prodigy1387

so my best friend has a 2000 bmw 323i, 5 speed. he talks his car up so much, which i don't mind, ya know, it's a nice car, it's got a decent pick up, i generally like it. and he is knowledgeable about cars, so i give him the benefit of the doubt.

one night we raced. i beat him....pretty good. he claims his car was like just right at the back of my rear bumper. i disagree, but i didn't argue with him. but come on, i have a 215 hp 229 torque c320 coupe compared with his 170 hp 164 (i believe) torque 323i. only advantage he has is manual to my auto, but even so, the MB auto is pretty aggressive, and his manual doesn't compensate for the fact that i just have more power. just look at the stats on paper!

he blamed his loss on his clutch because it's "slipping" (i can't tell that it is as i drove it) and he claims his 323i is faster than what bmw rates it at (the stats i gave above), and explains that bmw gives it such low specs because they have to exaggerate the "little" difference between the '00 323i and 328i.



he says that he is going to fix his clutch and have a rematch, where he will "own" me. LOL, i don't even know what to say to him. i just thought i'd share this story; i can't help but laugh at him.

victor20170

Watch out with BMW drivers. Check this out

https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...threadid=73668

prodigy1387

that is *******g ridiculous!

those times call for actions like that woman in texas who ran over her husband several times in her s-class haha.

S23O5C15

Quite amusing. Let's eliminate the rampant exaggeration and get down to business.

It's late, of course, and me being myself, I am awake and browsing forum boards. Not much else to do, really.

But of course, I had to stumble across this. Because I am very bored at the moment, I must defend my honor.

Responses in kind:
The only actual fact in your entire post is the first line. I do indeed have a 03/00 build 323i, with a variety of options and retrofitted equipment, and the all important manual transmission. That said, "talking up" is a term I would use very loosely if I were you. It IS, however, a very underrated car in the right hands (just ask the G35, 330i, C320 and A4 drivers that I have embarrassed at the track), but that aside, it's still nothing special from a raw performance standpoint. I'm the first to admit that.

As such, I'm very realistic about what it's capable of. We're talking mid 15's in the 1/4 mile, which is nothing particularly impressive, but quick enough to keep you entertained if you're in the right mood. As for 0-60, we're looking at around 7-7.2 seconds, but as anybody who really knows their stuff will tell you, 0-60 is pretty worthless (as an aside, I myself prefer 0-100) for a large variety of reasons. I won't get into why, except to throw out a quip about gearing, which can have a major effect on 0-60 times.

It suffers from moderate understeer, excessive body roll, but is forgiving and predictable at the limit (thanks mostly to the aforementioned understeer). In summary, it's neither fast, nor particularly agile, on the sports car scale (because everything is relative). But neither is the bloated C "sport" coupe. Then again, these aren't sports cars. They're glorified passenger cars.

159.8 rwhp @ 5600 rpm
163.2 rwtq @ 3500 rpm

Those are my peak rear wheel numbers, obtained on a humid 83 degree day. For reference, my car weighs in at approximately 3180 pounds with a full tank of gas (officially quoted as 3153 with full tank and 165 lb driver...I am 190 lbs) and me in the driver's seat. I don't need to discuss the torque curves of the M52B25TU engine, that's not in doubt. Needless to say, it's pretty flat.

Forget what the Mercedes-Benz Manual for Dummies says about engine power. Crank figures are totally worthless beyond the following two situations:

A.) discussing the technological and engineering merits of a particular engine
B.) advertising

...and every enthusiast knows this. What doesn't get to the wheels isn't helping you.

I don't pay attention to advertising lingo, so you're going to have to produce something more convincing.

Just for fun, here's what my numbers translate to assuming a fairly standard RWD manual trans 16.5% drivetrain loss: 191.3 hp / 195.4 tq. So does BMW underrate, is their drivetrain amazingly efficient (just 6% lost to the wheels?!?!), or was the dyno off? The third option can be eliminated easily, because my numbers are in line with what others have gotten around the country on a variety of dynometers. The second is extremely unlikely; anybody who has a basic understanding of frictional loss should be able to deduce that. Hence, you're left with the likely possibility of an underrated engine (FYI - many companies underrate either for insurance reasons, or to protect themselves from liability).

