Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > Vehicle Specific > European Imports
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-10-2006, 01:22 PM   #31
born to drive
CF Newbie
 
born to drive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 26
i like both, as an m sport owner i like the out and out sportiness of the these cars. to me the amg versions are just faster (in some cases ridiculously fast ) versions of a rather softer, less sporty marque. and fair dues to them aswell

to me it would depend on what your requirements for a vehicle are to which version you go for

as a consumer its just great to have the choice from both manufacturers
__________________
born to drive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2006, 01:42 AM   #32
StiMan
CF Retired Post Whore
 
StiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Posts: 2,964
Ugg... this has got to be the like 39871938749827th thread with this same topic.
__________________
John

StiMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 03:16 AM   #33
AstandardM
CF Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by What?
I prefer AMG's engines. M-engines are overrated.

That new 6.3 liter V8 by AMG which makes 500+ hp and has a 7,200 redline excites me more than the M5's V10. It has more power, more torque, and it's lighter.

M5's V10 is overrated.

Overall, I prefer M cars.
I dont understand 100 hp per litre naturally aspirated is very rare how is the m engines overated and amg not when they use forced induction to duplicate the same thing. the e39 was the only recent m engine that dont fall in cat with this theory. 5.0 400bhp every fast merc has forced inductions take the turbo and superchargers from mb and u got a moderately fast luxury car youd have to take a plug from the m to reduce perf. its all natural that 2 me is astounding naturally aspirated engines always being compard to forced induction engines that says it all.
AstandardM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 09:38 AM   #34
What
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Costa Nocha
Posts: 652
Quote:
Originally Posted by AstandardM
I dont understand 100 hp per litre naturally aspirated is very rare how is the m engines overated and amg not when they use forced induction to duplicate the same thing. the e39 was the only recent m engine that dont fall in cat with this theory. 5.0 400bhp every fast merc has forced inductions take the turbo and superchargers from mb and u got a moderately fast luxury car youd have to take a plug from the m to reduce perf. its all natural that 2 me is astounding naturally aspirated engines always being compard to forced induction engines that says it all.

The 6.3 liter Merc engine that I was celebrating is a NA engine dude. This engine will go into a majority of their recent AMG vehicles. The 6.3 liter is physically smaller, lighter, more powerful, and more torquey than any BMW M engine. Shut it.
What is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2007, 01:55 PM   #35
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by AstandardM
I dont understand 100 hp per litre naturally aspirated is very rare how is the m engines overated and amg not when they use forced induction to duplicate the same thing. the e39 was the only recent m engine that dont fall in cat with this theory. 5.0 400bhp every fast merc has forced inductions take the turbo and superchargers from mb and u got a moderately fast luxury car youd have to take a plug from the m to reduce perf. its all natural that 2 me is astounding naturally aspirated engines always being compard to forced induction engines that says it all.

Hp/liter is ricer math and pretty much useless
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2007, 02:14 AM   #36
elchango36
WWJCD
 
elchango36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Last year @ SIUC
Posts: 2,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enthusiast
Hp/liter is ricer math and pretty much useless
of course you would say something like that.
__________________
elchango36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2007, 07:11 PM   #37
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
I care more about hp density and power to weight ratio.
The 5.0 BMW V10 makes 500 hp or 100hp per liter and only like 384ft/lbs, but the motor is still bigger and heavier than the LS7 which is 7.0 and make 500/500.

The only time i think hp/liter matters even a little is when you are racing in a displacement restricted class.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2007, 11:42 PM   #38
windsonian
Dodger65's weirdo
 
windsonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Below
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enthusiast
.... only like 384ft/lbs, .
forgive my ignorance, but what's a ft/lb ??? how far the car can travel divided by its mass on 1 tank of gas??
__________________
You can only be young once. But you can always be immature.
windsonian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2007, 01:14 AM   #39
What
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Costa Nocha
Posts: 652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enthusiast
The only time i think hp/liter matters even a little is when you are racing in a displacement restricted class.

Some engineers use it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by windsonian
forgive my ignorance, but what's a ft/lb ??? how far the car can travel divided by its mass on 1 tank of gas??

He's not as smart as us...lb-ft Enthusiast...or radius X Force..
What is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2007, 01:28 AM   #40
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Ive heard both foot pounds and pound feet. I even asked a local engine builder/head porter and he told me either could be used.
I guess thanks for correcting me though.
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2007, 02:00 AM   #41
What
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Costa Nocha
Posts: 652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enthusiast
Ive heard both foot pounds and pound feet. I even asked a local engine builder/head porter and he told me either could be used.
I guess thanks for correcting me though.

You still don't get it. This isn't division...so it doesn't matter which order you say it. Your builder was correct but you'd rather ask someone at a school or a book about Physics equations...or me.

Your original thought of ft/lb was "feet-per-pound". You wrote it wrong. Didn't you say you were super-smart?

Last edited by What : 08-01-2007 at 02:17 AM.
What is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2007, 04:40 AM   #42
windsonian
Dodger65's weirdo
 
windsonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Below
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by What
You still don't get it. This isn't division...so it doesn't matter which order you say it. Your builder was correct but you'd rather ask someone at a school or a book about Physics equations...or me.

Your original thought of ft/lb was "feet-per-pound". You wrote it wrong. Didn't you say you were super-smart?
thank you sir
__________________
You can only be young once. But you can always be immature.
windsonian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2007, 09:48 PM   #43
Enthusiast
VTEC LOL
 
Enthusiast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by What
You still don't get it. This isn't division...so it doesn't matter which order you say it. Your builder was correct but you'd rather ask someone at a school or a book about Physics equations...or me.

Your original thought of ft/lb was "feet-per-pound". You wrote it wrong. Didn't you say you were super-smart?
OH haha didnt even catch that. Thanks
__________________
Enthusiast is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.