Jeremy Clarkson reviews BMW 1 Series

[FeZ]

After all that flying vehicles of lately, lets get that forum back down to earth for a bit :D

BMW 1-series
By Jeremy Clarkson of The Sunday Times
This car is taking BMW into dangerous territory

One of the things I used to admire about BMW was the focus shown by its designers and engineers. They were the snipers of the car industry, lying in wait while the enemy blundered about with smoking tanks and faulty machineguns, and then, boomf, delivering a killer shot that never missed.
Once the company had stopped fiddling about with three-wheelers and converted post office vans, it developed a recipe that served it well for nigh on 30 years. All its cars had double headlamps at the front, a straight-six engine in the middle, and rear-wheel drive at the back.

There were, in essence, three body styles, five engines and a range of options, so the customer could indulge in a spot of pick’n’mix.

You could have a small car with a big engine and no equipment. Or you could have a large car with a small engine and electric everything. But whatever you chose there was a rightness to the feel of the thing. A sense that the company had put driving pleasure above everything else.

Then it did a Coca-Cola. The sniper decided he didn’t want to be a sniper any more and changed the damn recipe. So we ended up with four-wheel-drive cars that were made in America, and two-seater convertibles, and a wide range of diesel engines. And then it put a chap called Chris Bangle in charge of design.

Before Bangle, most BMWs adhered to the same set of rules. They had a lean-forward shark’s nose, they had the double-kidney grille, they had grey paint and then there was that little kink on the rear pillar. It’s called the Hofmeister kink, after the man who invented it, and it gives the car an aggressive, lean-forward stance.

Now, though, all of these design cues have been lost in a sea of planes and creases that probably play well in design circles. But in the real world they don’t look modern or sharp. They look daft.

Still, at least the BMW badge continued to count for something. Apart from dipping their toe into the mass market with the truly awful 3-series Compact, Beemers were always a cut above norm. They were what you bought to demonstrate that life was treating you well.

Only now, with the launch of the 1-series, this last bastion of BMWishness has gone. Because the 1-series, like a Focus or an Astra or a Golf, is a five-door family hatchback.

For now, of course, this is great. It means a large number of people who could never afford a BMW in the past can put that blue and white badge on their drive. The neighbours will be impressed. The curtains will twitch. Men will offer their daughters to your sons.

But how long will it be, I wonder, before the 1-series does for BMW what Freddie Laker did for air travel? Turns something glamorous and exciting into a “win free save!” orgy of packaged mass transportation.

In the early Seventies, if you went to Florida for your holidays you were seen as pretty cool. But now you’re seen as a rather stupid oik.

The 1-series will be the ruination of the BMW brand. Of that I have no doubt. But at the moment, despite the lost vision and the appointment of Bangle, that ruination has not yet got into its stride. For now you can still buy a Beemer and survive the experience with your dignity intact. The question is, should you? And to answer that, we have to work out if the 1-series is any good.

The advertisements tell us, endlessly, that unlike any other family hatchback on the market it has rear-wheel drive. And that’s great. Rear-wheel drive is a significant part of BMW’s DNA.

In a front-wheel-drive car the front wheels have to deal with the steering and the delivery of the engine’s power to the road. It’s a tough job and in most cases, for the purist at least, the end result is deeply unsatisfying. With rear-wheel drive the back wheels do the power delivery, leaving those at the front to get on with steering. It’s a much more expensive option but the result is balance. And balance is a building block on which something spectacular can be created.

You can feel the benefits, immediately, in the 1-series. Even at normal, trundling-about speeds it feels more together than even the Focus, king of the front-drivers.
There’s more, too. In the Beemer you have a thick steering wheel, a short-throw gearchange, and an antilock braking system that cuts in when you’re in real trouble and not because it can’t be bothered to work out when that moment might be. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that as a driving machine this is a significant cut above the hatchback norm.

And now, here comes the but, galloping over the hills with news of many, many problems that will leave you wishing, with all your heart, that you’d bought something else.