To complement the numbers above, the average 328i puts around 172 hp and 182 tq to the wheels. Compare those to the numbers above and tell me if there's a $6000 difference (the price difference between the two cars when new). The 323i name alone doesn't seem suspicious to you, when the car has a 2495 cc engine? But we're not here to debate that. Go read the BMW boards if you care.

My clutch is definitely slipping, and prematurely at that. It's a common problem on the E46; I invite anybody to run a search on E46 clutch issues and see what they find. Here's an excellent description of exactly what is occuring on my car, from a gentleman who is extremely well versed in the mechanical aspects of BMW's, old to new:

"The problem with the clutches in the E46 (and E39) is the SAC - Self Adjusting Clutch. This new mechanism built into the clutch pressure plate is supposed to keep your clutch pedal engagement point the same as the clutch wears... but in all reality, it's a case of engineers with too much free time. They have added a layer of complexity and feedback isolation, filling a need that didn't need filling - like anyone ever notices that their clutch engagement point as moved 1/2" over 50K miles?

The SAC mechanism itself causes problems; it over- or under-adjusts the pressure plate and therefore causes the clutch to slip or burn out prematurely. They are also known to shift, causing the pressure plate release fingers to slip off the plate, keeping 1/3 of the pressure plate engaged at all times. Bottom line is that the only fix is a complete clutch job, and your dealer is likely to claim "driver abuse". We've seen it happen too many times."

My friend, prodigy1387, doesn't even know what a slipping clutch is, and still wouldn't realize it even if he drove with one.

I was hesistant about racing you the first time, simply because my car was not in the best of working order then and still isn't right now. It has lead to what I have feared...more **** talking, on an internet forum board that I don't even frequent, no less!

Here's the actual funny story that was mysteriously left out by the original poster. He must've forgotten. :

There's a lot of **** talking that goes back and forth between us on this very subject. We can indeed argue facts, statistics and numbers and make excuses all day long. None of it, this entire thread included, means anything. It's not about what you know, it's about what you can prove...

As long as I mention that, I should also mention that I never claimed I would "own" you (except on the track, where the huge experience gap would quickly show). Only that - in a lame drag race - it would be very close, if not a tie.

What you failed to mention is that I have challenged you multiple times to run against me at a local autox event or, better yet, on the track. Your car is, as you say, superior in every way. It's more powerful. It "handles" better (you've never even pushed the car's limits...how would you know?). Why not demonstrate that to me in person? I still don't see it. But the offer still is - and always will be - there for you to accept, if you ever decide to man up to it and take the beating that you know you're going to get.

prodigy1387

jon jon jon.....i knew you'd find this post hahaha.

i'm not going to continue this argument we've had going for about a year now, but i am just going to say 2 things.

1) i don't want to autox my car because, as i've told you several times, first, it's far away - i don't feel it's necessary to drive all the way to ft. myers to put extra wear on my leased car, second, no one else was interested in going, and third, i have already told you that you have autoxed more than i have (in fact i've NEVER autoxed), so i would hope you would do better than me. but that doesn't mean my car couldn't outperform yours and such at autoxing with a more experienced driver. i don't have the time to go autoxing every chance i get just so i can get to an equal level as you and then we could see who's better - i don't care that much at all.

2) i do know what a slipping clutch is - i've driven one of my sister's previous manual cars that had the problem and recognized something was wrong right away actually. but i just yes you, and nod, and don't argue, and ask you questions to see how well you know your **** and to hear all the excuses you have :-P. yes, you probably know more than i do about cars because you focus on it so much, whereas i don't, but i certainly know enough to know something as simple as a slipping clutch.

fact is: no matter what you say, downing my car or challenging it or whatever, i still know that at the end of the day my car is better equipped than yours and faster . you're lucky you're my friend or else i'd backhand you for all the cuts you made at my car haha.

taylor192

LOL this is entertaining. BMW gears their cars for the 0-60 times to make C&D, R&T and other mags happy to print great 0-60 numbers cause most buyers are too sheepish to consider gearing.

