Quote:
Originally Posted by elp_jc
I'm a driving enthusiast with a NA V8 6MT bias (NA 6MT F6 is 2nd), without regard of price, brand, performance above a certain level (400HP is enough), or anything else. As such, the M3 is IMMENSELY more satisfying to drive than the GT 5.0. I don't care if it's a bit quicker, brakes a bit shorter, or whatever else; it's the TOTAL PACKAGE. The M3 has all the perfornance I need, so anything above is totally irrelevant to me.
The Mustang drives like a truck by comparison
|
All evidence to the contrary. I think you're letting your obvious brand bias lead you. If Randy Pobst, who I think we can all agree is much more of a driver than any of us will ever even come close to being, says that the GT is only a set of good shocks away from equalling, or besting, the M3 at roughly half the cost then the GT IS the total package.
Quote:
|
and that's without even considering its looks, which are a deal-breaker to me at any price.
|
THIS is the real reason you don't like it, not it's performance, real or perceived. The GT simply doesn't have the "status" that the M3 does. TBH, if the Mustang was available in a sedan form and kept all of its performance I'd probably have gone that way and pocketed a huge amount of money and had upgrade parts that are more plentiful and much less expensive to boot. Don't even get me started on how much I almost went with the GT500 over the M3. My desire for a performance sedan is the only thing that kept me in an M.