http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v736/suzpectx/fiona1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v736/suzpectx/fiona2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v736/suzpectx/fiona3.jpg Click the auction for videos. Car sounds amazing.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors...&rd=1 (http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-1751-2978-71/1?AID=5463217&PID=2509925&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fcgi.ebay.com%2Febaymoto rs%2Fws%2FeBayISAPI.dll%3FViewItem%26ih% 3D019%26sspagename%3DSTRK%253AMEWA%253AI T%26viewitem%3D%26item%3D290178202986%26 rd%3D1)

Looks cool, but, gonna need a new paint job on the hood soon.

I saw pics of the M70 swapped into a e30 3 series. It was all motor.

Damn, that is one badass Bimmer; needs black paint. (I love a good wagon)

Kudos to the man/woman behind that.

Needs to be either painted estrosil blue or cosmos black. And with add the M-Technic bodykit.

Is that the same engine used in the ''M''8? Looks fantastic anyway. Gonna be an awesome sleeper car. The owner should keep the looks that way anyway; as it looks great.

Its out of a 850csi and its also used in the e32 (88-94) 750il.

Looks cool, but, gonna need a new paint job on the hood soon.Haha, you don't think all that heat isn't good for the paint?

Haha, you don't think all that heat isn't good for the paint?

I KNOW its not, no speculation on my part my friend. My e38 (and all others as well) are notorious for running a lot of heat under the hood, and thats with the 4.4 liter v8. Take a car that is designed for a six cylinder, apply vaseline and then stuff a 12 cylinder in it, that is gonna generate some serious Un-expected heat. Oh, well, maybe the owner was looking for an excuse to repaint it. http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w245/lsixer/dunno-1.gif

Hey LSixer, The e34 had the m60 4.0 under the hood as well. The M5 had the S38 which also runs hot.

hmm ,pretty impresive , sleeper :cool:

I loved the sound of that v12 :) Very nice and rare car. Only one touring like this was made ;)

I would take it. It looks awesome. Impressive tuning. Very nice. Gongrats.

I think its safe to call that beast a sleeper...its so cool!!
Just imagine you pull that car out and stop at a stop light with a ricer..give the other driver a smile and wave, then when the light turns green, SMOKE HIM!!!

is it that 850ci V12? if so it's not much of a sleeper cause that motor sucked.

a V12 in a....space wagon.... (ok , it's a BMW but still a SW) you don't see that every day.

a V12 in a....space wagon.... (ok , it's a BMW but still a SW) you don't see that every day.

Its really cool. Its a Touring or estate. A space wagon makes me think of a minivan.

is it that 850ci V12? if so it's not much of a sleeper cause that motor sucked.

Its out of a 850csi and its also used in the e32 (88-94) 750il.

ha.

On the other hand, the M70 that BMW built for the McLaren F1, however, is in a different galaxy. There have been a few totalled McLaren F1s, if someone can get a hold of those...

I knew I should have saved the pictures. The auction ended and now the pictures have been deleted. Or is my computer?

is it that 850ci V12? if so it's not much of a sleeper cause that motor sucked.

It didnt suck, not much made by BMW "sucked".

However it was not a high performance v12 as it were, not as much as the m-power blocks. Thus, the wagon isnt an instant viper killer, but, will give other similarly aspirated vehicles a ride for their money.

LSixer,t he 850ci was originally supposed to be a M car....It was designed to be a M car..then when they canned the idea because they figured the Bimmer crowd wouldn't agree to it dawning the M badge..

It sucked

it LOOKED nice..but the engine..sucked
it was a 5.0 v12 short of 300HP

or it was the 5.4L 322HP motor with peak HP at 5000, and redline at nearly 7,000...

With a powerband that spiked more than a BPU++ Supra

The 850CSi was Alright, it made almost 400 with a 5.6L V12 and over 400 ft lbs..

but the engine itself weighted more than most small cars.

and I LOVE BMW..but there is quite a bit of CRAP they've put out on the market..or do you actually LIKE the BMW 316?

Or do you think the R65 was a good bike?

The 1 series is a joke, and the 645...wow...

LSixer,t he 850ci was originally supposed to be a M car....It was designed to be a M car..then when they canned the idea because they figured the Bimmer crowd wouldn't agree to it dawning the M badge..

It sucked


Lets be clear. If you are talking poor design, then that may be the case. Be definitive in your comment, is it your perception that the design was poor, or is it your understanding that the quality was poor?What exactly made it "suck" because they did not badge it for the M-power's?.


it LOOKED nice..but the engine..sucked
it was a 5.0 v12 short of 300HP

So because it did not produce Ferrari output it "sucks"? Please, I am not sure what the premise of the engine design was, but, I am not seeing evidence that the engine "sucks" because of a lack of output. Do you know what the design was for? Maybe it was meant to be like the old Jag 12 bangers, to reach 120 mph and drive that speed for several hours. Again, I do not see any compelling evidence that the motor quality "sucks".



