Hi Gang,

A friend took his 335i JB2R w/ 96 octane out tonight for some more test runs. He searched google earth for a nice level road (and found one headed up and down First St close to Royal), and took several passes going each way. The results were many 3.8x 0-60 times, as well as several 7.9x 1/8th mile times. The video shows the best 0-60 and 1/8th mile which was 3.82, and 7.90@88.5, 1.7 60' time. This video is heading away from Royal.

The videos are rather large AVI files so only one is uploaded (and it took 2 hours to load!), but if any more doubters would like to put their credibility and a few dollars on the line I will happily upload all the runs.

Also for your enjoyment I photographed a few of the top 0-60 times listed in the FX2. Can you say 3.x 0-60 "all day"?

As a side note I did a lot of driving last night with my Nitto 555R drag radials and was pretty impressed with the wet traction. Aside from the shorter life span, I'd suggest any 335i north of 300rwhp pickup a set.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37EG0vGKkiY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37EG0vGKkiY

Wow! From what I remember, you have Kosei K1 17x8.5 inch rims. What tire sizes?

Wow! From what I remember, you have Kosei K1 17x8.5 inch rims. What tire sizes?

Yes! I went with 245/45/17 tires. Generals up front, and the Nitto 555Rs out back. It's a nice street/strip setup, IMHO.

Terry, get a VBox instead of that cheap Beltronics accelerometer.
The VBox uses 10 times a second sampling from GPS satellites for extremely accurate
times.
It's hard to know what you are really doing with that accelerometer that estimates times based on G loads.

What does that Beltronics show for a stock 335i?

Terry, get a VBox instead of that cheap Beltronics accelerometer.
The VBox uses 10 times a second sampling from GPS satellites for extremely accurate
times.
It's hard to know what you are really doing with that accelerometer that estimates times based on G loads.

What does that Beltronics show for a stock 335i?

Hi Driver72,

Tell you what, let me borrow your VBox. If I run a 3.x 0-60 with it, I get to keep it. If I can't, then I'll give you $500. Sound fair? :evil2

PS. I would appreciate it if you would put a post up on e90 retracting your claim that I was running down hill on my runs. It is the honorable thing to do.

Hi Driver72,

Tell you what, let me borrow your VBox. If I run a 3.x 0-60 with it, I get to keep it. If I can't, then I'll give you $500. Sound fair? :evil2

That sounds fair to me.

:evil2

So was this driving done on the drag radials you mentioned?

So was this driving done on the drag radials you mentioned?


Yes, I have had them on for the last 7,000 miles. :)

Hi Driver72,

Tell you what, let me borrow your VBox. If I run a 3.x 0-60 with it, I get to keep it. If I can't, then I'll give you $500. Sound fair? :evil2

Typical Terry...


Your using a $150 device to substantiate your claims. If this is your business, you'd think you would have a more professional testing equipment, or just goto the dragstrip and post your video and time slip....

...otherwise some people might call your claims BS! :evil2


Also, it's a little disheartening to know your testing your product on neighborhood streets located near schools..!

Typical Terry...


Your using a $150 device to substantiate your claims. If this is your business, you'd think you would have a more professional testing equipment, or just goto the dragstrip and post your video and time slip....

...otherwise some people might call your claims BS! :evil2

-Garrett

Here are 6 runs from an offical track, before the high octane switch:

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=834850

Here is a 1/4 mile run on 91 octane, 2800' DA:

http://www.dragtimes.com/BMW-335i-Timeslip-12992.html

Also, it's a little disheartening to know your testing your product on neighborhood streets located near schools..!
Im 99% sure these tests are done during the evening (look at the pictures I dont see sunlight) unless you're talking about the satellite picture and if you think Terry took that picture then you might be better off at E90post

Im 99% sure these tests are done during the evening (look at the pictures I dont see sunlight) unless you're talking about the satellite picture and if you think Terry took that picture then you might be better off at E90post

I'm pretty sure the guy that did those runs did them around 1am.

PS. Still waiting for Driver72 to man up and post his retraction:

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1531148&postcount=53

Terry, we should meet up one day. I would love to see the JB2 in person. Charlie said he was very impressed by the product when I talked to him today.

I would personally like to see it in action. Good job man, way to make a product affordable to the community.

Im 99% sure these tests are done during the evening (look at the pictures I dont see sunlight) unless you're talking about the satellite picture and if you think Terry took that picture then you might be better off at E90post

Hunh..?

