# Hmm--ZHP Perf Numbers don't stack up



## blackhawk77 (Mar 16, 2003)

Wow-- I was just perusing the November issue of Motor Trend (pg 44) and was shocked to see them report that the 2003 330i Performance Package is slower from 0-60 than a 330i Sport Package-only equipped car they had tested previously--6.1 to 5.8 respectively.

Now even when one considers the variances in test conditions, this is still quite a (disappointing) surprise considering the BMW billing and advertising would have us believe that there is much more bang for the buck with the ZHP.

I'm glad I didn't fall for it when I almost cancelled my 330 Ci order to hold out for the yet to be released ZHP!!

I know, I know--All you ZHPers are going to fly off the handle with comments like "there's more to it than numbers"...... etc.. 

But there's no arguing that when you combine this latest revelation with the purported rough idle problems, ugly (IMO) dark interior/materials, rougher ride and louder exhaust--It certainly begins to look like that 3,900 dollars could be better spent. 


:dunno:
:dunno: 
:dunno: 
:dunno:


----------



## Nick325xiT 5spd (Dec 24, 2001)

a) The reason is the heavy-ass wheels.
b) We all know it's all about marketing.
c) For most of us, the interior is a huge plus.
d) The suspension in ALL E46es is way too soft, anyway so it doesn't matter.

IF I ordered a 330 today (which I wouldn't because my money could be much better spent), it would be a ZHP. But I do see where you're coming from. If you're buying a BMW for its Lexus qualities, than the ZHP is absolutely not for you.


----------



## JetBlack330i (Feb 8, 2002)

I'm waiting for emissions' report.
I don't trust MT. Is that confirmed not to be a typo?


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

Nick325xiT 5spd said:


> a) The reason is the heavy-ass wheels.
> b) We all know it's all about marketing.
> c) For most of us, the interior is a huge plus.
> d) The suspension in ALL E46es is way too soft, anyway so it doesn't matter.
> ...


a) absolutely correct - with my Miglias on I can sense a big difference it straight forward launch speed. 

b) Just call me Mikey :eeps:

c) correct again - I have leather seats, but the wheel, boots and trim make it a plus for me :thumbup:

d) the ZHP suspension is an improvement IMO, throw in the sort shifter and I think the package is worth it :bigpimp:


----------



## PhilH (Jun 7, 2002)

Car & Driver got a 0.5 second improvement in their 0-60 times. The ZHP did it in 5.6 vs. the 330i SP in 6.1. The 1/4 mile was 14.3 @ 97mph vs 14.8 @ 95mph. Skidpad was 0.86 vs 0.83. Braking was 158 ft from 70 vs 168 ft.

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=6978&page_number=2


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

I've driven the ZHP and although my 330i had a 'lighter on it's feet' sort of feel, I like everything about the ZHP package.

Here is a quick review when I drove it . . . 
http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43149&highlight=zhp

If I were to buy a 330 today, it would definitely be a ZHP though I'd order it with the leather option.


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

Dr. Phil said:


> a) absolutely correct - with my Miglias on I can sense a big difference it straight forward launch speed.
> 
> b) Just call me Mikey :eeps:


Mikey, when are you going to post some ZHP pics witht he Mile's ?

Also the wheel weight difference in your case is porbably only about 3 to 4 lbs a wheel but you can see how it makes a difference . . . it's pretty amazing how a small amount of unsprung weight makes the car feel quicker . . .


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

AF330i said:


> I've driven the ZHP and although my 330i had a 'lighter on it's feet' sort of feel, I like everything about the ZHP package.
> 
> Here is a quick review when I drove it . . .
> http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43149&highlight=zhp
> ...


You just want to be like me Alan :AF330i:


----------



## BradS (Aug 27, 2003)

If it's magazine numbers that make up your mind on this, perhaps you should have perused the Sept issue of Car & Driver, http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=6978&page_number=2, where they squeezed a ZHP from 0-60 in 5.6 seconds, vice 6.1 for a 330i.

