tbielobockie

M3 is more predictable, has better brakes and isn't unsettled by bumps.

Likely the RX would handle better on glass smooth pavement but in the real world because the M3 and roll over bumps and still be pointing in the same direction it handles better.

Pretty amasing for 500lb more weight, a back seat, real trunk and great build quality.

ZeroBanger

The 60-0 in the FD was 109 Feet, what is the 60-0 in the M3? i agree the M3 has amazing brakes, it may even be close or in the same territory as the FD, but to say they are better, please post some stats, thanks.

You can make comments about the M3 and handling in the real world, I can say the same thing about the RX-8. In the real world on rough pavement the Rx8 would outhandle an FD. But we are talking about the ability of the car in ideal circumstances (on a track) the FD has better handling and that is partially because of the engine placement.

Thanks.

ZeroBanger

IN this article http://bmw.jbroadtests.com/3series/2002M3/index4.php I see the M3 has braking 60-0 in 112 feet. The best recorded time for an FD is 109 feet. I am sure thats with in reason of saying that both cars have similar braking performance. So why does the M3 have "better brakes" Thanks.

tbielobockie

Look at the brakes on the FD then look at the brakes on the M3.

The M3s are much larger and carry more mass.

I don't really care what the car stops from 60. How does it stop after 10 60 to 0 runs. Thats what counts.

In the real world, on real pavement the M3 is the better of the FD.

I don't give a **** what it does on Car and Drivers glass smooth skidpad or the unreality of the autocross. Which IMHO the M3 is the better of the FD at as well because... of the M3's superior throttle response and better powerband.

tbielobockie

Since you only have one of the cars in question and I have both... let me tell you from experience the BMW has better brakes. (and is a better car overall). I've beat on the BMW brakes and I can't get them to fade nor after 70k+ miles are they any worse than when new. The FDs brakes got all warped by 45k miles. The brakes are just like everything else on the FD... low quality.


The FD is neat looking and rare... the BMW does everything better stock for stock.

ZeroBanger

all that matters is how fast the car stops, not the size of the brakes. The m3 is a fat pig, it needs larger brakes.

clayne

You are an ignorant fool.

Please go back to school and read up on bushings, compliance, and suspension geometry.

BTW: I notice you aren't mentioning much about the inferior MacPherson strut system used on the M3.. I wonder why that is?

I think BMWs are great cars - I've always loved the 2002s, CS', and E30 M3s - but I'm not sitting here making false comparisons between the cars with ancedotal data that means jack (MacPherson design is a valid issue).

wingsfan

Zero, I see you post this all the time and I just have to add that you don't know what the **** you're talking about in regards to the COG and handling associated with the swap. If anything my COG is lower, and I would characterize the handling as unaffected. You'd be hard pressed to tell me you could notice the difference. If you did I'd assume that it was 99.99% due to your bias against the swaps.

My LS1 sits lower in the car (I had to lower the steering rack about 0.75"), and the bulk of the weight of the engine is in the crankshaft (bottom of the engine). The engine barely extends over the front axle and the accessory pulleys are the bulk of what is forward. They probably weigh about as much as a front mount intercooler and it's piping, but I neversee anyone post about how their FMIC ruined their handling.

As for someone auto-X-ing their V8-RX7, that'd be me. I might get beat by Jeff Hoskinson in his lightly modded FD, but he's a much better driver than I am, and he was beating me while my car was still rotary powered. I'd bet he has to rebuild his engine before I do though.

Anyhow, you've expressed your disapproval of the V8 swaps many times over. We get it, you don't like it. I'm not asking you to like it, or even approve of it. I'd just like to see you stop spreading misinformation. You look like an idiot when you spout off about things you obviously have no clue about.

clayne

There is no way in HELL the V8 has the same or lower COG. Come ON! Yes, the crankcase is the majority of the weight, but the heads are not exactly "feather-weight."