Look at the google earth pic, thats the street he using to test his runs... its in a friggin neighborhood..!
What does it matter what time a day it is..?

Get a Vbox and post some numbers, plz.

Hunh..?
Look at the google earth pic, thats the street he using to test his runs... its in a friggin neighborhood..!
What does it matter what time a day it is..?


It's a rather large 4 lane road + shoulders with a cement divider and few cross streets, and at 1am I understand it was pretty empty.


Get a Vbox and post some numbers, plz.


I'm waiting for Driver72 to take me up on my offer. It will be the easiest $500 he ever made, right Driver72? :devillook


PS. No comments on the track times?

Terry, we should meet up one day. I would love to see the JB2 in person. Charlie said he was very impressed by the product when I talked to him today.

I would personally like to see it in action. Good job man, way to make a product affordable to the community.

Hey, that would be fun! Charlie and Tony are the "roll" racers, but I'd be down for a couple 1/4 mile runs. Bring your drag radials... :)

To be honest 14psi on race gas is pretty aggressive whether you do it with a procede v2 or the jb2r, I hope normal JB2 11psi customers running 91-93 octane and stock tires don't expect this kind of performance. :)

Hey, that would be fun! Charlie and Tony are the "roll" racers, but I'd be down for a couple 1/4 mile runs. Bring your drag radials... :)

To be honest 14psi on race gas is pretty aggressive whether you do it with a procede v2 or the jb2r, I hope normal JB2 11psi customers running 91-93 octane and stock tires don't expect this kind of performance. :)

Terry, how can I get my hands on a JBR2? Is it easy to install? From what I've read, is it true that you will only turn it on when you fill up with 96 octane or else it will throw a CEL? What if you use higher octane than 96?

Terry, how can I get my hands on a JBR2? Is it easy to install? From what I've read, is it true that you will only turn it on when you fill up with 96 octane or else it will throw a CEL? What if you use higher octane than 96?

I'm still doing development so I don't want to release it until I know its safe, etc, and then I will have a group of beta testers running it. Hopefully in the next month or two it will be ready for release? It's just a few more wires between the JB2 and ECU, 100% add on to existing JB2 owners.

It requires 96+ octane and it would be risky to run it on normal 91-93 octane. It could throw a cell, miss, etc. The higher the octane the better the performance, 96 is just the minimum. :)

Yeah, he was talking to me.
I told him to get rid of his cheap $99 accelerometer and use a VBox like I have and see what he gets.

Then I now see this thread with a link to the other forum and that he's betting me $500.

I noticed in that thread (just now because of the link) I don't go to that forum much at all, but Terry has been PMing me and when I get a PM on that forum it sends me an email.
So I responded to a couple of his posts and now I guess he thinks I visit that forum on a regular basis.

Then I see this, that he posts, "come on man up" or whatever.

See, here it is for those who didn't believe Terry's antics.
I don't go on that board for what 24 hours and he's making bets and saying "man up"? LOL
He tells me to "man up" on a statement I made about the unlevel road he does his runs on and retract that statement based on what his response is.

It's funny because a day or two earlier he said the road looked level to him.
Then when I point out the road runs downhill he says, "I got those times running in the uphill direction."

Sorry Terry, but it's easy to say, "oh, I did those runs uphill"
I'm supposed to just take that as fact?? Come on now.
Your true colors are coming through again Terry with those "man up" comments like that.
You need to earn respect and trust Terry.
Sorry Terry, I know your ways.
There's an aweful lot of things you've done and statements you've made people could say you should "man up" about, and those are truthful things.

I don't need to bet with my VBox or $500 either.
I don't need your $500 and as someone says, if I made that bet, how am I to know what you've done to your car.
You could tune in some special 100 Octane tune and run pure 100 Octane and remove more weight from your car and yada yada.

My points to you were simple:

1. Run on a road that is level
2. Buy a VBox (they are $500 you make more than that on selling 2 JB2's), and use it, not that cheap $99 accelerometer you have.
3. Video tape the runs

Doing those three things will validate or invalidate your claims, period.

Why bet me $500 when for that you can just go out and get a VBox and do as I suggest.
Post the video of your results.
It's that easy. If you get the 0-60 in 3.x great for you, if not, oh well.

