What we are proving here is that there is significant grey area about the
Lightweight. I consider the Sipester to be somewhat of an expert on M cars.
Believe him. Grey area, <200 cars produced: STOCK? NOT!
As far as CSP M3's (E36's) and ASP M3 Lightweights, the problem may be the
ability to update/backdate cars into Lightweights. Maybe the SEB wanted to keep
that from happening?
AB
Woody Hair <woodym3@erols.com> on 08/23/99 09:41:18 PM
Please respond to Woody Hair <woodym3@erols.com>
To: marka@telerama.com
cc: AUTOX@autox.team.net (bcc: Andrew Bettencourt/FIELD SALES/Kingston)
Subject: Re: Re: Stock ACR, non-stock M3 LTW...?
> >Why don't you buy it? I've got no idea what the production numbers for an
> >M3 LTW are, but if its hard/impossible to get 'em, why shouldn't they be
> >barred from stock?
> >
> >I also don't know how they compare performance wise to stock M3's. If
> >they're light years better than perhaps they (in effect) simply got
> >performance indexed outta stock, similar to the viper?
> >
> >Mark
Mark,
BMW produced 85 M3 Lightweights, a unique model for the US market.
Other than slightly stiffer springs, a strut-tower stress bar and about
200 less pounds, it was not that different performance-wise than the
standard M3. There's no way it should have been considered a "stock"
car, but can anyone explain to me why it should be in ASP when the
regular M3 can be prepared way beyond the LTW and runs in CSP?
Woody Hair
|