First of all there’s the styling. Now I know that when it comes to hatchbacks familiarity breeds indifference. The new Astra is a truly stunning piece of design, but like pylons you see so many you simply don’t notice the grace and cleverness. The BMW, however, is just plain ugly. It may have the double headlamps and the kidney grille and the Hofmeister kink, but viewed as a whole it looks like a van.

So what about the engine? Well, the petrol version will get you from 0 to 60 in about two hours, so if you want any poke at all, and surely that’s the reason why you’re buying a BMW, you have to go for the diesel. It’s not a bad diesel by any standards, but come on. Where’s the fun in a car that sounds like a canal boat? So it’s slow and ugly and now things really go downhill because thanks to the prop shaft and all the other rear-wheel-drive gubbins, there is no space in the back. And I don’t mean that legroom is limited. I mean there is absolutely none at all.

Even BMW says this car will sell to young people with no children, but this is silly. If you have no children, why buy a family hatchback? Because you want a big boot? Well forget that as well, because in the 1-series it’s tiny.

And then there’s the ride, which thanks to the fitment of run-flat tyres is intolerable on anything but a kitchen work surface, and the quality of some trim pieces, which will disappoint those who may have expected granite rather than Plasticine.

But the worst thing about the 1-series is the prices. In the past BMWs were expensive because they were demonstrably better, and more exciting, than all of their rivals. But the 1-series, as we’ve seen, is demonstrably worse.

And yet for the top-of-the-range diesel you are asked to pay £20,700, and anything up to £32,000 if you go berserk with the options list. Even if you show some self restraint you’d be lucky to put a car like this on the road for less than £23,000, and I’m sorry, but you can have two hatchbacks for that.

Park one of these on your drive and the neighbours will not think, “Hmm, that’s an expensive car. He must be doing well.” They’ll think, “Hmm, that’s an expensive car. He must be off his rocker.” You can have a Golf GTI for less, and that, in almost every single way, is a better car.

So if you want a hatchback, buy a Focus. If you want a hatchback with some go, buy the VW. If you just want some action and you don’t care about space in the back, or a hard ride, or the price, buy a sports car. A Honda S2000 would be fine.

I have been accused, in recent years, of having it in for BMW. There was even some talk, after my recent review of the dreadful X3, that I would not be allowed any more press demonstrators. And this is why I’ve devoted the entire column this week to a test of the 1-series rather than tagging it on to the end of a rant about cheese.

And it’s why I’m choosing the words for my conclusion with even more care than usual. So here goes. The 1-series is crap.

VITAL STATISTICS

Model BMW 120d Sport
Engine type Four-cylinder, 1995cc
Power 163bhp @ 4000rpm
Torque 250 lb ft @ 2000rpm
Transmission Six-speed manual, rear-wheel drive
Fuel/CO2 49.6mpg (combined) / 152g/km
Tyres 205/55 R 16
Acceleration 0-62mph: 7.9sec
Top speed 137mph
Price £20,700
Verdict Handles well but essentially pointless
Rating 1/5


from http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/

[chris]

Clarkson would choose a Golf over the 1 series? The man has gone off his rocker.

I don't normally like new BMW cars, but I don't mind the 1 series, because it has the courage to be rear-wheel-drive in a market where everything conservatively remains front-drive, and because the styling isn't too bangled up. I also have no problem with modern diesel engines. A drive in a car with a modern BMW diesel inline-6 will leave you hard-pressed to know it is a diesel.


So if you want a hatchback, buy a Focus. If you want a hatchback with some go, buy the VW.


Last hatchback with some go VW offered here was a stinking pile of garbage. It had a GTI badge, but it didn't have the rest of what GTI was supposed to mean. And I still don't believe a new one would stand up to a 1 series when handling is compaired.

The BMW, a bit crook looking as it might be has the one feature that none of the others can match, unless they do a complete clean sheet redesign, and I believe they deserve credit for sticking to their drivers car ideals, rather than just taking the easy option of front-wheel-drive.

