1
  270. What do you mean, there was no such thing going on in this entire video? I watched the video two times and dont see anything unusual at all. The needle behaves perfectly as normal. Are you confusing the shifting gears for in-gear rev variance?
    1
  271.  @webfreakz  It just a normal rev drop from shifting gear, specifically upshifting from the examples you gave. Do you hear the sound of the engine changes and the orange number in the bottom right of the digital gauge changes from 4 to 5, and later from 5 to 6. Thats the current gear number. Nothing unusual at all.
    1
  272.  @DrunkNeltey  No way is that what you are seeing. You got something else confused for it. Most likely to me gear change and bumps in the road.
    1
  273.  @Wreck-Gar  Still dont see anything but normal bumps in the road and normal engine mapping/power variance. No ICE engine is perfectly linear, dont see anything out of the ordinary.
    1
  274. Secondly, the E60 might have better aerodynamics than the F90, it certainly did compare to the F10. Thirdly, the speedometer on the F90 is bang on, whilst the speedometer on the E60 is very optimistic, with about 10% error it seems. All these things add up.
    1
  275. Factory tuned, TRD skunk works.
    1
  276. Wasnt there a Gpower 700 or something like that based on this car?
    1
  277.  @xidropkillzx3246  I got 500hp in my cayenne (factory stock), and for sure it could have at least double (1000) if that was possible without any drivability issues at all, it is very heavy and stable. I have actually done 281kmh (175mph) gps verified in it. Not bad for a stock 2500kg brick.
    1
  278.  @s4mple279  Because no real 310 hp, unfortunately.
    1
  279. Not so sure about that, top speed reached here is about right for such a big, tall car. Also, the acceleration tapers off in a natural way. Cant be many more kmh to go if it is indeed limited.
    1
  280.  @Doggepe  Dont know how distracting it would be compared to everything else, but I supposed that would be an argument. Still, a 1 Hz update rate as most vehicles featuring digital reaout got now, is just an insult.
    1
  281.  @stubones  True, but I think e60 has lower drag, that is something to consider as well.
    1
  282.  @yashma_52  Mind linking the top speed video, would be nice to see. Thanks.
    1
  283. You could pay bmw to get a 305kmh limiter from factory instead. But this one probably has a third party remap.
    1
  284. Paper tuning
    1
  285. Just a tiny bit slower than My old cayenne Turbo 500hp. This shows what a more modern gearbox, and a drive system with lower drag can achieve (This doesnt have the "terrain-focused" extra low gear that the older platform Touareg/cayenne do. Becuse of this, it might also be a bit lighter, maybe? Still, as I said, just a tiny bit slower. Not bad.
    1
  286.  @HVN8R  You are right, but it did do 322 km/h GPS (dragy).
    1
  287.  @Alex-hv3ir  600hp aside, Power to weight is what determines acceleration, broadly, until you are getting into speeds with very high aerodynamic drag for your power level.
    1
  288.  @jedenszesc  You are right of course, but hope dies last. If I can free just one soul from these 1940s motor journalists myths that still lives on, it will have been worth it. 🙂
    1
  289. Some sort of fuel savings/ev mode estimated range?
    1
  290. If "supercars" got 700hp, it is quite a bit faster than ~290-ish, I assure you. Unless its limited by software or gearing.
    1
  291. Dragy. This speedo is calibrated from factory for customers to be satisfied.
    1
  292. Its that way in many cars, but since the E series BMW M were pretty fast, it makes more of a difference. Also the M:s got more percentage error than the normal models...
    1
  293. Yeah, 118 degrees or so oil temp isnt that bad if you ask me.
    1
  294. They are surprisingly tall compared to a modern crossover, well surprising to me at least when I drove one and looked down on the volvo xc60 parked next to me.
    1
  295. Pretty common back then.
    1
  296.  @wildnshortz5213  Yeah, I agree.
    1
  297.  @asko___  You are not wrong, but it is enormously expensive doing this stuff, its not realistic for such a small volume manufacturer to be on par with a mass market one, unfortunately. No matter the price of the car. Software is hard.