ZeroBanger

bullshit. Plain and simple.

clayne

Let me give you some perspective as to who our little friend tbielobockie is:

Dude is a 17 year old who goes by the name "v8-7". Funny how he cannot decide if he was born in 1982 (ls1-tech forums) or 1986 (here). Perhaps he wants to look older to his domestic friends:

Some of his choice words:

12-24-2003, 04:32 PM
v8-7
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5

the rotary engine is the biggest joke, RX7 stands for Rotary Expirement #7. Ive read/experienced soo much about these engines,,, bottom line, they are not reliable, they have no low end torque, they suck. hey my car was fast when it ran 12.56 best. Only lasted 4k miles but it had **** for power under 4000RPM and tryin to double clutch any gear was a joke becuase i never had boost built up, i had to wait, but by then i had to make up bus lengths.
I find it funny, most of the rotards on that site have gone through 6, 7, and 8 engines, keep in mind these are the weekend warrior types, nothing hardcore, nothing with high miles. Hahah, i read once, this one fool blew his engine on the dyno on a BASE run! he just spent 3-4k on a single turbo setup, never got to use it, trailered the car to the dyno, and then she blew.... doesnt that sound great??? My engine blew once, and that was enough for me, the ls1 is my new powerplant. I would own a T/a, but i already have soo much money racked up in my 7 i would lose my *** if i tried to get rid of it. So the next best thing is the LS1 swap some pics on this link: http://www.irondonut.com/personal/b...s/beefprep.html
when i get my car done, it is my personal goal to smoke the **** out of every single rotard freak i see on the road, and rub it in their ignorant faces. !
---

Looks like this guy really knows how to drive - just look at that misinformation he has spread already.

clayne

More actual information:




Umm yea, so that has a better CG and polar moment than the 13B-REW? You don't have to be an engineer to figure out the bunk factor of that statement.

Some actual information from a 93 FD + LS1 OWNER:

12-16-2003, 04:48 PM #4

1point3liter
Teching In
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 41
ok, someone on another board didn't fully understand the numbers the car makes. Let me break them down real quick.

The car trapped just short of 129mph, (100mph in the 1/8th). It has run 11.4 with a 100 shot and 11.7 with a 2.3 60 rolling out of the hole with a 150 shot. The car cut's 1.7's on bfg drag radials and shouldn't have trouble cutting 1.6's on et streets. Reading between the lines you'll see the car will run 10's still with stock heads.

Excellent condition 3rd gen rx-7 r1 rolling chassis's sell for an easy 5-6k with out an engine trans, etc. An excellent condition stock R1 3rd gen rx-7's will sell for around 17K+.

If I have time, I'm going to put the car on a dyno for some tuning if it hasn't already sold. I know the car has 130mph trap speeds in it. And it's evident the car can produce 10 second time slips.

The price is listed as obo, and I do know it's a little higher than a stock fbody, but please understand that fast rx7's sell for these prices, and I'm not selling an fbody

I notice that I also forgot to mention the car weighs 2700lb's with half a tank of gas and still retains a perfect 50/50 weight distrobution.

Thanks again!
__________________
93' RX-7 R1 "57B"
M6, Spec 3, LS1edit, TR224, 918's, Ti Retainers, Comp Pushrods, JBA Shorties, NX 150 wet
11.7 @ 129mph
---


Fast car, definitely - but not exactly Drag Strip Dominator.

Black Magic

iTrader: (2)

Clayne, your a moron, V8-7 is my user name on LS1tech.com and i do know how to F-in drive, i had a garret GT 66 single on my 7 and it sucked,,, maybe the turbo wasnt matched properly and that caused all the turbo lag and therefor the lack of low end torque. I know when i downshifted that car with that setup it sucked ***. it wasted time even with stayin on the gas while downshifting into a lower gear. i have a del sol with an ITR swap, when i downshift on that bitch it f-in pulls with no stall whatsoever, Yeah thats an ALL motor piston car Vs turbo rotary, point being i can drive, the setup is at fault more than likely aside from no low end torque to begin with,,, and this tieblocke fellow is not me,, so dont be going around playing Sherlock holmes or some gay crap like that. i am 21 yrs old, own a 93 touring and am performing the ls1 swap. What i post is what i feel like typing,, if you dont like it,, suck it. Mycar isnt done yet, i just sold the rotardly engine, and am in the process of selling my single turbo. then i will buy an LS1 swap.do you even own an FD????
stop being an ***,i know all the facts about the ls1 swap.
and yes the crank shaft of the ls1 in a FD sits lower than the E-shaft of a rotardly engine ina FD as for the lower COG,,, who knows, the Ls1 has heads to add to upper end weight whereas the rotardly obviously doesnt have heads.
To end this debate of the LS1 FD Vs. rotardly FD i say we organize a meet. FD's with a LS1 swap and FD's with a rotary setup with the same HP levels give or take.basically keep everything identicle except for power plants.We'll run Autocross, 1/4 mile, top speed, braking, full scale road course, ETC. similar suspension setups, ETC.
----Untill this day occurs, all this LS1 Vs rotary FD debate is prectically useless. yeah hinson did this, irondonut did that, 1point3liter accoplished that.... What we need is a REAL comparision, a competition, and that will settle all.
-done dont want to hear no more...