But, that's my opinion anyhow. ;)

[VQ]

There were, in essence, three body styles, five engines and a range of options, so the customer could indulge in a spot of pick’n’mix. - That's what I loved about BMW's that and the dual headlamps.

I've seen a BMW 1 series on the road, because there's a BMW headqaurters on my way to school, they truly are a horrible looking car and even our A3 Golf can fit me in the back with the front seat halfway forwards, and I can do it for a long trip too.

[Justin Martin]

There were, in essence, three body styles, five engines and a range of options, so the customer could indulge in a spot of pick’n’mix.

I suppose he's forgetting the 507 and the Z1? I don't know why BMW has to stick to sedans/coupes, expecially given how nice their 2 seaters have been. (particulary the M versions :D) Ahh well, it's just Clarkson, the Rush Limbaugh of the automotive "journalism" industry.

Clarkson would choose a Golf over the 1 series? The man has gone off his rocker.

I wasn't aware he was ever on his rocker in the first place. ^_^

[VQ]

Chris: he's talking about the MK5, I mean, the TDi 3.0 has the DSG box, that means something, and the new GTi motor is going to be a 2.0T isn't it?

Maybe they should relese them as a 3 door as well, then they might get away with having no rear space.

[chris]

I suppose he's forgetting the 507 and the Z1? I don't know why BMW has to stick to sedans/coupes, expecially given how nice their 2 seaters have been. (particulary the M versions :D) Ahh well, it's just Clarkson, the Rush Limbaugh of the automotive "journalism" industry.



I wasn't aware he was ever on his rocker in the first place. ^_^

Yes, the 507 was nice, the M Roadster was great, and the Z8 was fantastic. :)

[DCsplash]

I'd take a Golf in favour of a 1 series any day, and a Focus.. evan a Renault Kangoo is favourable to the awfull little Beemer.. :D. It has to be the ugliest thing to have rolled across the planet in a good while.. No doubt it drives well though.. Ok, OK,, i'll have the Beemer,, i just can't bring myself to agree with Clarkson.. :)

[chris]

Auto Motor und Sport TV will be comparing the 1er with its rivals in 25 minutes from when this post has been made.

See www.dw-world.de and look for the live video stream. (install Real Alternative if you need the plugins for real video streams).

Also, they have the big Nardo speed-test on as well, and the funny VW Touareg W12.

[VQ]

When are VW gonna start putting these wounderful motors like the W12 motor and the W8 and the TTV10TDi motor in sports cars? or at least in a model below what they normally come in as a hot light version, like mercedes benz, but lighter and awd?

Why not actually make the W12 concept car a relaity with a W12 and a twin turbo v10 diesel? that would be best.

[chris]

The Phaeton 4.2 is on sale now, or very soon, and the W12 will soon follow.

As far as I know, VW has given up on the W8, or at least that's what I heard.

[VQ]

It's in the Passat though.

[chris]

Hmm, the AM&S test displayed graphically the handling advantages of the BMW. It's slalom course performance is amazing, and it stops much quicker too than all the others.

But somehow, the 118d got rated 4th. The Golf got first place, the Astra 3rd, and the Focus 2nd.

Fair enough rating. The Focus these days is a world away from the old one. Interior quality is so much better than before.

[VQ]

Erm, really chris, for what these cars are usually used for, dialy driving and breif extended trips, a golf or Astra is a good car for the job, you don't make any sacrifieces in speed etc, because really, when do you go touring in a little car unless it's a roadster.

[lewi]

OOch, BMW got drilled!!.

I do feel a bit sorry for Bangle though, because he was probably told to "reinvent" BMW or something, because the man can design good cars (take the new 5-series for example).

I don't think the 1-series is overly ugly, well in comparison to the rest of the range.

But the poor ride, poor power and poor space factor is almost unforgiveable for a company like BMW.

[chris]

The old 318is only had 103kW (the wheezy 1.9 litre Z3 engine), but that didn't stop it from being a hugely popular car, or from being fitted with M3 loolalike bodykits and wheels. :)

The dead giveaway was the clattery 4 cylinder engine noise, instead of the frenetic inline-6 scream, and a few other telling little differences.

