Challenger SRT Hellcat

[Haywood]

Originally Posted by JAM3S

LOL some of these posts prove my point.

American cars are too hard for a lot of the guys on here. They need their heated seats and buttons that do everything for them so they talk on their blue tooth on their way to get their de-caffeinated skinny latte's from Starbucks.

BMW cant even put out a single performance dedicated car. Ford and GM have multiple options for enthusiasts and people who need their creature comforts. Id rather brag about my HP numbers and the sound that comes out of my exhaust than how many MPG's I get and my leather interior. Some of you sound like Prius drivers.

Have you owned an American muscle car?

[Ashley Schaeffer BMW]

Originally Posted by Haywood

Have you owned an American muscle car?

Nope, but when I hear the word "muscle car" I dont go in with high expectations of having a 7 series like interior.

[TheKosherStogie]

Originally Posted by Nordstat

Your comment about the mustangs proves my point: add more HP to get around a track faster. Sure minors suspension tweets and all, but these are, in general, very heavy cars that aren't getting any lighter. Yea Boss kept up with / edged out the M3 on a track with a professional driver. Try that with weekend warriors and I would guess a different story as the M3 inspires more confidence than a mustang. As a package you get a hell of a lot more car in the M3 (as you should for the extra $). Z28 is purpose built as a track car: different story (and a cool one).

I know the USA is improving their cars... I just don't know if it is actually "keeping up."

False, I owned a Boss 302. Was faster at Buttonwillow and Willow Springs. It took KW clubsports and a bbk on my M3 to keep up with my boss 302 with just sway bars. Otherwise the boss was 1-1.5 seconds faster on same tires

[swanson]

[Savage_M3]

Sounds like a monster...

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by pgviper

At the end of the day, different strokes for different folks. I personally rather win a race than lose one and say, "well at least I have a better interior".

i have had different types of cars. My last car was a camaro with a built engine. it it was loud and fast. the whole idea of those cars gets pretty dam old IMO. Sure mustangs, camaros etc are fast. but its such a typical car for someone to buy for the people who want to go fast and be "the man." a lot of people who buy those cars think they are the hottest shit. its so funny.

IMO AMG cars, M cars, Porsche etc. are not the fastest for the money and would lose races to cheaper cars. but they are still fast, classy and "bossy". thats why people always say they are not all about the numbers. there is more to them.

anyone can afford a mustang at the end of the day.

the only American car i would buy is a CTS-V or z06 corvette. then i can be fast and have a better car status, hey your on a BMW forum. dont forget.

[Ashley Schaeffer BMW]

Damn that sounds viscous.

But in b4

"sound is subjective..... OMG the farts on the M4 exhaust are sooooo intoxicating!!"

-BMW fanboy.

Say what you want about American cars. At least we have options here. Whether its engine size, turbo, NA, supercharged, track built, track poser built, or luxury cruiser. With BMW its basically 1 type of car now. They all look 90% the same and the same turdbro engine is in the majority of the cars. People just buy them to brag about the badges and how many ///M's they have on their car these days.

[swanson]

Originally Posted by JAM3S

Damn that sounds viscous.

But in b4

"sound is subjective..... OMG the farts on the M4 exhaust are sooooo intoxicating!!"

-BMW fanboy.

Say what you want about American cars. At least we have options here. Whether its engine size, turbo, NA, supercharged, track built, track poser built, or luxury cruiser. With BMW its basically 1 type of car now. They all look 90% the same and the same turdbro engine is in the majority of the cars. People just buy them to brag about the badges and how many ///M's they have on their car these days.

[Petros]

Originally Posted by Ezio

i have had different types of cars. My last car was a camaro with a built engine. it it was loud and fast. the whole idea of those cars gets pretty dam old IMO. Sure mustangs, camaros etc are fast. but its such a typical car for someone to buy for the people who want to go fast and be "the man." a lot of people who buy those cars think they are the hottest shit. its so funny.

IMO AMG cars, M cars, Porsche etc. are not the fastest for the money and would lose races to cheaper cars. but they are still fast, classy and "bossy". thats why people always say they are not all about the numbers. there is more to them.

anyone can afford a mustang at the end of the day.

the only American car i would buy is a CTS-V or z06 corvette. then i can be fast and have a better car status, hey your on a BMW forum. dont forget.

so you're one of those people who seek other peoples approval for your car choices? Btw merc may be classy, not sure, but bmw and porsche are "classy"? Are you serious? Have you heard of the joke about bmw/porsche and porcupines?

[swanson]

Originally Posted by Petros

so you're one of those people who seek other peoples approval for your car choices? Btw merc may be classy, not sure, but bmw and porsche are "classy"? Are you serious? Have you heard of the joke about bmw/porsche and porcupines?

