New M3 better than a 997 911 Turbo?
06-02-2008, 12:43 PM
#17
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Bend, OR
Posts: 879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, I don't really care about a few tenths of second here, a couple tenths of a G there, I still like Porsches and would take the Turbo anyday. Still can't believe the M3 is so good though - it's crazy.
06-02-2008, 03:30 PM
#18
Burning Brakes
Its amazing how the GTR is not as fast as the first test were. I knew the preproduction cars were some what race prepped and were not that much faster then they were orginally thought. I do think they got the wrong porsche for the test. The turbo has become more of a luxo cruiser for the well to do then the true enthusist. A better comparison would be the GT3 or even the Carrera S which is lighter then the turbo and on par with the M3 as far as acceleration.
06-02-2008, 03:41 PM
#19
Rennlist Member
06-02-2008, 03:46 PM
#21
Rennlist Member
I do think they got the wrong porsche for the test. The turbo has become more of a luxo cruiser for the well to do then the true enthusist. A better comparison would be the GT3 or even the Carrera S which is lighter then the turbo and on par with the M3 as far as acceleration.
One thing that struck me about the test was that the M3 was the "lightweight" of the group at 3600+ lbs. I understand we've got improved safety and extra electronic gizmos, but do these things REALLY need to be so porky? Porsche should be ashamed of itself for producing a 3,700 lb TT. As noted above, I guess that's why they make the GT3.
06-02-2008, 04:04 PM
#22
Ironman 140.6
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
One thing that struck me about the test was that the M3 was the "lightweight" of the group at 3600+ lbs. I understand we've got improved safety and extra electronic gizmos, but do these things REALLY need to be so porky? Porsche should be ashamed of itself for producing a 3,700 lb TT. As noted above, I guess that's why they make the GT3.
That's what struck me when I read it.
The article title was "Vision Quest". However when you consider the weight (M3 3,600 lbs, 997TT 3,720, GT-R 3,900) "Three little pigs" would seem to be a better title.
06-02-2008, 04:45 PM
#24
Drifting
Thread Starter
Well, 1st off, it felt slow to me. Coming from the Turbo, that's probably normal. Although I forget to hit the M button till 1 block away from the BMW dealership on the second drive. But I did mess with teh damper settings and I like it on Sport.
They felt small, and sporty JUST like a 911. Handling felt as good or better than my Turbo. The car was SO easy to drive, effortless. The Engine roared and it just feels SO raw, yet refined and I don't know, it just fits and you feel SO connected. BMW has really done it!
They felt small, and sporty JUST like a 911. Handling felt as good or better than my Turbo. The car was SO easy to drive, effortless. The Engine roared and it just feels SO raw, yet refined and I don't know, it just fits and you feel SO connected. BMW has really done it!
06-02-2008, 08:52 PM
#25
Nordschleife Master
If given a choice, it would have to be the Turbo for me. I like the M3 but it is so not the same thing - and it's not cheap either. I'd lioke to drive the R8, but I can't get used to that Stainless Steel band thingy
06-02-2008, 10:52 PM
#26
A couple of weeks before I bought my p-car, I test drove the new M3, M Roadster, and the Z06. I currently own a 1999 328i which I bought new (now my wife's car) and have always enjoyed my BMW. I thought both the M3 and M Roadster performed great. The dealer, where I test drove the new M3, did not let me push the car as hard as I wanted to because it had only 100 miles on it. I could not get a good feel for the top end (RPM range) or really the power. To me, it really did seem like it had over 400 HP.
On the other hand the Z06, is an absolute rocket. It definitely has throw-you-in-your-seat power! Fun to drive but it is still a GM product with the same old 80s feel interior. Will they ever learn?
About the GTR, it is just plain UGLY! I can't get over the bad looks...interior and exterior!
There is more to a car than just winning the 0-60 times or slightly higher top end. It is quality, workmanship, heritage, refinement, and sheer beauty!! There is no question...we have the better car.
On the other hand the Z06, is an absolute rocket. It definitely has throw-you-in-your-seat power! Fun to drive but it is still a GM product with the same old 80s feel interior. Will they ever learn?