[Wazza]

Some of those 318's do look nice. I was even thinking about buying one though.

Probably then to have someone crash into it. :rolleyes:

1/5 stars? Yeah very funny. So in terms of safety, features, bad styling. What is it really? 3.5?

[chris]

1/5 is Jeremy being his usual biased self. If it had a Ferrari badge on it, it would be automatically be 5/5. ;)

I wouldn't say the 1er is perfect, but it is definately not a 1/5. You'd give it a 3.5 out of 5, or maybe 4. When it offers such brilliant handling performance and brakes, it deserves to be applauded for that.

I also don't think it is too bad in the engine department. A 120i offers reasonable performance, with a quite efficient valvetronic engine, as does the diesel version.

I suppose you could give other rivals a 1/5 for not matching the BMW's handling and braking?

I believe the 1 series is a big breath of fresh air in a stale small car market too long dominated by the same old conservative front-drive hatch-backs. I'd say rivals are terrified of the BMW, and hoping desperately that it won't be successful, because if it is, it will force a huge revolution in small car design. Manufacturers will have to adopt rear-wheel-drive in response, and that would mean a total clean-sheet redesign of their current small car models - a costly and time consuming undertaking - especially for those makers with little experience in developing rear wheel driven cars.

BMW's ad-campaign should do even more to push the fact that the 1 series is rear-wheel-driven, and really drive home the fact that it is something exclusive to BMW in the small car market at the moment.

Rear wheel drive has the huge advantage of the front wheels only having to steer the car, and not propel it as well. A front drive car suffers the penalties of not only having to steer the car, but also make it move too.

One of the plus points of 3 series models over the recent years, (E36, E46) has always been the handling prowess they offered. Even a base model 318i offered superb handling. The old E39 5 series had that tradition as well, while the E38 7 series was the sole drivers car in the large saloon market. It was the only one with taut suspension, firm steering, and sporty handling. In fact, all of its controls had the same precise, firm feel.

Despite its mammoth size (mostly the daunting length to be honest), the old 750iL could be hustled along with impressive effect. You'd never try it with the rivals, because they'd just rock and roll about too much, or understeer, or various combinations of all three.

Today the Quattroporte is the E38 7 series of its class, with handling prowess clearly a fair margin above its rivals capabilities. An A8 even despite complex 4wd, and advanced alluminium body/spaceframe construction can not hope to corner as quickly as the Quattroporte. It just won't do it.

If 1 series, E38 7 series, and Quattroporte all have one thing in common, it is that they were designed with the keen driver in mind.

[blackice111288]

I believe the 1 series is a big breath of fresh air in a stale small car market too long dominated by the same old conservative front-drive hatch-backs. I'd say rivals are terrified of the BMW, and hoping desperately that it won't be successful, because if it is, it will force a huge revolution in small car design. Manufacturers will have to adopt rear-wheel-drive in response, and that would mean a total clean-sheet redesign of their current small car models - a costly and time consuming undertaking - especially for those makers with little experience in developing rear wheel driven cars.
do you think they;ll bring back RWD corrolas and Maximas, or even finally make the Civic RWD? oh well, i shouldn't be getting my hopes up, even though that would be a welcome change.

[VQ]

Nah, toyota and Honda want the cheapest way out, and they will stick with FWD, as will everyone else, because people actually like back seat space, compared to this which has none. Even MB witht he A class went fwd and in LWB form has mnore leg space then a LWB S class!

[chris]

What about those who like nice handling? I know a lot of people who don't like the fact that their small cars don't handle as well as they want.

And the space issue, at least in the back isn't a huge issue. Most small cars around 1 series size have the same amount of room in the back of them in real terms. Astras, Corollas, etc. You have to go to the mini-MPV's like Scénic to get greatly more room.

I think rear-wheel-drive in small cars will make a come-back in the future. Wheelbases will be longer, and the small cars might end up being a little bit larger, but with short overhangs front and rear.

