Lets get my credibilility out of the way
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
More on M&M's credibility:
....here we have a tale of two times. You are claiming to have run a 13.0 @ 108 at sea level, and an altitude-adjusted 12.794 @ 108.75 at 6,000 ft., both of which when you were "bone stock".
Exhibit A: a timeslip that you have posted in the first post of this thread (fourth photo down), claiming to prove that you ran an altitude-corrected 12.794 @ 108.75mph.
Exhibit B: a post of yours made last night at Bimmerforums (before their moderators stepped in and shut you down, something I wish ours would do, as you are clearly in violation of terms of use). Your quote from this post:
And if we examine the time of car number 6, we see:
1/4 mile time: 14.25
1/4 mile speed: 161.10 (100.6875 mph)
Hmm, this is over 1/2 second slower than the timeslip you claim as your own.
I'm assuming that since neither the winning RS6 nor the 2nd place E55 broke 13 seconds, this race was also done at 6,000 ft. So, using the altitude correction you provided before, what does this translate to at sea level?
13.27 @ 108. A far cry from 12.79 @ 109!!!
This is bit more realistic. Thank you for posting that.
Let the excuses begin!
Exhibit A: a timeslip that you have posted in the first post of this thread (fourth photo down), claiming to prove that you ran an altitude-corrected 12.794 @ 108.75mph.
Exhibit B: a post of yours made last night at Bimmerforums (before their moderators stepped in and shut you down, something I wish ours would do, as you are clearly in violation of terms of use). Your quote from this post:
Originally Posted by M&M
I am the M3 that came in 6th. As you can see the CSL was quicker than me which proves my car was stock then.
1/4 mile time: 14.25
1/4 mile speed: 161.10 (100.6875 mph)
Hmm, this is over 1/2 second slower than the timeslip you claim as your own.
I'm assuming that since neither the winning RS6 nor the 2nd place E55 broke 13 seconds, this race was also done at 6,000 ft. So, using the altitude correction you provided before, what does this translate to at sea level?
13.27 @ 108. A far cry from 12.79 @ 109!!!
This is bit more realistic. Thank you for posting that.
Let the excuses begin!
Last edited by Improviz; Jan 8, 2005 at 12:37 PM.
Super Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
From: California
ML350 '06
Originally Posted by ultraseven
M&M and Thai have provided excellent reading material, so I won't urge them to stop.
A few topics that I recommend:
1) Go to a Porsche forum and tell them how their Boxster is second rate - a poor man's Porsche
2) On the same forum, start this thread "Mighty C6 eats 997 for breakfast, lunch, and dinner"
3) Go to a WRX forum and state "My EVO ate 5 STi's this past week"
4) Post the vice-versa on an EVO forum
Bring popcorn and your favorite beverage. Sit back and relax.
A few topics that I recommend:
1) Go to a Porsche forum and tell them how their Boxster is second rate - a poor man's Porsche
2) On the same forum, start this thread "Mighty C6 eats 997 for breakfast, lunch, and dinner"
3) Go to a WRX forum and state "My EVO ate 5 STi's this past week"
4) Post the vice-versa on an EVO forum
Bring popcorn and your favorite beverage. Sit back and relax.
That is funny as hell! :p
Let's not forget what kind of response you can get with the ole reminder to the Mustang forums of what FORD stands for! I'm sure you'll get a favorable repsonse!
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Improviz
....here we have a tale of two times. You are claiming to have run a 13.0 @ 108 at sea level, and an altitude-adjusted 12.794 @ 108.75 at 6,000 ft., both of which when you were "bone stock".
Exhibit A: a timeslip that you have posted in the first post of this thread (fourth photo down), claiming to prove that you ran an altitude-corrected 12.794 @ 108.75mph.
Exhibit B: a post of yours made last night at Bimmerforums (before their moderators stepped in and shut you down, something I wish ours would do, as you are clearly in violation of terms of use). Your quote from this post:
And if we examine the time of car number 6, we see:
1/4 mile time: 14.25
1/4 mile speed: 161.10 (100.6875 mph)
Hmm, this is over 1/2 second slower than the timeslip you claim as your own.