About the GTR, it is just plain UGLY! I can't get over the bad looks...interior and exterior!
There is more to a car than just winning the 0-60 times or slightly higher top end. It is quality, workmanship, heritage, refinement, and sheer beauty!! There is no question...we have the better car.
06-03-2008, 01:13 AM
#27
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Opinions are like rectums...everybody has one.......
According to Car & Driver, the new E92 M3 coupe beats out the brand new 911 Turbo as well as the GT-R. 
First Place: 2008 BMW M3
The voices in our head say: “How could the M3 win against a GT-R and a 911 Turbo? Are you guys goofy? BMW jock sniffers! How could you let this happen? Impossible!”
In this group of radical cars, the M3 emerged quickly as the voice of reason. The extremist voices of the Porsche and the GT-R are just not present in the M3. It never shouts, utters complaints, or makes any unbecoming demands. Road and tire noise are subdued, the fabric-covered seats are perfect, and there is a back seat and a real trunk. But even with those attributes, the M3 doesn’t skimp on supercar performance. It just happens to be dressed in a polished and practical package.
Even without the optional adjustable electronic dampers, our M3 test car displayed a better ride-and-handling compromise than either the 911 or the GT-R. Handling, both on the track and public roads, matched the GT-R in our individual scoring. But the M3 goes about its business differently. The GT-R steamrolls the tarmac into submission in an eerie sort of way; the M3 allows the driver to use the car as an instrument. Not many cars can play the road—the car world has more fakers than a middle-school band concert.
As one test driver put it, “The M3 is the car that the driver has the most control over.” Oversteer, understeer, and neutrality are all on the M3’s résumé, but they’re dependent on the driver’s inputs. The chassis has no surprises, no snap reactions, no bad habits—even midcorner bumps are sopped up without drama. Strong brakes have excellent initial bite and didn’t fade even after many, many laps. The BMW’s lap time lagged 1.5 seconds behind the 911 Turbo’s, but that translates to an average speed throughout the lap that was only 0.3 mph slower than the far more powerful Porsche. Thus the BMW, though suffocated by the thin air at 4200 feet, managed to make up most of the difference by cornering faster.
Unlike the heavyweights, the BMW feels smaller the harder it is driven. Part of that feel is due to light steering, but the importance of having the lowest mass and the narrowest width also plays a huge role.
It is immediately obvious (especially at altitude) that the M3 isn’t as quick as its turbocharged competition, but 0 to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds is nothing to scoff at, either (other M3s we’ve tested have been slightly quicker). A naturally aspirated 4.0-liter V-8 can’t deliver the massive torque of the blown sixes, but the M3 delivers its 414 horsepower in a linear and consistent manner from idle to its 8300-rpm redline. No lurching, no drama, no sudden explosions of boost. And the sound the BMW V-8 makes is due a Grammy. It’s a V-8 note not often heard outside racetracks, while the Nissan and the Porsche both sound as though they could wear a Dyson label.
If you’ll overlook the now cliché complaints about the iDrive control system and the car’s light steering, the M3 didn’t draw any negative words in its logbook. And the iDrive gripe is easily solved by not ordering the $2100 optional navigation system.
The M3 offers an unparalleled mix of hassle-free livability and performance at a price that undercuts those of the *Nissan and the Porsche. For that, it wins in our book. We say its performance deficit is made up by the near perfection and sophistication of the rest of the package. And before you think we’ve gone soft and are too old for a wildcat like the GT-R, know that the average age of the test drivers (and the voters of the comparison test) was 29.5 years. Moreover, we’re the only three C/D staffers who dream of having a Lotus Elise as a daily driver. Trust us, we can put up with a lot of crudeness—you should have heard our dinner conversations. But if you can have it all without the pain, who would vote against that? And until that Elise thing happens, the M3 is the car we’d take home forever.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...st+page-4.html
First Place: 2008 BMW M3
The voices in our head say: “How could the M3 win against a GT-R and a 911 Turbo? Are you guys goofy? BMW jock sniffers! How could you let this happen? Impossible!”
