Nonsense Thread

[Panici]

Crash safety is a good point, but it's all relative and everyone's tolerance for risk is different.

In the summer I drive my tiny 1990 Miata to work sometimes, and motorcycles too.
You're far safer in any BMW from the 80s then either of those.

Pickup trunk bumper height lines up with my head while I'm in the Miata. 💀
Turbo noises first thing in the morning are worth the risk though!

[Northern]

I've kind of been waiting for our inspection requirements to change, but since 2009 it's only your usual safety items, plus a visual inspection on emissions hardware (edit: only for 1991 and newer, so catless e30 is legal) and just making sure the CEL isn't on. It's bound to change soon with the number of absurd "popcorn tunes" on every shitbox under the sun lol

I had wondered why you were specifically excited about the '99 - I didn't realize they went dbw after that.

[2mAn]

I go back and forth on this shit all the time.

I love analog cars with no unnecessary crap added, but then I also like modern crash safety, comfort, and some of the bells&whistles of something modern.

Maybe a happy middle ground exists with E36/E46/E39, maybe I would even argue that a manual N52 E90 could be in there. But I really like having both and keeping the two separate at the moment.

Im with you and I think this is why the 00s were the sweet spot where lots of good performance, manual transmissions, minimal sensor intrusion and good safety.

In CA, having a 00 VS a 99 is a big difference when dealing with smog because the former is a plug into the OBD and make sure all monitors are good VS the 99 gets plugged in but still has to spend time on the dyno. Its a little frustrating because I really wanted the 99-996 with its drive by cable VS drive by wire and lack of other nannies... oh well.

[Northern]

I go back and forth on this shit all the time.

I love analog cars with no unnecessary crap added, but then I also like modern crash safety, comfort, and some of the bells&whistles of something modern.

Maybe a happy middle ground exists with E36/E46/E39, maybe I would even argue that a manual N52 E90 could be in there. But I really like having both and keeping the two separate at the moment.

[varg]

Close to stock is the best place to be in a DD

I am stupid and even if I did like Audis will never be able to afford something like an RS6 so turbocharging an old BMW wagon it is

[MrBurgundy]

I dunno man, I can't get over the electronic integration (manual swapping an E39 is more of a pain than it should be) and the ABS on the exhaust side with E39s. I only considered an E39 for my daily until I saw that they put the ABS system where I needed to put my turbo and its exhaust. To me it seems it was all downhill after the E34. Even the E34 has some stupidity compared to earlier cars, like the extremely unreliable HVAC setup, the garbage window regulator clips and chipboard door panels, the broken-100%-of-the-time headlight adjusters.

13 years in my shop and I seldom see ABS issues on e39s.

If you want a manual e39, just buy one. They're everywhere and e39s are just not expensive enough to justify purchasing an auto and swapping it to manual.

Sure an e39 is not a perfect candidate for a turbo setup. IMO a turbo on that car doesn't even make sense. It's a nice, quiet sport sedan. A turbo would make that car something it was never supposed to be. A smooth v8 is plenty in that car.

Close to stock is the best place to be in a DD

Lower it a bit, get some nice fitting wheels and call it a day

[varg]

I dunno man, I can't get over the electronic integration (manual swapping an E39 is more of a pain than it should be) and the ABS on the exhaust side with E39s. I only considered an E39 for my daily until I saw that they put the ABS system where I needed to put my turbo and its exhaust. To me it seems it was all downhill after the E34. Even the E34 has some stupidity compared to earlier cars, like the extremely unreliable HVAC setup, the garbage window regulator clips and chipboard door panels, the broken-100%-of-the-time headlight adjusters.

[MrBurgundy]

Yeah, cars def peaked early 2000s.

e46/e39 was the pinnacle of BMW.

I absolutely love my e39.

[roguetoaster]

Think that's a key point. Just give me a car, I don't need a crazy tech package.

These aren't supercars, you don't need traction control, stability control. And don't get me started on lane keep assist etc.

