11-18-2011, 09:46 AM | #23 |
Brigadier General
![]() ![]() 424
Rep 4,709
Posts |
So what do you think is going to be different in the production version? I'd imagine the side view cameras replaced with actual mirrors, smaller exhaust, no (big) front splitter, and maybe the fender vents going away.
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-18-2011, 09:49 AM | #24 | |
Lieutenant General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 1138
Rep 12,444
Posts |
Quote:
The E30 M3 wasn't as stiffly sprung as people might think, and it still retained limitations based on its chassis's origin. Its primary quality was its ability to remain balanced in corners to maximize speed and carry momentum. I'm not digging on the car—I still think it's one of the all time best collecters cars, but its legendary status garners too much hype that seems to be a product of people glorifying the past.
__________________
Past: '08 E92 335i|ZPP|ZSP|6AT
Past: '15 Mustang GT|401A|PP|6MT Current: '20 Shelby GT350|6MT Last edited by Year's_End; 11-18-2011 at 09:54 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-18-2011, 09:54 AM | #25 |
Lieutenant General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 1138
Rep 12,444
Posts |
Cannot unsee.
__________________
Past: '08 E92 335i|ZPP|ZSP|6AT
Past: '15 Mustang GT|401A|PP|6MT Current: '20 Shelby GT350|6MT |
Appreciate
0
|
11-18-2011, 10:10 AM | #26 | |
Banned
89
Rep 1,247
Posts
Drives: fat cars are still boats
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: compensating a fat car with horsepower is like giving an alcoholic cocaine to sober him up.
|
Quote:
In a way... yes. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-18-2011, 10:22 AM | #27 |
Lieutenant General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 1138
Rep 12,444
Posts |
"Good handling" can be achieved multiple ways. The E30 had a lot of slack and was slow and predictable at the limit. From the looks of things, this car doesn't look like it has much "slack" and will offer superior handling through typical sportscar meat-and-potato engineering (i.e. low center of gravity, stiff controlled suspension, neutral weight balance, etc).
__________________
Past: '08 E92 335i|ZPP|ZSP|6AT
Past: '15 Mustang GT|401A|PP|6MT Current: '20 Shelby GT350|6MT |
Appreciate
0
|
11-18-2011, 12:24 PM | #28 | ||
Banned
89
Rep 1,247
Posts
Drives: fat cars are still boats
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: compensating a fat car with horsepower is like giving an alcoholic cocaine to sober him up.
|
Quote:
"That the car can be very controllable during a slide. In other words, that you can be able to control precisely the weight distribution using the brake and gas, maximizing the joy out of a corner." The differences you are assuming that will exist are only the natural consequence of twenty years of distance between now and then. Quote:
Also, if you think about that agressive 1M's front fat flares you'll see that they kill the vehicle's aerodynamic and that's the reason why BMW try to compensate for using the so-called 'Air Curtain System' to channel the air around the front wheels, but it only helps slightly. The 1M drag coefficient (Cd) is 0.37 and the "air curtains" drop that by about 0.01 only. When you compare that figure to Subaru's Cd = 0.27 (a Prius is 0.25) you can clearly see how good its aerodynamic also is and without the need of any gadgets: This car is built with very neat engineering. Last edited by GoingTooFast; 11-18-2011 at 12:37 PM.. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
11-18-2011, 03:35 PM | #30 | |
Brigadier General
![]() 401
Rep 3,288
Posts |
Quote:
![]() But, this car looks good. And I hardly am moved by most Japanese cars, from a looks/style perspective. But if that is a Concept with the intention to build, I would consider owning that car.
__________________
![]() |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-18-2011, 03:39 PM | #31 |
Brigadier General
![]() 401
Rep 3,288
Posts |
Coincidentally, I also just read that the e90 had as good as Cd = 0.26.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automob...ag_coefficient
__________________
![]() |
Appreciate
0
|
11-18-2011, 03:56 PM | #32 | |
Major General
![]() ![]() ![]() 4463
Rep 9,160
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-19-2011, 08:30 AM | #34 |
Colonel
![]() 299
Rep 2,874
Posts |
It looks more like the Mitsubishi Eclipse than anything else.
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-19-2011, 10:29 AM | #35 | |
Banned
89
Rep 1,247
Posts
Drives: fat cars are still boats
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: compensating a fat car with horsepower is like giving an alcoholic cocaine to sober him up.
|
Quote:
![]() ![]() So, my conclusion is: there are two different engine specifications... the last one is more powerful. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-19-2011, 10:42 AM | #36 | |
Banned
89
Rep 1,247
Posts
Drives: fat cars are still boats
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: compensating a fat car with horsepower is like giving an alcoholic cocaine to sober him up.
|
Quote:
That figure is from its Toyota sibling but we can assume the same value for the Subaru base version (non STI). Apparently you can improve the aerodynamics even further with several factory upgrade parts. See Toyota FT86: ![]() ![]() |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-19-2011, 03:11 PM | #37 |
Savoir Faire
![]() 74
Rep 1,772
Posts |
Saw the BRZ STi concept and LA auto show. My god that thing is gorgeous in person.
