|
|
|
01-23-2013, 12:54 AM | #67 | |
Banned
72
Rep 2,934
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2013, 02:23 AM | #68 |
168
Rep 1,460
Posts |
Pav is correct as much as i really love the M3 it is by comparison to N54 powered cars SLOW, it has no real get up and go there is no aggression with the power delivery it feels just to smooooooth. Point A to point B it is a fast car BUT you cant beat a turbo car for the raw seat pushing performance.
WHY did BMW not fit the N54 into the E92 M3 i think they stuffed up it should have been an option it could have been the perfect M car. Maybe the next M3 will be the best, i guess we will have to hope the accountants have been locked in the toilet long enough for the engineers to do there magic. Don't get me wrong that little V8 is a gem it sounds like music @ 8000rpm + and seem to be very reliable, more so than the N54. If i eventually own one i will fit a supercharger and have the best sounding M3 ever with some GRUNT. We all know the six sounds like crap when you compare it with the M3 V8 |
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2013, 02:46 AM | #69 | |
Brigadier General
169
Rep 3,093
Posts |
Quote:
Here's my take on N54 vs S65. N54 is a rough, raw blonde that wants it hard but bitches and whines too much, and the S65 is the stunning brunette that's always consistent and classy. Reliability definitely goes to the V8. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2013, 02:53 AM | #70 | ||
Banned
72
Rep 2,934
Posts |
Quote:
And let's not forget only bald fat old farts drive m3's |
||
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2013, 03:17 AM | #71 |
Major General
401
Rep 9,156
Posts |
This is gold Edwin! So true
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2013, 03:33 AM | #72 | |
Banned
72
Rep 2,934
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2013, 03:56 AM | #73 |
Major
62
Rep 1,147
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2013, 05:54 AM | #74 | ||
Brigadier General
169
Rep 3,093
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|