I'm assuming that since neither the winning RS6 nor the 2nd place E55 broke 13 seconds, this race was also done at 6,000 ft. So, using the altitude correction you provided before, what does this translate to at sea level?
13.27 @ 108. A far cry from 12.79 @ 109!!!
This is bit more realistic. Thank you for posting that.
Let the excuses begin!
Exhibit A: a timeslip that you have posted in the first post of this thread (fourth photo down), claiming to prove that you ran an altitude-corrected 12.794 @ 108.75mph.
Exhibit B: a post of yours made last night at Bimmerforums (before their moderators stepped in and shut you down, something I wish ours would do, as you are clearly in violation of terms of use). Your quote from this post:
And if we examine the time of car number 6, we see:
1/4 mile time: 14.25
1/4 mile speed: 161.10 (100.6875 mph)
Hmm, this is over 1/2 second slower than the timeslip you claim as your own.
I'm assuming that since neither the winning RS6 nor the 2nd place E55 broke 13 seconds, this race was also done at 6,000 ft. So, using the altitude correction you provided before, what does this translate to at sea level?
13.27 @ 108. A far cry from 12.79 @ 109!!!
This is bit more realistic. Thank you for posting that.
Let the excuses begin!
Looks like mm dude is seriously messed up. His every post is BS. I doubt he owns hte car or any time slips. A fking Milly Vanilly of automotive forums.
Junior Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: Florida
ok, i din't read the whole thread but from what i'm seeing he claims that he ran a 12.7 blah blah?...
if that's corrent than no...
the person that ran that M3 STOCK witha 12.7 @ whatever mph is real *****. he's over at the M3forum. He's a pro drag racer though. He gets unbelieveabily sick 60' ft. His name's Lee
the same guy Lee, ran 12.4 @ 108 i think with chip,intake,rear differn, and pulley i think. But anyways...whatever.
if that's corrent than no...
the person that ran that M3 STOCK witha 12.7 @ whatever mph is real *****. he's over at the M3forum. He's a pro drag racer though. He gets unbelieveabily sick 60' ft. His name's Lee
the same guy Lee, ran 12.4 @ 108 i think with chip,intake,rear differn, and pulley i think. But anyways...whatever.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Nope.
That's been discussed here...M&M posted the videos of this guy's runs, and you can see by watching them that that M3 was *definitely* not stock...had the front (and therefore probably rear) seat removed, did not have stock rims, and almost certainly had drag radials.
I viewed the videos, and did a frame-by-frame...if you want the link, let me know.
I viewed the videos, and did a frame-by-frame...if you want the link, let me know.
Junior Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: Florida
here's a video from Lee from M3forum.net
http://www.daftproductions.com/videos/leedrag1.mpg
he ran a 12.59 sec against a low 11 sec Honda. It didn't show on the board, but thats what the Lee himself said.
This is another one
http://www.daftproductions.com/video...497_109-30.mpg
same guy Lee, ran fastest...not stock tho, had intake pulley rear differ, and a lighten a few pounds.
*EDIT* in that video he didn't have the Rear differ 4.10 installed yet!
http://www.daftproductions.com/videos/leedrag1.mpg
he ran a 12.59 sec against a low 11 sec Honda. It didn't show on the board, but thats what the Lee himself said.
This is another one
http://www.daftproductions.com/video...497_109-30.mpg
same guy Lee, ran fastest...not stock tho, had intake pulley rear differ, and a lighten a few pounds.
*EDIT* in that video he didn't have the Rear differ 4.10 installed yet!
Junior Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: Florida
STRAIGHT FROM m3forum.net
"I was there with Lee and witnessed it for myself - in fact I am the one who filmed it. Here is a picture of one of his time slips taken next to the tires to show the stock tires. I had to enhance the numbers because they were very faint.
I admit that when I first saw his time I was skeptical but now having met Lee and seen him do it I can say for 100% sure that these times are real. There is a lot of BS on the Internet but this is for real. There is no supercharger, no hidden NOS, no trick drag radials, no fake videos, no nothing - just pulleys, software, some wight reduction (passenger seat, rear folding seats, wheels and battery) and LOTS AND LOTS OF SKILL!! If Michael Schumacher was driving on a race track against me and he was in a stock Honda Element, I'll bet he would give me and my M3 a run for the money and I am a darn good driver - don't discount skill level!
