Smaller engines are better drivers cars?

[Redline]

@Rha

Great topic this BTW

Another thing to consider about the additional weight isn't so much it's even distribution, but surely where that weight appears dynamically.

The greater proportion of the additional weight will end up being transferred onto the outside front tyre in a corner. You're now chucking an extra 75kg+ into a bit of rubber less than the size of a 1/4 of a sheet of A4 paper. Even if you reduce the tyre wall to reduce lateral shift in the load its an awful lot more it has to deal with and keep planted to the tarmac. The rear suspension may help the turn in but it's still that front tyre carrying much of the additional load and getting you around the corner. Same size tyre (not sure whats fitted to the various cars but I suspect they're all around 225 wide) means it's ultimately going to complain or give way earlier on an heavier 3.0L than a 1.9. Getting more or stickier rubber will help.

Sit 4 x 56Ib bags of potatoes on the bonnet of your 1.9 and see how it reacts then!

 

[t-tony]

@Rha, Weight has a massive effect on handling and its ability through the twisties, if the 2.8/3.0 are giving up 100+kg to the 1.9s then this does go to someway explain the different in handling characteristics. Even if both are equally balanced (51/49) the extra mass in the 2.8/3.0 needs to be dealt with.

I often take instruction on track days and you are taught two things over everything else, be smooth with your inputs (steering, throttle, brakes etc.) and consider your weigh transfer, the two of these driver skills working in harmony will dramatically change the attitude of your car both coming up to and whilst in a corner. A balanced car will be quick without too much hassle.

I will though go back the to the point though that this subject is subjective, I suspect @TaffZee clicked with his 1.9 and found a way to hustle the car which suited his style, it's about the feeling/feedback you get and what you expect at any given point, I could drive my 1.9 quickly but did not get a comfortable feeling at speed, I do in my 3.0.

Great topic this BTW

You only have to hear the commentators comment about different F1 driver's style of driving. Some take a car by the scruff of the neck whilst others are more gentle/controlled. They both get the job done!

Tony.

 

[Rha]

I've been trying to stop posting on this subject in case I might offend but all in all it's probably one of the most interesting topics in motoring. I welcome the diversity of the comments, and it's good to here the experienced views of drivers who have actually tried and tested their cars (especially on track) and believe they certainly add interest and value to those of us who haven't. (Yet) The subject has no boundaries and I'm sure it can go on and on. Now it's time for me to do a little more listening and a lot less talking on this. So if I go quiet it's not because I'm bored but just the opposite. Maybe I'll learn something. Roy.

 

[Brian H]

Another thing to consider about the additional weight isn't so much it's even distribution, but surely where that weight appears dynamically.

The greater proportion of the additional weight will end up being transferred onto the outside front tyre in a corner. You're now chucking an extra 75kg+ into a bit of rubber less than the size of a 1/4 of a sheet of A4 paper. Even if you reduce the tyre wall to reduce lateral shift in the load its an awful lot more it has to deal with and keep planted to the tarmac. The rear suspension may help the turn in but it's still that front tyre carrying much of the additional load and getting you around the corner. Same size tyre (not sure whats fitted to the various cars but I suspect they're all around 225 wide) means it's ultimately going to complain or give way earlier on an heavier 3.0L than a 1.9. Getting more or stickier rubber will help.

Sit 4 x 56Ib bags of potatoes on the bonnet of your 1.9 and see how it reacts then!

+1, this is what I was referring to when talking about added weight, just did not make it as clear as this

I have seen many cars at track days running a square set up this as you point out increases the width of the front tyre to help take the load.

Sticky rubber helps tremendously and inspires confidence but I did almost ruin a brand new near side front R888 at Croft my first time out, they just keep on giving you grip, the more they give the more you try and take

 

[Brian H]

I've been trying to stop posting on this subject in case I might offend

Ahhh so you've seen me drive then.............

 

[oldcarman]

I agree that weight differential makes a HUGE difference but also feel that the type/ brand/size tires and driving style of individual drivers is equally important. It's a combination of so many factors that there is no perfect set up to suit everyone as we all have our own style of driving. Each individual, given the chance to drive one vehicle set up, would turn completely different lap times if the variables on the car stayed constant. JMT JIM

 

[zedonist]

Here are the weights, 1.9 1275Kg the 2.8 1335Kg I make that 60Kg difference, not much difference in reality a fat (me) driver in the 1.9 and a skinny driver in a 2.8 would be equal weights, the 2.8 has uprated ARB's over the 1.9 to take into account the extra nose weight (750 kg v 790 kg), therefore handling performance should be comparable, ergo they are a poor handling car out of the box. Just to add to the confusion the M Roadster comes in at 1425 Kg just 20 less than the Coupe...

So in conclusion I would have to say driving style is the differentiator here...I think we should do a controlled test with a standard 1.9, my 1.9 and a standard 2.8, volunteers?

 

[zedonist]

Some other facts, the 2.8 is actually higher than the 1.9 by 1/2 a cm, the M roaster is lower still, the front track on a 1.9 is the same as the M Roadster and is wider than the 2.8, the wheel base on the M Roaster is longer than all variants (Increased Castor).

 

[zedonist]

The drag race from the lights question:

0 - 30 mph (must stay legal) 1.9 - 2.9 secs, 2.8 - 2.5 secs & M Roadster 2.2 secs. a dodgy gear change could easily see the 1.9 win.