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by Petros

so you're one of those people who seek other peoples approval for your car choices? Btw merc may be classy, not sure, but bmw and porsche are "classy"? Are you serious? Have you heard of the joke about bmw/porsche and porcupines?

they have more class than a fuking mustang. thats for dam sure.

I am not trying to seek others approval. more so the cars i want have more going for them than just performance.

If all people wanted was performance, then why are they buying M3s? there are cars much faster for the money.

[LarThaL]

Originally Posted by Petros

I agree. It seems modern M and AMG cars are geared more for rich soft dickheads who just wanna pose than towards any real driving enthusiasts. All those fools ranting about interior quality on performance cars just make me wanna

Modern cars are geared for what will sell modern cars. Don't blame the auto manufacturers. Blame the general public for what they expect. Cars carry an image. There is no doubt about this, and that image drives sales more than any actual virtue of the car.

Most people are "posers" to one degree or another about some things in life....like the sports fanatic who has never played the sport, etc, etc.

[Haywood]

Originally Posted by JAM3S

Damn that sounds viscous.

But in b4

"sound is subjective..... OMG the farts on the M4 exhaust are sooooo intoxicating!!"

-BMW fanboy.

Say what you want about American cars. At least we have options here. Whether its engine size, turbo, NA, supercharged, track built, track poser built, or luxury cruiser. With BMW its basically 1 type of car now. They all look 90% the same and the same turdbro engine is in the majority of the cars. People just buy them to brag about the badges and how many ///M's they have on their car these days.

It's amazing how much shit you talk considering you never owned an American muscle car. How did you become such an expert? And you're on a M3 board dissing M3 drivers and you own a M3?

I had a 2006 300C SRT-8. Put a new exhaust, sway bars, and chipped the ECU. It had about 450hp. Took the car to VIR. It's a 4200lbs saloon that was keeping up with most other cars on the track. Tough to catch me from the turn at Oak Tree down the back stretch doing 145mph. The engine is amazing in that car.

But, the refinement, handling, and overall quality of the car wasn't even close to what anything BMW offers. Traded that in and my SRT-6 for my first 135i. Most American muscle cars are just that. In your face, big bore engines with over-the-top styling. What makes this country great is you get choices! So, if that's what you're into, great. I'm a car guy, not just a BMW fanboy. So, stop being a dick and stereotyping all BMW drivers. Go own different cars before you call yourself an expert.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by Nordstat

How many come with an interior to be proud of i.e. not predominantly plastic and other cheap materials? How many come with multiple suspension, drivetrain, and throttle settings? I know we are talking different price ranges for some of these cars, but the "American way" is still derivative of the same formula. When a Honda Fit or Accord has a comparably stylish interior to a boss mustang, I start to have a problem.

So, if interiors are what does it for you, why aren't you driving an Audi?

As for multiple throttle and suspension settings, why bother when a lowly Mustang GT pretty much runs neck and neck with the E9X cars as is?

Originally Posted by Nordstat

Your comment about the mustangs proves my point: add more HP to get around a track faster. Sure minors suspension tweets and all, but these are, in general, very heavy cars that aren't getting any lighter. Yea Boss kept up with / edged out the M3 on a track with a professional driver. Try that with weekend warriors and I would guess a different story as the M3 inspires more confidence than a mustang. As a package you get a hell of a lot more car in the M3 (as you should for the extra $). Z28 is purpose built as a track car: different story (and a cool one).

My son owns a '13 6-speed M3 with competition package and little else, plus he owns a Boss 302 LS for track days. From his point of view (and other Boss 302 drivers he runs with), stock M3s are simply not competitive on track. You just drive around them while chasing Porsches. Don't get me wrong. He really likes his M (traded a C63 for it), but he didn't really buy it for track use. He got it mostly because, like his old man, he hasn't matured enough to like driving an automatic every day.

Originally Posted by Nordstat

For example, look at the anemic tire options on the camero, charger, challenger, and mustang lineups and that will tell you how "track ready" they are. Relatively narrow for straight line performance, not wide for lateral grip. Eventually, this formula will not work in the marketplace. Just not yet.

First, It's CamAro. Second, one doesn't run narrow rubber to be quick in a straight line. Sheesh. Third, while the Challenger simply isn't competitive, the Boss 302 and 1LE Camaro each blow away the E9X M3s around any given track, with whatever tire sizes they come with from the factory.

Oh, they also have brakes that actually work on track, as well, while a properly driven M3 loses brakes after 4-5 laps around any given venue.

And don't give me any crap about how well your M's brakes work on track. If that's the case, you're just plain slow.

