impressive

I have no such experience with the E90, but my E46 is downright scary at speeds in excess of 125. The aerodynamics and chassis seem as though they ought to be competent enough up to 140 or 150, but that's still really pushing the edge of the envelope.

Thus, though some will claim otherwise, I really don't think the 3 series was genuinely designed, built and tested with excessive speed in mind. You need only drive a more capable machine such as a 997, M5 or SL-class MB to get this impression.

And no, nothing is wrong with it.

Originally Posted by fidozoom

And the only price for this feeling of safety is a few hundred iraqi children's heads blown out and a few hundred innocent iraqis left with only half their bodies.

if you had really felt this has no place in a car forum, that's all you'd have said.

Well ... I posted a responce to this ... but decided this was not the place for it ....

Originally Posted by akhbhaat

I have no such experience with the E90, but my E46 is downright scary at speeds in excess of 125. The aerodynamics and chassis seem as though they ought to be competent enough up to 140 or 150, but that's still really pushing the edge of the envelope.

Thus, though some will claim otherwise, I really don't think the 3 series was genuinely designed, built and tested with excessive speed in mind. You need only drive a more capable machine such as a 997, M5 or SL-class MB to get this impression.

And no, nothing is wrong with it.

That's a very good point. I've not been that fast in my 3er so I have no idea how well it supports that speed.

Arguing on the internet is like the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.

Originally Posted by wheeler

Arguing on the internet is like the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.

Sometimes if you open your eyes, you might see things in a different light.

Having a discussion or arguing in the internet can be very educational if you follow it up with research and objective thinking ....

Arguing blindly and closed minded is retarded no matter what the format.

Originally Posted by adc

Oh yeah? Where the hell were you from 1945 to 1990? There were some 60-70 million people all over Eastern Europe who didn't exactly relish being handed over to Communist Russia after the war.
. . .
To keep this sort of on topic, I wonder if anyone knows what the speed limit is in Iraq?

I agree with your opinion. I don't know the speed limit in Iraq, but here are some limits in different countries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limit
Variable speed limit looks like a perfect approach.

We can't blame speed for all accidents on our roads. There are others:
1) Young, unexperienced drivers:
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...18/207699.html
2) drunk drivers
http://alcoholism.about.com/cs/drive...htsa031224.htm
In 2002, more than 17,000 people were killed in alcohol-related crashes on the nation's highways, representing a death every 30 minutes. An estimated 258,000 people were injured in crashes where police reported that alcohol was present
3) the cell phone conversations, while driving
http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20060629...vingwhiledrunk
4)unsafe vehicles (like SUVs)

Overall 2002 Highway safety data
http://www.nhtsa.com/people/Crash/cr...stics/National Highway Safety Data charts.pdf

Of course speed gets the most of publicity. It's easier to control.
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/inju...troduction.htm

Speed-related crashes can occur on high speed limit roads at low speeds, e.g. below 30 miles per hour; for example, truck rollovers on exit ramps
So the data in the report don't present the highway fatalities only

Wow. This thread has veered off topic quite a bit...

Still, anyone that spells piqued "peaked" should NOT be doing 155, anywhere, on a track, in a plane, space shuttle, whatever.

And don't confuse this with being high-handed about speeding, sure we all speed, here there and everywhere, but read this post and tell me it doesn't scare you a wee bit.

"Yeah! I know about all those pieces of crap that mightbe on the road but sad to say that will not stop me from trying. I am dumb like that. There is something about having to drove through traffic other than a track that peaks my interest. One day something is really going to go wrong on the street, but until that time street racing I will cont."

1. He openly admits to being dumb in the second sentence.
2. He changes tense no less than 3 times in one sentence, quite a feat.
3. Ends with acknowledgement that something will go wrong, eventually, but what the hey...

I'm not being a prude, I smoke marijuana, I believe in government conspiracies, but this guy scares the **** outta me.

Originally Posted by anon

Wow. This thread has veered off topic quite a bit...

Still, anyone that spells piqued "peaked" should NOT be doing 155, anywhere, on a track, in a plane, space shuttle, whatever.

And don't confuse this with being high-handed about speeding, sure we all speed, here there and everywhere, but read this post and tell me it doesn't scare you a wee bit.

"Yeah! I know about all those pieces of crap that mightbe on the road but sad to say that will not stop me from trying. I am dumb like that. There is something about having to drove through traffic other than a track that peaks my interest. One day something is really going to go wrong on the street, but until that time street racing I will cont."

1. He openly admits to being dumb in the second sentence.
2. He changes tense no less than 3 times in one sentence, quite a feat. This guy
3. Ends with acknowledgement that something will go wrong, eventually, but what the hey...

I'm not being a prude, I smoke marijuana, I believe in government conspiracies, but this guy scares the **** outta me.

(Except the part about goverment conspiracies: There has to be some competence in an organization in order to pull off a conspiracy. Obviously, that's not the case.)
This guy is a perfect example of why many think we need the speed limits that we have. (And maybe they're right). The majority lose freedoms due to irresponsible behavior by a minority. Some of us learn that in kindergarten. High speed is one thing; doing it in traffic because it's more interesting? Idiot.

Originally Posted by fidozoom

And the only price for this feeling of safety is a few hundred iraqi children's heads blown out and a few hundred innocent iraqis left with only half their bodies.

Cheap shot. I don't know what kind of lollipop fantasy world you live in, but perhaps you might acknowledge that the last several decades of prosperity at home in the United States is not reflective of how the rest of the world has been living. You use your life on the east coast in two century old democracy with the rule of law firmly in place as a standard for the rest of the world and this is not reasonable.

