Maser Quattroporte kills M5 & B5

  • Click here to become an Official Member of BMW Club Malaysia Download Form
Redd,

No need to get your panties all twisted up trying to discredit the documented merits of 50/50 weight distribution :p .

Bottom line is that 50/50 weight distribution is ONE of the ideal design criterias of chassis and automobile engineering. No one ever said one without the other. In fact the merits of the principle applies not when the car is static (obviously useless) but when the car is in motion. A balance chassis reduces the extremeties during weight transfers, of braking, turn-ins, acceleration and lateral tyre loading. For e.g. front biased cars say with a static 70/30 distribution will have even higher distribution to the front, under heavy braking and turn ins caused by the weight transfer. Not good for physical tyre loading on the front and even impacts how much brake force can be applied to the rear wheels before the tyre and tarmac loose traction. I am sure you know all this right?


Bottom line is a well designed automobile will have all the ideal characteristics if possible. Hence there are many exotics which cost more than what you and I can afford with a base platform design of mid engine layout configuration. Some of them are Italian made as well you know :). Easier to accept the merits of good weight distribution now?
 
e46f, im no bimmer expert, but are all bmws 50/50 distribution? how is the 50/50 measured? with driver (what size) and with or without fluids+fuel.

all that affects weight distri i guess, so just wanna know what's the german std for that 50/50 measurement.

redd
 
Originally posted by Redd@Nov 26 2005, 05:27 PM
e46f, im no bimmer expert, but are all bmws 50/50 distribution? how is the 50/50 measured? with driver (what size) and with or without fluids+fuel.

all that affects weight distri i guess, so just wanna know what's the german std for that 50/50 measurement.

redd
Click to expand...
Like I said earlier, 50:50 is marketing hype. Let's say a car is 50:50, the manufacturer applies negative camber to the front wheels, positive camber to the rear, seriously hard suspension in front and really soft behind, what would you get? Perfect handling? The car's setup is paramount when determining the handing. Even one of the world's worst car in terms of weight distribution, the 911 can run circles around most cars due to its setup. I can certainly say that from experience. Actually nothing beats it for traction when the weight presses down the rear wheels when you floor it.
 
Agree with WJ 911 rules. Even powerwise. Comparing even the 964 to say e36 m3 evo. e36 m3 evo on paper more power but reality is different. Nothing beats the 911 in terms power accesibility and nice spread of torque and of course suspension set up. M3 is nothing to shout about. It's a super fast sedan that's it. It can't hide its origin from the humble 3series. 911 is designed as sports car from scratch. I definitely know which one I prefer by miles. Last week, topgear they did a test between m6, AMV8 & Carrera s on isle of man. Guess what, 911 onpaper 140hp down on power (less weight, but m6 has higher powert to weight ratio), outrun the m6 by 6-7 seconds on a 1.30 minute lap. 6-7 seconds on a short lap is massive. Its just to prove that the set up is far more important, & nothing beats porsche when it comes to that.

M3 rules, think not ese. The King is already here, the Cayman S
 
Originally posted by zagato@Nov 27 2005, 08:41 AM
Agree with WJ 911 rules. Even powerwise. Comparing even the 964 to say e36 m3 evo. e36 m3 evo on paper  more power but reality is different. Nothing beats the 911 in terms power accesibility and nice spread of torque and of course suspension set up. M3 is nothing to shout about. It's a super fast sedan that's it. It can't hide its origin from the humble 3series. 911 is designed as sports car from scratch. I definitely know which one I prefer by miles. Last week, topgear they did a test between m6, AMV8 &  Carrera s on isle of man. Guess what, 911 onpaper 140hp down on power (less weight, but m6 has higher powert to weight ratio), outrun the m6  by 6-7 seconds on a 1.30 minute lap. 6-7 seconds on a short lap is massive. Its just to prove that  the set up is far more important, & nothing beats porsche when it comes to that.