    1
  298.  @cesteres  Both of which cost a lot of money. Which is not a realistic cost-benefit when you sell a handful of cars per year. Thats the economic reality.
    1
  299. It pobably will do 305, even if it seemed doubtful. My 335d e92 with only 350hp or so does 285.
    1
  300. Yeah cooling is a big problem I have heard when tracking, especially when tuned. Same with My 335 diesel, it gathers temperature very fast when using full throttle. Dont know if can stomach to watch the numbers it will get up to on my next nurburgring trip.
    1
  301. 118 degrees isnt that bad if you ask me.
    1
  302. Same as with any other high power car though.
    1
  303.  @TH-qq2lb  For sure, for normal roads more speed is not needed.
    1
  304.  @papa_pt  I very much agree with almost everything you said, except the fact that as long as the turbo is spooled up, the volume of the engine doesnt really matter for power area, no matter what displacement the engine has. And it certainly is spooled up between shift on this car. It is more likely the drivetrain losses and turbo and shifting lag costing time here. Still dont think its the advertised 440hp though, even at peak.
    1
  305.  @xIcarus227  I am sorry for being unclear in my post, I can see you put quite a bit of time in this reply, and since I already knew the the things you wrote, I apologize to take up your time. What I meant in my post was that it might be possible to decouple it even further "upstream" than most cars do, so to say, in the DCT gearbox itself for example. Of course, even if that might be possibIe I dont really believe that is the answer, and that the other explanations are more likely. I have edited the post you replied to avoid further misunderstandings of what I meant. Yes, almost every car these days has some kind of "on demand" clutch system in their 4wd/AWD system it seems like. That is why the distinction seems a bit outdated according to me. Cheers and thanks again.
    1
  306.  @thomasholdsworth2422  Drivetrain loss isnt that big these days in most cars. 500hp seems very unlikely during this test.
    1
  307.  @chiel-  I am sure it is, but dynotesting can differ quite a lot because of for example: How Different brands of dyno calculate power. Different calibration of the dyno. How the measuring is done (Time for sweep or static for example) And how the dyno operator chooses settings. As an example, it is very possible to make a true 500hp turbocharged car show anywhere between 300-600hp depending on the above.
    1
  308.  @chiel-  Yes I do think its a bit slow for over 500hp. Nothing too dramatic but a little bit. He is spinning in 4th gear with AWD? Sounds incredible, how did he manage that, has he disconnected or modified the drivetrain software?
    1
  309.  @nvl2691  380hp would suffice, but factory stock 100% except cams? Not sure about that. But if you got cams, surely one has other mods, however small, as well? Those can make a big difference in top speed.
    1
  310.  @VB0120-u4z  power loss of more then 10٪ is not normal because of mechanical wear, unless its way above 300 000 km, but maybe thats what you meant. Chassis wear is something else entirely. In any case, if your engine has lost 10% or more power, something is enough out of spec to be considered broken, not just worn. Splitting hairs maybe but there is a difference. But as I said, maybe broken was what you meant.
    1
  311.  @VB0120-u4z  Yes, I know. It all depends in the definition of "broken" I suppose. For me, out of spec = broken. But that is looking at it from a pure physical working perspective. (Design specification)
    1
  312.  @blastaway1784  Nah, there are tools and ways to find were the broken parts are. Could be as another guy said, just clogged injectors or something simple like that. Its doable, have done it myself with a Porsche that was missing about 100hp. Fixed some vacuum and boost leaks on hoses, and cleaned everything. +100hp and more or less restored power from new. 20 years ago wasnt that long ago, Maybe you mean 50 years ago or more? Because 10% power difference between engines hasnt been a thing since.... I dont know, but 1950s? earlier than that probably. Now 10 hp difference is another matter, and is possible but that isnt 10% on a 340hp engine.
    1
  313.  @ENERGYCORP  I dont know, depends on how you look at it. If it has the same power as it should have since new, its not very good, but its conceivable given the gearing and the maybe not too good aero.
    1
  314. My old cayenne only had 8kmh, maybe its a Porsche calibration thing?
    1
  315. Why though? If you can find grip, more revs is faster on this engine. Didnt see much struggling for grip in this video?