If you don't like the ZHP package for the subjective reasons, that's great--that is why you can order cars with different options. If what you want is different guts, softer suspension, and quieter exhaust, then you have probably chosen wisely for your personal preferences. OTOH, the ZHP is exactly what I want.

BTW, here's an inarguable number for you, and one you won't see in a regular 330i until you've spent some of those saved dollars on new engine software to get rid of that pesky 128 mph governor.


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

AF330i said:


> Mikey, when are you going to post some ZHP pics witht he Mile's ?
> 
> Also the wheel weight difference in your case is porbably only about 3 to 4 lbs a wheel but you can see how it makes a difference . . . it's pretty amazing how a small amount of unsprung weight makes the car feel quicker . . .


I threw up 2 quick shots the other day, need to give it a bath before I take more ......


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

Dr. Phil said:


> You just want to be like me Alan :AF330i:


Very true . . . I've always admired your admirable qualities 

Your car looks good in that picture . . where are the other shots you took ?

Also what is the deal with going to a place to have them change your wheels out :tsk:? You need to buy a Jack & a torque wrench my friend !!


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

AF330i said:


> Very true . . . I've always admired your admirable qualities
> 
> Your car looks good in that picture . . where are the other shots you took ?
> 
> Also what is the deal with going to a place to have them change your wheels out :tsk:? You need to buy a Jack & a torque wrench my friend !!


I know, I need to get those things but for now I needed inspection and one of my wheels was staying there to get rash repaired. Plus, I am still having some issues post neck surgery  Might need some shoulder work as well now


----------



## blackhawk77 (Mar 16, 2003)

AF330i said:


> Very true . . . I've always admired your admirable qualities
> 
> Your car looks good in that picture . . where are the other shots you took ?
> 
> Also what is the deal with going to a place to have them change your wheels out :tsk:? You need to buy a Jack & a torque wrench my friend !!


Hey, Alan--Dont be Shanghai-ing my thread 

Actually--I just pm'd the Doc to ask about his wheels 'cause I still havent made up my mind yet and those Milles look nice......

Happy T-Day (mine just officially ended over here).

--


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

blackhawk77 said:


> Hey, Alan--Dont be Shanghai-ing my thread
> 
> Actually--I just pm'd the Doc to ask about his wheels 'cause I still havent made up my mind yet and those Milles look nice......
> 
> ...


I was actually going to pm you later on to see what you ended up going with . . . keep me posted and hope you had a great holiday :thumbup:


----------



## ___lk___ (Dec 21, 2001)

blackhawk77 said:


> It certainly begins to look like that 3,900 dollars could be better spent.


well, if you're that worried about performance/$$$ spent, u could always get this:










outperforms any 330i in every conceivable way, and will cost you well over $10,000 less....


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

___lk___ said:


> well, if you're that worried about performance/$$$ spent, u could always get this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 :thumbup:


----------



## flashinthepan (Jul 25, 2003)

If I were worried about a few tenths of a sec. I would just go M3. I am a coupe fan though.


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

·clyde· said:


> :thumbup:


 :flipoff:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

flashinthepan said:


> If I were worried about a few tenths of a sec. I would just go M3. I am a coupe fan though.


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

___lk___ said:


> outperforms any 330i in every conceivable way


Especially in the 0 to fugly times. :rofl:


----------



## flashinthepan (Jul 25, 2003)

> Especially in the 0 to fugly times.


 Have to agree :rofl:


----------



## SergioK (Aug 14, 2002)

___lk___ said:


> well, if you're that worried about performance/$$$ spent, u could always get this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Correction, you get the performance of an M3 for half the price.