While I agree on lane keep and would add crash avoidance as unnecessary stuff, I can call out the E39s ASC as a shining example of getting it right. Blind spot warning is also nice on modern blind spot mobiles, but like all tech it seems to be a case of now that it's here we can abandon basic principles like actually looking in a mirror, or heaven forbid, adjusting it to see outside rather than inside.

But since it's here it all needs to be built with the assumption that the driver can do the thing they are doing, not catering to careless morons.

OTOH, every piece of crap that's installed on a car makes it more expensive to repair when crashed, which indirectly costs us all in insurance, so screw it, no cupholders, radio deletes for all, and wheels that only just clear the calipers.

[Panici]

Nothing to "turn off"

Think that's a key point. Just give me a car, I don't need a crazy tech package.

These aren't supercars, you don't need traction control, stability control. And don't get me started on lane keep assist etc.

[2mAn]

I think vehicles in general peaked in the early '00 models.

Where the enthusiast offerings were still a "driver's car" and motorcycles didn't have electronics beyond fuel injection.

To be clear I'm not talking about outright performance, because obviously a modern vehicle is better in every way.
But I don't really care about that tbh, it's more about how it feels to the rider/driver.

Sure there are exceptions to the rule with modern cars like the GT3 RS still offered with a manual, but those are toys attainable only for the rich.

Theres a point in the mid 00s where the cars became too overridden by tech. Its honestly one of the reasons why I love my 996 so much. Its Drive by cable. There is no traction control at all. Nothing to "turn off" ... Theres nothing. Yet it has nice A/C, power steering and can take my kid around in the back, relatively safely. Its a perfect car for me to keep, long- term and its also now my only car. It will have to do everything.

[DEV0 E30]

This was similar to what was on the Carmudgeon podcast recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLtIFxj3U38

[Panici]

The late '90s/early '00s models.

I scoffed and returned to my stodgy opinion that non sport bikes peaked in the 2000s.

I think vehicles in general peaked in the early '00 models.

Where the enthusiast offerings were still a "driver's car" and motorcycles didn't have electronics beyond fuel injection.

To be clear I'm not talking about outright performance, because obviously a modern vehicle is better in every way.
But I don't really care about that tbh, it's more about how it feels to the rider/driver.

Sure there are exceptions to the rule with modern cars like the GT3 RS still offered with a manual, but those are toys attainable only for the rich.

[varg]

The late '90s/early '00s models. IMO the perfect ZX-9R is the 02/03 which came with better brakes, but it's easy to fix that (I ditched the 6 piston calipers for 4 piston bandit calipers on my ZRX, it's just as easy on the ZX9), less easy to make the engine improvements. The earlier 90s models are noticeably heavier. I say old because I didn't know if Kawasaki has made one since then. I guess it would be a poor choice if you're tall, it was perfect for me though at only 5'9". I do enjoy a smaller sportbike but once I got my hands on bigger ones like the ZX-9 I realized that despite the weight and perhaps lower ultimate performance vs a 600 supersport or other ultra-light performance bike, the engines and ergonomics are far superior for the street.

I haven't paid much attention to modern offerings and it has served me well because when I saw the mistakes made on Kawasaki's latest retro standard lineup (including the boondoggle of detuning the Z900 engine for the Z900RS, claiming it's for low end torque, then seeing that the dyno results for both contradict that) I scoffed and returned to my stodgy opinion that non sport bikes peaked in the 2000s.

[Panici]

Good lord, a naked ducati as a touring/long rides bike? Talk about motorcycle masochism. If you want a bike that does sport and touring well, without being ugly or a 650lb+ pig of a bike like a concours or similar, the old ZX-9R is fairly heavy (just a little lighter than the noble standard that hasn't been matched since, the ZRX), but it does sport and touring both pretty well. It's more relaxed in riding position than a literbike but more sporting than most sport touring bikes.

It certainly does have a lot of character, for better or for worse. 😅
Interesting about the ZX-9R, when you say old, what year range are you talking?