    1
  316.  @flaviokart16  Exactly, thats why I said I cant see it struggling for grip, which is the only performance reason to short shift for nearly every car out there. Shifting for "max torque" is slower, not faster in almost every car out there. Best acceleration is had at max average power between shifts, torque really is a red herring, albeit a persistent misconception. So, thats why he shouldnt short shift in this case, it would have been much slower. Cheers. What he can do for top speed is either gearing the car up so 5th gives a higher speed per rpm, or gearing it down so 6th will give a lower speednper rpm and placing it better in the powerband.
    1
  317. More like: Popular opinion.
    1
  318. ​ @TheEryk03 Do you mean "quick" or fast? Because its on par with other cars of similar weight and power, right? So....?
    1
  319.  @jareknowak8712  Power curve is more useful I feel.
    1
  320.  @unrealeck  that could maybe account for a 10hp difference. In a turboed car such as this, it should have more consistent power compared to most engines. No, the 420hp is just a dream number, as usual with many tuned cars.
    1
  321.  @mustafa-kemal3499  No, that was the numbers on the GPS app on the smartphone, look again.
    1
  322. Probably not any that would matter for speed.
    1
  323.  @shad0w275  No country has a speed limit even close to 200km/h, as far as I know. And at lower speeds, it is on par with what is normally expected. So it still wouldnt make sense for avoiding fines, compared to a normal 3 series or other cars. Someone (likely BMW themselves) have coded a larger than normal error at just speeds above 200 km/h, but normal error below it. Or maybe I misunderstood what you were trying to say.
    1
  324.  @keving.2983  According to when sport auto tested it in the windtunnel, The GTS actually got better drag numbers than the standard M3, believe it or not.
    1
  325.  @shad0w275  Dont know why my reply to you disappeared, but here goes again: What I meant what is that the "error" is likely intentional and programmed by BMW themselves, to make the customer happier about his fast car. Its not unheard of, many other cars and motorcycles do the same, Golf GTI being one of the best known ones, which often shows almost 220km/h already at 200 km/h real speed. Many M3 and M5 of this age got almost as big of an error. I find a malfunction very unlikely, considering how the speedometer works, and the results of other similar cars.
    1
  326.  @paulshi5974  Indeed they got other programming from the F series, and the G series is as you say, more or less bang on. I think G series uses its GPS for correction.
    1
  327.  @HustlerTrickipedia  No it doesnt. You might be thinking of the "unlimited" parts. Which as you can tell from the name, has no fixed speed limit.
    1
  328. Youre not wrong but its pretty cool to se how far you can take a cardboard box with performance, and have it still look more or less stock. I like it.
    1
  329. I dont think so considering the 100-200 time. 260hp is enough for those times pretty easily in this car I should think. Its not very heavy.
    1
  330. Doesnt the launch control do that though? Build boost I mean. If it doesnt, what use is it?
    1
  331.  @caominh2874  Should be a countdown in the car then, that shows when it has reached full allowable boost. Bit of an oversight. Or maybe there is? I Havent driven one of these cars.
    1
  332. Not in a 2700kg car with big transmission losses as this one got, it probably cant...
    1
  333. Eh, no harm in doing that really. Its meant to be used after all.
    1
  334. It could have done even more than 260 on gps, considering the acceleration still going on. 265, even 270 might be possible on an ideal day.
    1
  335.  @trader2473  Well, there you go. I stand corrected, even more was possible it seems. Of course I dont think we know the conditions of those different tests, one might have had a headwind, the other one a tailwind, which can make a big difference. Still, good info.
    1
  336. You only get confused if you dont know how dyno runs in europe are done. I would suggest its up to the watcher to educate themselves in this case, most euro watchers know the standard already.
    1
  337.  @papa_pt  Sure, that 90% may well be true, but thats because they are most often made in the US, where RWHP is the norm.
    1
  338. They dont I guess. But not as big of an issue in EU as US.
    1
  339.  @The_Noticer.  Mostly oil quality and regularity of high load driving, I think. Fuel quality might be a factor, but hard for me to see how that can affect intake manifold build up. So, I think its mostly the first 2.
