Have a tiff...with BMW V-12's and V-12's that have FI

[burntrice087]

I have got to say i love BMW's,Nice interiors..good prices on most of them...But what irks me the most is there V-12 engine used in thier upper class 7-series. In my opinion a V-12 should at least be cranking out 500BHP, Not a measly 430HP that most N/A V8's could have. Rolls-Royce also seems to have that problem too...Huge ass saloons with 400HP V-12's does not look appetizing on my credit card bills when the 300K+ should buy a freaking 500-600HP beast. Now time to rant on forced inductioned(sp) V-12's. While Mercedes does a decent job on Turbocharging thier V-12's(AMG just finished on a 604HP Twin-turbocharged V-12) I believe that any Engine above 6 cylinders should be all about the motor..Supercharging or Turbocharging in my opinion should be reserved for small I-4's or 6-shooters that cant push alot of HP.


Wow sorry for the long rant but i needed to get it out lol

[jncodave]

yeah its pretty ridiculus that some of those cars cant even push out 500 hp. forced induction is a good way to make cheap hp though on any engine. the ferrari enzo is a v12 and when it came out it cost $650,000 and you had to have owned both an f40 and f50 to even be considered for the enzo if im not mistaken, now youre lucky to get your hands on one for less than $2,000,000. on the other hand, there is a V8 corvette tuned by lingenfelter that is twin turbo and pushing out about 850 hp, does 0-60 in 1.98 seconds which is faster than the enzo and will keep up in top speed too. the availability of this car is about the same if not easier to get than an enzo, plus it costs about $165,000, much less than an enzo. my point is, you are paying for the name and the exclusivity of the car. sorry for ranting.

[KC Ron Carter]

You do know who makes the Rolls Royce engines?

You do know that BMW bought the name and sold the factory to VW?

If you are convinced a GM car that decreases in value as it is driven is a better deal than a Ferrari that is selling for a 400% increase, you may need help.

You have never driven a Ferrari, or the issues would be easier to understand. Performance can be documented, but is only understood from the drivers seat.

On the other hand, many manufactures add decals and design to a test standard, then sell to a less knowledgable customer.

I have not purchased a new car in 20 years, and unless there is a big change, may never need a new car. My personal opinion on the newer designs is not good. My 1977 BMW Calloway Turbo, bought for 8k, is still a daily driver and my 635csi is still an attention point at any car show I attend, even though it is never entered.

Here is Dyno run on my Tow Mule.
It has a top speed in excess of the 165mph I have seen.
I do have more performance in the basement for a bigger pop.






Later,

[jncodave]

If you are convinced a GM car that decreases in value as it is driven is a better deal than a Ferrari that is selling for a 400% increase, you may need help.


yes i do think it is a better deal to pay $165,000 for a car that has better performance than one for $2,000,000. and no i have never driven a Ferrari or a Corvette. but i have seen test figures for both of these cars on numerous occasions, and going by that, the corvette's performance is up to par with the Enzo's for a much nicer pricetag

[Osca777]

For the record the new rolls royce phantom has over 450 hp. What's more important, torque is at 550 lbs/ft. Knowing rr, these numbers are most likely conservative and more then "adaquete". After all 0-60 is about 5 and a half seconds, enought to smoke a mustang gt. These cars are meant to be driven in and their price reflects their features and the rr image. The people who are actually buying these cars are not going to be impressed with a 600hp "beast", they would opt for a smooth, quiet ride, considering that they probobly have an enzo in the garage allready.