Thinking to trade in e92 M3 for 2011 gt500 Mustang

[captainaudio]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

.
They're really nose heavy and tail happy. They do very well on tracks that have a lot of long straightaways.

That sounds like a description of the M3.

CA

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by captainaudio

That sounds like a description of the M3.

CA

The M3 is closer to a 50/50 weight distribution,weighs about 500 lbs less,one is less of a pig and more balanced. In case you didn't know the m3 loses ground in straightaways when racing a GT500.The 3 series is the most copied car in the world also known as the benchmark,I've never heard anyone refer to the Mustang as the benchmark. I like to reward originality with my money.

[captainaudio]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

The M3 is closer to a 50/50 weight distribution,weighs about 500 lbs less,one is less of a pig and more balanced. In case you didn't know the m3 loses ground in straightaways when racing a GT500.The 3 series is the most copied car in the world also known as the benchmark,I've never heard anyone refer to the Mustang as the benchmark. I like to reward originality with my money.

.
The original Mustang was one of the most copied cars ever produced and an entire category of cars (Ponycars) was named after it.

CA

[valeram]

It was featured in foxnews.com. They did mention that the rear suspension is just like a truck, solid axle and not the independent rear type. They said that it is great if you are in a perfect road or drag race. But it is a nice sports car with a lot of power.

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by captainaudio

.
The original Mustang was one of the most copied cars ever produced and an entire category of cars (Ponycars) was named after it.

CA

Copied by GM and Chrysler,sure. You must not be familiar with the 1968 BMW 2002tii,1966 2002. Unlike the ponycar,a true performer to this day.

[captainaudio]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

Copied by GM and Chrysler,sure. You must not be familiar with the 1968 BMW 2002tii,1966 2002. Unlike the ponycar,a true performer to this day.

Not only am I familiar with the 2002tii I had one. I also had a 1967 Camaro Z28, Both were performace cars although they were very different in feel and character. I'm still kicking myself for getting rid of that Z28, Wish I had them both back (along with my 1954 Jaguar XK120 and my LIonel Trains)

CA

[TRZ06]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

The M3 is closer to a 50/50 weight distribution,weighs about 500 lbs less,one is less of a pig and more balanced. In case you didn't know the m3 loses ground in straightaways when racing a GT500.The 3 series is the most copied car in the world also known as the benchmark,I've never heard anyone refer to the Mustang as the benchmark. I like to reward originality with my money.

Not even close to 500lb difference. The GT500 comes in at 3,820lbs, the M3 comes in at 3,7xx.

Unless there is some new math that has been developed 3,820 - 3,7xx does not equal anywhere close to 500lbs

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by captainaudio

Not only am I familiar with the 2002tii I had one. I also had a 1969 Camaro Z28, Both were performace cars although they were very different in feel and character.

CA

So you must know about the M3's tradition,originality etc. as a true performer. I cherish handling more than brute power. If I was to ditch my M3 it would be for a Porsche Cayman not a GT500. I like autocrossing anyway,where the cayman even the e92 m3 will spank the GT500.

[captainaudio]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

So you must know about the M3's tradition,originality etc. as a true performer. I cherish handling more than brute power. If I was to ditch my M3 it would be for a Porsche Cayman not a GT500. I like autocrossing anyway,where the cayman even the e92 m3 will spank the GT500.

I like a wide variety of cars and am not partial to any brand in particular.

I am fully aware of the M3s tradition and have a lot of respect for it.

Ford, who I will be the first to admit has built some real crap over the years (and I speak from first had experrice as I had a few of the worst) has as stong a performance and racing tradition any manufacturer.

Tradition is fine but as we say in the music business "You're only as good as your last hit".

CA

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by TRZ06

Not even close to 500lb difference. The GT500 comes in at 3,820lbs, the M3 comes in at 3,7xx.

Unless there is some new math that has been developed 3,820 - 3,7xx does not equal anywhere close to 500lbs

I have a base M3 on stock 19's, I posted my weight ticket on here somewhere. It weighs about 3,450lbs. You're right...mine doesn't represent the typical my M3 with all the crap you don't need. And I was under the impression 2011 was a 4,000lb car. I stand corrected
.

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by captainaudio

I am fully aware of the M3s tradition and have a lot of respect for it.

Ford, who I will be the first to admit has built some real crap over the years (and I speak from first had experrice as I had a few of the worst) has as stong a performance and racing tradition any manufacturer.

Tradition is fine but as we say in the music business "You're only as good as your last hit".

CA

The Cobra Shelby,Ford GT40...yes not the current GT500 tho. You can take a well balanced miata and make it a great car,not so much with the current GT500.

