1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

General conversations about BMW E28s and the people who own them.
Post Reply
e12euro
Posts: 220
Joined: Jan 11, 2007 4:28 AM
Location: EA

1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

Post by e12euro »

I was looking at Car Life's July 1969 article, and Road & Track's March 1982 report on a gray market 745i that had smog controls/ 5mph bumpers as part of the importation process, and was surprised how similar both cars tested. Both had a/c, 3 speed automatic, and nearly the same diff ratio 3.08 and 3.07:1 The Vette was running 99 octane leaded, the BMW 91 octane unleaded!

Vette 350 (base 300 hp) 0-60 mph 8.4 seconds, 0-80mph 14.5 seconds, 0-100 mph 24.6 seconds 126 mph top speed 15.5 mpg, weight 3,405 lbs

e23 745i 0-60 mph 8.5 seconds, 0-80mph 14.2 seconds, 0-100 mph 24.9 seconds 124 mph top speed 14.0 mpg, weight 3,530 lbs

Of course, the 7 series can seat 4 adults in comfort and has room in the trunk for more than a toothbrush. ;)
Blue Shadow
Posts: 10195
Joined: Feb 12, 2006 12:00 PM
Location: SE PA

Re: 1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

Post by Blue Shadow »

When it comes to racin a sport car I'm in the group of 4 people with luggage. Not many can keep up with that.

Interesting numbers. My 7 is quicker and faster based on just driving it around. I don't know why the 745i was limited in top end. The 85 745i, €-version has 7.9 to 62 and 141 top speed. Maybe that Federalized 745i really did have a cat installed.
e12euro
Posts: 220
Joined: Jan 11, 2007 4:28 AM
Location: EA

Re: 1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

Post by e12euro »

Blue Shadow wrote: Sep 25, 2021 3:05 PM When it comes to racin a sport car I'm in the group of 4 people with luggage. Not many can keep up with that.

Interesting numbers. My 7 is quicker and faster based on just driving it around. I don't know why the 745i was limited in top end. The 85 745i, €-version has 7.9 to 62 and 141 top speed. Maybe that Federalized 745i really did have a cat installed.
In my 1981 Euro brochure it said the 745i, on 98 octane gas no smog controls and small bumpers, 0-62 mph 7.8 seconds and 138 mph top speed.

This gray market car was smogged, Road & Track said they got it to 124 mph at 5,500 rpm, which was the rpm shift point for 1-2 and 2-3. They did say their Contributing Editor Paul Frere, got 139 mph out of the Euro version, in Europe.

The Vette barely had any smog controls, it hit 126 mph at 5,100 rpm. 51 mph at 5,000 rpm and 85 mph at 5,000 rpm. The BMW got 50 and 85 mph at 5,500 in 1st and 2nd.
stuartinmn
Posts: 9380
Joined: Feb 12, 2006 12:00 PM
Location: Minneapolis

Re: 1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

Post by stuartinmn »

Traction probably had a lot to do with the 0-60 times. The BMW was on radials, the Corvette was on rock hard bias ply tires.
Mike W.
Posts: 26872
Joined: Feb 12, 2006 12:00 PM
Location: California Whine Country

Re: 1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

Post by Mike W. »

Yeah, a lot of the "Muscle Cars" weren't really all that fast. Actually I'm surprised it was that even, the 300HP for the Corvette was gross and many of the ratings went down 25-40% when they went to net HP. I remember when I got my Bav 2800 going in the early 80s being surprised when a then, late model Corvette pulled me on an on ramp GP. But not by much.