Black Magic

iTrader: (2)

BTW,,, clayne,, whos side are you on? you post some good factual info from 1point3liters thread on his v8-7 and then your all bitchy about it not possibly having anywhere near the same COG as a rotary setup....
and if you knew anything about 1/4 timeslips or even going to the track, youll know that a 129 MPH trap is DAMN dead on for a mid 10 second pass. Obviously 1point3liter was launching lightly, cutting not so great 60fts. 1.5 Vs 1.6 60fts is .25 at the end of the 1320. that sad 2.3 60ft he pulled Killed his overall ET. Aside from the poor 60ft time,,, this guy is obviously spinning his ***** off~!
400-440 hp ls1 in a 2900lb car (rx7) will produce mid 10 sec passes with a good driver. that **** just doesnt happen with the rotary engine. Face it, the ls1 FD will own a rotary FD.
A turbo honda Vs a all motor honda, i know this because i am the honda guru. I know when i punch the throttle on my ITR del sol, that bitch immediatly takes off, then i bang second and im gone. ive raced many turbo cars, when i raced another turbo honda,,, we'll hit the gas at the same time, and no matter what ill pull ahead right away, grab second,,, as hes just startin to wind out 1st and im gone at that point. Same deal here with an LS1 FD Vs turbo FD.
----JUST LOOK AT THE FRIGGIN DYNO NUMBERS!!! totally flat trq curve with an LS1 therefor maximizing the performance of the car/engine. Look at ANY turbo rotary where does the power come in???? 4-8k and its linear,,, so when you grab the next gear, you already at a lower trq level and it has to work its way back up, whereas the ls1 when it grabs the next gear is at the same trq level as it was at redline losing no ground and throwin you in the seat like no other.
---i have freinds in CA, ill drive down there, party it up with them, smoke your sorry ***, and throw another party with my freinds....il do it to prove a point, **** ill make sure i get it on tape and post it all over this forum with links to this post so everyone can see what a jackass you are....

Black Magic

iTrader: (2)

your in Nor Cal, so is he,, Livermore to be exact....
-this can work out, i cant wait...

skunks

id be willing to put money down on the LS1, and i normally dont gamble hehe

clayne

"----JUST LOOK AT THE FRIGGIN DYNO NUMBERS!!! totally flat trq curve with an LS1 therefor maximizing the performance of the car/engine. Look at ANY turbo rotary where does the power come in???? 4-8k and its linear,,, so when you grab the next gear, you already at a lower trq level and it has to work its way back up, whereas the ls1 when it grabs the next gear is at the same trq level as it was at redline losing no ground and throwin you in the seat like no other."

Hah jackass. Do you actually believe the initial turbo spool up as shown on chart to chart actually represents the entire power band through all the gears? What, you think the turbo STOPs when you shift gears? Do you even have a ******* clue how a turbocharger works?

I'm truly not interested in your drag offs - if YOU, not your pal, want to head over to Laguna Seca or Thunderhill (which is near us) next DE we can both get together on, we can throw a hot lap timer on both cars and go at it.

My apologies for referencing you with the other guy, as you both happened to use language which referred to the same ******* website as if you both owned the same car.

BTW dude: I happen to know about Hondas too. Did my first B18C swap back in 96 - before you fast and the furious dudes were even out of middle school.

Whenever your car is ready holmes.

wingsfan

No, the heads are not "featherweight", but the engine remains bottom heavy nonetheless, and it is tucked very nicely into my engine bay. The COG argument is the latest argument from the haters that don't want to see their precious wankel replaced, now that they can't refute the actual weight of the car.

"Chicken Little's", all of you. "The sky is falling!" Face it, you CAN replace the 13brew with a V8 and not really upset the balance or weight of the car.

And any differences that do occur can be tuned out through the suspension. I don't think the fact that my car now has a 51:49 weight distribution makes it handle like ***.

Of course, Zero will probably just respond with "Bullshit, Plain and Simple", because that is easier to regurgitate than to accept that he might be wrong.

clayne

Because it is bullshit dude.

Look, it's not "the sky is falling, oh my god, watch out!" it's just simply not the same style of engine or way of getting the job done.

Here's some reading for you:

http://www.wrc.com/en_GB/Features/Co...feature003.htm

wingsfan

Hey thanks for suggesting some reading and assuming I don't know about any of that. I read it, it's interesting, but it didn't point out anything I didn't already know.

Anyhow, From your own link.