My point is why ditch the M3 for a car that's less balanced,more tail happy and weighs more? I rather have a Cayman,really. I guess people have different priorities,some like jumping on the interstate then mashin on the gas picking up speed. Others are happy on a cloverleaf, like to maintain the speed limikt on the twisties and not worrying about accumulating points on their driver's license.

[quality_sound]

I can't imagine Ford taking the Mustang GT, which we all know already equals the M3 on the track, and making the GT500 a lesser performer.

[V1.47fan]

Anybody knows the Mustang GT or the Mustang GT500 lap times at nurburgring?

[elp_jc]

Originally Posted by captainaudio

The original Mustang was one of the most copied cars ever produced and an entire category of cars (Ponycars) was named after it.

That was 50 years ago man . And it still lives in the past, just like the other 'ponycars'. I'm not a fanboy of any brand or model, but man, I absolutely HATE retro crap. Something reminiscent of it, like the Merc SLS AMG okay, but the 'modern' ponycars look like crap inside and out. To be fair, the Mustang is the best, but still feels like 30 years old. You sit in a hole of ugly plastic and awful design and materials. I'm a performance guy, but I'd MUCH rather own a freaking Hyundai Genesis coupe V6 than any Mustang, no matter how powerful. But if you're only after straight-line performance, I can see the attraction of it. To each his own. And no, the M3 is not remotely close to being perfect either, but MUCH more satisfying to drive and own IMO. Good day.

[ihyln]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

Anybody knows the Mustang GT or the Mustang GT500 lap times at nurburgring?

AFAIK, there isn't anything.

But here is an interesting observation made by a forumgoer here:
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showpo...9&postcount=13

8:22.85 147.49 km/h -- Chevrolet Cobalt SS, 260 PS/1349 kg, company test driver John Heinricy
8:31.--- 145.13 km/h -- 2006 CADILLAC STS-V, 440PS/1948 kg,
8:43.52 - 141.55 km/h -- Chevrolet HHR SS, 260 PS/1488 kg (Windng Road 02/08)
8:51* -- 139.66 km/h -- Ford Focus ST, 225 PS/1330 kg (sport auto 09/05) (*mfr.)

cars within 2 seconds...
8:18 --- 149.92 km/h -- BMW Z8, 400PS/1651 kg (sport auto 08/00)
8:18 --- 149.92 km/h -- Chevrolet Corvette Z05 Commemorative Edition, 344 PS (sport auto 09/2003)
8:18 --- 149.92 km/h -- Ferrari F355, 380 PS/1350 kg (sport auto 06/97)
8:18 --- 149.92 km/h -- Maserati GranSport, 400 PS/1672 kg (sport auto 09/05)
8:20 --- 148.32 km/h -- Audi RS6, 400 PS/ 1815 kg (sport auto 03/01)
8:20 --- 148.32 km/h -- BMW M3 E36, 321 PS (Autocar magazine 1997)
8:20 --- 148.32 km/h -- 2008 Honda NSX, 500 PS/??? kg, http://www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsAr...llCars/225863/
8:20 --- 148.32 km/h -- Porche 993 GT3, Walter Roehrl (Car magazine 10/99)
8:22 --- 147.75 km/h -- BMW M3 E46, 343 PS/1584 kg (sport auto 12/00)
8:22 --- 147.75 km/h -- BMW M Coupe, 321 PS/1445 kg (sport auto 10/98)
8:22 --- 147.75 km/h -- Mercedes-Benz C55 (sport auto07/2004)
8:22.38 147.62 km/h -- Nissan Skyline R32 GT-R (Best Motoring video "Carrera Invasion")

The Camaro is in good company

Yes, good company except those cars managed 8:20 almost 9 years ago.

[karussell]

http://www.motorauthority.com/blog/1...-gt500-preview

looks like they did all the right things with the new GT500. looking forward to your review. I still think a better comparison to the M3 will be the Boss 302, but the GT500 will certainly be up there. looks like you just need to get the widest rubber possible on the back and be easy with the throttle on corner exit. should be a very fun car.

[captainaudio]

Originally Posted by elp_jc

That was 50 years ago man . And it still lives in the past, just like the other 'ponycars'. I'm not a fanboy of any brand or model, but man, I absolutely HATE retro crap. Something reminiscent of it, like the Merc SLS AMG okay, but the 'modern' ponycars look like crap inside and out. To be fair, the Mustang is the best, but still feels like 30 years old. You sit in a hole of ugly plastic and awful design and materials. I'm a performance guy, but I'd MUCH rather own a freaking Hyundai Genesis coupe V6 than any Mustang, no matter how powerful. But if you're only after straight-line performance, I can see the attraction of it. To each his own. And no, the M3 is not remotely close to being perfect either, but MUCH more satisfying to drive and own IMO. Good day.