0-50 mph 1.9 - 6.3 secs, 2.8 - 4.8 secs, & M Roadster 4 secs. 2.8 could win this, the 1.9 could easily draw.

0-60 mph 1.9 - 9.5 secs, 2.8 - 6.9 secs & M Roaster 5.4 secs the 1.9 has bowed his head...

But lets think about the twisties and accelerating from 0 to 50 and in between, they are all comparable, but 1.9 and M Roaster are probably neck and neck winners due to handling, so in conclusion if you live in the country get a 1.9 you will smile, if you live in a mix of areas get the M Roadster, if you like motorways get a 2.8...

 

[GazHyde]

so in conclusion if you live in the country get a 1.9 you will smile, if you live in a mix of areas get the M Roadster, if you like motorways get a 2.8...

Or alternatively, get yourself a 2.2 and leave everybody else arguing and go and drive it

 

[zedonist]

Well no not really Gaz, because all those with 2.2 are to busy queuing in Halfords for oil...

 

[M666BMG]

Well no not really Gaz, because all those with 2.2 are to busy queuing in Halfords for oil...

True

 

[GazHyde]

Well no not really Gaz, because all those with 2.2 are to busy queuing in Halfords for oil...

Dang it, I left myself open to that!

 

[miller1098]

I'm not qualified on which is the best handling but I know a man who can.but I can tell you my experience with a bike.Most people I.e. 99% are over biked.if I went on a circuit on a 250cc bike I could probably ride it faster than on Rossis GP bike .Not so much on a drag strip as power can mask a lot of driver faults .Most good drivers/riders start off carting or mini bike master that discipline and move up one level at a time.Most of us just buy our way to the power without the experience we need to fully utilize it. We've a2.8 and a 3.2 I could probably drive a 1.9 faster around here but I like the smile I get when I put my foot down with a bit more power occasionally for me is better than racing around everywhere

 

[t-tony]

I like the smile I get when I put my foot down with a bit more power

Me too Hugh, and that's mainly why I bought my Z4 3.0 and believe me it does put a big silly grin on my face. My Z3 2.0 is a great car, I thoroughly enjoyed driving it again last Sunday when I went for a run out for lunch with a few of the lads. I wish I could keep both but I really can't justify that.

Tony.

 

[littlefeller]

here my twopence, they dont need to handle well, there two seater convertible sports cars, what did people expect. any road going production car would benefit from a solid roof, but ours don't have this (yay) glad too cars like these are historically dangerous, isnt that part of the attraction (abit like some who build a real lightweight roadster kitcar and put a really daft large engine in, that's the whole point isn't it). Ok so maybe we don't want to have to keep changing our underwear every time we drive, but the answer to that is simple - just slow down. driving with the roof down (plus all the comments from complete strangers) more than makes up for all of the above.it doesn't really effect me though as i live in the country and drive a 1.9

just an after thought, personally i think the 6 pot was the correct choice for bmw

 

[Brian H]

Here are the weights, 1.9 1275Kg the 2.8 1335Kg I make that 60Kg difference, not much difference in reality a fat (me) driver in the 1.9 and a skinny driver in a 2.8 would be equal weights, the 2.8 has uprated ARB's over the 1.9 to take into account the extra nose weight (750 kg v 790 kg), therefore handling performance should be comparable, ergo they are a poor handling car out of the box. Just to add to the confusion the M Roadster comes in at 1425 Kg just 20 less than the Coupe...

So in conclusion I would have to say driving style is the differentiator here...I think we should do a controlled test with a standard 1.9, my 1.9 and a standard 2.8, volunteers?

3.0 = 1585kg

 

[Poprin]

I don't profess to be a great driver, but being in the fortunate position of being able to drive many different cars over my lifetime as a driver has given me quite a lot of experience. I own an M44 1.9 and have been reliably informed by a BMW Motorsport specialist that goes as well as any he's driven. I love the car and it's great fun, but would I change it for a 2.8 / 3.0? Yes in a heartbeat.

My reasoning is this and I think collectively we have all hit the nail on the head. The Z3 handles well, much better than critics of the mark would have you believe but crucially it has one major fault... It's a convertible. So ultimately you are compromising handling for all the great things a convertible gives you. Therefore smooth inputs and a slow in fast out approach to bends is the order of the day and ultimately more power and crucially torque is going to be your best friend.

You can launch a 1.9 into bends and come out the other end mostly unscathed, ultimately it is much more forgiving because it's lighter and has less power. However do I think Jason Plato / Tiff / insert great road car drivers name here would get down any road faster in a 1.9 than say a 2.8? I think we all know the answer. I'm not saying I could make a 2.8 go round a bend better than my 1.9 with my driving ability but I sure as hell know I'd like to try!

 

[zedonist]

In response to the above, the facts above i penned yesterday tell you that they would all mostly behave the same around the twisties, with the difference being you can probably use the full power band of the 1.9 which gives better control as you would be using a limited power band on the others and probably blipping the throttle and changing gears quite a lot. You have to remember that power is delivered on a rising rate you don't have for example 320 bhp from the start, this is the reason why they are quite comparable between 0 - 50 mph (delivering power at same rate and quantity), at which point the rising rate curve of power starts to change dramatically. I therefore don't think you could get down and round the bends quicker, but you could certainly add more uncertainty to it, and I suppose scares = frills, would be quite exciting.

 

[miller1098]

The question was handling ,but not where eg .race track,motorway,auto test ,twisty mountain road or tesco car park ?