"I was there with Lee and witnessed it for myself - in fact I am the one who filmed it. Here is a picture of one of his time slips taken next to the tires to show the stock tires. I had to enhance the numbers because they were very faint.
I admit that when I first saw his time I was skeptical but now having met Lee and seen him do it I can say for 100% sure that these times are real. There is a lot of BS on the Internet but this is for real. There is no supercharger, no hidden NOS, no trick drag radials, no fake videos, no nothing - just pulleys, software, some wight reduction (passenger seat, rear folding seats, wheels and battery) and LOTS AND LOTS OF SKILL!! If Michael Schumacher was driving on a race track against me and he was in a stock Honda Element, I'll bet he would give me and my M3 a run for the money and I am a darn good driver - don't discount skill level!
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Yes, and the video you posted proves my point.
Originally Posted by boxed
Look at the video. Look closely. Notice anything missing...like the right front seat??
STOCK M3's come with right front seats. STOCK M3's come with rear seats.
So, the car was clearly MODIFIED by stripping weight. I.e., it was NOT STOCK.
Which I pointed out to you yesterday, and which was pointed out before in this thread, here: the car in the video was modified.
Similarly, look at the second video you posted. Those are NOT stock M3 wheels, meaning they could be shod with drag radials, and as before, the front seat is missing, which as I again pointed out to you yesterday, means that in all likelihood the rear seat was missing.
"Stock" means "unmodified". If I strip 500 pounds out of my car and throw on some drag radials, I'd be well into the 12's as well, but guess what? The car would no longer be stock. Stock is "as it came from the factory".
Modded Honda Civics are fast too...but we are talking stock. Anything can be modded to be fast. Want to see a 12 second minivan? Click here.
Last edited by Improviz; Jan 10, 2005 at 11:48 PM.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Junior Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: Florida
theres a misunderstanding..
he ran 12.7 STOCK, COMPLETELY..
than the other times are not stock. sorry for the misunderstanding.
*edit
and you're right, he did take out his passenger seat, back as well i think..
lighter battery, rims/tires...and some other stuff. (while "moddied")
he ran 12.7 STOCK, COMPLETELY..
than the other times are not stock. sorry for the misunderstanding.
*edit
and you're right, he did take out his passenger seat, back as well i think..
lighter battery, rims/tires...and some other stuff. (while "moddied")
Last edited by boxed; Jan 10, 2005 at 11:55 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Prove it.
Each and every video I've seen of that car is modded. The fact that he, or you, or anyone else claims on an Internet forum that a particular car, unmodified, ran a time that nobody else on the planet seems to have come close to is NOT PROOF.
PROOF would be a video showing the car, the exhaust, the tires, and then having it head down the strip. There is nothing even CLOSE to that that has been produced for this car.
And here's a little hint: your saying so and posting a timeslip doesn't make it so, any more than my posting the following timeslip and saying I ran an 11.962@113, BONE STOCK!!
Yup, there's your proof, dude: I did it, bone stock. And don't you dare question it, because it's an irrefutable fact!! Why?? Well, um, because I said so!!
Get real. Oh, and did you know that the word "gullible" is not in the dictionary? It's true...look it up!
PROOF would be a video showing the car, the exhaust, the tires, and then having it head down the strip. There is nothing even CLOSE to that that has been produced for this car.
And here's a little hint: your saying so and posting a timeslip doesn't make it so, any more than my posting the following timeslip and saying I ran an 11.962@113, BONE STOCK!!
Yup, there's your proof, dude: I did it, bone stock. And don't you dare question it, because it's an irrefutable fact!! Why?? Well, um, because I said so!!
Get real. Oh, and did you know that the word "gullible" is not in the dictionary? It's true...look it up!
Originally Posted by boxed
theres a misunderstanding..
he ran 12.7 STOCK, COMPLETELY..
than the other times are not stock. sorry for the misunderstanding.
he ran 12.7 STOCK, COMPLETELY..
than the other times are not stock. sorry for the misunderstanding.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
No, I didn't say you lied; you're just being a bit too trusting.