----------



## Ashe too (Dec 22, 2001)

Road tests in Car & Driver, Bimmer and Sports Car International all show performence improvements over the 330i w/o the zhp package (but I haven't seen anything in Road & Track or Automobile yet) and they all say things like "arguably the pick of the entire current BMW model range" (Sports Car International, Nov. 2003, p. 57); or "nderneath that sheen of sophistication is all the poise, sensation and capability of a real driver's car, one that would have no problem keeping up with the old M3 around a racetrack" (Bimmer, Nov. 2003, p. 48); or [t]he 330i Performance Package is the best 3 Series that has ever rolled off BMW's standard productin line" (Id, p. 51) or "*ut what you do get is a nice uptick in performance, with virtually no sacrifice in comfort, and of course four doors, for about seven grand less than you'd have to pony up for an M3 coupe" (Car & Driver, Sept. 2003, p. 132). Now, I'd give more weight to Car & Driver's report than Motor Trend's any day.

Admitedly, these comments reflect a partly subjective assessment of the package. While the purely objective numbers aren't a startling improvement one-by-one, the sum is far greater than the parts. And at the already significant level of performance of the 330i w/o the zhp package, improvements are bound to be incremental in the absence of radical modification anyway. The improvements in this car are also in line with the kind of improvements that would come from similar aftermarket modifications, cost less, come with a factory warranty and constitute a package that will be looked back on as one of the more interesting pacakages BMW ever produced.*


----------



## Rich_Jenkins (Jul 12, 2003)

blackhawk77 said:


> Wow-- I was just perusing the November issue of Motor Trend (pg 44) and was shocked to see them report that the 2003 330i Performance Package is slower from 0-60 than a 330i Sport Package-only equipped car they had tested previously--6.1 to 5.8 respectively.
> 
> <snip>


Obviously MT has forgotten to fill up the tires with ZHP air - Recently discovered in this forum, it has shown to reduce 0-60 times significantly...

Seriously, the 0-60 times are useful indicators, but with HP within a few percent (222 vs. 232) or whatever it can't be that odd to expect testing variations to show anomalies, esp if taken at different times?


----------



## BlackChrome (Nov 16, 2003)

BradS said:


> If it's magazine numbers that make up your mind on this, perhaps you should have perused the Sept issue of Car & Driver, http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=6978&page_number=2, where they squeezed a ZHP from 0-60 in 5.6 seconds, vice 6.1 for a 330i.


Car & Driver, July 2002, page 74-81, _Hobson's Choice_, 330Ci vs CL Type-S 6-speed

2002 330Ci, 5-speed manual with SP/Xenon/Moonroof ($40,628 as tested)
0-60:5.8
1/4: 14.4 @ 97MPH
Top speed: 135MPH


----------



## dynosor (Jul 15, 2003)

*Track or Street?*



Nick325xiT 5spd said:


> a) d) The suspension in ALL E46es is way too soft, anyway so it doesn't matter.
> 
> The suspension is too soft for what; throwing the car around on a track or having fun on the street? Don't confuse the two.
> 
> Your 325xiT may be too soft for you, but my 330i SP would be annoying if the spring rates were any higher because the natural frequency is already quite high. The only way I would consider "improving" it is with larger anti-roll bars, and then only if I was to auto-cross the car. On the street the stock SP suspension makes the car a well balanced very capable all-rounder with a civilized ride.


----------



## Frank Rizzo (Aug 2, 2003)

___lk___ said:


> well, if you're that worried about performance/$$$ spent, u could always get this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And you would need to hang a sign over your a$$ that says "Lincoln Tunnel" - because you would look like a little ghey :nono::nono::nono::nono::nono: boy.....and sooo many people would want a piece.

yeah....nothin sez performance like NASCAR stickers..........and yeller cars.


----------



## blackhawk77 (Mar 16, 2003)

Frank Rizzo said:


> And you would need to hang a sign over your a$$ that says "Lincoln Tunnel" - because you would look like a little ghey :nono::nono::nono::nono::nono: boy.....and sooo many people would want a piece.
> 
> yeah....nothin sez performance like NASCAR stickers..........and yeller cars.


Say what ya really mean--Frank. :rofl:

--


----------



## Seneca (Feb 13, 2003)

*Performance Package*

You guys may have discussed this already, but just wanted to give an FYI that BMW NA will make the Performance Package available in the 330ci and also the convertible next year. Haven't heard what time of year yet. . .


