Curious how do you guys fair against e46 m3s??
09-01-2004, 04:35 PM
#17
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Well, at least BMWNA has been paying for the repair lately. At first, they blamed it on driver error (even with SMG which is impossible to over-rev) and charged customers $17k for the pleasure. That would be a nasty accident if the thing seized and locked up the rears - not a nice thing on the autobahn...
09-01-2004, 05:32 PM
#18
Nordschleife Master
Originally Posted by JasonF
I think our NA 993's do 0-60 in about 5.5 seconds, versus 4.8 for the M3...I have driven a friend's M3 extensively, and found it to be fast and portly. It just doesn't have the "fun" factor of a 993 and isn't as tossable...
The rumor mill is buzzing about the next generation M3, which is likely to have a V-8 to keep up with the Audi S4.
The rumor mill is buzzing about the next generation M3, which is likely to have a V-8 to keep up with the Audi S4.
However, it just doesnt have the FEEL of driving a 911. M3 is a GT. 911 is a sportscar. I felt like I was going faster when I test drove 993s, even though I knew I wasnt. I have nothing but great things to say about the E46 M3, and if I HAD to have a backseat/trunk, it is the clear choice in my opinion.
The comparison to an S4 is sort of silly though...the S4 wont keep up with an E46 M3 unless you are talking about a wet track...its a fast car no doubt, but much less exotic and less visceral in my mind. A lot of the hardcor M guys view the move from inline 6 cylinder to V8 on the same level you view the move from air to water cooled....will be a shame when it happens, which will be soon.
09-01-2004, 05:33 PM
#19
Track Day
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've put my data logger in my M3 and 993RS. Both European cars so I don't know if performance differs vs the US cars (not even sure Porsche sold the RS in the US).
Anyway, Autocar did some standing starts in the M3:
0-30mph 2.01s (I recorded 2.12s in my M3)
0-60 5.0s (RS is reported 4.8 - 5.0s depending on what tests you read), I recorded 5.2s in both the M3 and RS
0-100 12.12s (I recorded - not on public roads - 12.67s vs 13.0s in the RS).
I was being kinder to the RS when I did these tests as there is so much traction at the back you carry the risk of popping driveshafts if you don;t get some wheel slip. I'm sure I could knock a bit of time of the RS test. Similarly the RS had a full tank of fuel (which is 90 litres on the German spec endurance tank = 65kg) so I could probably have gone faster on a lighter fuel load.
Splits (these are all my times):
20-40mph: 1.86s M3, 1.42s RS
30-50mph: 2.06s M3, 1.92s RS (compared with 1.40s in my Caterham Fireblade!)
40-60mph: 1.98s M3, 2.03s RS (Caterham 1.46s)
... I won't retype all the stuff here but will just give
90-110mph: 4.96s M3 4.62s RS
On the track they are like chalk and cheese. M3 great engine but very heavy, floaty, little steering feel, awful brakes. RS is awesome! The M3 is a road car. If anyone wants the detailed performance comparison calculations from the data logger then just send me a private mail.
Hope this helps.
Anyway, Autocar did some standing starts in the M3:
0-30mph 2.01s (I recorded 2.12s in my M3)
0-60 5.0s (RS is reported 4.8 - 5.0s depending on what tests you read), I recorded 5.2s in both the M3 and RS
0-100 12.12s (I recorded - not on public roads - 12.67s vs 13.0s in the RS).
I was being kinder to the RS when I did these tests as there is so much traction at the back you carry the risk of popping driveshafts if you don;t get some wheel slip. I'm sure I could knock a bit of time of the RS test. Similarly the RS had a full tank of fuel (which is 90 litres on the German spec endurance tank = 65kg) so I could probably have gone faster on a lighter fuel load.
Splits (these are all my times):
20-40mph: 1.86s M3, 1.42s RS
30-50mph: 2.06s M3, 1.92s RS (compared with 1.40s in my Caterham Fireblade!)
40-60mph: 1.98s M3, 2.03s RS (Caterham 1.46s)
... I won't retype all the stuff here but will just give
90-110mph: 4.96s M3 4.62s RS
On the track they are like chalk and cheese. M3 great engine but very heavy, floaty, little steering feel, awful brakes. RS is awesome! The M3 is a road car. If anyone wants the detailed performance comparison calculations from the data logger then just send me a private mail.
Hope this helps.
09-01-2004, 06:15 PM
#20
Burning Brakes
I've driven on the track with e46's. Maybe they were modified, but I was thoroughly impressed with how fast they were compared to many other fine automobiles - even in the corners. I have a lot of respect for them now.
09-01-2004, 06:23 PM
#21
If you want an M3 that provides the same thrills as our 993s, you must buy the original 88-91 E30 M3. A truly wonderful car - IMHO the best BMW ever made by far. My E30 M3 offers 7/8 of the fun of my 993. The E36 and E46 M3s are truly overweight and lacking in feel in comparison.
