|
|
01-16-2010, 12:38 AM | #2 |
Sleeper
29
Rep 281
Posts |
You can read the article here:
http://www.motorgeek.com/phpBB2/view...r=asc&start=25 034 def brought it. Supercharged M3 results somewhat disappointing..
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-16-2010, 04:13 AM | #3 | |
JOSH SHOKRI.
524
Rep 5,881
Posts
Drives: 991 GT3RS, 964, Raptor
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: los angeles, california.
|
Quote:
__________________
Current: 16 991 GT3RS , 91 964 C2, 17 Raptor | Past: 2015 991 GT3, 2015 i3,15 YMB F80 M3, 13 E92 M3 DCT, 08 E92 M3 6MT, 07 E60 M5, 02 E46 M3
Instagram: @josh_speeddistrict #SpeedDistrict @SpeedDistrict |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-16-2010, 08:06 AM | #4 | |
Lieutenant
6
Rep 402
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-16-2010, 02:59 PM | #7 |
Colonel
183
Rep 2,872
Posts |
Typical media crap. So put a stripped out race car with interchangeable suspension and Turbo/Tune against street performance built cars on Conti3's...really?
Any of the cars could've been made to compete at that level, just depends how much money they would've dumped into it. Its a team/shop built car vs. private owners. This was done kind of shitty Either way this issue kind of sucks. Eisenhaus made it onto the cover |
Appreciate
0
|
01-16-2010, 05:02 PM | #8 | |
Captain
37
Rep 977
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-16-2010, 06:38 PM | #9 |
Colonel
183
Rep 2,872
Posts |
Well yeah, the SC M3's are out of place too, this test doesn't make any sense.
Than they say they're split into classes, but that doesn't work out either to have all these cars together. But Tires being the only factor I wonder why the M3's placed so low in the roadcourse |
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|