What proof have you seen? Someone said he did it on the 'net, and some other guy claims to have met him??
Let's look at a hypothetical situation: suppose some guy on the 'net posted a photo of himself in a running outfit with Nikes, holding a stopwatch, and said that he'd run an 8 second 100m dash in those Nikes. And suppose further that some other guy said he'd witnessed the event.
Would this be sufficient proof in your mind for him to be declared the new World Record holder in the 100m dash?
Or do you think that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?
Simple question.
Let's look at a hypothetical situation: suppose some guy on the 'net posted a photo of himself in a running outfit with Nikes, holding a stopwatch, and said that he'd run an 8 second 100m dash in those Nikes. And suppose further that some other guy said he'd witnessed the event.
Would this be sufficient proof in your mind for him to be declared the new World Record holder in the 100m dash?
Or do you think that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?
Simple question.
Last edited by Improviz; Jan 11, 2005 at 12:20 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Hahaa, no, but here's an offer for you:
Originally Posted by boxed
Hey, wanna meet up and do that 11 sec pass while i get it on tape?
Junior Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: Florida
haha not that good of a driver :p
but anyways, i dunno why its so hard to believe someone like Lee, pro drag racer hitting 12's in his m3...
even some people on the m3forum has hit 13.0 flat stock SMG...
i haven't been to the track yet...the nearest one is like 2 hours away... =\
but anyways, i dunno why its so hard to believe someone like Lee, pro drag racer hitting 12's in his m3...
even some people on the m3forum has hit 13.0 flat stock SMG...
i haven't been to the track yet...the nearest one is like 2 hours away... =\
Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 171
Likes: 4
From: Puerto Rico
G63, SLS Black Series, C63 Blackseries
It's true, Lee Matthews, former mustang drag racer ran a 12.7 on a completely stock M3. Stock tires, seats, nothing was touched. The 12.4 run didn't have seats and some slight engine upgrades. If anyone knows anything about BMW's, they are so well tuned that even a chip, intake and exhaust won't do anything.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Originally Posted by boxed
haha not that good of a driver :p
Originally Posted by boxed
but anyways, i dunno why its so hard to believe someone like Lee, pro drag racer hitting 12's in his m3...
even some people on the m3forum has hit 13.0 flat stock SMG...
i haven't been to the track yet...the nearest one is like 2 hours away... =\
even some people on the m3forum has hit 13.0 flat stock SMG...
i haven't been to the track yet...the nearest one is like 2 hours away... =\
As to that time: the issue I take is the 60' time he claims to have gotten. I simply (as do others who have studied this, including many of the people on the BMW forum where he hangs out--check out the original thread where he made this claim and you'll see plenty of M3-owning doubters) don't believe that a stock M3 on stock Contis is capable of hitting a 1.6 or 1.7 second 60' time, which is what it would need (and what he claimed it did) to hit that time.
The tires don't have enough contact patch, and the car's suspension setup doesn't allow for a rapid enough weight transfer to get the level of grip needed to hit that 60' time. That is in AWD territory!
So, color me skeptical, but I'd be equally as skeptical if someone claimed to hit this time in a stock CLK55 if it makes you feel better!
Throw on some drag slicks and do a bit of weight reduction, and sure: I think an M3 could probably hit 12's with a really good driver...but not stock.
Heck, I know a guy who took a stock 4-speed auto C5 'vette, put a high-stall torque converter in there, some drag radials, and an exhaust, and he could run consistent 12.7's all night long...but stock, no way. The thing preventing it is traction and weight transfer, not driver skill.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
So I've heard.....
...I just haven't seen any proof of it, and some guy's saying he did it isn't proof in my book, no matter what his background. I'll pose the same question to you that I posed to boxed:
Let's look at a hypothetical situation: suppose some guy on the 'net posted a photo of himself in a running outfit with Nikes, holding a stopwatch, and said that he'd run an 8 second 100m dash in those Nikes. And suppose further that some other guy said he'd witnessed the event.
Would this be sufficient proof in your mind for him to be declared the new World Record holder in the 100m dash?
