View Poll Results: Which one?
2004 GT3
38
63.33%
2005 E60 M5
5
8.33%
2005 Hummer H2 SUT
17
28.33%
Voters: 60. You may not vote on this poll
Which car: GT3 or E60 M5?
11-11-2004, 09:43 PM
#31
Nordschleife Master
Originally Posted by Holger B
How do I switch my vote to the Hummer? 
Seems like a weird comparison. Gt3 or M5. There really is nothing in common between the cars and they really serve different purposes. The GT3 is a nervous high strung sportscar, the M5 is a smooth executive sport cruiser with gobs of power. I would imagine the M5's handling is numb in comparison to the GT3.
11-11-2004, 09:51 PM
#32
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My E36 M3 will run circles around my GT3 at the track
Which track? I've out at Willow with countless e36's and haven't had one pass me yet?
What did you do to it?
Which track? I've out at Willow with countless e36's and haven't had one pass me yet?
What did you do to it?
11-12-2004, 12:13 AM
#35
Scott,
Bob R, Rocketman and Macfly have hit the nail on the head.
If you intend to track the car, get the GT3.
If not, get the M5.
I owned a 2002 Dinan M5 and I now have a '03 TT and '04 Gt3. The M5 was such a terrific car that I've ordered the new one to replace the TT. But, it could never replace the GT3. The GT3 is a track car that can be run on the street. Mine spends almost 100% of its time on the track. There is no M5, past, present or future, that will keep up with my GT3 on any track. If I thought that, I would sell both my Porsches for the new M5. But, I know the new M5's role will be the same as the old M5, a super fast and luxuriously decked-out street car, not a track car.
Your decision should be clear once you decide how you will use the car most of the time.
Bob R, Rocketman and Macfly have hit the nail on the head.
If you intend to track the car, get the GT3.
If not, get the M5.
I owned a 2002 Dinan M5 and I now have a '03 TT and '04 Gt3. The M5 was such a terrific car that I've ordered the new one to replace the TT. But, it could never replace the GT3. The GT3 is a track car that can be run on the street. Mine spends almost 100% of its time on the track. There is no M5, past, present or future, that will keep up with my GT3 on any track. If I thought that, I would sell both my Porsches for the new M5. But, I know the new M5's role will be the same as the old M5, a super fast and luxuriously decked-out street car, not a track car.
Your decision should be clear once you decide how you will use the car most of the time.
11-12-2004, 09:44 AM
#37
Instructor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: VA
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Guys, I very much appreciate all the helpful comments. I think I've decided to go with the M5 *only* because this car won't be used a track car. Just a very fast, luxury cruiser. My modded E46 M3 is my track car...and while it's not as fast as a GT3, it's still very fast around a track. Again, I really appreciate all the great comments.
11-12-2004, 11:56 AM
#38
1st Gear
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
8 mins around the ring is quick. Unfortunately - if you are BMW - the GT3 RS does it in 7mins 40. 20 seconds at 180mph is an awfully long way.
In the UK, I drive an M5 (400bhp) for every day transport and a GT3 RS for my pure driving experience. My advice is to do the same (GT3 Mk2 in the US). But please do not make a direct comparison between the 2. I drive the GT3 RS developed by the UK Works Porsche Team - with only geometry changes and cup tyres the car was as quick as a Carrera GT around Lemans and 1.5 seconds quicker that the Ferrari challege pole time set by an F50 last year. In reality, the GT3 is light years quicker than the M5 - even with 500bhp - . Don't be fooled by the hype.
Steve Rance
In the UK, I drive an M5 (400bhp) for every day transport and a GT3 RS for my pure driving experience. My advice is to do the same (GT3 Mk2 in the US). But please do not make a direct comparison between the 2. I drive the GT3 RS developed by the UK Works Porsche Team - with only geometry changes and cup tyres the car was as quick as a Carrera GT around Lemans and 1.5 seconds quicker that the Ferrari challege pole time set by an F50 last year. In reality, the GT3 is light years quicker than the M5 - even with 500bhp - . Don't be fooled by the hype.
Steve Rance
11-12-2004, 12:23 PM
#39
Still plays with cars.