You cannot complain about 0-60 times, your car is most likely designed for the maxium 0-60 times (redline in 2nd > 60 mph).

S23O5C15

Did you even read what I wrote? You simply repeated everything I just said.

I'm not complaining about 0-60 times. I am, quite obviously, pointing out that they are, in fact, worthless, and that gearing plays a very large part in the times you get out of any car. Shifting into 3rd before 60 is obviously going to kill your 0-60 time, as will excessively tall gearing.

S23O5C15

1.) Your car is far too heavy and probably understeers way too much to be any good at autox. You would get killed, not only by me, but by lightly modified Honda Civics and Mazda Miatas (who would also be crushing me, but that's beside the point). You'd be running D-stock, same as me, against WRX's and other nasties.

However, I don't care about autox as a performance comparison, because it isn't a very good one. I'd rather track the cars, where we would both be better off.

The only one making excuses here is you. You wouldn't want to drive a whopping 20 miles to put "extra wear" on your leased car. That's exactly the point...first off, it's leased, so who cares? That aside, you've obviously never seen what they do to the damn things on the prototype test courses. I assure you that you haven't even begun to stress your car or use more than 50% of it's potential. And as a driver, I don't think you're good enough yet. That machine can and will take a beating...if it's the sporty car you claim it is, it's been designed for it.

2.) Then you should be able to explain - with basic technical details - why a slipping clutch is such a huge performance hinderence. Recognizing that SOMETHING is wrong is considerably different than recognizing WHAT is wrong. Speaking of frictional drivetrain losses, the clutch is the most important factor in that equation. If it's slipping...and mine usually does with any more than 30% throttle or so...you're losing a tremendous amount of power to frictional loss, and gear charges take abnormally long.

Do this and I shall be satisified.

prodigy1387

autoxing is not even practical anyway - who the **** drives like that to work everyday? yeah, not me...or 99% of other drivers. and i think you talk yourself up way too much too - you think you're such a superior driver, yet your other friend was talking at how badly you drive a manual - probably why your clutch is f*cked up now.


lol, but that aside, i told you, i'm not arguing with you. at the end of the day: my car is faster and better equipped, end of story.

btw, you're too wordy.

schwarzwagen

S2305C15:

How many miles does your 323i have on your current clutch? If the clutch is loosing effectiveness with only 30% of engine power applied, why have you not repaired it yet? and why are you racing it with an inoperative clutch?

My E30's clutch never slipped before or after I had it replaced, your clutch's friction surface must be dangerously low which can overheat and damage your flywheel and trans...

S23O5C15

My car has 47,250 miles as of writing. At least 20,000 of those are highway miles, possibly more. The clutch started going at around 38k.

According to the research I have done, either the pressure plate or the slave cylinder is what has actually failed. Nearly all of the symptoms point to either of those. There are numerous documented cases of E46 owners with prematurely slipping clutches who replace the damaged clutch only to find that the disc itself is fine, and simply glazed over.

Oddly enough, it doesn't even slip with consistency...particularly when the car hasn't been driven for several days (not just cold...I mean it hasn't been touched), the clutch grabs hard and there is absolutely no slippage. Just tonight, however, I drove a good 20 miles with numerous gear changes and the clutch was not slipping. Because of this, I cannot predict when it will grab and when it will slip (even though it slips 70-80% of the time), and at the time we raced, the clutch had been grabbing somewhat well and not slipping (up until that point). This is why I suspect the problem is a combination of the pressure plate, and the self-adjusting mechanism which I wrote about in the first post.