BTW, your "bets" and "man up" comments are childish and unnecessary.
I decided after all this time to actually respond to you in a couple of posts, (I ignored all your other PM's you sent to me on this board with all the fake usernames you used...they just got passed on to Jason),
but it's apparent I need to still ignore your comments and posts.
Though much more in disguise and low key now (now that you are selling a product and want people's money) it didn't take long for you to make jabs and insults at people.
Comments you surely would not have made to one of your customers who have bought a JB2, now that's a fact you could bet on.

Hi Driver72, you're making this more complicated than it needs to be. Here are the facts:

1) I ran a 3.82 0-60 and posted as much detail as I could about my car, the runs, and the road

2) You came in and claimed I was running down hill, and then cross posted that as fact on other forums where I can't respond to you

3) I PMd you stating I was running on the uphill portion of that road and asked you to publicly retract your downhill claims. I also offered to take runs with you in the car.

4) You would not post a retraction and suggested I video tape some runs on a different road that is 100% flat

5) I provided video taped 3.8x runs on a 100% flat road.

6) After all this you still won't "man up" and post a retraction regarding your downhill comments

Anyway you're so confident that I can't run a 3.x 0-60 with the JB2R I figured why not make it interesting. You can come and inspect the car before hand if you'd like. It will be the JB2R on 96 octane (we can swing by the gas station ahead of time and you can pump the gas), mild exhaust work, and my nittos. It's not about the $500 or the free vbox, it's about you making claims on the forums and then not standing behind them.

I'm pretty sure the guy that did those runs did them around 1am.

PS. Still waiting for Driver72 to man up and post his retraction:

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1531148&postcount=53

"man up"? :rolleyes

Retract statement? Based on what Terry?
The fact that at first you said the road was level?
Or that after me posting that to my eye and to Google Earth it clearly runs downhill, only for you then to say, "I ran those times going uphill"??

So I'm supposed to just believe that and what you said based on your post history and antics on e90post?
Come on Terry.

Sorry Terry, but it's easy to say, "oh, I did those runs uphill"
I'm supposed to just take that as fact??
Your true colors are coming through again Terry with those "man up" comments like that.
You need to earn respect and trust Terry.
Sorry Terry, I know your ways.
There's an aweful lot of things you've done and statements you've made people could say you should "man up" about, and those are truthful things.

I don't need to bet with my VBox or $500 either.
I don't need your $500 and as someone says, if I made that bet, how am I to know what you've done or will do to your car.
You could tune in some special 100 Octane tune and run pure 100 Octane and remove more weight from your car and yada yada.

My points to you were simple:

1. Run on a road that is level
2. Buy a VBox (they are $500 you make more than that on selling 2 JB2's), and use it, not that cheap $99 accelerometer you have.
3. Video tape the runs

Doing those three things will validate or invalidate your claims, period.
Do those 3 things and I can delete the post about running downhill, as I wouldn't be necessary then (but we still wouldn't know if you removed your passenger seat like you've done before, or remove other weight).

Why bet me $500 when for that you can just go out and get a VBox and do as I suggest.
Post the video of your results.
It's that easy. If you get the 0-60 in 3.x great for you, if not, oh well.

BTW, your "bets" and "man up" comments are childish and unnecessary.
I decided after all this time to actually respond to you in a couple of posts, (I ignored all your other PM's you sent to me on e90 boards with all the fake usernames you used...they just got passed on to Jason),
but I guess I need to still ignore your comments and posts.
Though much more in disguise and low key now (now that you are selling a product and want people's money) it didn't take long for you to make jabs and insults at someone who called you out a bit and posted some facts and suggested using a more accurate tool. And I was doing all those things in complete fairness for the sake of accuracy and factual info.
You surely would not have made those comments to one of your customers (who might of pointed out those facts and suggested a better measuring tool) who have bought a JB2, now that's a fact you could bet on.

Good luck, and I hope you do get 0-60 in 3.x with VBox on a level road.
With the use of your DR's custom tune, light weight base car, ultra light weight wheels, race gas, 2nd cats and resonator deleted, and who knows what else, I'd think you can.

Heck I got 0-60 in 4.4 on a completely stock 335i (including stock wheels and runflat tires) except PROcede v1.47 and that was 3/4 tank of just 91 Octane and at 1425 feet in elevation.
With all your reduced weight, DR's, race gas map, additional mods, and lower elevation, heck it shouldn't be too much of a problem running 3.x with even an accurate tool like the VBox.