The dicussion was about tradition. The 2002i was also 50 years ago.

I wonder how many of the posters here that are commenting on the way the GT500 drives have actually driven one?

CA

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by quality_sound

I can't imagine Ford taking the Mustang GT, which we all know already equals the M3 on the track, and making the GT500 a lesser performer.

No, but I would like to see the Mustang GT, Boss 302, Boss 302 LS, and GT500 compared. My bet is that, in some scenarios the GT will actually come close to the GT500, and the Boss 302 and especially the Boss 302 LS will easily eclipse the GT500's performance. In other words, adding 150hp to the car might not necessarily yield much real world advantage, especially when you consider they are putting more weight over the front of the car. The Boss's do it the right way - add power to the existing 5.0L, while also cutting a little weight (or at least not adding any).

The point here is, just because the GT already matches the M3, doesn't mean the GT500 will automatically decimate it. We've already seen the M3 win comparison tests against the much more powerful Cadillac CTS. Sure the CTS-V was faster in many respects, and the GT500 will be as well, but depending on the situation that's not necessarily going to make it the best car. And yes, I do know that the GT500 is noticeably faster than the M3 on some tracks like VIR. Let's throw the M3 and the quartet of Mustang's on the N'Ring and let them duke it out. That's something I think everyone would be very curious to see. Oh and yeah, I know the CTS-V is faster than the M3 by five seconds there too. I'd still like to see the Mustangs have a go, particularly the Boss and GT500 in comparison to one another (both will probably beat the M3... but maybe not by a lot).

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by ihyln

AFAIK, there isn't anything.

But here is an interesting observation made by a forumgoer here:
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showpo...9&postcount=13


Yes, good company except those cars managed 8:20 almost 9 years ago.

Thanks,I tried Mr Google,came up with nada also. I'm really curious to see how they compare to the M3 on the ring. On most US car mags on fast/open tracks the E92 M3 manages to beat the Porsche Cayman but if i was buying my car based on handling alone,i'll go with the Porsche Cayman,E92 M3,Mustang GT500.

[SnakeKiller]

Originally Posted by elp_jc

That was 50 years ago man . And it still lives in the past, just like the other 'ponycars'. I'm not a fanboy of any brand or model, but man, I absolutely HATE retro crap. Something reminiscent of it, like the Merc SLS AMG okay, but the 'modern' ponycars look like crap inside and out. To be fair, the Mustang is the best, but still feels like 30 years old. You sit in a hole of ugly plastic and awful design and materials. I'm a performance guy, but I'd MUCH rather own a freaking Hyundai Genesis coupe V6 than any Mustang, no matter how powerful. But if you're only after straight-line performance, I can see the attraction of it. To each his own. And no, the M3 is not remotely close to being perfect either, but MUCH more satisfying to drive and own IMO. Good day.

wow what a ridicules comment, the mustang is as relevant today as it was 50 years ago, not only that its become the best bang for buck car in the world. no one can question the mustang history, 50 years of non-stop production, 50 years of racing history a feat many cars can't match. the mustang has a lot of shortcomings, its limited by its price tag. we can't really compare a luxury make, to a make for the masses, but you can certainly compare performance. you need to read some reviews and be less bias, the mustang does not feel 30 years old(fan boy talk).

the 70's crippled the mustang image but it was regain back quickly, with cars like the LX, 5.0L, cobra(R), SVO, mach 1. some how this cars are forgotten by import fans, and they seam to think ford hasn't made a fast good handling car forever, let alone one with IRS. the M3 is indeed the ultimate driving machine(well in most minds) but its starting to lack in what got it there.

[zhangzeyuandss]

Originally Posted by captainaudio

Not only am I familiar with the 2002tii I had one. I also had a 1967 Camaro Z28, Both were performace cars although they were very different in feel and character. I'm still kicking myself for getting rid of that Z28, Wish I had them both back (along with my 1954 Jaguar XK120 and my LIonel Trains)

CA

can't believe you sold a z28 and a 2002tii...lol

[bobbyd1961]

Originally Posted by stingray23

NO ONE can dispute the history and relevance of the Mustang. Just because some delusional fanboys dont like them and try to talk shit about mustangs or American cars in general doesnt mean they are irrelevant. They have a MUCH bigger following then the M3.

i dont think "following" is the proper term. because the mustang is more affordable it generates more interest however when people, all ages, go by my car (especially the youngsters) they are in awe looking at the car whereas the majority dont even look at the mustang even though they have a much greater chance of being behing the wheel of a mustang.
dont get me wrong i like the mustang but i was always a corvette person until i suffered in the 1984 vette. M3 is a Rocket solid as a ROck that seats 5 . i love it