M3 rules, think not ese. The King is already here, the Cayman S
Click to expand...
:blink: eh..what happened to ur maser?? now its the cayman s huh???

well,i love the cayman s for what it is but it ain't no performance saloon.and i believe if go back to the start of the topic,we were talking about saloons..sorry ese but u missed,waaay off mark.if i recall correctly,u were the one who started this all..hmmmm :blink:

no use arguing here when people have made up their minds..me,i'm open to any config be they FWD,RWD or AWD.all works fine to a certain degree,some works better than the other no certain tracks or roads.also,u gotta look at what the cars have been designed for in the first place..some might be faster than the other because one was designed as a true blue sportscar from the start while the other is from a lowly saloon to carry four in comfort plus their luggages.so to compare them just on the subject of laptime around a small island is not a very wise thing to do.more to it than that..innit??

maybe too much trackdays huh?? remember,not all who track are good drivers and not all who don't are bad ones..gotta look at the bigger picture.to discount 50/50 wt distrbtn just cuz of a few laptimes aroung a small track is missing the point too..waaaay off mark..

but hey,who am i..i'm just someone who've never tracked before.i've only owned lowly alfas and a stupid m3 that's only a fast saloon..the odd vtec doesn't count too cuz thay're just lowly civics.

50\50?? what does bmw know huh??? they only make benchmark performance saloons,lowly ones at that.. what do they know... :wink:

but i agree on one thing though..the Cayman S rocks!!! but i'll reserve my comments till the M Z4 coupe comes out not to mention the M3 E90.
 
Supergripen,

the comparison against 911 is a relevant one to illustrate that 50:50 is not the be all & end all. Porsche will rule in the sports coupe segment for a very long time as no other cars can combine practicality, power, and character at the same time. As for sedan, I'll take the maser any time, thank you. That engine note, the style, the pedigree. At least no one will mistaken it for a munich taxi.
 
Originally posted by zagato@Nov 27 2005, 10:16 AM
At least no one will mistaken it for a munich taxi.
Click to expand...
I almost dropped dead laughing. I was just thinking of getting a Stuggart taxi myself :)
 
:) nobody is saying 50/50 is the final say in handling..we're merely stating that its a valid concept to be applied.no one is saying Porshes are not good handlers..its a well known fact.

people choose cars based on so many factors and reasons..its an individual thing.everyone is entitled to their own opinion..but to condemn a concept that is tried and tested is sorta like shooting oneself in the foot.but again,u are entitled to ur thoughts..what people think about u is another matter..but who cares..ain't got nothin' to lose.

u can belittle all u want but i bet the M5 will sell a LOT more than the Maser.. not to mention the new M3..like i said,tried and tested.but hey,like u said..these are taxis.stay away..

hey,even Audi is reconfiguring its new A4 for better weight distribution to get closer to 50/50..combine that with Quattro,hmmmmm...
 
Originally posted by zagato@Nov 26 2005, 07:41 PM
just to prove that  the set up is far more important, & nothing beats porsche when it comes to that.

M3 rules, think not ese. The King is already here, the Cayman S
Click to expand...
Yea, you are right. Cayman S is a great car, and the guys at Porsche designed it with weight balance in mind as well by giving it a base mid-engine configuration platform. I hope they were not just doing so because of "marketing hype" :p ..

"The thing is, at £43,930, the Cayman S is a considerable £14,450 cheaper than an entry-level 911. And unlike that car, its engine is positioned for perfect weight distribution and balance."

Top Gear Appreciates Good weight balance for performance cars... Do you?
 
If unequal weight distribution is such a bad thing, ever wondered why the 911 is the winningest car ever in the history of motorsport?

Well, because the amazingly unequal weight distribution of the 911 allows it to enter corners weighted like a front engined car (hence equally good entry speeds) and also allows it to exit like a rear engined car (hence, superior exit speeds). Of course, the catch is that you must know how to drive a 911 properly. That's a BIG catch.
 
Trivial for all the 50:50 fans. Let's just pick on the E36 as an example which is sold as a 50:50 car. I wonder which car in the range is 50:50, is it the 318i or the 325i or the M3? Auto or manual or SMG? All the 3 cars are of different weight up front. Or the E39 for that matter? The 520i? 530i? 535i? 540i? or the M5? How about the e36? 316i? 318i? 320i? 328i? M3? Iron or alloy block? Auto or manual? Hmmmh? All of them?
 