Good day Terry, take care.

^^^ that only proves what I thought all along... it's people who make all this stuff melodramatic not the maker... as they say, don't hate the player, hate the game.

You surely would not have made those comments to one of your customers (who might of pointed out those facts and suggested a better measuring tool) who have bought a JB2, now that's a fact you could bet on.


I've said all along the FX2 or any device is no replacement for a certified track. The only reason I posted 0-60 runs in the first place was so people could compare with other 0-60 times being posted.

Having said that, I have no issue with you questioning the FX2's accuracy so don't try to frame this in to a FX2 discussion.

It's about me giving 100% disclosure, you accusing me of lying about it (which did personally offend me, BTW), and then you refusing to retract your statement after I provided further proof. That's it.


Good luck, and I hope you do get 0-60 in 3.x with VBox on a level road.
With the use of your DR's custom tune, light weight base car, ultra light weight wheels, race gas, 2nd cats and resonator deleted, and who knows what else, I'd think you can.

Heck I got 0-60 in 4.4 on a completely stock 335i (including stock wheels and runflat tires) except PROcede v1.47 and that was 3/4 tank of just 91 Octane and at 1425 feet in elevation.
With all your reduced weight, DR's, race gas map, additional mods, and lower elevation, heck it shouldn't be too much of a problem running 3.x with even an accurate tool like the VBox.

Good day Terry, take care.

I don't see why everything is always about what your car runs, or what mods you do or don't have. It's not my fault you spent more on the procede and less on tires. It's not my fault you tried lighter rims and ran slower on them. We're talking about my car here and development I'm doing on a new add on for the JB2.

Terry, we should meet up one day. I would love to see the JB2 in person. Charlie said he was very impressed by the product when I talked to him today.

I would personally like to see it in action. Good job man, way to make a product affordable to the community.

You should try one out on your car, or at least someone with downpipes. I think the JBS2 should integrate nicely with these mods.

You should try one out on your car, or at least someone with downpipes. I think the JBS2 should integrate nicely with these mods.

I just shipped a JB2 to someone with Riss downpipes. ;)

I really think that since no testing and tuning was done with DP that it will hurt any of the piggybacks' performance out there. Anything you mess with A/F and flow and the ECU isn't tuned for that it should create less power, which I think was proven on a few of the others already.

I really think that since no testing and tuning was done with DP that it will hurt any of the piggybacks' performance out there. Anything you mess with A/F and flow and the ECU isn't tuned for that it should create less power, which I think was proven on a few of the others already.

I'll be working with downpipes when I get them any may produce a JB2 specifically for use with downpipes if needed. Like you said everything has to be matched for it to work well.

Hi Driver72, you're making this more complicated than it needs to be. Here are the facts:

1) I ran a 3.82 0-60 and posted as much detail as I could about my car, the runs, and the road

2) You came in and claimed I was running down hill, and then cross posted that as fact on other forums where I can't respond to you

3) I PMd you stating I was running on the uphill portion of that road and asked you to publicly retract your downhill claims. I also offered to take runs with you in the car.

4) You would not post a retraction and suggested I video tape some runs on a different road that is 100% flat

5) I provided video taped 3.8x runs on a 100% flat road.

6) After all this you still won't "man up" and post a retraction regarding your downhill comments

Anyway you're so confident that I can't run a 3.x 0-60 with the JB2R I figured why not make it interesting. You can come and inspect the car before hand if you'd like. It will be the JB2R on 96 octane (we can swing by the gas station ahead of time and you can pump the gas), mild exhaust work, and my nittos. It's not about the $500 or the free vbox, it's about you making claims on the forums and then not standing behind them.

Hello "Terry @ BMS":

I do not have a dog in this fight. However, I think that there is a misunderstanding. Conventional thinking might lead one to think that running uphill would give an indicated 0-60 time less than on a level surface or down hill. Note that I wrote "indicated". If you use an accelerometer based device and do not recalibrate for the slope, the "indicated" 0-60 time will be LESS when running uphill than on a level surface.

Here is why:

The device will solve Newton's equations of motion. One is:

V = V0 + A * t

Let's put in some typical numbers. A number of people are claiming a piggy-back will get the 335i to 4.5 seconds for 0-60. 60 mph is 88 ft/s. Assuming you start out from rest, the equation becomes (with V0 = 0):

88 = A * 4.5

So, A = 19.556 ft/s^2.