__________________
Current: Alpine White F10 M5|H&R springs|12mm/10mm spacers|Eisenmann Race
Sold:Imola Yellow RS4-KW V3|MTM 10mm spacers|Hotchkis rear sway bar|APR Stage 1|Milltek Catless|RNS-E|Euro RS4 Flat bottom Steering Wheel Sold:E46 323i |
Appreciate
0
|
11-20-2011, 08:25 PM | #39 |
Banned
89
Rep 1,247
Posts
Drives: fat cars are still boats
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: compensating a fat car with horsepower is like giving an alcoholic cocaine to sober him up.
|
What I find most curious, despite the 1M being a bigger car than the Subaru, is that both keep the same proportion between overall length and wheelbase:
Subaru 4240/2570 (mm) = 1,65 BMW 1M 4380/2660 (mm) = 1,65 So, both have an equally short wheelbase... which in turn means that the tail of both cars will have the same will to step out. ![]() However, the 1M is a significantly taller car than the Subaru... 1420mm against 1285mm. It means that not only you seat significantly lower in the Subaru but also that the center of gravity is again very low and the aerodynamics improved. |
Appreciate
0
|
11-20-2011, 09:35 PM | #40 |
Colonel
![]() ![]() 68
Rep 2,352
Posts
Drives: IS 300
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Bradenton FL
|
Looks like a ugly poor mans LFA..
__________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Speed never killed anyone its very important to get that straight, Speed has never killed a soul. Suddenly becoming stationary thats what gets people." - Jeremy Clarkson |
Appreciate
0
|
11-20-2011, 10:14 PM | #41 | |
Lieutenant General
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 1138
Rep 12,444
Posts |
Quote:
I still stand by my statement which was that this is hardly anything more of a spiritual successor to the E30 M3 than many other cars of its variety. It's very much like the cars I listed earlier. The RX-8 seats four, has limited power, and an excellent chassis with dynamics superior to a majority of cars on the road, so wouldn't that make it a spiritual successor to the E30 in your case as well? "The differences you are assuming that will exist are only the natural consequence of twenty years of distance between now and then." There are plenty of cars like this with easily controllable cornering behaviors that have been made over the past two decades, does that make them spiritual successors to the E30 if this is the only criteria? I could go into why the 911 is so great, and makes so much sense to me, but that's for a day where I feel like writing a Great Wall of Text. As for the 1M's air curtains, I believe they're largely a matter of marketing and unique design. If they wanted to decrease the Cd by a significant amount, they would've employed an aerodynamically-optimized undertray with a real diffuser, and they would've decreased the amount of intake space up front. It's pretty obvious to see that the car isn't the most aerodynamic shape in the world.
__________________
Past: '08 E92 335i|ZPP|ZSP|6AT
Past: '15 Mustang GT|401A|PP|6MT Current: '20 Shelby GT350|6MT |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-21-2011, 04:35 AM | #42 |
Brigadier General
![]() ![]() 435
Rep 3,888
Posts |
Why the FT-86 could be a successor of the M3 E30 is because most of the car enthusiasts want a car LIKE the M3 E30: not very powerfull, but light and enough practical. Today such car does not exist (new). There is no more RX-8, S2000, the 1 Series M is still to heavy, the Cayman too expensive and the Lotus not very practical for daily drive. Other cars are turboed and FWD. I can't think of any other car that is similar to the M3 E30 other than the TOYOBARU. The other only rival of the FT-86 is the MX-5. Light and fun, but not that fast.
M3 E30/FT-86 Body: 2 doors + trunk/coupé Seats: 4/2+2 Engine: N/A ~ 2l 4 cylinders, ~ 200 PS Layout: front engine, rear drive Weight: ~ 1200 kg |
Appreciate
0
|
11-21-2011, 05:55 AM | #43 | |||
Banned
89
Rep 1,247
Posts
Drives: fat cars are still boats
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: compensating a fat car with horsepower is like giving an alcoholic cocaine to sober him up.
|
Quote:
As for your question... the answer is yes! All rwd front engined cars with easily controllable cornering behaviors are "spiritual successors to that E30's trait". ![]() Quote:
![]() Quote:
The amount of intake space up front is necessary to cool down the engine by means of bigger radiators. If you look closer you'll see that the 1M and the Z4 35is (which has the very same engine) have roughly the same amount of intake space up front because the famous double-kidney grille is much bigger on the Z4 than on the 1M. ![]() ![]() That's the reason why the drag coefficient of the Z4 35is isn't much better than that of the 1M, despite of the fact that the Z4 is significantly lower - Cd = 0.35! Just out of curiosity, the Subaru is even lower than the Z4, 1285mm against 1291mm!!! ![]() |
|||
Appreciate
0
|
11-21-2011, 09:05 AM | #44 | ||
Banned
89
Rep 1,247
Posts
Drives: fat cars are still boats
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: compensating a fat car with horsepower is like giving an alcoholic cocaine to sober him up.
|
Quote:
Quote:
1. The 1 Series M is still too heavy; 2. The Cayman too expensive; 3. Lotus not very practical for daily drive. The best summarized description yet. Last edited by GoingTooFast; 11-21-2011 at 09:13 AM.. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|