    1
  340.  @The_Noticer.  That is true, its been so long since I ran a car with EGR active that I forgot about that factor a little bit. Still, question is how big that factor is compared to the oil vapor. 25k km is actually very doable, and more than that if you got good oil and very good driving cycle. Many cars from this time period ran 30-40k kilometers between oil changes. For sure my M135 showed a very long interval on its service meter when I had it. It works surprisingly well if you drive the car briskly on autobahn every day. If you on the other hand live in a cold climate and do short runs at low speed city driving, 10k km oil change interval is too much. Were are you located? I doubt resale value is too much affected by carbon buildup woes, probably most people dont even know about it, rather other market factors seems more likely to me.
    1
  341. @MarcTrump No, its not anything special at all, I agree. Though It was 277kmh as seen on the GPS. A tuned GTI can do it, but that is a bit besides the point. It will take longer to get to that speed, unless its got quite a lot of horsepower itself. Top speed over 250-260 is academic to almost everyone, thats why it really doesnt matter much. Its like stating which car is the fastest in reverse gear or which supercar can fit the heaviest load on its roof. Its just numbers on a paper, since almost no one will use it. Thats why this car "Only" doing 280-ish isnt a big deal, the intended customers dont care.
    1
  342. They probably edited out a bit, but its not far from what could be possible, yeah.
    1
  343. Torque deosnt accelerate cars unfortunately, power do. So its nothing special in that regard. Nice having pretty good power while not reving much when you are towing a heavy trailer, though.
    1
  344. Souped up diesel BMW 1 series, perhaps.
    1
  345. Yep, sure seems like it.
    1
  346.  @lambertomainardi7933  No, its called simple math. Acceleration is directly proportional to power/weight. From the video we can see the acceleration, and the weight can be found in a spec sheet. Now we can easily calculate the missing factor; power. Many learn it in school, nothing supernatural about it, I assure you.
    1
  347.  @lambertomainardi7933  Not precisely of course, but within 10-15hp margin of error is possible to calculate from the video. Saying it had 505hp is therefore easily falsifiable. Check out other autotopnl videos, a lot of them have similar comments. Wishful power numbers are as old as cars itself. Because it sells tuning kits.
    1
  348.  @lemcakes32422  No, not really. Especially not considering the factors that this car was made for.
    1
  349.  @lemcakes32422  No you didnt, not when it was as I said above.
    1
  350.  @lemcakes32422  I have said it two times before above, please read the post properly, as its written. Cars are judged on what they are made for. This is an elementary fact when judging cars. Hence it certainly didnt get "smoked" when doing what is was built to do. Now, do you finally understand?
    1
  351.  @lemcakes32422  Touring and GT car classes, mostly. But neither street version has much in common with their full on competition version. No common impreza was made for rallying either. That was the competition versions job. Same with the E46 M3. Better to focus what they were truly made for: Having fun on the street, but in different ways. Seems pretty elementary to me, as said (again) above.
    1
  352.  @lemcakes32422  You havent looked very well then. E46 has won WTCC for example, as high as it goes for touring cars, and of course lot of lower classes. None of that is relevant to a road going version though, as said above. Race cars are race cars, not the street cars discussed here.
    1
  353.  @lemcakes32422  Its as much a M3 as any race car is, or any rally impreza is a street impreza. Perhaps you dont realise what a true competition car is? They often dont share a bolt with the street version. Perhaps base engine block, and the roof body panel, if you are lucky... but even that is not very common at the top levels of motorsport. Thats how things work. Anyway, wholly irrelevant as said above. You have never seen a rally spec impreza racing a rally or race spec BMW. Never. Which meams its street cars we are discussing, just as it always was. Which was my point from post #1. Both cars are great at what they are meant for, your strange comparison makes no sense if you know anything about cars beyond an extreme surface level. Its akin to calling an F1 car slow compared to a stock honda accord because the F1 car got stuck in the gravel in the parking lot, whereas the Accord with its higher ground clearance, did not.