[Nordstat]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

So, if interiors are what does it for you, why aren't you driving an Audi?

As for multiple throttle and suspension settings, why bother when a lowly Mustang GT pretty much runs neck and neck with the E9X cars as is?

My son owns a '13 6-speed M3 with competition package and little else, plus he owns a Boss 302 LS for track days. From his point of view (and other Boss 302 drivers he runs with), stock M3s are simply not competitive on track. You just drive around them while chasing Porsches. Don't get me wrong. He really likes his M (traded a C63 for it), but he didn't really buy it for track use. He got it mostly because, like his old man, he hasn't matured enough to like driving an automatic every day.

First, It's CamAro. Second, one doesn't run narrow rubber to be quick in a straight line. Sheesh. Third, while the Challenger simply isn't competitive, the Boss 302 and 1LE Camaro each blow away the E9X M3s around any given track, with whatever tire sizes they come with from the factory.

Oh, they also have brakes that actually work on track, as well, while a properly driven M3 loses brakes after 4-5 laps around any given venue.

And don't give me any crap about how well your M's brakes work on track. If that's the case, you're just plain slow.

I didn't like the Audi, and in 2009 when I got my '10 M, all they had available was the old RS4's. Simple as that.

I won't get into "track competitive" as that is subjective unless you are a pro driver. I will agree that cars are better than the M3 and cars are worse. No revelations here. And I agree about the M3 brakes, hence my upgrade to ST60's. However, based on your comments, you should know there is more to a car than track performance. I owned a mustang and a vette, and TO ME neither hold a candle to the all-around experience of driving the M3.

Second, one doesn't run narrow rubber to be quick in a straight line. Sheesh.

Tire Physics 101: A tire's contact patch primarily a function of car weight and tire pressure and is essentially constant, regardless of tire width, for a given car weight and tire pressure. Wide tires give a short, wide patch while narrow tires give a long, narrow patch. Performance benefits from friction in the direction of motion, hence a narrow tire is more beneficial for straight line and a wide tire for handling (given the constraints of constant weight and pressure). A quick search into the physics of dragster tires (low initial tire pressure with 'floppy" wide width that quickly stands up to a narrow profile once up to temp) and F1 cars (very wide with relatively high initial pressure) will show this.

PS: Camaro....lol all my bad!

[Nordstat]

Originally Posted by Ezio

they have more class than a fuking mustang. thats for dam sure.

I am not trying to seek others approval. more so the cars i want have more going for them than just performance.

If all people wanted was performance, then why are they buying M3s? there are cars much faster for the money.

+1

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by Nordstat

...I won't get into "track competitive" as that is subjective unless you are a pro driver. I will agree that cars are better than the M3 and cars are worse. No revelations here. And I agree about the M3 brakes, hence my upgrade to ST60's. However, based on your comments, you should know there is more to a car than track performance. I owned a mustang and a vette, and TO ME neither hold a candle to the all-around experience of driving the M3.

There are a ton of people who agree with you - including me.

Originally Posted by Nordstat

Tire Physics 101: A tire's contact patch primarily a function of car weight and tire pressure and is essentially constant, regardless of tire width, for a given car weight and tire pressure. Wide tires give a short, wide patch while narrow tires give a long, narrow patch. Performance benefits from friction in the direction of motion, hence a narrow tire is more beneficial for straight line and a wide tire for handling (given the constraints of constant weight and pressure). A quick search into the physics of dragster tires (low initial tire pressure with 'floppy" wide width that quickly stands up to a narrow profile once up to temp) and F1 cars (very wide with relatively high initial pressure) will show this...

We'll just have to disagree here (except for contact patch area).

1) A wide tire offers benefits both laterally and straight ahead.

2) Dragster tires are both wide and tall, and of course made of limp-wristed, stupendously sticky rubber (average acceleration of 3 Gs over a quarter mile).

The tires are made to "stand up" (increase their rolling diameter) as speeds increase so that they may act more or less like a CVT, with the higher "gears" down track. This characteristic (along with slipping, sequentially-engaging multi-plate clutches) allows them to make essentially max power right from rollout to the finish, with rpm remaining almost constant.

Have you ever watched the Top Fuelers run? If not, please do so. As my grandson says, "You don't watch the Top Fuelers run. They happen to you."

[pgviper]

Originally Posted by Ezio

i have had different types of cars. My last car was a camaro with a built engine. it it was loud and fast. the whole idea of those cars gets pretty dam old IMO. Sure mustangs, camaros etc are fast. but its such a typical car for someone to buy for the people who want to go fast and be "the man." a lot of people who buy those cars think they are the hottest shit. its so funny.