Or do you think that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?
Simple question.
Let's look at a hypothetical situation: suppose some guy on the 'net posted a photo of himself in a running outfit with Nikes, holding a stopwatch, and said that he'd run an 8 second 100m dash in those Nikes. And suppose further that some other guy said he'd witnessed the event.
Would this be sufficient proof in your mind for him to be declared the new World Record holder in the 100m dash?
Or do you think that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?
Simple question.
Originally Posted by BLKM3
It's true, Lee Matthews, former mustang drag racer ran a 12.7 on a completely stock M3. Stock tires, seats, nothing was touched. The 12.4 run didn't have seats and some slight engine upgrades. If anyone knows anything about BMW's, they are so well tuned that even a chip, intake and exhaust won't do anything.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Hey, boxed....
....trying to start a flamewar here? The following really isn't very cool....
http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=53049
What's up with this? If you want to debate here, debate here, but starting flame wars really isn't necessary.
http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=53049
What's up with this? If you want to debate here, debate here, but starting flame wars really isn't necessary.
Junior Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: Florida
I'm just pointing out that some people just don't believe (much thick skull). Its just too complicated. No harm feelings.
* edit
Search around, you'll probably dig up some old crap of m3 owners not believing him running those times as well..
* edit
Search around, you'll probably dig up some old crap of m3 owners not believing him running those times as well..
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Hmmm....
Originally Posted by boxed
I'm just pointing out that some people just don't believe. Its just too complicated. No harm feelings.
http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=24872
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
OK, let's examine this infamous 12.7 second video, boxed...
...this is the video where Lee claims he ran a 12.7, stock.
Here is the thread where he announced it.
Here is the post in the thread where the link was given:
And he claimed the following, here::
Um, no. Not hardly. Watch the video from about 2 sec. in to about 8 sec., paying close attention when the camera zooms in from about 3 to 6 sec.
You'll have to zoom in a bit, but guess what: the front seat is plainly missing, which means that the rear seat was probably taken out as well. And do those look like stock M3 wheels to you? No, because they aren't stock M3 wheels.
Or, to put it in simple terms: the car in that video was in no way, shape, or form "stock".
BUZZ!!! Nice try, but you lose. Thanks for playin!!
Here is the thread where he announced it.
Here is the post in the thread where the link was given:
And he claimed the following, here::
Originally Posted by Matthews
All I have for mods are power pulleys.
You'll have to zoom in a bit, but guess what: the front seat is plainly missing, which means that the rear seat was probably taken out as well. And do those look like stock M3 wheels to you? No, because they aren't stock M3 wheels.
Or, to put it in simple terms: the car in that video was in no way, shape, or form "stock".
BUZZ!!! Nice try, but you lose. Thanks for playin!!
Last edited by Improviz; Jan 11, 2005 at 01:22 AM.
Junior Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: Florida
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Originally Posted by boxed
he ran a 12.63 in that video u posted lol. that video, he wasn't stock.
I have faith in you, boxed, and faith that you can read the English language. Can you please read the following post of Matthews' and tell me what it says? What is that he says about his only mod being pulleys?
Originally Posted by Matthews
All I have for mods are power pulleys.
Did you simply not read the above, or not watch the video, or are you being willfully obtuse?? The proof is right there, in the video: the front seat is GONE, dude.
And frankly, I'm done debating this with you, until or unless you can produce some actual evidence (and some guy saying he did it on the internet is NOT actual evidence).
A claim is not evidence. A claim is a claim. That you and lots of other people are willing to uncritically accept this as factual when video evidence plainly shows the car WAS MODIFIED when these runs were made is fine and dandy, but it has not been proven.
Originally Posted by boxed
Let's look at a hypothetical situation: suppose some guy on the 'net posted a photo of himself in a running outfit with Nikes, holding a stopwatch, and said that he'd run an 8 second 100m dash in those Nikes. And suppose further that some other guy said he'd witnessed the event.
Would this be sufficient proof in your mind for him to be declared the new World Record holder in the 100m dash?
Or do you think that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?
Simple question.
Last edited by Improviz; Jan 11, 2005 at 01:43 AM.