    1
  354.  @lemcakes32422  Thats what I said about how it works, dude.... its right there in the post. I notice a total lack of adressing what I said, not only in that post, but since the start. Get back to me when you are serious. It seems you are not.
    1
  355. Bigger Wheels would lower the error, not increase. Maybe they changed the gearing or something, the speedo is way more off than normal.
    1
  356. Try doing high speed in windy conditions in pretty much any car, it will whistle quite a bit if the wind hits the car at some angles.
    1
  357. Its not all that uncommon at all really, certainly among older cars. Its for "customer satisfaction", for sure.
    1
  358. Maybe, but if one knows the road a bit or have a good view it should be possible. Just keep the revs up, its not any worse powerband than a 2 stroke motorcycle or a many diesels after all.
    1
  359.  @CarsandChris  They somewhat did tune the fifth gear to the engines potential, yes. But not fully. It could no doubt do quite a bit higher speed with another, suitable ratio or another gear. Yes, I am sure everyone knows that it reaches the top speed in fifth, would be very strange if it could do it in sixth with such an enormous step between it and fifth. A shorter sixth gear would give quite a bit more than 2 mph more, at least 6 mph and possibly 10 or a bit more would be easily acheivable. This is borne out from watching the acceleration of the car in the video, as well as the fact that by pure maths and numers a 530-ish hp car should do 300 kmh quite comfortably unless it got an atypical amount of drag for its frontal area. I dont agree it was struggling, as in there is no more speed to be had. It is closing in on its top speed for sure, but as I said earlier, with that amount of acceleration seen in this video there is often at least 6 or so mph left until one reaches the true aerodynamic limited top speed. In the end its mostly academic, just about no one ever pushes their car to their "true" top speed in the end. This fifth gear is a good compromise that is still more than sufficient for even the longest straights on any race track in the world.
    1
  360.  @MrFlazz99  Yes, this in indeed very common since the 1980s in American cars. If I remember correctly the first Dodge Viper for example was geared ridiculously high, with a theoretical top speed of close to 480kmh in top gear, and that was with way lower revs than this Mustang engine as well. So none of this is new in any way. Having a very tall top gear or two highest gears is not a problem at all for the American market where just about no one goes above 250kmh regularly, certainly not back in the 1980-1990s. Since then, it has found its way into more and more cars, with a lot of cars now having very tall top gears. My Porsche cayenne for example is also geared for a theoretical top speed of way more than 400kmh, just as this Mustang. What is a little bit surprising is that they wouldnt make the fifth gear juuuust a little bit taller, but they probably felt the tradeoff in acceleration wasnt worth it for a bit more top speed that as good as no one ever uses. Fair enough, hard to argue with that. Regarding too low gearing for max top speed, It is often found in diesels, just as your clio, since they have more limited revs. My old BMW 123d could hit the revlimiter in top gear already at stock power, and with just a little bit of tuning it was very easy to do so. Funnily enough, the 120d model with less power had higher gearing, and the 118d with less power again had even higher gearing than that. This was probably because BMW assume the customers buying the stronger engines prioritized acceleration vs fuel economy. Cheers.
    1
  361. No.
    1
  362. 8,82 seconds.
    1
  363. Eeeeh? Where did you find those numbers, the ones I have seen looks like the Tesla is waay slower? Aside from the annoying exhaust, which I am sure you can choose to have normal-sounding, why isnt it good as a daily driver?
    1
  364.  @ThenameisOskar  Yeah, thats the numbers I have seen as well. Way slower than this Golf if that is the case.
    1
  365. According to wind tunnel tests made by sport auto, the GTS has less drag even with the wing. Probably because the front splitter diverts more air over the car than the standard model, which is smoother than the underside. If you want a datapoint of the non M cars, my 335d e92 shows 300-301 or so at 285 km/h, so more "normal" speedo error. Though just as the e9x M and e6x M, many performance models of other brands have optimistic speedos for "customer satisfation".
    1
  366. 320 sounds better I guess....
    1
  367.  @ron999  Almost entirely correct post, only thing a bit incorrect is its just the power that matters, not torque.