The 850CSi was Alright, it made almost 400 with a 5.6L V12 and over 400 ft lbs..

but the engine itself weighted more than most small cars.


And how does this make it inferior? Despite it being alright as you say, the weight is irrelevant. If it weighed a lot, I am sure there was a design reason for it, of which I do not know.


and I LOVE BMW..but there is quite a bit of CRAP they've put out on the market..or do you actually LIKE the BMW 316?

Never saw it, nor driven it. What is your evidence that it "sucks"?


Or do you think the R65 was a good bike?

Why do you think it was bad? I have never owned one, nor driven one. Unless I did, I would not make any judgements. Just the way I operate.


The 1 series is a joke, and the 645...wow...

I do not care for the 1 series design myself, however, I am not in the position to say it sucks. Why do you presume it is a joke? I am sure it is a fine car, I just do not prefer that model.

And I like the new 6 series, all of the engine sizes. I have driven in one of those and I will tell you from the short amount of time I spent in it, absolutely NOTHING sucks about that car. I would prefer the 650, but,I was not privileged enough to get a ride in that model.

So, to sum it up, my original point stands. Not much created by BMW "sucks". The designs may not be 100% brilliance in all of their products, nor do all of their products appeal to 100% of all markets.

To me, "sucks" means a quality issue, if that is not how you interpret it, then we are not comparing apples to apples and there is no need to continue the conversation. Thanks.

Lets be clear. If you are talking poor design, then that may be the case. Be definitive in your comment, is it your perception that the design was poor, or is it your understanding that the quality was poor?What exactly made it "suck" because they did not badge it for the M-power's?.

Do i have to go over the performance, the design, the dimensions, the interior dimensions, the longevity

ALLL
Vs

The Cost.. or can i leave it with that gigantic hint and you catch the drift?



So because it did not produce Ferrari output it "sucks"? Please, I am not sure what the premise of the engine design was, but, I am not seeing evidence that the engine "sucks" because of a lack of output. Do you know what the design was for? Maybe it was meant to be like the old Jag 12 bangers, to reach 120 mph and drive that speed for several hours. Again, I do not see any compelling evidence that the motor quality "sucks".

No..it has nothing to do with ferrari type output....

How many 5.4+ls in that "tax bracket" have ever culminated into such a mediocre performing car, and got praise from this board?

and hay maybe it WAS meant to be like old jag 12 bangers,
Or maybe it was a car that regularly fried radiators, and warped front rotors due to it's temendous girth, or maybe it was a car that's throttle motor would stick on all the time and drain your battery!..

Yeah, fantastic..the car could do 120mph road trips..., could be why the car only hit the states with an auto tranny..makes even more sense..



And how does this make it inferior? Despite it being alright as you say, the weight is irrelevant. If it weighed a lot, I am sure there was a design reason for it, of which I do not know.

ok..how does it make it inferior? Because weight = bad

Weight = generally archaic..
This car was the pinnacle of BMW high cylinder count performance..in 1990....Which at the time..wasn't anything to care for because BMW's low cylinder count motors were performing better.



Never saw it, nor driven it. What is your evidence that it "sucks"?


http://www.thepeatles.de/BMW%20316i%20Comp%201b.jpg

Now you've seen it..Let's start with how absolutely ugly it is.
There's one reason..

Oh and you can't forget it's sweet *** 1.9 liter 102horsepower monster under the hood.
yet it's original MSRP was well.....f'in high for that POS..

There's the iceberg tip on that car...so you get my point...


I do not care for the 1 series design myself, however, I am not in the position to say it sucks. Why do you presume it is a joke? I am sure it is a fine car, I just do not prefer that model.


Because the cars market is for a "small family" that's why it's a joke.

Ever see a 1 series? in any trim considering there's about 5948390485 different trims of the car, BTW only in 08 did the damn thing get a i6....

I mean really, for a small family it comes as a 5 door..yea!!! good job! smart!!!

Wait...it weights 2900+ lbs stock!....
with...whaaaa? 120hp?

Dude that aint cartin CRAP around..

Oh but wait you got a diesel model..that weights over 3000lbs..but don't worry it makes 200 horses...and 400!!!!nm!!! of torque..
wait..it makes 400nm for..400rpm's...(yes four hundred)
Ohhh man...

and base model startin at 30,000 ..Dude that's the BEST idea i've seen BMW come up with..


So, to sum it up, my original point stands. Not much created by BMW "sucks". The designs may not be 100% brilliance in all of their products, nor do all of their products appeal to 100% of all markets.


Not much from BMW sucks short of everything bangle touched which is a recent majority.

Their timing..

Their concept of what people want from a car, because face it BMW doesn't do what people want it to do..People get it because..it's a BMW....
It's been that way for a loong time..
It used to be diff but not so much anymore


To me, "sucks" means a quality issue, if that is not how you interpret it, then we are not comparing apples to apples and there is no need to continue the conversation. Thanks.

