Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

just thought i'd share my underpants changing experiences with ya guys :)

in the last 2 weeks, i've been lucky enough to be in the presence of 2 R32 GTR's, a BMW E46 M3, and a BMW M5.

I guy i met on the forum came round to pick a CD up from my house last week, white R32 GTR. I've never actually been that close to one, i've only ever seen them driving on the road for a couple of seconds. Man, that car is really something right up close, damn it demands respect!!

While I was at Hampton BP, a Black R32 GTR pulls in (complete with hot chick in passenger seat :) ) I think you know what i was looking at more!! :D

Tonight, an awesome red M3 launches, and i mean LAUNCHES from the other side of the lights, passed me. That thing was singing like you wouldn't believe!!! I saw it on the other side of the lights and wound my window down all the way, hoping that the guy wasn't some rich old guy who couldn't drive. I was lucky, they guy took off big time and i've always heard about how u are hard pressed to find a better sounding car than the new M3, now i know why. It was incredible!!!! Then about 5 mins later a black M5 turns into the road i was on and blasts up the street.

Needless to say, i was quite delirous by the time i got home. Thank you bayside for thy bounty of awesome cars to cast thy eyes upon. :)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6975-biggup-bayside/
Share on other sites

Dunno...whats the kw rating of an M3 these days?? Actually, off to bmw site...here we go...

M3: 252kw @ 7900rpm (that is high!).. weight is 1525kg

When i pick up my skyline (177rwkw or around 230kw flywheel) I look foward to testing this. It would be a close one I think. When I chuck the Greddy B it should be easy.

Now next:

M5: 294kw @ 6600rpm... weight is up to 1790kg..

Ok, well that is pushing things...although there are plenty of skylines in this forum that would probably kick it to the kurb. You'd probably want 240kw or so to be comfortable... that extra 400kg or so in the M5 would really bring it down

Yes, well with a 2L GTS I'd be racing you in my old R31 :-)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6975-biggup-bayside/#findComment-105000
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, forgot these ones...0-100 times are similar between M3 and M5 actually..with M5 slower believe it or not.

Acceleration 0-100 km/h

M3: 5.2 sec

M5: 5.3 sec

Standard RB25DET is 6sec... so with a bit of work, yeah, I'd be putting my money on the skyline.

Of course this is stats only :D

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6975-biggup-bayside/#findComment-105007
Share on other sites

Obviously the 'line will rip an M3/5 to bits with a bit of work.... But for a NA 3.2 litre engine to produce 252kw is nothing short of amazing!

Its prolly the build quality that would own me. A black M3 with matching black leather interior, electric everthing.... EVERYTHING, a "standard" stereo that would put most maccas hangers to shame, 19 inch wheels (again "standard"), and the list goes on....

God I want one!!:uh-huh:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6975-biggup-bayside/#findComment-105062
Share on other sites

the 0 -100 times for the M3, M5 are very often misquoted. The 5.3 and 5.2 are used alot. But on "Top Gear" and independant timing found 3 sites, with 0 - 100 and 400m times. The M3 was 4.8 0 -100 across the 3 sites also on the "Top Gear" show. The M5 being a flat 5 seconds.

So 4.8 seconds is ur target for Skyline to beat an M3.

It is amazing that a 3.2 Ltr Straight Six can make 252kw, BMW just knows how to make a straight six, simply awesome engines. Put it this way:

3.2 Ltr Straight Six = 252 kw

5.7 Ltr V8 = 226 kw..... :confused: ....

well i think we can all quess how made that waste of space V8 ;):D

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6975-biggup-bayside/#findComment-105113
Share on other sites

I have driven many M3's and two M5's and I can assure you they go hard. They are a very impressive car. One of a few cars that you can hop into and drive fast straight off. Very well balanced. I would think that my GTR would kick them but they are still very impressive cars.

I saw a white 32 gtr in Brighton Saturday week ago along beach road about 9-9.30 when I was driving mine. Wonder if it is the same car.

Mick.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6975-biggup-bayside/#findComment-105214
Share on other sites

I am sure they are very nice cars... different class of vehicle, more luxury sport. Probably much smoother power as well.

Although for $141,000 for the M3, and $195,000 for the M5 I can't imagine too many people rushing to trade in their skyline to buy one :D

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6975-biggup-bayside/#findComment-105328
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Latest Posts

    • Input shaft bearing. They all do it. There is always rollover noise in Nissan boxes - particularly the big box. Don't worry about it unless it gets really growly.
    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
×
×
  • Create New...