As it is in the small car market now, everything is nearly the same, except for badges and shape. Same driving, different cover. :( Only BMW is brave enough to challenge the traditional ideas. But BMW has to do that, because BMW's have always traditionally been rear-wheel-drive.

BMW's have also never offered the biggest interior in class, the old E39 5 series was more compact than its rivals inside, but it beat them by a mile when it came to handling.

The front-drive A6 in comparison rocked and rolled about in a drunken fashion, while the slab-sided E-Class was strictly conservative in nearly all respects, but swifter than you'd expect, and with a surprisingly small turning circle. Both rear-drive models (Benz E280 and BMW 528i) both had far tidier handling than the A6.

The A6's trait of lifting the inside rear wheel off the ground during cornering might make the driver look like a hero, but ultimately doesn't do the handling much good, with the body leaning hard on the outside front corner.

Surprisingly, the 4wd A6 wasn't greatly better than the FWD one.

I've noted a lot of interest in the BMW 1 series because it is rear-wheel-drive.

[VQ]

I still don't think it will, we use our golf to carry 4 people, 5 at a stretch and it does it, there is plenty of backseat space, but I guess it's like with 4x4's and having a family of 6, the people in the very back seats get jibbed with tiny uncomfortable seats, BMW is used to donig that anyway.

I honestly don't know why you wouldn't just buy a GTi version of any of the euro cars, the new A5 GTi is meant to be as good as the original from what I've read and they handle really well and have good interior space in a 4 door form, I'm more concerned with the fact BMW is flogging it off as a 4 door, when the rear is useless, and really, when do you EVER get a chance in Victoria or NSW to legally go faster then 110km/h and be able to test it's excelent high speed cornering? never, so who really cares unless it's used as a racecar. If you want a cheap RWD sports car, get a MX5, it has good balance and handling and a low price and it's better looking then the 1 series and actually not meant to hold 4 people. When BMW make a 3 door hatch 1 series, then you can rant how good they are, but till then it has to be a whole package.

They are going back to RWD in the mid class, but I really doubt that most companys will go to RWD in the small class, because the cost is more isn't it? hence why a Golf will be what? 10K cheaper then a BMW with the same features?

[chris]

It might be cheaper here (not in all countries though), but the Golf is still a Golf, and still front-wheel-drive. And BMW can murder the Golf with that, because rear-drive is the one thing the Golf doesn't have.

You can market that very effectively, because almost everyone likes sporty, fun to drive cars, and that is the one thing BMW is renowned for. :) You don't have to speed to enjoy those properties, of the front wheels only doing the steering, and the rear wheels propelling the car along. :)

It's price competitive though:
120 2.0L Valvetronic: 24,300 euros
Golf 2.0L FSI: 24,900 euros

I suspect when the M version of the 1 series arrives, the rivals will be feeling the white-heat of BMW's rear-drive small car revolution. ;)

To be honest, the 1 series is the only new BMW I consider really worth buying. The rest are too bangled up. And with the 1 series, you don't feel like you are the poor joe settling for the lowest end of the range.

[VQ]

what about a little golf hatch called the R32? AWD with a 3.2 V6? And it's a wrx beater. And the fact the M will cost near base 5 series costs, yeah, cheap.

[Justin Martin]

do you think they;ll bring back RWD corrolas and Maximas, or even finally make the Civic RWD? oh well, i shouldn't be getting my hopes up, even though that would be a welcome change.

Maximas maybe, it'd make sense to do it as a cheap FM platform sedan since the Altima has moved upmarket into what was once base Maxima range.

I'd be supprised if the Corolla went back rwd. They'd run into the same packaging issues as JC brought up with the 1 series, and I doubt that's a sacrifice Toyota's willing to make for a economy sedan. They could do a seperate rwd Corolla coupe, but cheap coupes are very much hit and miss at the moment, the demise of the Prelude and soon demise of the Celica are evidence enough of that.

[chris]

Nissan Maxima doesn't need to be rear-wheel-drive. Just needs to be culled and replaced simply with the rear-wheel-drive Nissan Skyline 350 sedan and coupé imported direct from Japan.