Ok..well then because the engine weights more than alot of compact cars, and produces mediocre results..BUT!! it doesn't turn into a ball of fire when you start it...it means it doesn't suck?

ok there buddy.

that 3-series your have there is a compact which is ugly and from what i know doesnt handle aswell as the coupe, saloon or estate version and you got the performance figures wrong the 316i does have 102bhp but its a 1600cc engine but the 1900cc engines comes from the 318is with 140bhp

Yeah, fantastic..the car could do 120mph road trips..., could be why the car only hit the states with an auto tranny..makes even more sense.
I've seen some around Minneapolis, MN that have the V12 with a manual transmission. Does that mean that they were imported? Or did these cars receive a transmission swap?
:confused:

that 3-series your have there is a compact which is ugly and from what i know doesnt handle aswell as the coupe, saloon or estate version and you got the performance figures wrong the 316i does have 102bhp but its a 1600cc engine but the 1900cc engines comes from the 318is with 140bhp

Who said that the ti does not handle well? It has the same suspension as the Z3. I work with a guy that has a supercharged 318ti and its quick and handles really well. I would do a built s52 (96-99) M3 motor swap and Z3 M suspension.

i didnt say that i said the compact version which was pictured doesnt handle as well as the other 3-series

i didnt say that i said the compact version which was pictured doesnt handle as well as the other 3-series

This is what you said:

from what i know doesnt handle aswell as the coupe, saloon or estate version

Or where you comparing it with something else?

Anyways, comparing it with the other e36 chassis 3ers like the sedan, coupe or wagon the ti does handle differently. Because its has the e36 front suspension setup and e30/z3 rear suspension setup.

because the compact has a shorter wheel base or something but im not sure i just read it somewhere

because the compact has a shorter wheel base or something but im not sure i just read it somewhere

shorter wheel base = better handling in most cases.

It all good.

not always

it's not about wheelbase length that = good handling..

it's a ratio between track width, and wheel base also incorporating center of gravity(ride height/vehicle height/angel of undulation)

Do i have to go over the performance, the design, the dimensions, the interior dimensions, the longevity

ALLL
Vs

The Cost.. or can i leave it with that gigantic hint and you catch the drift?



No..it has nothing to do with ferrari type output....

How many 5.4+ls in that "tax bracket" have ever culminated into such a mediocre performing car, and got praise from this board?

and hay maybe it WAS meant to be like old jag 12 bangers,
Or maybe it was a car that regularly fried radiators, and warped front rotors due to it's temendous girth, or maybe it was a car that's throttle motor would stick on all the time and drain your battery!..

Yeah, fantastic..the car could do 120mph road trips..., could be why the car only hit the states with an auto tranny..makes even more sense..



ok..how does it make it inferior? Because weight = bad

Weight = generally archaic..
This car was the pinnacle of BMW high cylinder count performance..in 1990....Which at the time..wasn't anything to care for because BMW's low cylinder count motors were performing better.




http://www.thepeatles.de/BMW%20316i%20Comp%201b.jpg

Now you've seen it..Let's start with how absolutely ugly it is.
There's one reason..

Oh and you can't forget it's sweet *** 1.9 liter 102horsepower monster under the hood.
yet it's original MSRP was well.....f'in high for that POS..

There's the iceberg tip on that car...so you get my point...



Because the cars market is for a "small family" that's why it's a joke.

Ever see a 1 series? in any trim considering there's about 5948390485 different trims of the car, BTW only in 08 did the damn thing get a i6....

I mean really, for a small family it comes as a 5 door..yea!!! good job! smart!!!

Wait...it weights 2900+ lbs stock!....
with...whaaaa? 120hp?

Dude that aint cartin CRAP around..

Oh but wait you got a diesel model..that weights over 3000lbs..but don't worry it makes 200 horses...and 400!!!!nm!!! of torque..
wait..it makes 400nm for..400rpm's...(yes four hundred)
Ohhh man...

and base model startin at 30,000 ..Dude that's the BEST idea i've seen BMW come up with..



Not much from BMW sucks short of everything bangle touched which is a recent majority.

Their timing..

Their concept of what people want from a car, because face it BMW doesn't do what people want it to do..People get it because..it's a BMW....
It's been that way for a loong time..
It used to be diff but not so much anymore



Ok..well then because the engine weights more than alot of compact cars, and produces mediocre results..BUT!! it doesn't turn into a ball of fire when you start it...it means it doesn't suck?

ok there buddy.

Ok sport, I am not going to get in a flame war, I am above that. You think BMW has some piss-poor prducts, thats your opinion. So be it. I'll say it again, not MUCH BMW pruduced sucks in terms of quality, PERIOD. Thats just my opinion. And, I think that the fact that where I live, you see bimmers all over the place is a sign that others agree with me.
I'll buy another bimmer again, and again and again. Because I have owned other cars and nothing stacks up to it, NOTHING.

Im done, thanks.

I myself, would buy another bimmer aswell, without a second thought..

I'm just not blind to truths.

because the compact has a shorter wheel base or something but im not sure i just read it somewhere

I've heard about this too, but it's not to do with the wheelbase, it's because the suspension BMW put in it isn't as good as that of the saloon etc