Life in a war zone following the violent collapse one of the most infamous tyrannies in world history is certain to contain horrors. Nobody likes thinking about it but to be objective you have to know that it's par for the course. If you have a fruit fight, you're going to bust grapes.

Bottom line--the price of the war on terror is far less costly than maintaining the status quo. Accept the realities.

If the "big three" stopped making cars (they lose about $2k on every one sold), I think we could eventually have higher speed limits because we'd have more capable fleet. A Chevy Cavalier can't go 150mph because it's not stable, not geared right, unable to slow down, not stiff enough, and the list goes on. But for the same price an economy model Mercedes A class SUV or Audi A3 can achieve this level of performance. Capable cars coming out of Detroit are an exception - Corvette, a few Cadillacs maybe.

American car manufacturers have mismanaged the largest auto companies into the world into an embarassment. They're selling mediocre to downright poor cars to the frugal half of middle class at deep discounts, but these consumers can buy much better cars from foreign manufacturers in the $15-$20k price range.

Who knew it would be a bad idea to let unions pay uneducated "git-r-done" line workers over $100k to build the worst cars in America in a business with 1% margin? Screw R&D - we just thought of heated washer fluid (which BMW used to put on their cars a decade ago). And there's nothing wrong with putting 4 speed automatics in the new-for-2007 models.

Honda and Toyota have rehired the same workers that Ford and GM are laying off at a clip of 30,000 a year each and somehow good cars come out and labor costs are in check. So I blame mismanagement.

Originally Posted by westwest888

Honda and Toyota have rehired the same workers that Ford and GM are laying off at a clip of 30,000 a year each and somehow good cars come out and labor costs are in check. So I blame mismanagement.

The highest quality domestic nameplate automobile factory in the United States is the GM-Toyota NUMMI joint venture plant where they build the Corolla, Tacoma and the Pontiac Vibe. They don't just use the same GM union workers, they even use the same factory.

While I don't know how many ex-GM workers end up employed by Honda in Alabama, I suspect its not too many. Honda tests and screens its workers before offering them employment.

The QC that made the Japanese namelates what they are today was even invented by an American, Dr. C. Edwards Deming. It's an interesting story of the decline and fall of an American industry.

I have a 1986 Porsche with heated washer fluid. This stuff is fairly old technology.

The automobile industry is, along with the construction industry, airplane industry, and munitions industry, one of the few major manufacturing bases the United States still retains.

As an American citizen with an interest in the continued economic viability of the nation as a whole, I don't want to see GM and Ford disappear or collapse. We need a manufacturing base of some sort to retain credibility worldwide - especially against the likes of China, which (unlike the western world incl. Europe and the US) maintains a growing industrial base. A mounting trade deficit (caused by the decline of the industrial base) means that we'd be forced to buy virtually everything on credit (not that we don't already, as it seems). This is fine so long as the dollar remains the world standard of economic exchange (guaranteeing the US a virtually unlimited credit line), but what happens if it doesn't? Nothing is forever and nothing is guaranteed.

As much good as the labor unions may have done for a number of common workers, they (as a whole) have done a much greater disservice to this nation and its economy by demanding compensation which has made our industrial base uncompetitive with the rest of the world. Look at what's happened to the steel industry - and look at what's happening to the automobile industry. GM, for one, is tied down by enormous legacy benefit costs which greatly restrict their R&D and QA budgets, meaning they turn out subpar products which they must sell at a reduced (oftentimes at a loss) price in order to move product. And why move product at a loss? So they can at least try to cover the costs and benefit expenses which are causing them so much headache in the first place.

I'm going to stop before this evolves into a thesis on the benefits of free market economics...

Why? I had a 1978 Plymouth Horizon that was probably the worst car ever built outside of a non-communist or socialist country. Stuff broke on that car that I didn't think could possibly break on a car. They shoulda let Chrysler go bankrupt back then. That was my last "Big Three" car.

My wife and daughter both drive Honda products, built in America by Americans using American-developed quality control.

I purchased my Honda stock on the New York Stock Exchange.

Kaiser, the huge West-coast HMO, is what is left of the company that built the WWII Liberty Ships. It couldn't build ships profitably, so it became an HMO. Perhaps that's what Ford and GM should do. They are dinosaurs, it's the 21st Century now, let them die.

This thread needs to be moved to the political science forum.

I got my 330i up to about 128mph, the car was still accelerating, the car is strong. I dont know what the restrictor limit is on the car but it sure seemed to want to go past 130 ifi I kept on going.

Originally Posted by gkambanis

I got my 330i up to about 128mph, the car was still accelerating, the car is strong. I dont know what the restrictor limit is on the car but it sure seemed to want to go past 130 ifi I kept on going.

My ZHP is less stable than my previous E36 M3 at speeds over 120mph.

Aero? Camber/castor? Other suspension considerations?

Not sure yet... the ZHP does seem to have a more eager turn-in than the M3, so maybe it's the alignment after all... maybe just my car?



Please keep this thread going, I'm learning quite a bit about some of the seemingly incurable diseases of the USA. (Not saying this out of spite, but rather love).

adc
03 330 ZHP

Originally Posted by adc

My ZHP is less stable than my previous E36 M3 at speeds over 120mph.

I knew I wasn't insane when I suggested this at the beginning of the thread.

Originally Posted by akhbhaat

I knew I wasn't insane when I suggested this at the beginning of the thread.

They fixed this on e90 I guess, because it was quite confident going 130 on a wet highway in Germany at night.

140+ started to get a little tense, but I think the tension was between the seat and the steering wheel.