Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I asked if they would let me discuss with the Saab Factory Tech.
Long story short. They did the fair thing and gave me a new clutch. In the absence of signs of abuse it's hard to see how a clutch could fail at
12,000 miles, to Saab's credit they acknowledged that.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Article on feature new to 2003 Vette's.
E46 BMW M3 ---- Engines Blowing Up?
http://www.jdpower.com/auto/search/winners.asp?StudyID=625&CatID=1
I guess the same could be said for some C5 and Z06 owners. Its just that the LS1 and LS6 engines can handle the 'abuse' much better.
I personally always have the D.I.C. set to OIL TEMP to help remind me to wait until the engine is ready to go.
I think the most important part of a high performance engines longevity is the break in period. If you run the shite out of it before all the components have a chance to seat properly, you are just asking for quick trouble.
Someone should start a topic of "what performance car model has the most ignorant, inexperienced, abusive owners" and see how it relates to that particular car's longevity rating.
You make a good point! Reading the M-3 blown engine thread is a bit of gallows humor for me! As you probably know I was almost on the list for the 2001 and the 2002 BMW M-3.
Given 3000 total USA M-3 production per yr, there is a rumor that there are 88 engines (with more that haven't been published ) with grenading issues.
There were pre production rumors through the various car magazines that the major reason for the 2001 BMW M-3 delay was grenading engine issues. That was a MAJOR red flag for me. Evidently, they didnt solve the issues before production, or in fact felt they could deal with the fallout in the market place by fixing only those who are the most insistent.
Another personal reason I went to the eight cylinder Z06, was that once you make a 6 cylinder that "performance" oriented, the driver has to take pains to break it in right Operate it right and do the massive amounts of maintenance necessary to keep it running right and keep the engine on the unexploded edge side!
One change that they made from the EURO versions that was very nice was to go from solid lifters (expensive and potentially critical adjustments) to a hydralic lifter type situation!
Another telling situation (minor red flag) is that the M-3 racing machines much to Porsche's chagrin (since they race against M-3's) went to the eight cylinder!
The other oxymoronic thing is that the SMG is supposed to have FAIL safe rev limiters, but out of 88 or more engines a good % of engines that crapped out have SMG !!???
How Corvette might intergrate the concept of SMG remains to be seen. It would be interesting to see what the drive train losses will be, say : 6 speed, normal automatic, and SMG. If the drive train losses are less than the normal automatic, that would be a GLARING advantage. And a big IF, it had the same or less drive train loss than a 6 speed the writing would almost be on the wall! But the truth is that these are not problems that series of dyno runs couldnt ferret out.
SMG is a manual 6-speed with the foot-operated clutch replaced by a hydraulic pump and electric control valves. Same losses (no more & no less) as a foot-operated manual transmission.
Then based on what you said which I already had known, then the writing is on the wall. It makes BMW's auto transmissions as well as Corvette's auto transmissions conceptually obsolete.
Ultimately, "clutch-less" CVT transmissions (ala Audi multitronic) will take over with electronic throttle control to prevent over-powering of the wet clutch on launch. Maybe better than a torque converter but no substitute for a foot-operated manual....
At idle, the engine was not only loud but I could feel it through the chassis to the seats to my butt. Not sure if this was a good feeling, almost like a slight massage at idle. I can't complain about the handling but the visibility and internal ergonomics weren't too exciting. There was more noise coming from the back than the front, almost as though engine noise was making its way from the front-mounted engine to the rear trunk, then into the cabin. At first I was positive I was driving a rear-engine car.
I liked the plastic top of the coupe, great upward visibility on the car. Brakes were phenomenal. It seemed a bit heavy into turns but planted nonetheless. 28 year old + corvette turned out to be a disaster in the making, I better not buy one of these for at least ten more years. It is way too exciting
Anyway, just wanted to say that I was pretty deeply impressed. I don't think I'd buy one until the visibility improved, especially over the large rear, and for some reason (maybe just lack of familiarity) the car seemed to do a pretty poor job of inviting me to explore its potential; I guess the road feedback isn't as tightly presented as I am used to. Nonetheless that's a mighty impressive car Chrysler has built. If they can cut a tiny bit off its size and lift its interior up a couple of notches, and hopefully smoothen the engine a bit (it felt like it didn't want to rev and wasn't smooth at all) I could definitely see myself driving one in a few years....
As to engine noise not sure I hear it much and only thing I've felt through the seat is the sound system. Cranked it once and noticed the outside mirror took the beat as well, plastic cars do have issues.
As to visibility, sitting 6' 3" about 1 inch from the top with the seat as low as it will go I do not have any issues, and think it is as good as most I've driven so not something that will be an issue for everyone.