How far do you travel in that time?

Another equation the device solves is:

X = X0 + V0 * t + 1/2 * A * t^2.

If we let X0 = 0 and V0 = 0,

X = 1/2 * A * t^2 and:

X = 1/2 * (19.556)*(4.5)^2

X = 198 feet (about 200 feet).

Now, let's pick a rise over that distance. Say 20 feet. I can not draw a free body diagram here but if I could we would see that the slope could be calculated from:

Tan(theta) = 20/200

And:

theta = 5.71 degrees.

Again from the free body diagram, we would calculate the component of gravity pushing against the accelerometer at rest as:

F = G * Sin(theta)

F = 32 * .0995 = 3.184 ft/s^2

So, when you start your run, the accelerometer "thinks" you are accelerating at 19.556 + 3.184 = 22.74 ft/s^2.

It then starts the measurements and calculates:

V = A * t

But, it now uses 22.74 instead of 19.556 ft/s^2. To get to 88 ft/s (60 mph) it solves:

88 = 22.74 * t

t = 3.87 seconds.

So, because you are running uphill, the device "thinks" you are accelerating to 60 mph in 3.87 seconds, not the actual 4.5 seconds.

Less slope will cause less of an effect, but it will still be counterintuitive.

So, the lesson is:

If someone wanted to appear to have better 0 - 60 times than they really did have, they would run uphill, not downhill.

Sounds reasonable, I'm not that familiar with how this particular accelerometer works. I do know it is multi-axis and assumed it would take in to account X, Y, and Z movement in its calculation.

The grade in question was supposedly ~2%, and the device recorded similar times going up and down it. So you'd have a 4' drop in your calculation.

My point with this thread was to update people with the results from a 100% level 0% grade road. They matched the times from my previous runs.



Hello "Terry @ BMS":

I do not have a dog in this fight. However, I think that there is a misunderstanding. Conventional thinking might lead one to think that running uphill would give an indicated 0-60 time less than on a level surface or down hill. Note that I wrote "indicated". If you use an accelerometer based device and do not recalibrate for the slope, the "indicated" 0-60 time will be LESS when running uphill than on a level surface.

Sounds reasonable, I'm not that familiar with how this particular accelerometer works. I do know it is multi-axis and assumed it would take in to account X, Y, and Z movement in its calculation.

The grade in question was supposedly ~2%, and the device recorded similar times going up and down it. So you'd have a 4' drop in your calculation.

My point with this thread was to update people with the results from a 100% level 0% grade road. They matched the times from my previous runs.

Hello "Terry @ BMS":

Good enough. Just wanted to set this uphill vs downhill thing in the proper perspective. The readings would not be as most people would think.

If you "recalibrated" before each run, the device should compensate for the component of gravity due to the slope.

Also, the effect is more than most people would think.

...Conventional thinking might lead one to think that running uphill would give an indicated 0-60 time less than on a level surface or down hill...



Wouldn't the device indicate you were already accelerating when pointed uphill and at a complete stop? And from that I woud think that the timer would already be started, before the run even began.

Wouldn't the device indicate you were already accelerating when pointed uphill and at a complete stop? And from that I woud think that the timer would already be started, before the run even began.

Hello "sambonator":

If it works like my GTECH, when you press the button to start a "run" it waits until it sees a change in the readings from the accelerometers to start the timing and measurements.

Hello "sambonator":

If it works like my GTECH, when you press the button to start a "run" it waits until it sees a change in the readings from the accelerometers to start the timing and measurements.

Perhaps the GTECH and other devices already takes into account the acceleration that it detects before the "change" occurred, thus cancelling out the effect of going uphill.

His car is faster than my bimmer. The chevelle on the other hand.........I would lose everywhere but straight line.
Nice car Terry!!! Don't let the posers bother you! If I had the 335 I would buy it. When I get my 135, I will be first on the block to purchase your product, when you have the big one ready!!

His car is faster than my bimmer. The chevelle on the other hand.........I would lose everywhere but straight line.
Nice car Terry!!! Don't let the posers bother you! If I had the 335 I would buy it. When I get my 135, I will be first on the block to purchase your product, when you have the big one ready!!