"The first priority is to get as much of the weight as low as possible."

That's pretty nicely accomplished with the swap (heavier, bottom heavy engine that sits lower in the car), so I'll quickly move on to the next point.

I'll concede that the polar moment of inertia is changed by moving some of the weight farther forward in the chassis, but to what extent? Is it better, worse, or indifferent? By most accounts the LS1 is around 40-50 lbs heavier than the 13brew. Agreed? How much of that 40-50 lbs is in front of the axles? Maybe 4-5 lbs? OK, I replaced the 36 lb stock battery with my 13 lb Hawker Genesis. So now I am 25 lbs heavier or so in my engine bay, but I've cut a shitload of weight in front of the axles. So what's the net result to my PMOI?

I'd contend that the difference it causes is so minor that you wouldn't notice it in anything short of pushing the car to its extreme limits, and even then keeping the car under control is more driver skill than anything mechanical about the car.

Have you even seen an LS1 converted FD? Driven one? Gone for a ride in one? If your answer to those is no, then you don't know what you're talking about. You're just making an educated guess.

Is my car better now that it has a V8 in it? I honestly don't know. I changed so many things in my swap (new bushings, rebuilt brakes, new coilovers, a strut tower brace, new wheels and tires, etc.) that the car is completely different than it was before (mostly stock). It still handles great (or better than it was), and I have tons of instantaneous power on tap (and a flatter torque curve), better reliability, and better mileage to boot.

Anyhow, to reiterate. if you haven't driven/ridden in one, then you're guessing. It's like me arguing that an Enzo outperforms the new Porsche Carrera GT. I've never seen either of them in person, much less driven them, so all I have to go on is hearsay, conjecture, and what's printed in a magazine.

I stand by my statement earlier that the differences you'd notice would be subjective and would fall along the lines of your personal bias. Find someone local to you that's done the swap and go for a spin. It'll be an eye opening experience I'm sure.

Bottom line is this. I'm happy with my car. I'm glad I did the swap. I'm not trying to convince anyone that they should or shouldn't do the swap. I'm just frustrated with all of the bullshit theoretical rhetooric some people are throwing around. 99.99% of the people involved don't know what they're talking about because they're trying to find the differences on paper, or through what someone told them on the 'net. At some point the misinformation needs to stop.

I've said my peace now, so I'll just step aside and quietly shake my head in disgust the next time I see the V8 v. rotary debate pop up. We might as well argue over what's better, Coke or Pepsi. (BTW it's Coke)

pp13bnos

iTrader: (1)

Now here is a good post- CJ

sloshua71

While not that relavent, to throw a twist into the whole polar moment idea, Porsche used a front engine rear tranny setup on the 928 to provide a fair amount of weight over each axle instead of having all the weight lumped in the center of the car. Supposedly this gives the car two definate ends like a dumbell so rotation is predictable and controllable. Seems like it may be true from all the statements ive read about it being hard to stop a midengine car from spinning once its started.
Josh

FormerPorscheGuy

To answer the origninal question:

Single turbo. I have spent thelast week installing one with a friend and I like the idea of what that setup offers.

If I wanted a LS1 I would have bought a corvette.

V8 is a juice, not an engine option.

Black Magic

iTrader: (2)

haha, my Del sol will prolly spank your FD and its my daily driver. My LS1 FD will be done in spring, it will be pulling low 10s maybe high nines and still handling like it should. You will not beat it, anywhere, period.
Who gives a **** when you did your first GSR swap, i did my first one 3 yrs ago woo hooo, guess what? it was one of the fastest bolt ons/swap car ive heard of. 2700Lb car with 180WHP turning 13.8s w/ not so great 2.0 60fts,,,now thats some driving.
P.S that car has nothing on the del sol, you dont have ****, and why is it with all you cali fools are cocky ******? so ive noticed.

Black Magic

iTrader: (2)

BTW, i know how a turbo works, i know it doesnt stop. If your making full boost at 5000 RPM making 300 WHP and then at 8000 PRM still at full boost making 400 WHP.
---Your still at full boost when you shift or damn near, but i dont care how you look at it,,, your still gonna gonna be 100 WHP less when you shift into the next gear. Unless you have some magical car that stays at 8000 RPM through all gears making full power at all times.
Anyone knows thats any turboed car has a linear torque curve, unless you have a dinky turbo, then maybe youll get a flat torque curve.
What does your FD have done to it? Never have i heard anything about your ALL MIGHTY and ALL POWER and ALL SUPERIOR rotary steup....
stock twins??? cool