6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

Discussion in '2002 BMW M3 CSL Concept' started by vwgolf2, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    After all money does make the world go round, doesn't it? Still, M3 is in my opinion still the top performer for the price.
     
  2. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    i hate to burst your bubble, for 2002 that's true.
    but I believe Jaguar, and even Audi will be creating cars with equal or better performance, plus both Jag and Audi are cheaper than BMW.
    the M3, is worth what BMW is asking for it yes, but it may begin to lose its value in the short future when competition hits.
    let's face it, bmw 330 is a dieing model now.
    not saying it stinks, but it's not what it use to be...
     
  3. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    Sorry, but there are no Audis or Jaguars which could rival a M3 for the price - not in my country anyway. Seems that BMW is expensive where you live.
     
  4. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    the x-type and the A4 is cheaper than the M3.
    the x-type R, hitting the roads of UK in a couple months, is set to be faster than the M3, at $1,000 less.
     
  5. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    I still don't see how a X-type Jaguar or an Audi A4 rivals a M3 ???
    Which particular models are you talking about? Send me the info on the A4 and the X-type you are referring to, then I'll check if they are even available around here and I'll do a price comparison. This could be interesting, checking just how expensive Jag is in my country.
     
  6. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    Why does anyone compare ONLY engines? What about weight or brakes? For instance Z06 has only 350mm b disks and Strassenversion has 450mm. And so on. Lets start comparing those factors too. Then it will be something more than just a dumb HP to HP comperance.
     
  7. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    Jaguars are cheaper than BMWs.. they're amount of standard options sort of inflate their price.
    Jaguar X-Type R is hitting the streets of the UK soon.
    Will be around 47k Euros, 49K US.
    330HP engine, virtually matching the M3, with a 3.0 Supercharged engine.
    a 3.2 Variant to be producent by Arden is set to outperform it.
     
  8. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    when the X-Type first came out... the Jaguar X-Type, the A4, and the 330i were tested.
    the 330i, at a test price of $2,500 dollars more, being the most expensive beated the X-Type by .1 seconds in the 0-60 department, with minimal difference. The X-Type was claimed to have the better handling on curves (AWD system). The A4, was far cheaper than both, giving respectable numbers.
    The X-Type since then had some minor power upgrade surpassing the 330, from 231 to 246 in some European countries.
    the 2003 Jaguar 3.0L engine has 246 not 231.
    My statement is this, the S-Type 4.2L kills the 540i.
    The S-Type R being cheaper than the M5 surpasses it,lets do this again
    again

    Comparison:

    M3 Sedan: $56,220
    M5 Sedan: $72,620
    S-Type R: $62,400
    X-Type: $43,695
    X-Type R: $53,975 (35k pounds starting for those in the UK)
    330i: $42,960
    Z3 Road: $44,220

    all cars are fully loaded with navigation, winter, premium packages premium sound, etc.

    Jaguar 4.2 L 400 HP / 408 ft lbs of torque 0-60: 5.3 (5.1 manual)
    BMW M5 5.0 L 394 HP / 368 ft lbs of torque 0-60: 4.8
    BMW M3 3.2 L 333 HP / 262 ft lbs of torque 0-60: 4.8
    Jaguar 3.0 L 231 HP / 209 ft lbs of torque 0-60: 7.3 (7.1 manual)
    X R 3.0 L 330 HP / 300 ft lbs of torque 0-60: 4.8 (4.9 auto)
    330i 3.0 L 225 HP / 214 ft lbs of torque 0-60: 7.0
    Z3 Rd 3.0 L 225 HP / 214 ft lbs of torque 0-60: 6.0

    so you said Jaguars expensive? look and compare before you talk
    again, the Beemer only beats the Jag in 0-60
    Jaguar has more HP, and Torque....
    Jaguars are now giving you more value for you bucks.
    To note, that the Jaguar wheel base are from 2-4" longer than the BMW competitor making the cars heavier than its German counterparts.
    again, BMW better watch up, cause there is a competitor that's going to fly pass them.
     
  9. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    You are right, the S-Type R looks like a good buy when compared to the M5. We don't have a X-Type R on our roads yet. Has Jag upgraded the handling of the X-Type recently? The report I read didn't feel too optimistic about it's handling when compared against the 330i. I still like the X-Type - must make a plan to go and test drive one soon.
     
  10. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    x-type got a major revamp in 2003... with the AWD system now more in sync it's handling outbeats its German competitor on curves, at least for the 330i. the M3 beats the standard X-Type, yes, but the X-Type R is planned to compete with it.
    most reports have the problem filled 2001 model review.
    2001 was its first year and there have been a lot of minor bugs. especially about noise, switching times....
    the X-Type will have the CATS system, a system being an improvement from the ABS using electronic signaling.
    has Car and Driver said:
    you may think it's a Ford, but once you drive it (3.0L of course) you'll come to realize it's more a Jaguar then what you think. It's doesn't have the same level of luxury as the XJ, but for the price, you're getting your money worth.
     