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Scott, I'm sure you'll be happy with the M5 - for its intended use it is a very nice car. Enjoy and please report on your own findings when you get it. I am enjoying the performance race between Audi BMW and Mercedes these days. Who would have thought that you could walk into a showroom and buy a car with 500 or even 600 HP (AMG V12) as if it was a regular commuter? OK the price tag is a little steep but it's astonishing that these things even exist.
Rgds,
Rgds,
11-13-2004, 03:28 AM
#40
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: San Luis Obispo
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
High 140's at laguna seca in the 911, on stock tires. 1:42 in the M3 on Hoosiers. I am way more conservative with the GT3, but i feel i could go faster regardless in the M3. I am not claiming the M3 is a faster car, i just run better in the M3. I've had it for years though . . . Not the case with the GT3
11-13-2004, 11:40 AM
#41
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not totally surprised, it took me a full 6 or 7 outings at Willow to beat my old e46 M3's times. That car was easier to drive, and I had it set up on a mix TC Kline suspension & Ground Control swaybars with all the rubber swaped to monoballs. It was an awesome car, and super easy to drive.
The GT3 needed for me to learn it, (PDE Masters was the ticket) and two goes at getting alignment right (dealer messed it up, Johnson's saved the day!) before I was able to match the M3. The GT3 really needs setting up right for the track. It is super sensitive to this, as has been spoken about much here, but once it's done it is significantly quicker than the e46. Most importantly it is a more satisfying machine to drive, and that is difficult to quantify or explain, but it certainly requires more input from the driver to go faster. In the M3 I always felt it was the car that was so capable, in the GT3 I feel it's the car and me together.
The GT3 needed for me to learn it, (PDE Masters was the ticket) and two goes at getting alignment right (dealer messed it up, Johnson's saved the day!) before I was able to match the M3. The GT3 really needs setting up right for the track. It is super sensitive to this, as has been spoken about much here, but once it's done it is significantly quicker than the e46. Most importantly it is a more satisfying machine to drive, and that is difficult to quantify or explain, but it certainly requires more input from the driver to go faster. In the M3 I always felt it was the car that was so capable, in the GT3 I feel it's the car and me together.
11-14-2004, 01:39 AM
#42
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: San Luis Obispo
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have an E46, i have an E36 (96), but i share most of your sentiments. I think the E36 was a MUCH more track capable car as opposed to the E46. Its just lighter and more nimble. The E46 is a luxury car, and the E36 is more serious. I just feel that the GT3 is not necessarily significantly faster than an E36 with more equal power and a better suspension setup. I think that is definately the case with the E46. The E46, IMO, has no steering or brake feel, too much weight, little responsiveness, in comparison to the E36. If the GT3 were in the condition of the E36 as far as track dedication, i am sure it would destroy the M3. But right now the M3 is not stock and the GT3 is :P
11-14-2004, 12:42 PM
#44
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Captain
The laws of physics come into play when you are comparing something that carries 33% more weight in metal. You have an additional 1,000+ lbs to move, slow and turn. The power to weight ratios may be similar (though still not the same). Meanwhile, for relatively little effort, you can RS your GT3 to 410 hp. Now do the math again.
wahooo! math time! someone please help me . . . i'm an engineering student.
anyway, captain was on to something when he said that things are not necessarilly the same even if two cars have the same power to weight ratio. it's because the weight penality is quadratic, not linear.
for example: if a 100 hp car that weighs 1000 lb is accelerating, a 2000 lb car would need 400 hp to achieve equal acceleration, not 200 hp. (the mulitplication factor is (2000/1000)^2, not just 2.)
let us apply this to some very rough power and weight estimates for the GT3 and the new M5:
a "well broken in" GT3 will put up 400 hp and with RoW GT3 seats, lightweight rims, and exhaust weigh around 3000 lb.
let's conservatively assume the new M5 4000 lb. anyone who believes this car weighs any less is out of his or her mind.
so, the horsepower needed for the M5 to equal that of the GT3:
400*(4000/3000)^2 = 711 hp
lets see what happens if the GT3 is only supplying 380 hp and weighs 3100 and the M5 weighs 3900 (bimmer guys would like these numbers better):
380*(3900/3100)^2 = 601 hp
so class . . . can the new 500 hp M5 accelerate with same tenacity as the GT3?
as a homework assignment, i'd like everyone to consider the weight penalty for the M5 in a corner. determine exactly how much more force the tires are dealing with. and as a bonus, use this difference to determine how much more forward energy the tires on the GT3 can supply while coming out of the corner assumming the tires on both cars are supplying 100% of their maximum traction.