That would require the Infiniti G35 to be culled (for obvious reasons). But that would make sense anyway, why does it need a special name just for one or two markets?

If Nissan still requires the services of a front-drive snooze-mobile, take the not too bad Teana sold in Japan.

[blackice111288]

no, i dont agree with that one chris, i already feel we got short changed when it comes to the skyine, its nothing more than the Fairlady's sexy sister, almost the same car.

they could have done us a favor by designing us a actual skyline that used a RB series motor, or at least by keeping the r34 around for another few years as an american only sale. i fell we deserve a RWD maxima, it could do battle with the 3 and 5 series sedans and Benz's c class- cheaper with comparable performance. the new FWD is a pretty good performer, even in its cursed front drive state.
the Maxima is basically the US version of the Teana.

ih8cops- good points, but i doubt that toyota would release a corrola coupe, for 1 reason-the Scion TC, the new little coupe they just came out with. they killed the celica line (rest in peace) to aim more buyers to the tc. it really isn't a bad car either. i feel with the release of the tc, they eventually would have pulled the plug on the celica anyways, just because people would go for the TC instead. i ve seen a few around, im sure we'll start seeing more of them by next summer.

http://www.scion.com/

[VQ]

The sportiest car we will have once the Celica and Mr2 go, because they really aren't selling, will be a Camry!! Argh, they are ugly and the rear end reminds me of a Leyland P76, at least the leyland had a V8 and it is more attractive.

[chris]

The P76 was chalk and cheese.. A modest V8, and a 6 cylinder with a bad case of internal combustion asthma. :rolleyes:

[VQ]

Lol, as I've said in the past, my grandad has had one since they came out, alright, it got a bad rap, but the lower models are rarely seen now, it's all the executives, which is equivilent to a premier at the time, which were the best ones other then the Targa Florio version which had parts from the crushed (scuse the pun) Force 7 project.

[Justin Martin]

That would require the Infiniti G35 to be culled (for obvious reasons). But that would make sense anyway, why does it need a special name just for one or two markets?

The Skyline, being a BMW 323/325 fighter in price and layout, would be a harder sell in the US as a Nissan. It's a tad more expensive than a Maxima, and it's not what people generally associate with Nissan over here.

It could be done, but even if they did, Nissan selling a premium car could undermine Infiniti. Infiniti, quite frankly, doesn't have much of anything compelling to sell besides their FM based cars.

[blackice111288]

The sportiest car we will have once the Celica and Mr2 go, because they really aren't selling, will be a Camry!! Argh, they are ugly and the rear end reminds me of a Leyland P76, at least the leyland had a V8 and it is more attractive.
celica and mr2 are already gone, i think '05 is the last production year. either 04 or 05. brings a tear to my eye........ but if they bring back the supra, i'll dry my eyes quickly.

[VQ]

Yeah, as a 911 Competitor, same as the GT-R a lot more expensive then what it was with a f1 based V10...

[lewi]

Mmmmm, supra. Well, toyota have a 'supercar' in the making at the moment, there's spy pics of it testing round the Nurburgring. It looks quite supra-ish but it also looks a lot more supercar based (ie - NSX type car). I think it may get styling influence from the supra, but thats about it.

Toyota were fools to destroy the old (good) Mr-2 like they did...............tut tut, soft top. If they kept the vibe of the Mr-2 the same, then they would have sold more AND they wouldnt be cutting it from the production.

[chris]

The old MR2 wasn't bad, but it sure could bite the unwary, in rather a similar fashion to old mid-engine Ferraris. The Spider versions would have been better with the 140kW Celica engine in them.

And then you have the problem of the price of some being quite expensive in the first place, bring into the equation things like a second hand Lotus Elise. An Elise might have a very modest 88kW, but it only weighs 675kg - light enough to make the light MR2, MX5, S2000 and Porsche Boxster look seriously overweight. And the others haven't a hope in hell of matching the awesome cornering and braking performance of an Elise. The Elise doesn't just stop well once or twice, but on many repeated applications of the brakes.

