07-04-2007, 06:31 PM | #45 |
Lieutenant General
343
Rep 16,407
Posts |
No offense but "how many HP per liter" is what ricers driving Honda's worry about. If the motor puts out 400-500 HP (or more), gets good gas mileage and performs like an ape hyped up on crack, I could care less if it took 5, 6 or 7 liters to do it.
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 06:36 PM | #46 |
Second Lieutenant
32
Rep 221
Posts |
this car is pure sex.. will command some serious respect on the roads.. get some DPE RO5 variant S with no rivites in brushed aluminum in 20" and its done! simple as that..
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 06:47 PM | #47 |
Major General
2280
Rep 5,364
Posts |
good points. I hope it has good mileage, I really do!
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 06:49 PM | #48 |
Lieutenant General
343
Rep 16,407
Posts |
Ditto. It's a nice looking car and I will seriously look at it when it comes time to trade in the E90. My wife loved the M5 until she saw the gas mileage. If GM can get a 500+HP motor to get 27-28 MPG on the highway, I don't understand why BMW can't/didn't, whatever.
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 06:55 PM | #49 | |
Major General
2280
Rep 5,364
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 07:14 PM | #50 |
Second Lieutenant
56
Rep 271
Posts |
um, isn't it a 6.3 liter (dunno why you guys say 6.2) . this thing will beat the isf with 50+ hp and over 100+ torque
I'm not too familiar with MB but aren't all their modern cars automatic or step and the SLR isn't that auto also? |
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 07:25 PM | #52 |
Second Lieutenant
32
Rep 221
Posts |
dude if its really a low 60k car then your damn right im getting it.. ill start my amg fund now.. i love the idea of having a monster sedan with some eye appeal like this.
IMO this blows away any 3 series bmw can put out sorry |
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 07:32 PM | #53 | |
Lieutenant General
343
Rep 16,407
Posts |
Quote:
I have a 6.0 liter in motor my C6 that puts out 475+ HP, gets 30 MPG on the highway and will smoke just about anything it comes up against in a straight line or on a track. What good is "better technology" if your still staring at another car's ass end and while you're stopping to get gas I'm driving for another 150-200 miles?? Sorry, I'm not troubled by that. Hell, I wish the more "technologically advanced" motor in my 330i got that good a MPG. Last edited by Carnage; 07-04-2007 at 08:12 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 07:35 PM | #54 | |
Second Lieutenant
32
Rep 221
Posts |
Quote:
i feel you man.. this is way better then any 3 series out or coming out. looks power sex appeal. pressence on the road.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 10:27 PM | #55 |
Brigadier General
407
Rep 3,893
Posts |
lovin it!
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 11:08 PM | #57 |
Lieutenant General
343
Rep 16,407
Posts |
Something tells me there's more to come. Lots of action in the performance cars section these days. I sure hope BMW doesn't pull an E46 M3 and think that it can just release the car and not change anything for 6-7 years.
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 11:15 PM | #58 | |
Expert Road Racer
60
Rep 1,329
Posts |
Quote:
C63: 450+, GTR: 480+, CTS-V: 550+ (600?) M3 420 |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 11:20 PM | #59 |
Lieutenant General
343
Rep 16,407
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-04-2007, 11:22 PM | #60 |
Expert Road Racer
60
Rep 1,329
Posts |
What are you talking about?
Just because they are bigger in displacement does not mean they are bigger is mass! For instance, the 5.0L V10 in an M5 weighs 529 lbs, while the 7.0L V8 in a Corvette Z06 weighs 490 lbs. The 3.0L in my 335i weighs 419 lbs, while a 6.0L LS2 weighs 440 (yes more but not by much for double the displacement!) |
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 01:58 AM | #61 |
New Member
0
Rep 23
Posts |
LOL... I thought the same thing thing as i was looking through the pics. It would be funny if MB has transformer technology and will be putting it in their cars to beat BMW.
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|