    1
  368. 320 to 285 is childs play error compared to older supercars cough countach cough and motorcycles. But this seems much even for a M3 e92.. perhaps someone has edited it a bit... Anyway, my E92 (same as this chassis) 335d shows 301-302 at 285 real km/h. Not 320 like this one. Mine has a more normal error.
    1
  369. Its possible, but then your Mazda would have been way lighter and with lower drivetrain losses.
    1
  370. Par for the course for older bikes, even with standard gearing. Even older ones were even worse than this.
    1
  371.  @oppoh739  Not singling you out, that is very good, but every 20kmh more top speed is like night and day in how much horsepower it takes though. 220kmh on the speedo, 150hp is easily enough in a smaller car. 250, then you need upwards of 200hp. And thats not taking into account real speed vs speedometer speed. But yes, VAG has been good with horsepower the last years. They also have a lot of speedometer error in some cars, such as Golf V and VI. Dont know about the newer ones, the one in this video seems "ok" at least. If we are talking real (GPS) speeds of 270-280 and more, that is when it really starts to use quite a lot of horsepower, a bit over 300 horsepower for most cars.
    1
  372. 262 real speed? Hard to read but I think so. Still not too bad... For a comparison, My Porsche Cayenne with the same generation chassis (but shorter), did 281 with a claimed 500hp. Seems a little bit too much of a difference for the same power, even if the Audi has a bit more drag.., but I guess Porsche maybe underrated the car a bit? Or maybe the Audi catches more wind than I thought in comparison.
    1
  373. ​ @austincaley5007 Acceleration at those speeds is identical for all comparable sports bikes. Any differences are more down to the test itself, not the bike.
    1
  374. Not really.
    1
  375. Your conclusion seem to be flawed... no evidence for numbers to be higher because of those factors you mention.
    1
  376.  @frozenhellcat  You are correct in that they read wheel horsepower. What you are incorrect in, is the correction factor which is different for every dyno manufacturer and also customizable by the dyno operator. As good as every dyno in europe outputs data in the form of corrected crank horsepower numbers, these numbers in this video are no different. There are also different ways to dyno cars, with sweeps of varying lengths and steady state. Hence, one cant say if the "real" power is more or less. Its, presumably, the best guess of the dyno owner. And the power itself varies as I described above.
    1
  377. 304 kmh on gps isnt bad for such a short run.
    1
  378. No way closer to 5 seconds, I did 4.9 in my M135i with its skinny tires on a not very grippy road at all.
    1
  379. Not sure he got to drive it, from the looks of it unfortunately. Understandable given the price I guess.
    1
  380. Same engine as normal m3, just a bit souped up. But the normal faults can be easily fixed within the budget if you got this kind of car. Its a collectors one, after all.
    1
  381. Its a common VAG thing. But almost no brand is innocent of this.
    1
  382. Yeah, but they state speedo speed for a lot of videos. Makes for more youtube friendly numbers.
    1
  383. At 200+ kph, it should be usable I think? I dont think its possible to have to much power, if the engine itself can take it.
    1
  384.  @guthrie1181  But isnt power per gear and/or speed commonplace when you tune to higher power these days? Feels like I have heard of it for at least 20 years. That should lessen much of the problem except increased turbo lag one would think. But if you only use the stock ECU with stock power delivery parameters the yeah, I can see the problem but if you have a 560hp MPS, wouldnt you use something better or at least some piggyback ECU?
    1
  385. 13.15s probably according to their google doc.
    1
  386. No, this is to much. Normal 3 series show 208 or 209 kph when real speed is 200 kph. This is a lot more.
    1
  387.  @pequod1  Exactly, thats almost always the case.
    1
  388. Maybe upwards of a real 330+ with taller gearing mod.
    1
  389. I think it is pretty long lasting. But it of course depends on what you mean by long lasting. I am sure that it will do more miles than everyone buying them will ever do in them.