----------



## ___lk___ (Dec 21, 2001)

Frank Rizzo said:


> nothin sez performance like NASCAR stickers..........and yeller cars.


why dont u pick up the latest issue of CAR and see how high the evo8 placed (well ahead of even the ///M3 CSL) in their performance rankings?

or if you're too cheap to spring for an import car mag, take a look at this

...u really ought to learn a few more facts (about cars, and life) before posting again... bigotry is probably not going to be well-tolerated around here, newbie. :thumbdwn:


----------



## racerdave (Sep 15, 2003)

dynosor said:


> The suspension is too soft for what; throwing the car around on a track or having fun on the street? Don't confuse the two.
> 
> Your 325xiT may be too soft for you, but my 330i SP would be annoying if the spring rates were any higher because the natural frequency is already quite high. The only way I would consider "improving" it is with larger anti-roll bars, and then only if I was to auto-cross the car. On the street the stock SP suspension makes the car a well balanced very capable all-rounder with a civilized ride.


:thumbup:

I also think the stock E46 SP calibrations make for the perfect ride/handling compromise. Yes, it's a compromise, but it's the best one on the market.


----------



## blackhawk77 (Mar 16, 2003)

___lk___ said:


> why dont u pick up the latest issue of CAR and see how high the evo8 placed (well ahead of even the ///M3 CSL) in their performance rankings?
> 
> or if you're too cheap to spring for an import car mag, take a look at this
> 
> ...u really ought to learn a few more facts (about cars, and life) before posting again... bigotry is probably not going to be well-tolerated around here, newbie. :thumbdwn:


I rented a Lancer a few months ago and IMO you could strap a Saturn Five and rails onto the thing and it will still be another go-fast piece of crap!

Fit and finish suck and the ergonomics approximate that of a Yugo.

Actually--the Lancer may be just for you--being that you're tolerant and all..........

---


----------



## e46shift (Oct 12, 2002)

owned haha :rofl:


----------



## bavarian19 (May 11, 2003)

blackhawk77 said:


> It certainly begins to look like that 3,900 dollars could be better spent.


I know its being meticulous, but the difference between the sport and zhp package is 2,700:

3900 (zhp)
-1200 (zsp)
______
2700

I would assume that you are arguing the zhp vs sport.

As the other members of this board have already said, if you are looking at the zhp for 0-60 times only, then you are probably looking at that specific model for the wrong reasons.


----------



## Tanin (Dec 21, 2001)

I find it odd that people are able to compare ZHP and SP without first person experience with both cars. If you are considering the ZHP option make sure you qualify the opinions on this board by checking credentials.


----------



## edsmax (Jul 28, 2003)

I like the shadowline trim on the outside and the short shifter. I am not crazy about the ZHP wheels...forget the alcantra seats...I dunno, it just seems to me that the $3900 isn't worth it although its still a nice car. I can probably get the short throw shifter and show trim for around a grand. 
IMHO, not worth it for the performance gains. Hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion!


----------



## Frank Rizzo (Aug 2, 2003)

___lk___ said:


> why dont u pick up the latest issue of CAR and see how high the evo8 placed (well ahead of even the ///M3 CSL) in their performance rankings?
> 
> or if you're too cheap to spring for an import car mag, take a look at this
> 
> ...u really ought to learn a few more facts (about cars, and life) before posting again... bigotry is probably not going to be well-tolerated around here, newbie. :thumbdwn:


Jeeez....I thought this was a BMW board??

Maybe this will help: Your answer is HERE


----------



## blackhawk77 (Mar 16, 2003)

Tanin said:


> I find it odd that people are able to compare ZHP and SP without first person experience with both cars. If you are considering the ZHP option make sure you qualify the opinions on this board by checking credentials.


Motor Trend tested both cars--This thread was started as a commentary on the MT findings (and thoughts based upon said findings) and was never billed as, or meant to be, a "first person experience" commentary-- You're off base with your comment.:slap:

While it may be impossible to verify--I do, however, agree with your check credentials observation.