09-01-2004, 07:12 PM
#22
Rennlist Member
Most of the E36 guys aren't too happy with the E46. I will stay with my 993 because I like the look and feel. I'll give up some straight-line speed for one of the best bods out there. Not to mention that it helps keep Viper Bob and Steve W. in groceries.
09-01-2004, 07:50 PM
#24
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by zubinranderia
I've put my data logger in my M3 and 993RS. Both European cars so I don't know if performance differs vs the US cars (not even sure Porsche sold the RS in the US).
Anyway, Autocar did some standing starts in the M3:
0-30mph 2.01s (I recorded 2.12s in my M3)
0-60 5.0s (RS is reported 4.8 - 5.0s depending on what tests you read), I recorded 5.2s in both the M3 and RS
0-100 12.12s (I recorded - not on public roads - 12.67s vs 13.0s in the RS).
I was being kinder to the RS when I did these tests as there is so much traction at the back you carry the risk of popping driveshafts if you don;t get some wheel slip. I'm sure I could knock a bit of time of the RS test. Similarly the RS had a full tank of fuel (which is 90 litres on the German spec endurance tank = 65kg) so I could probably have gone faster on a lighter fuel load.
Splits (these are all my times):
20-40mph: 1.86s M3, 1.42s RS
30-50mph: 2.06s M3, 1.92s RS (compared with 1.40s in my Caterham Fireblade!)
40-60mph: 1.98s M3, 2.03s RS (Caterham 1.46s)
... I won't retype all the stuff here but will just give
90-110mph: 4.96s M3 4.62s RS
On the track they are like chalk and cheese. M3 great engine but very heavy, floaty, little steering feel, awful brakes. RS is awesome! The M3 is a road car. If anyone wants the detailed performance comparison calculations from the data logger then just send me a private mail.
Hope this helps.
Anyway, Autocar did some standing starts in the M3:
0-30mph 2.01s (I recorded 2.12s in my M3)
0-60 5.0s (RS is reported 4.8 - 5.0s depending on what tests you read), I recorded 5.2s in both the M3 and RS
0-100 12.12s (I recorded - not on public roads - 12.67s vs 13.0s in the RS).
I was being kinder to the RS when I did these tests as there is so much traction at the back you carry the risk of popping driveshafts if you don;t get some wheel slip. I'm sure I could knock a bit of time of the RS test. Similarly the RS had a full tank of fuel (which is 90 litres on the German spec endurance tank = 65kg) so I could probably have gone faster on a lighter fuel load.
Splits (these are all my times):
20-40mph: 1.86s M3, 1.42s RS
30-50mph: 2.06s M3, 1.92s RS (compared with 1.40s in my Caterham Fireblade!)
40-60mph: 1.98s M3, 2.03s RS (Caterham 1.46s)
... I won't retype all the stuff here but will just give
90-110mph: 4.96s M3 4.62s RS
On the track they are like chalk and cheese. M3 great engine but very heavy, floaty, little steering feel, awful brakes. RS is awesome! The M3 is a road car. If anyone wants the detailed performance comparison calculations from the data logger then just send me a private mail.
Hope this helps.
See you at Brands Hatch?
09-02-2004, 02:16 AM
#26
Race Director
It depends on what you mean by 'fare'. If you'r talking straight line times, E46 M3 is faster hands down. The 993tt is the right vehicale for this combat.
EVERYTHING ELSE: cornering, braking, driving sensation, looks, fun on tract, etc. the 993 wins hands down. As other had said before, to find an M3 which has the fun factor as the 993, you need to get the E30 M3, hopefully the EVO version, as the regular E30 M3 lacks serious torque.
I'm not a big fan of the E46 M3. I compared that to the E39 M5 at length, and ended uo with the M5. Absoutely no regrets. Especially the RUF makes a perfect stable mate for the M5.
CP
EVERYTHING ELSE: cornering, braking, driving sensation, looks, fun on tract, etc. the 993 wins hands down. As other had said before, to find an M3 which has the fun factor as the 993, you need to get the E30 M3, hopefully the EVO version, as the regular E30 M3 lacks serious torque.
I'm not a big fan of the E46 M3. I compared that to the E39 M5 at length, and ended uo with the M5. Absoutely no regrets. Especially the RUF makes a perfect stable mate for the M5.
CP
09-02-2004, 01:27 PM
#27
Originally Posted by riviera 93
then the engine on the M3 goes POP! common occurance from what i hear.
e
e
I love your avtar inasmuch as I also have a Riveria 993. I just had to ehance your picture to better reflect the color. It is sized and ready to place if you so choose. You have great taste in picking your Porsche color.
09-02-2004, 03:06 PM
#30
we're not so sure she's a "pretty girl" Rivi and the wife don't get on so well, tad bit of jealousy.
All the gifts that Rivi gets (signature). Thanks for the color! Now how do I apply?e
ps love your pictures, (previously posted)
All the gifts that Rivi gets (signature). Thanks for the color! Now how do I apply?e
ps love your pictures, (previously posted)
