Chesterfield Posted April 17, 2008 Posted April 17, 2008 I couldnt be bothered to go from kg to pounds but made the jump from MM to inches just fine ok its 35.3lb/sq ft and 40.5lb/sq ft. happy.
Stew Posted April 17, 2008 Posted April 17, 2008 Not really! I'm a metric boy! :P Actually I can work both as I'm in the oil industry so working with both!
steve_b Posted April 17, 2008 Posted April 17, 2008 H5 Feel a little compelled to stand up for BMW's Do not think they are idiots really and are quite clever. If you compare a 335i Coupe at 1600Kg with a M3 coupe at 1655Kg then you can see why they changed things like a carbon roof to save extra weight. If not would be even heavier and the 335i would get closer to their marque brand. 335i is 0-60 in 5.5 and the M3 is 4.8, with the new double clutch 7 speed box it brings that down to 4.6 even adding more weight (even increases fuel economy by 1.1mpg compare to old box). Do not think they are stupid but damn clever and if you looked into the construction process for the carbon roof and the new box you might appreciate more. Then you have idiots like BMW try and turn a 3 series into a 'lightweight' version by still trimming things in leather but putting carbon fibre roofs on cars.
captint Posted April 17, 2008 Posted April 17, 2008 Marc, shall we hit the Lotus stand next year?! Mate I would, but if I got that close to Gordon, I fear Claret would be spilt
Kev946 Posted April 17, 2008 Author Posted April 17, 2008 Chris - I think you will find a car is 3 dimensional... PS: It's worth noting that the Cossie used a standard production car shell. 1300 kg was a normal car in those days not a light weight sports coupe. Anyway...
Guest prescience Posted April 17, 2008 Posted April 17, 2008 Chris - I think you will find a car is 3 dimensional... You can't honestly argue that its about the same size because it's higher Or perhaps the popemobile is bigger than a cadillac
Digsy Posted April 17, 2008 Posted April 17, 2008 Chris - I think you will find a car is 3 dimensional... You can't honestly argue that its about the same size because it's higher Or perhaps the popemobile is bigger than a cadillac Oh I think some folk would argue black was white on here........
captint Posted April 17, 2008 Posted April 17, 2008 Chris - I think you will find a car is 3 dimensional... You can't honestly argue that its about the same size because it's higher Or perhaps the popemobile is bigger than a cadillac Oh I think some folk would argue black was white on here........ Or would they
Sarnie Posted April 17, 2008 Posted April 17, 2008 Chris - I think you will find a car is 3 dimensional... You can't honestly argue that its about the same size because it's higher Or perhaps the popemobile is bigger than a cadillac Oh I think some folk would argue black was white on here........
Kev946 Posted April 18, 2008 Author Posted April 18, 2008 Chris - I think you will find a car is 3 dimensional... You can't honestly argue that its about the same size because it's higher Or perhaps the popemobile is bigger than a cadillac Just never heard anyone comparing weight based on square footage of a 3 dimensional object. Clearly the GT-R is a flag ship car to riase the Nissan badge image and from comments on here, it's doing just that, but how can you defend 1740kg, even though you guys are doing a good job. If you talk to the Lotus guys many have removed their sound system to save weight...
captint Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 Chris - I think you will find a car is 3 dimensional... You can't honestly argue that its about the same size because it's higher Or perhaps the popemobile is bigger than a cadillac Just never heard anyone comparing weight based on square footage of a 3 dimensional object. Clearly the GT-R is a flag ship car to riase the Nissan badge image and from comments on here, it's doing just that, but how can you defend 1740kg, even though you guys are doing a good job. If you talk to the Lotus guys many have removed their sound system to save weight... Ironically, a few trips down the gym and a few less pies would have paid off more
Guest prescience Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 Chris - I think you will find a car is 3 dimensional... You can't honestly argue that its about the same size because it's higher Or perhaps the popemobile is bigger than a cadillac Just never heard anyone comparing weight based on square footage of a 3 dimensional object. Clearly the GT-R is a flag ship car to riase the Nissan badge image and from comments on here, it's doing just that, but how can you defend 1740kg, even though you guys are doing a good job. If you talk to the Lotus guys many have removed their sound system to save weight... I agree it's a big weight but there is a big motor but why do Lotus guys remove the stereo system, surely they'd be better driving the car by remote control to save the weight of the driver You know Kev, you are quite similar to Valerio in lots of ways
lomoto Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 Just read through all these posts's if you want a Lotus buy a Lotus, no good arguing which is better..I would never buy one because I dont like 'em end of discussion !!
Sarnie Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 Chris - I think you will find a car is 3 dimensional... You can't honestly argue that its about the same size because it's higher Or perhaps the popemobile is bigger than a cadillac Just never heard anyone comparing weight based on square footage of a 3 dimensional object. Clearly the GT-R is a flag ship car to riase the Nissan badge image and from comments on here, it's doing just that, but how can you defend 1740kg, even though you guys are doing a good job. If you talk to the Lotus guys many have removed their sound system to save weight... You know Kev, you are quite similar to Valerio in lots of ways Ooooh. Now thats harsh. On Val.
H5 Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 H5Feel a little compelled to stand up for BMW's Do not think they are idiots really and are quite clever. If you compare a 335i Coupe at 1600Kg with a M3 coupe at 1655Kg then you can see why they changed things like a carbon roof to save extra weight. If not would be even heavier and the 335i would get closer to their marque brand. 335i is 0-60 in 5.5 and the M3 is 4.8, with the new double clutch 7 speed box it brings that down to 4.6 even adding more weight (even increases fuel economy by 1.1mpg compare to old box). Do not think they are stupid but damn clever and if you looked into the construction process for the carbon roof and the new box you might appreciate more. Then you have idiots like BMW try and turn a 3 series into a 'lightweight' version by still trimming things in leather but putting carbon fibre roofs on cars. Sorry bud, but do you have a degree in missing the point?? My point had nothing to do with gearboxes or the 335i. Is it not the difference between the old M3 and the old M3 CSL, that they went with a carbon fibre roof, but still had nicely stitched door cards etc? That was my point, that it is all a bit of flashy showy stuff for the typical BMW market. You do not see racing cars with heavily stitched door cards and fiddly little buttons in the middle to control the woman telling you where to go. If they want a track focussed car, then ditch that stuff.
Kev946 Posted April 18, 2008 Author Posted April 18, 2008 I think most of you guys are missing the point. No one is comparing a Lotus with a GT-R, forget that, 2 totally different cars. The point is simply that the manufacturers keep adding weight, then adding power, and one is cancelling out the other. I remember a Top Gear programme a while back where they took the oringial Mk1 Golf GTi v's a Mk4 I think it was, and did a standing start. The Mk1 left the Mk4 standing and others standing. See this vid, says it all really If the GT-R is supposed to be a performance car why does it weigh sooo much. I'm nt suggesting for one minute it should weigh the same as a Lotus, but it's something like 200 kg's at least overweight. This argument equally applies to other so called performance cars, such as the latest M3 and M5 for example. Both have a stupid "for show" carbon roof whih I don't expect makes anything more than a couple of kg difference. Anyway, what is clear to me is you guys don't care about weight, and personally I do. Can I not have an oppion here? Maybe now I can start to understand why Valerio left...
H5 Posted April 18, 2008 Posted April 18, 2008 I care about weight Kev, that's why the Lotus is there and is a great car. However, for daily driving that weight can bring added extra enjoyment, such as by big sub in the boot. I agree with what you say, but the title of the thread does indicate a very direct comparison.
Recommended Posts