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

  1.  @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
  2.  @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
  3.  @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
  4.  @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
  5.  @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
  6. Bigger Wheels would lower the error, not increase. Maybe they changed the gearing or something, the speedo is way more off than normal.
    1
  7. 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
  8. Its not all that uncommon at all really, certainly among older cars. Its for "customer satisfaction", for sure.
    1
  9. 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
  10.  @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
  11.  @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
  12. No.
    1
  13. 8,82 seconds.
    1
  14. 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
  15.  @ThenameisOskar  Yeah, thats the numbers I have seen as well. Way slower than this Golf if that is the case.
    1
  16. 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
  17. 320 sounds better I guess....
    1
  18.  @ron999  Almost entirely correct post, only thing a bit incorrect is its just the power that matters, not torque.
    1
  19. 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
  20. Its possible, but then your Mazda would have been way lighter and with lower drivetrain losses.
    1
  21. Par for the course for older bikes, even with standard gearing. Even older ones were even worse than this.
    1
  22.  @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
  23. 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
  24. ​ @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
  25. Not really.
    1
  26. Your conclusion seem to be flawed... no evidence for numbers to be higher because of those factors you mention.
    1
  27.  @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
  28. 304 kmh on gps isnt bad for such a short run.
    1
  29. 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
  30. Not sure he got to drive it, from the looks of it unfortunately. Understandable given the price I guess.
    1
  31. 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
  32. Its a common VAG thing. But almost no brand is innocent of this.
    1
  33. Yeah, but they state speedo speed for a lot of videos. Makes for more youtube friendly numbers.
    1
  34. 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
  35.  @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
  36. 13.15s probably according to their google doc.
    1
  37. 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
  38.  @pequod1  Exactly, thats almost always the case.
    1
  39. Maybe upwards of a real 330+ with taller gearing mod.
    1
  40. 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
  41. Dream car.... maybe one day...
    1
  42. Not too sure about that, depends on the tuning.
    1
  43.  @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
  44.  @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
  45. Agree, maybe 340hp? If that.
    1
  46.  @1bbnnkk  They are not. Dragy is close to real time.
    1
  47.  @riccardozamprogno5824  Seems likely.
    1
  48. 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
  49.  @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
  50.  @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