And if you don't like the Rover engine, you can always retro-fit a Honda Integra Type R engine (the old one). It apparently goes in quite well.

Toyotas new supercar looks like it will be a mean machine. With any luck, it won't be much like the Supra. The Supra was more grand-tourer, and less sports-car.

[VQ]

people still like to think they are and treat them so.

[blackice111288]

The Supra was more grand-tourer, and less sports-car. if it runs 13.1 in the 1/4 , its a sports car.:)

B18 in a Elise? wow, they'll put those in anything. they are stong motors once fully built though, the most ive seen from a street legal one was 500+, in a Integra GSR. it was running mid 10's in full street trim (as in full interior).
450 + in a integra or civic will get you at least high 10's.

on the toyota subject, i would like to see a sports car from them, not a supercar. they need something to do battle with the Evo, STi, GTO, Mustang GT, and the S2000. The last model MR2 (MR-S) was ok, but it ws slow. the handling ws there, and the clutchless 6 speed was a great feature, but its 0-60 times were close to that of a Civic Si. why pay that much just to have a great handling, slow drop top with no storage room? I dunno what direction there were heading with the celica. it went from a sports car to gas sipper, at least they kept the MRS RWD. they could have treated the celica with the same courtesy, since they changed the Corrola to FWD back in the early 90's
I would like to see a new RWD I-6 Cressida back on the market, possibly on the Altezza/IS300 or the GS300/Aristo Chassis, because they use I-6's (the non turbo version of the Supra's 2JZ-GTE)

[VQ]

The RB motor was outlawed because it wouldn't pass future emission laws, ditto for the old 13b rotary and the SR20 and the Supra motor as well, it's that simple, they need to make new motors simply because of emission laws and turbo's don't go that well with emissions.

Was that 10 second integra turbocharged? if it was N/A I'd be really impressed, but whacking on a turbo so you have no power till 5000 anyone can do.

[blackice111288]

Was that 10 second integra turbocharged? if it was N/A I'd be really impressed,turbo charged-but i have seen all motor hondas running 10's and less, but they are far and few in between, and usually drag only cars.

but whacking on a turbo so you have no power till 5000 anyone can do.
not if you plan on running quick times at the strip, your boost is coming on way before that, more like 1500-3000 rpm's at the most. if your boost is coming on at 5000, either your turbo is to big, your injectors are to small, blow off valves/waste gate is the wrong rating or your boost controller is tuned wrong or broken

[VQ]

Erm, the reason for such a large turbo is for making a huge amount of hp, because with a smaller one, you might have got less lag, but not as much hp, and people do it on purpose, like on those 1000hp skylines, do they REALLY have max boost at even 4 grand? doubt it. Even on V8's you need massive turbo's but at least with them they have a lot of waste gasses to be able to get decent driveability out of it.

The fastest FWD drag car is a Honda and runs a 9 second quarter! Street legal mini tubbed V8's run faster!

[chris]

Look at WRC. They are turbocharged, little 4 cylinder engines and have the torque of a large highly tuned V8 engine, at low engine speeds. Because they are restricted to about 300bhp, the manufacturers bump the torque output up to make up for it.

Compare the following two:

Toyota Corolla WRC: 677Nm@3000rpm (2 litres, 4 cylinders, 1 turbocharger)
V8 Supercar: approx. 580-620Nm@6000rpm (5 litres, 8 cylinders)

The V8 Supercar doesn't matter much what brand it is, both Ford/Holden cars have similarly peaky power delivery, torque at 6000rpm, power at 7500rpm. WRC cars don't have turbo-lag issues either.

[blackice111288]

The fastest FWD drag car is a Honda and runs a 9 second quarter!

actually it is a Saturn Ion driven by Lisa Kubo that runs 7's.