Transmission damage is a concern, but flywheel damage is not. I'm getting a lightweight wheel and a sprung hub M5 clutch (to eliminate the self adjusting mechanism) when I do replace it.

S23O5C15

Once again, you're simply getting defensive for no reason and irrationally attacking me, like you always do. Unfortunately, it's childish. Needless to say, this is not an appropriate place for that. It does not fit the context of this forum, and I doubt anybody here wishes to hear of it. And, by the way, if you choose to attack me, please use credible sources. Thank you.

Now to the topic at hand: I never claimed that driving the way you would at an autox would directly translate to how you should drive on the street. Definitely not! That's damn foolish. Seriously, what would give you such an idea? Certainly not me, that's for sure...unless you misinterpreted something I've said.

It never occured to you that the skills and knowledge obtained from an autox or car control clinic could be applied to real world scenarios, on the street, in traffic?

I guarantee you that you do not know exactly how your car, or any other, will respond at or beyond the limit - a limit you may very well reach or exceed when performing an emergency maneuver - but if you autocrossed, even just once, you probably would. A car control clinic would be better, but autocross is a decent substitute to the attentive driver. Knowing how manufacturers prefer to tune their cars, I can probably make accurate predictions on how your car would behave just based upon the experience I have with mine and others. That's not practical? The potential to avoid accidents safely, and save lives, isn't practical? Think again.

If I'm too wordy, sorry. I prefer to make sure everything is covered the first time, and as clearly as possible, to avoid being vague and the misunderstandings that often arise from that.

taylor192

Yes I did and you didn't understand. Silly BMW driver.

You buddy claims you state BMW under-rates your car, and your post basically confirms this. Thus when you state the 7.2 sec 0-60 time being worthless do to gearing, you imply that your car is faster than that.

BMWs are geared for 0-60, so if you're implying your car is a 7.2sec 0-60 car is UNDERestimated, you're wrong.

Your car is slow, yet most likely handles better in the twisties, thus why you request an auto-x to decide the winner. You choose to race a race you couldn't win, and now whine about wanting a rematch in a race you know you can win. I wouldn't enter a race I'd know I would lose, that's stupid, yet you already did, and lost, suck it up.

tyro

Bet these guys aren't best buds anymore
Airing their dirty laundry in public and everything!

Vomit

Almost sounds like a marital spat to me. Any bets on who the beotch is?

prodigy1387

hah, no, we're still friends. the arguments get like this all the time because we're both stubborn and i usually refuse to concede, and so does he. it seriously does sound like marital bs, hah, but i don't give a **** - i never have, never will....i know the facts and that is that my car is better.

and i really didn't think he'd actually come on to these forums just to try and argue with me, i am actually rather surprised about that.

DarrenCT

That's a real good way to get shot in my neck of the woods. (i'm not kidding)

schwarzwagen

S23O5C15:

I would try removing the CDV (clutch delay valve) first. It is a stupid thing that reduces hydraulic pressure to the slave cylinder in an attempt to smoothen out shifts. Are you sure an M5 clutch will fit on your car? The M5 uses a beefy 6-speed Getrag unit vs. your 5-speed Getrag unit, I have not heard of ppl using the M5 clutch on an E46, just curious.

MBE55AMG

All right, guys. Break it up.

Nice story, though.

Improviz

...the Benz would easily walk the BMW. 3150 pounds (weight without driver, per Edmunds.com) with 170 (rated) horsepower gives 18.5 lbs/hp, while the Benz has 3430/215 = 15.9 lbs/hp. That's pretty substantial, and in this case the BMW would be toast.

However, if this BMW did in fact dyno with 160 rwhp, with a 15% driveline loss it would be producing 188 at the crank, putting it at 3150/188 = 16.7, which still gives an advantage to the Benz, but the advantage is not as large.

To get the same weight/hp of the Benz, it would have to either lose 160 pounds, or gain ten horsepower. (Again, the preceeding assumes the dyno was accurate, etc., which sounds plausible if the cars were within a length or so of one anotther in their previous race).