In this group of radical cars, the M3 emerged quickly as the voice of reason. The extremist voices of the Porsche and the GT-R are just not present in the M3. It never shouts, utters complaints, or makes any unbecoming demands. Road and tire noise are subdued, the fabric-covered seats are perfect, and there is a back seat and a real trunk. But even with those attributes, the M3 doesn’t skimp on supercar performance. It just happens to be dressed in a polished and practical package.
Even without the optional adjustable electronic dampers, our M3 test car displayed a better ride-and-handling compromise than either the 911 or the GT-R. Handling, both on the track and public roads, matched the GT-R in our individual scoring. But the M3 goes about its business differently. The GT-R steamrolls the tarmac into submission in an eerie sort of way; the M3 allows the driver to use the car as an instrument. Not many cars can play the road—the car world has more fakers than a middle-school band concert.
As one test driver put it, “The M3 is the car that the driver has the most control over.” Oversteer, understeer, and neutrality are all on the M3’s résumé, but they’re dependent on the driver’s inputs. The chassis has no surprises, no snap reactions, no bad habits—even midcorner bumps are sopped up without drama. Strong brakes have excellent initial bite and didn’t fade even after many, many laps. The BMW’s lap time lagged 1.5 seconds behind the 911 Turbo’s, but that translates to an average speed throughout the lap that was only 0.3 mph slower than the far more powerful Porsche. Thus the BMW, though suffocated by the thin air at 4200 feet, managed to make up most of the difference by cornering faster.
Unlike the heavyweights, the BMW feels smaller the harder it is driven. Part of that feel is due to light steering, but the importance of having the lowest mass and the narrowest width also plays a huge role.
It is immediately obvious (especially at altitude) that the M3 isn’t as quick as its turbocharged competition, but 0 to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds is nothing to scoff at, either (other M3s we’ve tested have been slightly quicker). A naturally aspirated 4.0-liter V-8 can’t deliver the massive torque of the blown sixes, but the M3 delivers its 414 horsepower in a linear and consistent manner from idle to its 8300-rpm redline. No lurching, no drama, no sudden explosions of boost. And the sound the BMW V-8 makes is due a Grammy. It’s a V-8 note not often heard outside racetracks, while the Nissan and the Porsche both sound as though they could wear a Dyson label.
If you’ll overlook the now cliché complaints about the iDrive control system and the car’s light steering, the M3 didn’t draw any negative words in its logbook. And the iDrive gripe is easily solved by not ordering the $2100 optional navigation system.
The M3 offers an unparalleled mix of hassle-free livability and performance at a price that undercuts those of the *Nissan and the Porsche. For that, it wins in our book. We say its performance deficit is made up by the near perfection and sophistication of the rest of the package. And before you think we’ve gone soft and are too old for a wildcat like the GT-R, know that the average age of the test drivers (and the voters of the comparison test) was 29.5 years. Moreover, we’re the only three C/D staffers who dream of having a Lotus Elise as a daily driver. Trust us, we can put up with a lot of crudeness—you should have heard our dinner conversations. But if you can have it all without the pain, who would vote against that? And until that Elise thing happens, the M3 is the car we’d take home forever.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...st+page-4.html
06-03-2008, 01:15 AM
#28
Chandler!
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Well, 1st off, it felt slow to me. Coming from the Turbo, that's probably normal. Although I forget to hit the M button till 1 block away from the BMW dealership on the second drive. But I did mess with teh damper settings and I like it on Sport.
They felt small, and sporty JUST like a 911. Handling felt as good or better than my Turbo. The car was SO easy to drive, effortless. The Engine roared and it just feels SO raw, yet refined and I don't know, it just fits and you feel SO connected. BMW has really done it!
They felt small, and sporty JUST like a 911. Handling felt as good or better than my Turbo. The car was SO easy to drive, effortless. The Engine roared and it just feels SO raw, yet refined and I don't know, it just fits and you feel SO connected. BMW has really done it!
What's the sticker on that car?
06-03-2008, 01:19 AM
#29
Drifting
Thread Starter