Erm, the reason for such a large turbo is for making a huge amount of hp, because with a smaller one, you might have got less lag, but not as much hp, and people do it on purpose, like on those 1000hp skylines, do they REALLY have max boost at even 4 grand? doubt it. Even on V8's you need massive turbo's but at least with them they have a lot of waste gasses to be able to get decent driveability out of it.

the logic behind larger turbochargers is to be able to generate more boost. why get a huge T88 to get 15 psi when you can get a smaller T3/T4 to get 15 psi with much less lag? you dont nessesarily need a larger turbo to make more boost, it just causes more lag. All you have to do to make more boost is to get higher pressure blow-off valves (they do have a purpose other than to be loud, they are loud because they are letting off more pressure; or tune your boost via a boost controller, with is still working thru the b/o valves anyway.

and for the 1000hp skylines and such, they have sequential turbochargers to reduce lag, they come stock like that, and the person tuning the motor would be a fool not to keep a similar system on the motor. thats why if you ever see one of these built motors on display, there is usually a turbo larger than the other. the smaller one spools up first then the larger one spools up to create peak boost. and on the motors that are converted to Single turbo (which i think is stupid) like on Supras and twin turbo FD's,they keep a shot of 75-100hp of juice on board to spool up the usually oversized single turbo

[VQ]

Erm, but what about when people DO put on larger turbo's that are capable of a higher Hp rating, but as a result of it's size, it then has huge lag? don't say it doesn't happen, because I've read of cars that do, and they drift them still! So it takes some skill to use it with such high turbo point, but the power it makes is obviously worth it, now really, would you want a turbo capable of 300hp, or a turbo capable of making 500hp? the 500hp one is what you do when you can't get any more power out of a smaller turbo when the smaller turbo is running in it's optimum, so therefore going to a larger one with a higher optimum PSI level is logical, especially when chasing times down the qaurter.

The fastest FWD drag car is a Honda and runs a 9 second quarter!

actually it is a Saturn Ion driven by Lisa Kubo that runs 7's.

I'm talking about in Australia, not overseas.

And the 1000hp skylines and supras still have massive turbos with lots of lag, they have to, to be able to make that sort of power, can't make 1000hp with a T3 can you? speccially when it maxes out it's hp rating at 300hp or so.

Interestingly, Nizpro, and Australian mob, have managed to get 1000fwhp out of a XR6 Turbo 4 litre motor, and they used a wastegate instead of a BOV because they say that anything over 3 litres makes too much exaust gas for a BOV to be effiecent.

[blackice111288]

Erm, but what about when people DO put on larger turbo's that are capable of a higher Hp rating, but as a result of it's size, it then has huge lag? don't say it doesn't happen, because I've read of cars that do, and they drift them still!
answer:and for the 1000hp skylines and such, they have sequential turbochargers to reduce lag, they come stock like that, and the person tuning the motor would be a fool not to keep a similar system on the motor. thats why if you ever see one of these built motors on display, there is usually a turbo larger than the other. the smaller one spools up first then the larger one spools up to create peak boost. and on the motors that are converted to Single turbo (which i think is stupid) like on Supras and twin turbo FD's,they keep a shot of 75-100hp of juice on board to spool up the usually oversized single turbo
and most of the time, when someone is trhowing a T66 or larger turbo, their engine is usually able to supply enough EG pressue to run the turbo, which is why its pretty useless to throw a t88 on a SR20DET, even if its running more than 500 horses.

im not saying boost lag doesn't happen,what im saying is there are ways to reduce lag, and in a car modified by someone that knows what they are doing, boost is gonna come on waaay before 5000 rpm's

[VQ]

ok, more like 4000hp, I was exaggerating, but on rare occasions people do things like that on purpose.

[blackice111288]

oh, ok. but i wonder why some one would install a large turbo like that if it just would create lag instead of increase their engine performance? thats lke adding a t88 to my stock Si hatchback. it probably wouldn't even spool up till aroung 6 or 7 thousand rpm!!!

[VQ]

No, they do it because it increases the power it's making, maybe they have increased the exaust port flow or something?

[blackice111288]

not if its lagging untill late in the RPM band. there is a such thing as too big a turbo, which can decrease your performance. it really depends on the setup of the motor you are running on which turbo is going to create the most usable horsepower