  11. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    Do you know what stock means? because you most definetly don't know what stock means.

    Angus
     
  12. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    xj220 is stock you retard
     
  13. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    with stock parts, i meant new stock Jaguar factory parts installed in my old car... therefore it's still considered stock, because the parts being added or stocked.
     
  14. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    If the parts did not come on the particular car from the factory when it was new it is not stock. You can't take a motor from a 99 mustang and install it in a 95 mustang and consider it stock.
     
  15. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    even if they were performance parts from the time?
    even if i upgraded to the TWR version, or simply put, the R version, which was available at the time, through factory, but available in Europe. The car is not stock, but the parts all are all stock.
    Perhaps the car isn't stock, but it's a Stocked Jaguar.
    you're right, the 95 mustang isn't stock, but the mustang is stocked.
    you buy a V6 mustang for example, they all come with single exhaust.
    but you can bring it to the dealer, and they can put a double exhaust, and that's considered stock, because the parts are stocked out.
    I also was talking about the parts in the same year as well.
    I can see why you can considered the car is stocked, but i was referring to a car with stocked Jaguar parts.
     
  16. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    "not uncommon. But beginning to be impressive, especially in a market of mostly in the 200 hp for 6s.
    If i redo my '86 Jaguar 4.2 L6 engine, with higher quality (meaning newer or performance parts) I've seen it go over 500 hp stock.
    Then you also got the super 3.5L in the XJ220, which to my knowledge there isn't a more powerful nor faster 6, please correct me if i'm wrong."

    Observe, you said that if you redo your 86' jag, and put some performance parts in it, it would easily make 500hp stock. Judging by that statement you have no idea what stock means.

    Of course the XJ220 is stock, no one said that it isn't.

    Angus
     
  17. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    i meant jaguar performance parts, sorry for the confusion...
    stock, referring to Jaguar performance parts, new i meant parts that are used in newer Jaguars...
    when i referred to stock, i was referring to factory Jaguar parts.
    so you're right the car wouldn't be considered a stock car.
    there were stocked 400hp sedans at that time.
    that's the Jaguar XJS TWR in 1984.
    the XJ sedan got the same power upgrade version in late 1986, with a little bit more power, making it closer to 500

    instead of saying 500hp stock, i'm should have said 500hp pure Jaguar.
    that better?

    I also could have said i was going to upgrade my car to performance of a stocked Jaguar XJ TWR.
    sorry for the confusion.
     
  18. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    Agreed.

    Angus
     
  19. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    Hyunday in the Euro1 concept produced 380 Hp from an inline 4, that does not mean that its engine is better than m3's one...
    The engine of the M3 is the gr8test i think...It's a normally aspirated one, and of course its and engine that lasts , like MB engines...
     
  20. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP


    JaguarX, plz #$%# up with ur jag praise, Jags are for old man and they look like shit, and they can't make sportcars, damn
     
  21. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    People compare these things because it is a good indication of how the engine was designed and built based on performance. But I guess someone like you couldnt make that connection.

    Not to say that power to weight ratio isnt important....as a matter of fact Shelby was one of the first to take advantage of this concept by putting a big block in the AC ACE...aka the Cobra. Its not rocket science. He was even gonna use a Corvette at first but GM wouldnt sponsor any motors so he buddied up with Lee Iacoca and went with Ford...the rest is history.
     
  22. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    Horsepower per litre has nothing to do with thermaldynamic efficiency. The thermodynamic efficiency of an engine is dependant upon the compression ratio. Horsepower per litre is dependant on the mean piston velocity at peak RPM, the mean effective pressure, and the stroke.
     
  23. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    I wouldnt call it stock (and I dont think anyone else would) if you 'redo' the block and started over to get 500hp.
     
  24. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    yes it was already understood...
    however it'll be compared to perforamce of the TWR version of the time.
     
  25. Re: 6 Cylinder Producing 350HP

    Jags are for old men?
    many Jaguars are for people that want a more reliable car...
    because we all know BMWs are not.
    BMW advantage is it has manual transmissions.
    And good ones too.
    But comparing engine to engine... Jaguar makes BMW look underpowered, especially the more bigger engines.
    you match a BMW with an automatic, with a Jaguar, the BMW makes the Jaguar look like a racing car in comparison.
    put a manual transmission in a Jaguar, against a BMW, and now we're talking about performance.
    Jaguar has super cars... BMW does not.
    BMW "sport cars" like the Z8 is twice expensive as the XKR.
    Jaguar history, present and future shows they can make sports cars.
    XKR-R, the XJR-15, XJR-9, XJ220, XKE, XK180, F-Type, XJ 6.0
    saying Jaguar look dumb, is the same as saying BMW's are nothing mroe than boxes on wheels. Jaguar is and always will be known for making the most "sexiest" cars.
    then tell me a BMW that can go against the XKR-Trans Am... and then you can talk.
     

Share This Page