(what a dork!)
11-14-2004, 05:32 PM
#45
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by ljd-924SE
wahooo! math time! someone please help me . . . i'm an engineering student.
anyway, captain was on to something when he said that things are not necessarilly the same even if two cars have the same power to weight ratio. it's because the weight penality is quadratic, not linear.
for example: if a 100 hp car that weighs 1000 lb is accelerating, a 2000 lb car would need 400 hp to achieve equal acceleration, not 200 hp. (the mulitplication factor is (2000/1000)^2, not just 2.)
let us apply this to some very rough power and weight estimates for the GT3 and the new M5:
a "well broken in" GT3 will put up 400 hp and with RoW GT3 seats, lightweight rims, and exhaust weigh around 3000 lb.
let's conservatively assume the new M5 4000 lb. anyone who believes this car weighs any less is out of his or her mind.
so, the horsepower needed for the M5 to equal that of the GT3:
400*(4000/3000)^2 = 711 hp
lets see what happens if the GT3 is only supplying 380 hp and weighs 3100 and the M5 weighs 3900 (bimmer guys would like these numbers better):
380*(3900/3100)^2 = 601 hp
so class . . . can the new 500 hp M5 accelerate with same tenacity as the GT3?
as a homework assignment, i'd like everyone to consider the weight penalty for the M5 in a corner. determine exactly how much more force the tires are dealing with. and as a bonus, use this difference to determine how much more forward energy the tires on the GT3 can supply while coming out of the corner assumming the tires on both cars are supplying 100% of their maximum traction.
(what a dork!)
anyway, captain was on to something when he said that things are not necessarilly the same even if two cars have the same power to weight ratio. it's because the weight penality is quadratic, not linear.
for example: if a 100 hp car that weighs 1000 lb is accelerating, a 2000 lb car would need 400 hp to achieve equal acceleration, not 200 hp. (the mulitplication factor is (2000/1000)^2, not just 2.)
let us apply this to some very rough power and weight estimates for the GT3 and the new M5:
a "well broken in" GT3 will put up 400 hp and with RoW GT3 seats, lightweight rims, and exhaust weigh around 3000 lb.
let's conservatively assume the new M5 4000 lb. anyone who believes this car weighs any less is out of his or her mind.
so, the horsepower needed for the M5 to equal that of the GT3:
400*(4000/3000)^2 = 711 hp
lets see what happens if the GT3 is only supplying 380 hp and weighs 3100 and the M5 weighs 3900 (bimmer guys would like these numbers better):
380*(3900/3100)^2 = 601 hp
so class . . . can the new 500 hp M5 accelerate with same tenacity as the GT3?
as a homework assignment, i'd like everyone to consider the weight penalty for the M5 in a corner. determine exactly how much more force the tires are dealing with. and as a bonus, use this difference to determine how much more forward energy the tires on the GT3 can supply while coming out of the corner assumming the tires on both cars are supplying 100% of their maximum traction.
(what a dork!)
For example, take a 200 hp 2000 pound car and a 300 hp 3000 pound car. From a standstill they will accelerate at the same rate. However then look at how they accelerate at say 100 mph when 70 hp is used to maintain this velocity. The power to weight ratios of the remaining usable power will not be equal.
2000/(200-70) = 15.38
3000/(300-70) = 13.04
So the heavier car will pull away at speed even if the power to weight ratios are equal at a standstill. This is why a Lotus Elise will destroy many high performance cars to 60, but be humbled by many mediocre cars when accelerating from 100 mph.
The power to weight ratio favors the GT3 so under 200 km/h it should out accelerate the M5, however to demonstrate how things get closer as the speed increases check out the factory claims for 0-200 for each car. I wouldn't be surprised if the 0-250 km/h numbers favor the M5.
0-200 km/h
GT3 14.3
M5 14.4
It's good to meet another student, what field are you studying in engineering? I'm a 4th year math and physics double major myself although I've also taken a few engineering courses.
Last edited by Yargk; 11-14-2004 at 07:23 PM.