---


----------



## bimmaboy23 (Jun 7, 2003)

*edsmax*

the wheels on the zhp are definitely sick...yea they are a little heavy and are difficult to clean, but i have the car...trust me, they look damn good on the car...i guess you prefer the regular sport package wheels?? :dunno:


----------



## Tanin (Dec 21, 2001)

blackhawk77 said:


> Motor Trend tested both cars--This thread was started as a commentary on the MT findings (and thoughts based upon said findings) and was never billed as, or meant to be, a "first person experience" commentary-- You're off base with your comment.:slap:
> 
> While it may be impossible to verify--I do, however, agree with your check credentials observation.
> ---


As discussed on this board, MT has never been a consistent source of information (a topic brought up before the ZHP article). FYI this article was discussed 2 months ago (when it came out) on this site and quickly died because of that reputation.

Checking credential does not only apply to car magazines but individuals on this board.

Blackhawk77, have you driven the ZHP? If not, I suggest some seat time before you make comments. You might be surprised.

Unfortunately, at this point it will require you to drive a 6 speed. 

ps. maybe Guss was behind the wheel of the ZHP tested and he "just blew" the shifts!


----------



## jk330i (Aug 13, 2002)

The EVO VII is the best performance car you can buy for the price. For you elitist, high seated bimmer owners, just FYI, the Lancer EVO VII comes from a long heritage of rally inspired cars. Everything about the design, AWD, suspension, technology, etc, all amounts to what the Evolution is today. Let me edumacate some of you elitists further by displaying what a rally bred vehicle looks like (whether you think it looks hideous, plz learn what rally racing and AWD performance is before bashing the car):










And here are the numbers of a Evolution VI RS450 (enough to kill any BMW as far as in raw power and performance):
Engine Type twin-turbo I4 
Powertrain Layout front engine/awd Displacement, cc 1997 
[email protected] [email protected] 
Torque, [email protected] [email protected] 
Curb Weight, lb 2767 
0-60 mph, sec 3.8

I have love for my 330i, but please don't disrespect other cars for what you DO NOT know. Igonorance is bliss.


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

jk330i said:


> 0-60 mph, sec 3.8


:jawdrop:

It is still fugly. But that's damned impressive.


----------



## cgraff (Oct 3, 2003)

Motor Trend is notoriously inaccurate and unreliable.
All you have to do is look at their past test data history.

For example, their spec sheet for an 86 535i said the rear diff ratio was a 2.63:1, and this is off the top of my head.

And who else would name the Chevy Caprice as a "car of the year."

-Chris


----------



## jk330i (Aug 13, 2002)

Plaz said:


> :jawdrop:
> 
> It is still fugly. But that's damned impressive.


Ask anyone who knows anything about Rally car racing and they'll let you know that attractive looks is not what these cars aim for. However, to the rally race car enthusiast, he/she would think they are the best looking cars in the world. To each his own. 
My point is if any of you knew enough about WRC and rally car racing, you would understand the design concept in these cars. IMO, the truth to rally racing is that the uglier the car, the better it seems to perform in either dirt or gravel. The thing that interests me the most is that these so called fugly, rally cars can also dust many other street performance vehicles such as our beloved BMWs.


----------



## ___lk___ (Dec 21, 2001)

Plaz said:


> :jawdrop:
> 
> It is still fugly. But that's damned impressive.


..to think some genius actually compared it to a rental Lancer a few post up... :tsk:

i look back on my life and wonder if i've ever been in such desperate need of a clue.


----------



## Guest (Dec 2, 2003)

blackhawk77 said:


> Motor Trend tested both cars--This thread was started as a commentary on the MT findings (and thoughts based upon said findings) and was never billed as, or meant to be, a "first person experience" commentary-- You're off base with your comment.:slap:
> 
> While it may be impossible to verify--I do, however, agree with your check credentials observation.
> 
> ---


 It's Motor Trend. Enough said.

