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

  1. Whats bad about the engine?
    1
  2. 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
  3.  @lemcakes32422  Yes? One should hope so. But how is that relevant to any of the posts here, including mine?
    1
  4. This modified version would win vs a standard trackhawk, if both are modified its all about whos got the biggest wallet, as usual.
    1
  5.  @thomasholdsworth2422  8.1? Which time in the video, I must have missed it.
    1
  6. Its a collectors car, most people dont drive these kind of special models much. But its a shame, yeah.
    1
  7. Why? I think its really good to see the real speed and acceleration.
    1
  8. Fantasy numbers sells tunes, thats the unfortunate reality, so I dont blame them.
    1
  9.  @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
  10.  @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
  11. Should be a little bit faster than that, even at stock power. Probably something was slightly wrong with yours, unfortunately.
    1
  12. In this case its a bit excused since its a collectors car.
    1
  13.  @Smzxe  Yeah but he was speculating about max speed without any limiter, as I understood it.
    1
  14.  @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
  15. ​​​ @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
  16.  @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
  17. How did you measure that, If I may ask?
    1
  18. Strange comparison....
    1
  19. It isnt slower than a standard 280, butnit has far from 420hp, thats for sure.
    1
  20.  @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
  21. 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
  22.  @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
  23.  @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
  24.  @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
  25. 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
  26. Factory tuned, TRD skunk works.
    1
  27. Wasnt there a Gpower 700 or something like that based on this car?
    1
  28.  @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
  29.  @s4mple279  Because no real 310 hp, unfortunately.
    1
  30. 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
  31.  @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
  32.  @stubones  True, but I think e60 has lower drag, that is something to consider as well.
    1
  33.  @yashma_52  Mind linking the top speed video, would be nice to see. Thanks.
    1
  34. You could pay bmw to get a 305kmh limiter from factory instead. But this one probably has a third party remap.
    1
  35. Paper tuning
    1
  36. 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
  37.  @HVN8R  You are right, but it did do 322 km/h GPS (dragy).
    1
  38.  @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
  39.  @volvome7magic  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
  40. Some sort of fuel savings/ev mode estimated range?
    1
  41. If "supercars" got 700hp, it is quite a bit faster than ~290-ish, I assure you. Unless its limited by software or gearing.
    1
  42. Dragy. This speedo is calibrated from factory for customers to be satisfied.
    1
  43. 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
  44. Yeah, 118 degrees or so oil temp isnt that bad if you ask me.
    1
  45. 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
  46. Pretty common back then.
    1
  47.  @wildnshortz5213  Yeah, I agree.
    1
  48.  @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
  49.  @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
  50. It pobably will do 305, even if it seemed doubtful. My 335d e92 with only 350hp or so does 285.
    1