Now some of the Corvettes and Muscle cars really were fast, not to mention many cars currently which are just stupid fast. But I bet lots of 60's cars rated at 300+HP wouldn't hit 200 on a dyno. And then smog and cats and the 70s hit and it went down for a while. Way down.
kojo96
Posts: 798
Joined: Mar 31, 2019 7:39 PM
Location: Pleasanton CA

Re: 1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

Post by kojo96 »

Many of the stated HP ratings for the muscle cars up to around 1971 were grossly underrated, for many reasons. One being insurance rates or the ability to get insurance policies for younger drivers.
My 1968 Z28 4sp was rated at 290HP, it made much more power than that. Never had it on a dyno but it was scary fast.
Everything past 1972-1973 SUCKES, the 80s was worse.
e12euro
Posts: 220
Joined: Jan 11, 2007 4:28 AM
Location: EA

Re: 1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

Post by e12euro »

Mike W. wrote: Sep 26, 2021 12:32 AM Yeah, a lot of the "Muscle Cars" weren't really all that fast. Actually I'm surprised it was that even, the 300HP for the Corvette was gross and many of the ratings went down 25-40% when they went to net HP. I remember when I got my Bav 2800 going in the early 80s being surprised when a then, late model Corvette pulled me on an on ramp GP. But not by much.

Now some of the Corvettes and Muscle cars really were fast, not to mention many cars currently which are just stupid fast. But I bet lots of 60's cars rated at 300+HP wouldn't hit 200 on a dyno. And then smog and cats and the 70s hit and it went down for a while. Way down.
I am not surprised, a late '70s base engined Vette was a 17 second flat car, and the 2800/Bav was about that too. You might have been dealing with the optional L82 350 model.

That 300 hp Corvette was the cruiser comfort model. All the racy ones tested were 4 speed and had no a/c, and also idled like pigs. Some pony cars/muscle cars were underrated, some overrated. Road & Track said the base C2 Corvette 250 hp motor was around 180 net, GM liked to exaggerate, so figure that 300 hp was around 200-215 hp.

Corvettes were damn heavy for what they were, but all the weight was in the frame. The body was like a meringue with steel tubing running through it (the birdcage), which could and did rust. Not much crash safety.

A later comparison, Autosport from 1981 on the M535i (e12) and Road & Track in 1985 with the Corvette TPI 350 and 4+3 stick. Both cars abominable stick shifts, and 3.07 diff ratios. Respective 0-100 mph times 19.2 seconds and 19.1 seconds.
Tiit
Posts: 290
Joined: Oct 06, 2017 6:27 AM
Location: Canberra

Re: 1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

Post by Tiit »

Why is corvette as heavy as more modern luxury car? :|
e12euro
Posts: 220
Joined: Jan 11, 2007 4:28 AM
Location: EA

Re: 1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

Post by e12euro »

Tiit wrote: Sep 27, 2021 3:49 AM Why is corvette as heavy as more modern luxury car? :|
Yes, as I said all the weight is in the frame. The C3 Corvette's frame had to be built tough, because that's where all the car's rigidity is, the actual body doesn't play a structural part. The C3 was a heavy sports car.

This is why most modern vehicles have unitary construction, where the whole body is one unit. You end up with a lighter, stronger, more rigid structure that is also roomier. It's roomier because the footwell can extend deeper down, before the floor sat on the frame. That's why GM came up with their weak X frame, to have a lower footwell, by eliminating crossmembers.
wkohler
Posts: 50921
Joined: Oct 05, 2006 11:04 PM
Location: Phönix, Arizona, USA
Contact:

Re: 1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

Post by wkohler »

'69 Corvette is not bad. Auto and AC kinda ruin that. No thanks on the M102 745i.
e12euro
Posts: 220
Joined: Jan 11, 2007 4:28 AM
Location: EA

Re: 1969 Corvette Vs 1982 745i

Post by e12euro »

wkohler wrote: Sep 28, 2021 1:22 AM '69 Corvette is not bad. Auto and AC kinda ruin that. No thanks on the M102 745i.
The Corvette small block V8 weighed 500lbs in those days, the big block 700lbs. Auto and a/c is what most people wanted. And even in the e34 5 series BMW North America expected 8 out of 10 to go with the automatic. Back in the e3 and e12 days it was 70% stick, 30% automatic. In Europe it was the other way around, they viewed M30 powered cars as pure luxury, and often went automatic.

But as you can see here, even the humble twin carb 1975 Euro 528 automatic did 0-60 in 9.0 seconds and 120 mph, and 20 mpg overall. The small bumpers helped. :cool:

CAR November 1975 528
Post Reply