    1
  390. Dream car.... maybe one day...
    1
  391. Not too sure about that, depends on the tuning.
    1
  392.  @evilashflash  Yeah its possible if the power drops really sharply, but that is pretty uncommon for most gas engines, I guess a tuned N54 might be an exception. Be aware though, that when most people say this, its just a myth that they have convinced themselves of, so you unfortunately got lumped into the same category, rightly or wrongly.
    1
  393.  @evilashflash  Yep, I do. But its uncommon for most cars and also have to do with the tune one runs, of course, some are stronger than others lower in the revrange and vice versa. But its good you found the fastest way, I also shift my car about 300-400 rpm lower than factory max because of the dynocurve after tuning, but its a diesel. Factory stock, its fastest to pull mine all the way to the revlimiter. Cheers.
    1
  394. Agree, maybe 340hp? If that.
    1
  395.  @1bbnnkk  They are not. Dragy is close to real time.
    1
  396.  @riccardozamprogno5824  Seems likely.
    1
  397. Yepp, 0-100 is the point of this car. Jesus man... Nobody cares about 0-100 since the 1970s... No offence but how outdated are you really?
    1
  398.  @papugenas  Track driving. Thats what these cars are made for. Speed interval about 80-280 kph. 0-100 was a useful metric for testing engine power back in the days when it took normal cars at least 15 seconds or so, which was in the 1970s and earlier. Thats why it was used. But it is limited by tire grip for decades now. I have never heard of anyone driving 0-100 with full throttle in normal trafic regularly, have you? Better hope that one always is the first car at the stoplights when it turns green, or one will run into the back of the car in front, because most people dont use much power when pulling away. No, track driving is where its at for those who like to drive, and then you are usually way above 100kph, as I said earlier. Not that it matters much, cars at this price point rarely sees the outdoors anyway, they are locked up in a multi millionaires garage. A pity, but thats just life.
    1
  399.  @urosb82  sorry man, but I doubt it, when looking at real/gps speed. Thats only marginally slower than a 130i with another 30 hp... Maybe its possible but...
    1
  400.  @Lukas_Witte  Somewhat true, but that is because it has more horsepower elsewhere. If the power curves would be identical, the displacement of the engine wouldnt matter.
    1
  401. Yes
    1
  402. Its a limiter..
    1
  403. A lot of aerodynamic drag maybe.
    1
  404.  @zlover7777  "Aman" wasnt quoting you, so maybe he wasnt referring to your comment?
    1
  405. It is actually possible, if we are talking about gauge cluster speed. They are quite optimistic, probably at least 20kmh at that speed.
    1
  406. Yes, seems a bit slow. My E92 335d with only about 350hp does 285 km/h.
    1
  407. About 350hp more like.
    1
  408. Too bad no dragy so we could see the real speed. Ah well.
    1
  409. If this is the car from the google doc, its a 2001.
    1
  410. No, 600 ;P
    1
  411. Its subjective. Europeans drive way faster and further on average in "high performance" cars, and the exhaust roar makes you tired. German cars are built for the german market as first priority. Most of those cars are "daily drivers", a garage filled with different cars is uncommon. So it all comes down what you use the car for, the car culture is totally different. If you can afford a 100k car, you can afford a 1k exhaust if you want , so for me its an easy choice. I actually got a diesel instead of a gas car by choice, as it was comparably quieter at high speed.
    1
  412. E92 is very lucky to go 300. This still has more to give a 307, as can be seen in the video.
    1
  413. Do you have a PWG or EWG car? That makes a difference...
    1
  414.  @JerainJezza  Yes, I know. Had a PWG car myself a few years ago, but that didnt matter much because I was planning to change everything anyway. Long story short, I sold it. A shame, really ticks a lot of boxes, but it just wasnt for me, couldnt make friends with the steering. Cant get a legal tow hitch either, as far as I know. I bought an older car again instead, which I still have.
    1
  415. Well, wheelie control, to be exact. And even so, it still got lots of electronic trickery to prevent wheelies. Useless with shorter first few gears on a sports bike.
    1
  416. Does the one in the video have a k04?
    1
  417.  @basti2002xxx  Yes, but did they have any hardware differences? I did not understand that to be the case from the video. They said it was a closeout special, which one would think means its just a normal GTI with an Abt tune and some badges.