I can't wait to get my hands on a 135. I think I'll just gut it the first day and throw the JB2R on. Hello 11s? :eyecrazy

amazing all the threads that still revolve around the juice box? I have had the Turbo Tuner for 6000kms or so trouble free and love it! with the ease of install and removal I guess I am bias, but after doing some research on "Terry", I was extremely cautious on his product....to each is own I guess...but IMHO I would take the TT over the JB any day

I also have used the Turbo Tuner, but tried the JuiceBox2 and I ended up selling the SplitSec Turbo Tuner. JuiceBox2 gives better power than TT, especially at the upper RPM range.

The SSTT also does not modify the stock fuel delivery levels, and is more prone to power-loss from heat and timing getting pulled if you aren't using race fuel. But yes it was mighty convenient to be able to add or remove SSTT in like 2 minutes (engine has to be cold though).

As for Terry, you need to read the threads he was involved in, if you want to do an unbiased "research." The threads are available again on e90post.com. Oh and I understand that the moderators on e90post will be accepting him back again soon (this according to the e90post moderators themselves).

I thought I read the 1 series is only going to be a 100-200lbs lighter...not enough weight reduction for me to compromise the space.

I thought I read the 1 series is only going to be a 100-200lbs lighter...not enough weight reduction for me to compromise the space.
Here are the numbers from the BMW sites (http://content.bmwusa.com/microsite/1series2008/assets/pdf/2008_1series_coupe_catalogue.pdf
http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/3/328icoupe/techdata.htm
http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/3/335icoupe/techdata.htm)

128 coupe (mt/at): 3252/3329 lbs
328 coupe (mt/at): 3351/3417 lbs
135 coupe (mt/at): 3373/3384 lbs <--- BMW corrected the Manual number from 3732 to 3373
335 coupe (mt/at): 3571/3582 lbs

Agree the weight difference will have a minimal impact, but it will probably for more nimble with the smaller proportions. In the end it is the price diff that probably matters not the performance diff.

It might just be best to do a 0-60 run while video taping the speedometer. When editing you can add a timer via Adobe Premier and can see the actual 0-60 time. That should end all of the bickering and confusion.

Here's an example (http://texasbimmers.com/media/0-150_timed.wmv).

It might just be best to do a 0-60 run while video taping the speedometer. When editing you can add a timer via Adobe Premier and can see the actual 0-60 time. That should end all of the bickering and confusion.

Here's an example (http://texasbimmers.com/media/0-150_timed.wmv).

The speedo isn't accurate enough to the precision you'd need to infer tenths of a second, IMHO.

The speedo isn't accurate enough to the precision you'd need to infer tenths of a second, IMHO.
You're right that it may not be exact. But even if it's 5% off (high estimate), that's only 3 MPH at 60. 3 MPH goes by pretty quick when accelerating at WOT with a 0-60 under 4 seconds.

You're right that it may not be exact. But even if it's 5% off (high estimate), that's only 3 MPH at 60. 3 MPH goes by pretty quick when accelerating at WOT with a 0-60 under 4 seconds.

The other problem is you have no way of knowing whether or not the tires are spinning. On stock tires I can do 0-60 in around 1 second as timed on the speedo. :)

The other problem is you have no way of knowing whether or not the tires are spinning. On stock tires I can do 0-60 in around 1 second as timed on the speedo. :)
Yes, but if you're accelerating, the 335i will probably not be spinning the tires so much that it will cause a huge error.

Regardless, just thought it might just be another option. But that reason is why I went to 150. I stopped spinning the tires around 115 (when I shift to 4th) or so in my video. ;)

Yes, but if you're accelerating, the 335i will probably not be spinning the tires so much that it will cause a huge error.

Regardless, just thought it might just be another option. But that reason is why I went to 150. I stopped spinning the tires around 115 (when I shift to 4th) or so in my video. ;)


Hehe spinning at 100 sounds fun!! :redspot

Hehe spinning at 100 sounds fun!! :redspot
It is as long as the road is straight. :)

Terry: Are you gonna have downpipes at this Friday's California Speedway jig?

http://www.alternativemotoring.com/

Looks like you and I are the only 335i entries. Hope someone with Procede or something else shows up too! :)

Terry: Are you gonna have downpipes at this Friday's California Speedway jig?

http://www.alternativemotoring.com/

Looks like you and I are the only 335i entries. Hope someone with Procede or something else shows up too! :)

I think they are afraid of us... :)