When you have a magazine without any testing standards or editorial credibility you get results like this. The mag isn't worth the paper it's printed on and you can't trust anything contained inside.

I recall a similar thread a year or so ago where they tested a 330Xi and got a time something like 0.5 or 0.7 seconds faster than the manual tranny 330i they had tested.

The answer then was the same as the answer now. It's Motor Trend. It's not a real car magazine. It's like comapring car stats in Lady's Home Journal.


----------



## Tanin (Dec 21, 2001)

TD said:


> It's Motor Trend. Enough said.
> 
> When you have a magazine without any testing standards or editorial credibility you get results like this. The mag isn't worth the paper it's printed on and you can't trust anything contained inside.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup:

"Lady's Home Journal" :rofl: haven't hear that one yet!


----------



## BlackChrome (Nov 16, 2003)

cgraff said:


> ...And who else would name the Chevy Caprice as a "car of the year."...


Didn't MT name the _Dodge Grand Caravan_ "COTY", too? :tsk:


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

BlackChrome said:


> Didn't MT name the _Dodge Grand Caravan_ "COTY", too? :tsk:


Oh yeah, that's what I'm talkin' about. Schweeet.


----------



## blackhawk77 (Mar 16, 2003)

Tanin said:


> As discussed on this board, MT has never been a consistent source of information (a topic brought up before the ZHP article). FYI this article was discussed 2 months ago (when it came out) on this site and quickly died because of that reputation.
> 
> Checking credential does not only apply to car magazines but individuals on this board.
> 
> ...


Answer # 1--Hmm-- Based on the view counter-I'd say there's still some interest in this topic.....(1300 and counting)

Answer # 2--You're boring me with the credential banter--so I give up on that one if you wont. Bottom line is that there is NO way to verify "credentials" on this board.

Answer # 3--No-- I don't like sedans--please read my post again because I think youre failing to understand my message and the intent of the thread--RTFP!

Answer #4--Damn--I'm not sure I can drive a stick--I'd be all confused being that I make a living as a helicopter pilot. :tsk:

--


----------



## blackhawk77 (Mar 16, 2003)

___lk___ said:


> ..to think some genius actually compared it to a rental Lancer a few post up... :tsk:
> 
> i look back on my life and wonder if i've ever been in such desperate need of a clue.


RTFP--Genius.

It wasn't a "comparison" and ergonomics (certainly) and quality (likely) don't vary between the scores of rental Lancers (that I referred to) and the Evo.

I'm starting to think that Rizzo had you pegged dead on. :freakdanc

----


----------



## Tanin (Dec 21, 2001)

My point is to drive the car and then make an opinion. If you don’t, you might as well listen to my advice on how to fly a helicopter. 

My mistake about the 6 speed……..I was under the impression your 330 was missing a pedal.


----------



## Frank Rizzo (Aug 2, 2003)

blackhawk77 said:


> RTFP--Genius.
> 
> I'm starting to think that Rizzo had you pegged dead on. :freakdanc
> 
> ----


It's all the time at air assault school sliding out of Hueys......gives you a different perspective...... 










I'll never understand those who go on dedicated brand boards, then wax romantic about another brand....then when people jump on 'em they swing wildly......go tell someone else! No one logs on here to find out how neat-O mitsubarus are. If I wanted to know - I don't think I'd look here to get a synopsis of Car and Motortrend articles anyways.


----------



## blackhawk77 (Mar 16, 2003)

Frank Rizzo said:


> It's all the time at air assault school sliding out of Hueys......gives you a different perspective......


Hooah!

--


----------



## jk330i (Aug 13, 2002)

Frank Rizzo said:


> I'll never understand those who go on dedicated brand boards, then wax romantic about another brand....then when people jump on 'em they swing wildly......go tell someone else! No one logs on here to find out how neat-O mitsubarus are. If I wanted to know - I don't think I'd look here to get a synopsis of Car and Motortrend articles anyways.


uh duhr?