And as to driving it after you get to the point where it won't entice you to explore it's limits on occasion, don't hold your breath. Only a little surprise when one of the local club members left in blue smoke after a meeting with his wife, think he might be mid 70's. Of course those old big block Vette's don't have traction control.
No idea, I've never driven a NSX.
"So did you test drive a Chrysler or a Chevrolet product?"
oops GM. Don't know why I said Chrysler. Brain freeze!
At app 87-91k for a new NSX, for my two cents, I'd just as soon get two Z06's or a Z06 and a vert or coupe for the same money. But then again that is my personal opinion. I have ridden in one and had the fortune of a friend asking me to take a 200 mile leg on a 525 mile R/T journey. It is truly a performer. You would not go wrong in getting one! (except for premature tire wear and perhaps a rebuild of a transmission)I'd say if you can, test drive it! You will not be disappointed! The Z06 and or vert and coupe are actually better performers at a bit more than half the price.
I can tell you from an observation standpoint how an S2000 performs on the track in real world conditions compared to Corvettes and Vipers, but I am curious how an actual S2000 owner sees it.
At first I didn't think the vette was that fast, but that was because I didn't even have the throttle a quarter of the way down. I don't think I came close to flooring it the entire time, in fact I was afraid to see how fast it could go, initially because of the car's reputation, and soon enough because I could feel how much torque the engine was putting out. I felt more tentative with the vette. From the day I bought it, the S2000 felt like a car I could take right up to its limits - everything is very linear and controlled. I didn't feel that from the Corvette. I'd describe the S2000 as a sports car that begs you to drive it at 10/10ths, the corvette a sports car that makes you afraid to drive it at 10/10ths. I suppose each has its own unique appeal!
The shaking from the exhaust was another subjective difference that I still can't get out of my mind. Silky versus brutal. It's like watching Ray Allen shooting 3s versus Shaq dunking. Another metaphor - the S2000 is a bow and arrow, the Corvette a couple of sticks of dynamite. Pick your poison, I guess.
In the end I think I'd be happier with the S2000 because of the tighter ergonomics, stiffer body and much improved precision and road feedback. Even the pretty impressive Corvette seemed imprecise and unsteady next to the razor blade that the S2000 is commonly described as, especially in steering and road feedback where I think the Corvette could use a little work. I wish the engine were as buttery as the Hondas I'm used to... the smooth power of a Lexus V8, for example, without giving up the performance specs of the LS1/LS6. Maybe the C6 will offer that. The vette also didn't seem to track well for some reason - bumps deterred its path. At first I thought it was me or the wind, but it was definitely the tires and suspension. Maybe it was a problem with that particular car?
Ultimately, as a S2000 owner, the Corvette's engine wasn't enough to make me forget its size and weight which IMO are definite liabilities in cornering. Moreover, living in Detroit the Corvette is unfortunately not much of a status symbol, being as common as family sedans here. Driver demographic also plays a role, given the huge number of automatic status-only Corvettes in the Detroit metro area; the S2000 has a much more focused demographic. I could see how a Z06 and a S2000 could be considered similar cars for their single-mindedness, but the coupe seemed to be much more of torquey GT cruiser with a really loud exhaust - at least from the perspective of the s2k's driver seat.
A little more refinement might make me more interested, but it might also alienate the existing owner base that prefers the exhaust rumble and heavy engine. Tough call on GM's part, I wonder how they'll go with the C6. I'd like to see a 4.5L version of the Z06-tuned engine, putting out propertionately less hp/torque, in a somewhat smaller and lighter car. I'd also like to see that engine sitting lower to drop the front hood, and lastly I for one would sacrifice a little of the storage space to make the butt smaller. In fact, drop and round off the rear a la the older Corvettes, and you'll have a pretty sexy car. The current one is just too big for a 2-seater.
I'm not sure the owner of either of these cars could ever appreciate the other. They both probably get you from point A to point B with similar swiftness, but do so in vastly different ways.
I wouldn't doubt that at all! In the process of getting my Z06, the S2000 was on my short list. The M-3 was also, among others.
Add to that the MB-SLK 230.
It would be interesting to see what your DIC says also. Mine is numerically (DIC) and visually (analog gauges) (after mental calculations) very very close. This piece of triangulation should be able to further fault isolate.
I still would like to take a spin in an S2000 some day to get that "bow & arrow" perspective.
I can see how some people would own both - totally different driving perspectives - variety is good.
Hell, my other car right now is an LHS. You can't get much further across the spectrum than that...
http://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/kb/index.php?ownertopic_id=33
TIA
Thanks
http://www.idavette.net/facts/2001.htm
Then there is a list of codes somewhere in the car, in glove box or inside rear deck panels, not sure until I look.
Also on that link there is final production numbers link giving how many by color and auto/6sp got produced, interesting data unless it is Torch Red.
Good luck.