IMO AMG cars, M cars, Porsche etc. are not the fastest for the money and would lose races to cheaper cars. but they are still fast, classy and "bossy". thats why people always say they are not all about the numbers. there is more to them.

anyone can afford a mustang at the end of the day.

the only American car i would buy is a CTS-V or z06 corvette. then i can be fast and have a better car status, hey your on a BMW forum. dont forget.

You prove my point that most european car enthusiasts care about interior, class and status rather than all out performance. Nothing wrong with that, like I said before, different strokes for different folks.

Me on the other hand, I have a camaro for the track/weekends/fun (loud, fast and fun ), fiance has a bmw for daily driving that we split time with and I have my infiniti for when we need two cars. The infiniti and bmw were bought for what they do best, comfortable daily driving from point a to b. Both solid and reliable cars that I love! However, I can't justify buying a performance car that is a compromise.

My last point is also why I wouldn't buy a newer muscle car (mustang, camaro, challenger) except for a corvette because I see all of them as a compromise. Two are overweight pigs and the other is not ideal for handling and it's a ford lol. I am really waiting to see what's in store for the 2016 camaro. LT1 + alpha platform + TR6070 would make for a killer combo. In my eyes, the M3 really is a perfect compromise but compromise really isn't my thing.

[Nordstat]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Have you ever watched the Top Fuelers run? If not, please do so. As my grandson says, "You don't watch the Top Fuelers run. They happen to you."

On TV, yes. I have wanted to see them in person, but time is scarce as I try to finish up my PhD thesis. My M misses the track...

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by Nordstat

On TV, yes. I have wanted to see them in person, but time is scarce as I try to finish up my PhD thesis. My M misses the track...

Make some time if you can. A good day to attend is Saturday, when you can watch the qualifying runs. Sunday is for the actual event.

The four pro classes each have two attempts to qualify on Saturday, and each class is pretty amazing in its own right.

Pro Stock bikes have gone a best of 6.72 seconds @ 199 mph, running on gasoline. The class is currently dominated by Harley Davidson, with Suzuki a strong contender. I don't know if you ride (I hung up my leathers some years back), but if either of us mere mortals would make such a pass, I'm quite sure the only two parts of our bodies touching the vehicle would be our hands, with the rest of our corporal being waving in the wind like a flag. There'd also be a yellow fog following.

Pro Stock (6.47 @ 215) cars are actual doorslammers, with 500 Cubic inch V8s, running through carburetors on gasoline. Said to make over 1500 HP, which to me is a real achievement considering OHV, two valves per cylinder and cam in block.

Funny Cars (3.96 @ 324) are car-caricature bodies (maybe 125 pounds total) over a tube chassis. They run 500 cubic inch V8s on mostly nitromethane, which conveniently frees up extra oxygen molecules during the burn process, meaning you can load up the cylinders nearly to hydraulic lock. Said to make in the vicinity of 8000 HP, although nobody has ever dyno'd one because nobody makes such a dyno, and the engines will disintegrate if run for more than a handful of seconds. They get rebuilt after each pass.

The driver sits behind the engine. Imagine sitting in a small enclosed space with an 8000 HP widowmaker just ahead of your feet. Not me.

Top Fuelers run similar engines with similar estimated 8000 HP, but they have no real bodies to speak of, and extended wheelbases. The engine sits in back, just barely in front of the axle, with the driver just ahead. Current record: 3.701 @ 332.

The thing is, it's not possible to convey in the written word what it's like to witness a Top Fuel or Funny Car pass. First of all, they're down there, and a couple of eye-blinks later, they're way the hell up there. Second, the sound blast as they pass is a palpable pressure wave, almost like a bomb going off.

I guarantee that the first time you witness a Top Fuel pass, you will be quite literally stunned, as in "WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT?"

Doesn't matter if you don't give a damn about drag racing, or even if you don't give a damn about cars. The reaction will be exactly the same.

[IbanezGod]

this car is too big, regardless of the engine... it will probably still handle like the titanic. Back in the 90s muscle cars were lighter weight and more fun, now they are just too big and Dodge/GM seem to make them so you can't see out of the tank like windows.

[bogdan]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Oh, they also have brakes that actually work on track, as well, while a properly driven M3 loses brakes after 4-5 laps around any given venue.

And don't give me any crap about how well your M's brakes work on track. If that's the case, you're just plain slow.

Truer words never spoken regarding the M3 brakes.

Although, with any of these super capable heavyweights, M3, RS5, Camaro 1LE, Challenger, AMG anything. You can't defeat physics for too long. Even if you don't have to manage brake temps, you will need to manage tire temps.