[ruff]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Well the cup is either 90% full or 10% empty. What I want personally should not be of great concern to you and although I don’t feel like I need to justify my desires nor criteria to you I guess I will play along…again...

What I want is a jack of all trades and I really do not think many deliver as well as the M3. I want 2 doors and 4 useable seats. I also really want a dual clutch transmission. High on my list as well is aesthetics and here again nothing on my short list competes with the new M3. Last of all I want comfort. I don't want the noise nor ride of my current modded E36 M3. Fast and great handling goes without saying. Like I said simply a jack of all trades.

Sure the new M3 could shed a few pounds and that would make it faster and probably a bit more fun, but come on how fast it fast enough? You do get to a point where it is enough and I think the new M3 will be more than fast enough for my skills and my “appetite” (probably yours and 99% of us on this forum as well). Likely the only way to do this feat would be a significant compromise on safety, comfort and reliability. I like the way the M boys call their compromises!

The RS4 does weigh significantly more than the M3, unless you call 350 lb insignificant and it does put way less power to the ground than the M3 by nature of its AWD. The RS4 has “matched” the M3 is some initial comparisons but lost just as many. Head to head raw numbers on our nice thread tracking performance figures places the M3 quite a bit ahead of the RS4 (and even the R8 is many places). You can read just as well as I can! Stop distorting the facts and taking subjective evals from some journalists as gospel. Elevation? Come on get real? Who gives a bloody hell if the 335i will out accelerate the M3 on Mt. Everest; I live at Sea Level, precisely. If a FI car suits you better in your locale go for it.

Steering is critically important to me (I do have an E36 M3 now…) and I guess in this regard I simply have a little bit of faith. Look at all the initial bashing of the E46 M3 steering – what has happened since? Basically there are two possibilities, all of the BMW M experts who can drive circles around all of us blind folded (magazine dudes included) either “screwed the pooch” or know better than we do. If I drive the car and the steering is less than excellent I would strongly consider not buying it. Remember the recent F430 Scuderia review as well as all of the conclusions about the new M3 – it is possible these days to deliver racecar performance with GT comfort and ease of use. Although the M3 sure aint no Scuderia nor F430 for that matter it does seem to have mastered this compromise. I know I am making this sound like I have driven the damn car, which I clearly have not. This is just my synthesis of all of the wealth of information available to all of us.

As much as I do believe that Ring times are very demonstrative of the ultimate high speed track performance of a car it is clearly not the only contest that makes a car. When did I say that? Just because I like to talk about the Ring a lot surely does not mean I am blind to other criteria. What is great about the Ring is not its perfection but precisely the opposite, it's imperfections and diversity; bumps, roughness, blind spots, off cambers, variable radius corners, etc. Brakes: Do you really think that the Ring (20.6km) is short enough that it barely gets the brakes warmed up and then the whole world comes crashing down on lap 2? Again, “wake up” is my only reply. The brakes are far into high operating temperatures and probably very close to peak operating temperature in a single lap. I’m sure (despite your comments above) you know that number of brake pistons does not make a great brake. Cooling is a huge factor and I suspect BMW did “OK” on brake cooling, especially given the huge intake ducts in the front fascia. My reading of the information thus far is that the brakes may be the weakest link in the car, not the steering. If this is so, it is really not a big deal. With a nice BBK you get fade free performance, technology, long life and great looks (and your precious piston count as well). Heck even the factory option track pads are likely all you’ll need for severe track duty.

Like I have said before we don’t have pricing nor a head to head against the C63 AMG yet but I think it is likely that the M3 will outperform most of the following cars in most situations and best all of them in price except maybe the IS-F; RS4, R8, C63 AMG, AM Vantage, Cayman S, 911, 911S, IS-F, CTS-V. This is why the car is at the top of my current “short list”. My "M3 glass" is simply 90% full (no not fanboy full as in 99%, 100% or even 110%). I have been able to help you see yours as at least 70% or so full in the past, hopefully the thoughts above will help you refill your glass. Either way whatever I say is not likely to strongly influence your final decision. Choose the car that speaks to your needs, your criteria, your environment, your intellect and your heart. Cheers.

Nice retort Swamp. Not trying to change anyones mind here, just trying to have a good honest debate with you.

You are right, the M3 is a jack of all trades but as the rest of saying goes, it may also be the the master of none. Compromise, isn't necessarily a bad thing. Based on all the subjective reviews, if you really like 90% of the way the M3 performs, I don't know how steering response could be much of a factor for you in determining what make a great sports car. How could it be? Nor are fade free brakes for that matter. You hit it right on, I am at about 70% right now with the M3. If you would just take an hour sometime and actually test drive a Cayman, you would actually understand what great steering and handling prowess is. Just ask other BMW fanatics who have drove it. They will tell you the same thing. Ever heard a BMW enthusiast who has drove the Cayman saying anthing less than praise for the Cayman's handling dynamics? Now that should really tell you something shouldn't it? Not saying the M3 doesn't handle well, I am sure it handles great compared to most cars. However, compared to a light, well balanced, mid engine sports car, physics simply are not on it's side. I am not recommending you buy the Cayman, just drive it so you have a benchmark to judge other cars handling with. Can the Cayman haul four passengers?. Does it have a screaming 8400 red line? Does it come standard with Bi-Xenon. The answers are no, no, and no.

Your are correct in saying I took a "subjective evals from some journalists as gospel" to make my point. I am glad to see you are the better man than me and every magazine number or comment you have presented and argued points over are based on objective fact. So, if a magazine favors the M3 it remarkably goes from subjective to Automotive scientific journal. Ok, I get it. Besides, why would a South African mag know anything. Notice I pointed out elevation in my quarter mile times. Didn't try to hoodwink anyone with it. I just found it iteresting that the 335 sedan can run the same quarter mile time at I believe 4586 feet (which is quite a bit lower than where I live) with a carbon fiber roof, aluminum hood and aluminum suspended M3 coupe. You know as well as I, that manufactures and mags are throwing around different weight numbers based on different factors for all these cars. All I know is that the RS4 is running similar quarter mile time as the M3, with as you say, 350 more pounds and power train loss due to all wheel drive. To me, the proof of weight/horsepower/grip ratio is in the pudding, ie the numbers, not each criteria in and of it's self. I do recognize that AWD is an advantage for short sprints. Based on this little piece of information, don't you at least find find the quarter mile number favoring the normally aspirated RS4 over the M3 in this test or any test for that matter a bit intriguing or is it just subjective ballyhoo? No I don't live on Everest but my lungs feel like punctured balloons when I hammer my road bike anywhere north of 6000 feet.