I 'think' the proper name for that 'undedicated' brand car is Mitsubishi and NOT "mitsubarus".


----------



## ___lk___ (Dec 21, 2001)

Final Rankings from CAR Magazine's 2003 "Performance Car of the Year" Competition... 

1. Vauxhall VX220 Turbo
*2. Mitsubishi Evo VIII FQ-300* (yep, a rental Lancer! :rofl: )
3. Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale
4. Porsche 911 GT3
5. Nissan 350Z
6. BMW Z4 3.0 
7. VW Golf R32
8. Mazda RX-8
9. BMW M3 CSL
10. Mini Cooper S Works
11. Bentley Continental GT

*As chosen from this field of contenders..*

Alfa 147 GTA 
Mercedes E55 AMG
Alfa GTV 3.2 V6 
Mercedes CLK55 AMG
Ariel Atom 2 
Mini Cooper S Works
Aston Martin DB7 GTA 
Mitsubishi Evo VIII FQ-300
Audi S4 Avant
Nissan 350Z
Audi TT 3.2 V6 DSG
Noble GT3R
Bentley Continental GT
Peugeot 206 GTI 180
BMW Z4 3.0 
Porsche 911 GT3
BMW M3 CSL 
Porsche Cayenne Turbo
Caterham Superlight R400
Renault Clio V6
Daihatsu YRV Turbo 
Seat Leon Cupra R
Daihatsu Copen
Skoda Fabia vRS
Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale
Smart Roadster
Ford SportKa 
Smart Brabus
Jaguar XJR 
Subaru Impreza STi PPP
Lotus Elise 135R 
Vauxhall Astra GSi
Maserati Coupe
Vauxhall VX220 Turbo
Mazda RX-8 
Volkswagen Golf R32
Mercedes SL600 
Volvo S60R

*Test Criteria*

1. Design
A coherent and expressive appearance inside and out is important, with clever use of materials or design that enhances functionality as well as quality.

2. Engineering
The total engineering concept must be consistently executed, with solutions that improve performance and driver appeal while reducing waste and weight.

3. Safety
Both primary and secondary safety devices should exceed minimum requirements, but primary safety equipment must not unduly compromise driver appeal.

4. Value
Not an absolute, but a rating of each car against the price and equipment levels of its logical rivals in the relevant market segment.

5. Driver appeal
Contenders must score highly against baseline roadholding, handling, acceleration and braking parameters, but also display good ride quality, consistent feedback and linear response to control inputs.


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

___lk___ said:


> Final Rankings from CAR Magazine's 2003 "Performance Car of the Year" Competition...
> 
> 1. Vauxhall VX220 Turbo
> *2. Mitsubishi Evo VIII FQ-300* (yep, a rental Lancer! :rofl: )
> ...


If your point is that the Evo is a well-respected car, then cool. Much love for good cars of all makes.

If you're trying to say that just because it's #2 in a very subjective ranking from CAR Magazine, then are you saying that this proves the Evo is a better car? Even better than the 360, 911, and M3 CSL?


----------



## ___lk___ (Dec 21, 2001)

swchang said:


> If you're trying to say that just because it's #2 in a very subjective ranking from CAR Magazine, then are you saying that this proves the Evo is a better car? Even better than the 360, 911, and M3 CSL?


it has nothing to do w/ what I'm saying


----------



## blackhawk77 (Mar 16, 2003)

Is this thing one of the ugliest cars on the road or what???

Damn--even my metallic red rental Lancer looked better! :tsk:

You can have your rental car, boy-racer, refrigerator looking Evo there-- ____lk____, and good luck selling the thing when you get sick of it and the resale value has dropped like a boat anchor due to lack of build quality, comfort and the rental car image stigma.

Now--Please leave our ZHP debate, thank-you!

-----


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

jk330i said:


> And here are the numbers of a Evolution VI RS450 (enough to kill any BMW as far as in raw power and performance):


This is not a fair comparison. You are comparing a *rally* prepped car with a standard road vehicle here.


----------