    1
  418.  @Saif0412  Absolutely it is, dont think anyone doubts that.
    1
  419. No way. Almost same engine, after all.
    1
  420. Some cars have them even with manual transmission. I guess they use them for something else.
    1
  421.  @rekaarnes  It is quite a bit, but as he write: Certainly not unheard of. Golf 6 GTI being perhaps one of the most famous examples.
    1
  422. Maybe something like 150km?
    1
  423. Seems to be same as 0-250kmh, as you said, so 12.2. Not bad, I think.
    1
  424.  @lbnewell23  Well, its neither good nor bad, its par for the course of "modern" cars with just a smidge under 200hp. There were those 30 years ago as well. But as a small estate back then it had more power than most, yes. Yep, the wind whistle can come from multiple sources, but its not that it isnt "the pinnacle of arodynamics" in this case, since we see that the car hasnt got any protruding stuff, which wouldnt be factory fitment anyway. I am pretty sure its just the doors not sealing correctly. A majority of cars suffer from this at higher speeds. It doesnt affect top speed. Not busting your balls here with this post, honestly. Hope it doesnt come across like that. Just clarifying some details. Cheers.
    1
  425.  keralistyrus4241  Did your read the all of the posts above or are you indeed, as I wrongly assume the OP did, talking about this specific example? If so, how can you tell?
    1
  426.  keralistyrus4241  Ok. You might want to read the other posts above, they are pretty relevant to the discussion. Also, dont know what you mean by "E61 term", thats the name for the bodystyle and got nothing to do with the engine, or do you mean something else?
    1
  427.  keralistyrus4241  I recommend you read the posts above again, specifically my second one, it seems you are replying to something that was a misunderstanding in the first place, and thus isnt applicable in this discussion really. Cheers mate.
    1
  428. Thats the job of the same platform Golf R.
    1
  429.  @elsereno4  The color is for attention of manufacturer, essentially a marketing trick to look eyecatching in commercials/magazines. The rest of the stuff serves a functional purpose. Artificial Pops and bangs, in contrast, is for attention of the customer/driver of the car, and has no other function.
    1
  430. ​​ @Tafa-Mapa  They ones replying to you are mostly, if not completely, correct. The core of their argument is broadly correct, one can say, if not all the details. Hers the gist of how it is: The only thing that matters for vehicle (or any physical object) propulsion is (horse)power. Power means rate of energy conversion, which is what is happening. And yes, I am a physicist that also have decades of experience in vehicle design. Not that its needed, the formulas are quite simple and can be easily understood by almost anyone, if they looked into it. I recommemd doing so to anyone, learning how things truly work is both fun and educational. And can help one make your own vehicle better, if one builds or tunes for themselves. CHeers mate.
    1
  431.  @TheSuperProgrammerLB  102, ok, I see, that probably would do the trick. Any plans for additional injection like water/meth or will you be satisfied with e85 do you think?
    1
  432.  @TheSuperProgrammerLB  Yeah, e85 does most of what WMI does anyway, unless one really wants to chase those last few ponies. Good luck. Cheers.
    1
  433.  @cliffburtonnkardesiyim3725  You could increase just the power, not the torque by limiting it electronically. Also you I am sure the gearbox can handle the heat of a few drags with 800hp. But it is still a very heavy car, not ideal.
    1
  434. @ What is the purpose of that? Never been needed in any car I have heard of.
    1
  435. Sure, but tuned cars are a different kettle of fish.
    1
  436.  @ricardoquaresma1803  It doesnt, but the in the case of the car in this video, which is what he was talking about, it can easily pull more gearing for top speed. Easy enough to see just by looking at the acceleration, never mind just the pure physics of power vs drag forces.
    1
  437. They dont, but what is true is E60 series BMW have better aerodynamic drag than newer ones.
    1
  438. Yep, its pretty cool. I did that this last weekend, but in fifth gear, since I got a six speed gearbox.
    1
  439.  @satsumagt5284  I am sure you are correct, but I actually did it in another car. Should have been more clear about that, my bad.
    1