What is the root of this BMW design flaw in all 3,5,7 series BMW trunk wiring looms?

you forgot to add the important qualifier - "in comparison with a buick".

prelude.

irrelevant drivel.

true enough. how's that 3200 lb behemoth working out for you?

irrelevant drivel.

I didn't forget anything.

Type S

One version of the fifth generation Prelude, a high-performance model called the Type S, was only available in Japan. It was equipped with the

2.2 L H22A, featuring VTEC and producing 217 hp (162 kW; 220 PS) at 7,200 rpm and 163 lbf·ft (221 N·m) at 6,500 rpm.

Close, but not quite. Still respectable though.

Quite relevant.

It's much easier to achieve a certain hp/l number with a two stroke than a four stroke. Do you understand why? Same effect in operation here.

It's great. It rides and handles acceptably well, and unlike a CRX, Lotus, or Miata, I can actually carry three passengers and some luggage in comfort, which is important if you have friends.

Really? So if you have a limited amount of fuel, BSFC is not important at all? Fascinating.

nate

oh, but you did!

so if i understand you correctly, when you were claiming "100hp/l" you were trying to do so for years 2001-2006 [the years the e46 was produced], while somehow trying to claim that it's better than the 217hp / 2.157l = 100.6hp/l of the 1996 prelude, correct? so year for year doesn't figure in your calculations? or are you just too spectacularly incompetent to otherwise avoid being confronted by the facts on the s2000 instead? [rhetorical]

it's a red herring and therefore irrelevant.

wow, not only do you answer rhetorical questions [sic], you do so by way of suppositional nonsense!

how old are you nate?

red herring irrelevant drivel. see above.

Actually I came in late to this conversation, you were discussing power/displacement ratio with someone else and I just jumped in because I found it interesting. I don't know really anything about Quaaludes other than that they really were supposed to be some of the nicest handling FWD cars made, I just hopped on wiki and tried to find which engine to which you may have been referring. The bit that I quoted was the highest hp/l ratio that I saw; 217 hp/2.2l is still not quite 100. Now if the actual exact displacement is less than 2.2l, then OK, you get that one.

It's quite relevant, unless you're the type that likes to compare apples to oranges to "win" a usenet argument.

OK, in that case: You're both wrong. The very first Mazda production rotary yielded 110hp from 982cc. In 1965. I "win."

I'm just saying, your "approved list" actually includes some good cars, but they are not generally practical as a primary vehicle. You're attempting to compare sports *cars* to sports *sedans* (or coupes, as the case may be) and then running down the latter because of the comparison. Dissemble much?

The fact that you consider it irrelevant is telling. Results matter. How you get there is less important.

nate

If you need an explanation of why my example is not actually a fair comparison, see here:

Likewise, a two stroke completes all its power strokes in 360 degrees of crank rotation as opposed to the traditional 720 of a four stroke engine, therefore to normalize it WRT most of the engines that we encounter and the traditional methods of calculating displacement, their actual geometrically calculated displacements need to be doubled to make a fair comparison.

Alternately, instead of just using "displacement" as a raw number, we could use "displacement per revolution" e.g. an Otto or Diesel engine with a 3-liter displacement would have a 1.5 liter/rev displacement, which would actually make more sense, but the convention has been in place for so long that a change just to allow for fair comparisons with the exceedingly rare (only found in the current RX-8) Wankel engines and the similarly now rare (although somewhat common in the past, and we didn't appear to have confusion problems then) two stroke gasoline and Diesel engines.

That all aside, with the increasing prevalence of various forms of supercharging, actual displacement seems to be becoming less and less relevant anyway...

nate

i didn't "get" anything - you simply shot your mouth off without any attempt at basic fact checking. as per usual.

you're just grasping at truly pathetic straws.

???

you're putting false words in my mouth, then not even making sense with what you say i said. fail to comprehend much? [rhetorical]

you really are brain damaged. anosognosic.

he said, diving down the irrelevant brain-damaged rabbit hole of his own digging.

Um, I *did* attempt to check your facts, and I found that it was a nominal 2.2 liter engine with 217hp. If you have cites to the contrary, I'm willing to be corrected, because, as you well know, hondas are something that I have little to no experience with. In fact I am trying to remember if I've ever even driven one. Since you're the supposed expert, please, enlighten us.

No, if you consider power strokes per rev irrelevant, then the Wankel wins, hands down.

Man Look! I came here for an argument. Mr Barnard (calmly) Oh! I'm sorry, this is abuse. Man Oh I see, that explains it.

nate

then you're simply incompetent because you didn't check properly.

i've already given you the numbers, retard! do you want me to repeat them??? [rhetorical]

no. and i'm not wiping your ass for you either. retard.

he said, grasping at pathetic irrelevant straws.

so why do you keep coming back? [rhetorical] you are truly brain damaged.

Hey, you're the one making the claims, you back them up.

I'm not even saying you're wrong. I *am* saying that the burden of proof is on you because I (and likely many other readers of this group) are going to take your word for jack shit because you're hardly an authoritative source. And before you get your nosehairs all in an uproar, that's the way life works - unless you're a published expert, when you make a claim you need to back it up. And if you *are* a published expert, then the backup ought to be in your published works.

I shouldn't have to spend more than a minute or two researching anything you post, you lazy satchel.

In what way is it irrelevant? If you want to name a winner in the "breaking the 100 hp/l mark in a production automotive naturally aspirated engine" unless you exclude them and/or apply an adjustment factor (generally accepted as 2, e.g. the nominal 1.3l 13B engines should be considered to be 2.6l for purposes of this discussion,) Mazda wins.

Unless you want to start looking at two-stroke motorcycle engines... do those count, too? I'm sure I could find examples of those putting out over 200 hp/l before applying an adjustment factor.

Boredom? the need to feel better about myself? Who knows.

Clearly most of the intelligent people have left Usenet; I guess I'm a little nostalgic for the good old days when we used to have actual intelligent, enlightening discussions. A little libertarian/egalitarian part of me truly believes that a moderated forum is inferior in most ways to an unmoderated group; however, you and others like you are starting to make me seriously question that belief.

nate

probably, although I've never seen anything from lucas here.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

nope.

But I have had to do parking lot wiring repairs of modern german cards.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

Fair enough, but not only German.

Here's my employee's Ford which self immolated while taking the child to school one day:

Don't blame Lucas so much, because Lucas did make some decent systems for some British cars. Blame Triumph and MG who wanted the cheapest possible electrics from Lucas.

Although whoever decided it would be a good idea just to dispense with the headlight relay and use a 30A switch on the dashboard probably has a special corner of hell reserved for them. And don't get me started on the ignition coil designs...

--scott

harry.

In message , Nate Nagel writes

Stolen from "Monty Python".

A bunch of 'Jokers', no doubt. ;-)

You're a lying idiot. And this is from someone who has owned both a Prelude Sia and CRX Si.

Nope. He's right.

If true, there was "handicapping" going-on to "level the field".

There's not a purpose-built race car on the planet that is FWD. There are reasons for that.