Its such a simple fact for anyone who is an automobile enthusiast that good weight distribution only does good things to the overall dynamics of the car. I am really puzzled why so many non-bimmer drivers are trying so hard to discredit its merits.. :dunno:
 
Originally posted by zagato@Nov 26 2005, 07:41 PM
Agree with WJ 911 rules. Even powerwise. Comparing even the 964 to say e36 m3 evo. e36 m3 evo on paper more power but reality is different. Nothing beats the 911 in terms power accesibility and nice spread of torque and of course suspension set up. M3 is nothing to shout about. It's a super fast sedan that's it. It can't hide its origin from the humble 3series. 911 is designed as sports car from scratch. I definitely know which one I prefer by miles. Last week, topgear they did a test between m6, AMV8 & Carrera s on isle of man. Guess what, 911 onpaper 140hp down on power (less weight, but m6 has higher powert to weight ratio), outrun the m6 by 6-7 seconds on a 1.30 minute lap. 6-7 seconds on a short lap is massive. Its just to prove that the set up is far more important, & nothing beats porsche when it comes to that.

M3 rules, think not ese. The King is already here, the Cayman S
Click to expand...
Agree.

Power without control is nothing as you can see what happened to M6 (with 500 hp).

:yahoo:
 
Originally posted by The Necessary@Nov 27 2005, 10:44 PM
If unequal weight distribution is such a bad thing, ever wondered why the 911 is the winningest car ever in the history of motorsport?

Well, because the amazingly unequal weight distribution of the 911 allows it to enter corners weighted like a front engined car (hence equally good entry speeds) and also allows it to exit like a rear engined car (hence, superior exit speeds). Of course, the catch is that you must know how to drive a 911 properly. That's a BIG catch.
Click to expand...
hang on, now im foncused. so is 50/50 a good thing or not? from ur posting it seems like 50/50 isnt such a big deal afterall.

WJ, im also curious why everyone is avoiding the question of exactly which model BMW has 50/50 weight distri. being quite ignorant of bimmers id also like to know so i know which cars not to cocok in the corners. if not kena tapau dunno why. ;)

redd
 
Originally posted by wirelessjunkie@Nov 28 2005, 09:56 AM

Put it this way guys, any properly setup car will handle fine irregardless of weight distribution.  It's the driver that makes the difference.  A "balanced" and well setup car can only help to make it easier for the driver to drive but when it comes to the fancier stuff, skills and balls are the order of the day.  
Click to expand...
They way you are putting it, sounds like you are another one which subscribes to the theory that "The shittier car you drive, makes you a better driver". i.e. my car doesn't have all the ASC+T, DSC, high tech suspension design, good weight distribution, is FWD, and understeers... that makes me a superstar driver ...

Sorry thats just pure BS made up by well, people who drive shittier cars :p
 
Originally posted by supergripen@Nov 27 2005, 09:10 AM
remember,not all who track are good drivers and not all who don't are bad ones..gotta look at the bigger picture.to discount 50/50 wt distrbtn just cuz of a few laptimes aroung a small track is missing the point too..waaaay off mark..

but hey,who am i..i'm just someone who've never tracked before.i've only owned lowly alfas and a stupid m3 that's only a fast saloon..the odd vtec doesn't count too cuz thay're just lowly civics.
Click to expand...
Really, people who does not track are better drivers? That's news to me. And oh where or how does this group of excellent drivers who does not track practice or acquire their skills? By zig zagging on public roads?

Good on you that you have owned alfas & m3. So have some of us. May be you should try a porker next. Who know's it might change your mind :wink:
 

Similar threads

bmw7833
The new F10 M5
2 3
Replies
43
Views
2K
willie
willie
phas3r
2009 7 Series F01/F02
2
Replies
23
Views
588
phas3r
phas3r
selvahraje46
New 5 to debut 2010
Replies
6
Views
205
DaRkHoRsE7
DaRkHoRsE7
boy.yusoff
International Engine of The Year Result
Replies
2
Views
301
safri
S
bmw7833
World Premiere: 2013 BMW 7 Series Facelift
Replies
3
Views
344
MRTA.chew
M
Top Bottom