Otherwise (again, assuming dyno results were accurate), I'd expect the Benz to win in a straightline race, but it would be a fairly close race, with no more than a tenth or two for the Benz in the 1/4. Its large horsepower advantage is offset by its 300 pounds of extra weight, which effectively costs it 30 horsepower in the weight/hp race. Weight is every bit as important as horsepower in a straightline race, and more so in handling.

S23O5C15

Where do I imply anything? There is no talk of 0-60 times. You're reading too much into what the original poster wrote - not I (never once have I told him that my car reaches 60 any faster than what BMW says - only that it has more power than what they put on paper, because he seems to think there's a much bigger difference than there really is). I only claimed that the engine was underrated, not that the 0-60 times or 1/4 mile times were. My best 1/4 time was 15.4 on a cold day in north Florida, which is right in line with what is to be expected out of the car based on a huge variety of independent tests as well as what I've seen from other 323 owners on the BMW message boards.

The reason I say 0-60 times are pointless is because YES, they are gearing dependent and this is why my 0-60 time is as quick as it is, despite the car's weight and relative lack of power. You can't just assume that I'm implying something!

As for handling in the twisties, as I said, autox is not a good comparison for either car. You rarely exceed 60 mph, and most turns are made at 20-30 mph, not at speeds where my suspension (or his) is most comfortable. Go-karts and modified Hondas dominate the Autox. I'd far prefer an open road course (where proper cornering technique is essential to good lap times, unlike autox where it's more about how light your car is, how well the tires grip, and how quickly you can turn the wheel), which I did state, over an autox, but track time is very expensive and we'd have to drive a good distance to get to one, so the chances of that happening are unlikely.

Finally, my car is slow. I'm the first to say it. But believe me - so is the C320.

S23O5C15

Exactly! This is exactly what I've been trying to say. Making rated horsepower, I WOULD be toast. But the proof is in the writing...it did dyno 159 hp, which is nothing unusual for this particular car. I can also produce dyno charts from a variety of sources, unmodified cars other than my own, if this is doubted. They all put down between 153-162 horsepower at the rear wheels, differences which are accountable due to dyno variations, weather, and individual engines. I've repeatedly asked Shane to come up with dyno charts for automatic C320's so that I can get a better idea of how the cars really compare on paper.

Again, I've only said it would be a close race, all things being equal, not that I would win or "own" him. Even despite the evidence that my car is underrated, that's a ridiculous thing to say, and that's why I came in here to defend myself. I wouldn't make such statements without proof to defend them. He still has a slightly better power to weight ratio, and a more consistent transmission. Even if I were to win, he would likely win far more often and with more consistency.

As for what consitutes the faster car, in my mind it has more to do with lap times than 0-60 and 1/4 times. An E46 M3, for example, can outrun a 996 C2 in a straight line, but, with the same driver the C2 generally produces better average lap times. It is therefore the "faster" car despite turning in slower 1/4 times. This is why I want to race for real, on a track, instead of going straight on a deserted back road.

S23O5C15

It requires a flywheel that can take it...the standard flywheel would not be compatible with the M5 clutch disc.

It's from the E34 M5, as well, not the E39. I've never heard of anybody using the E39 clutch disc on an E46.

Tai230K

LoL, you guys sound like me and my friend. Ok lemme get this right isn't a 325i (manny) > 323i (manny) in quickness? and a c320 (auto) > 325i (manny).

If so then from 0-60; c320 > 325i(manny) > 323i(manny)

Improviz

BMW used the innacurate "323" designation to fool prospective 328 owners into thinking that their cars were 0.5L larger, which sounds "better" than the actual 0.3L it really was, and also underrated the horsepower of the 2.5L for that year. In 2001, they magically found 20 horsepower or so, even though the only thing that changed was the badge, and the fact that the 328 was replaced by the 330 (and picked up around 30 rated horsepower).

In tests, manual 325i and C320 test pretty much the same. Look 'em up...