Disappointed by E92 M3 1/4 Mile?

[13eastie]

Originally Posted by Leg

Im glad, most of the 1/4 miles near me have great scenery and quite often very attractive young ladies walking along them. I would hate to miss it and I like to think they would hate to miss me, although Im probably kidding myself.

Haha - nice one! Although this certainly does not ring true with my last experience of being dragged round Harvey Nicc's

[Epacy]

Originally Posted by revah2

This was supposed to invoke some constructive criticism, stupid me for ever thinking that would happen

There are plenty of novels on this board about what you posted. You can get your jollies there.

[Epacy]

Originally Posted by lucid

This is not a therapy medium so that you can work out your problems with your car.

I'm currently rolling

[NewhouseEnt]

Originally Posted by revah2

First off I'd like to say that I acknowledge the fact that a pleasurable driving experience isn't all about how fast the car goes in a straight line. Of course, there is more to a car. However, when price is put into the equation, getting a 335i and slapping a couple of mods on there seems like the better choice when put against the new M3. Car and Driver reported a quarter mile of 12.9 at 111mph. 335is with AA Xede and Exhaust are hitting 12.6@ 109 in the quarter mile with 3-5k worth of mods... not to mention your still spending about 15k less than you would be if you bought the E92 M3. The only thing that puzzles me is the M3s trap speed of 111 mph. With a trap speed like that, shouldn't the 1/4 mile time be mid to low 12s. Either that or there is a loss of traction, and the only way to get a better time would be to slap some new tires on there. I guess the 335i gave everyone very, very high expectations for the new M3, and that is exactly where BMW faulted. So, is the 6mph faster trap speed and about a half-a-second faster quarter mile time plus some extra styling and better handling (scored something like .05 higher on the skidpad than the 335i) worth the extra 20-25k for the new M3? Oh, you get the ///M badge.

DEAD ISSUE: This has already been spouted off about and the answer clearly lies in the fact they already stated their times will be significantly faster when properly tested. They basically did a few blast offs for fun, and stated as such. No eat your Milk Toast.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by revah2

First off I'd like to say that I acknowledge the fact that a pleasurable driving experience isn't all about how fast the car goes in a straight line. Of course, there is more to a car. However, when price is put into the equation, getting a 335i and slapping a couple of mods on there seems like the better choice when put against the new M3. Car and Driver reported a quarter mile of 12.9 at 111mph. 335is with AA Xede and Exhaust are hitting 12.6@ 109 in the quarter mile with 3-5k worth of mods... not to mention your still spending about 15k less than you would be if you bought the E92 M3. The only thing that puzzles me is the M3s trap speed of 111 mph. With a trap speed like that, shouldn't the 1/4 mile time be mid to low 12s. Either that or there is a loss of traction, and the only way to get a better time would be to slap some new tires on there. I guess the 335i gave everyone very, very high expectations for the new M3, and that is exactly where BMW faulted. So, is the 6mph faster trap speed and about a half-a-second faster quarter mile time plus some extra styling and better handling (scored something like .05 higher on the skidpad than the 335i) worth the extra 20-25k for the new M3? Oh, you get the ///M badge.

I was actually pleased by that Car & Driver report. One of the things that bothers me about the E46 M3 is the fact that you need to go for the right-hand side of the tach in order to go quickly. There's no such thing as lazy speed in that car. (As an aside, this would bother me less if the exhaust note was any good. Decades of sonorous snarl from BMW sixes replaced by that tinny rasp.)

In any event, the engine boys at the M Group apparently decided to forego maximum torque in favor of broadening the entire curve - and apparently it's paid off this time. 111 mph in the quarter mile is very impressive for a car that tips the scales at 3649 pounds (as BMW told the Edmunds people), and 12.9 seconds is about right for that mph on street sneakers. Furthermore, Autoweek reported a 50 - 75 mph time of 4.9 seconds in top gear, which is stupid fast (that's a technical term, son). You won't find another street car that can do this.

I know, I know. In concept, nobody cares about top gear performance, but I'll tell you what: Out on the road, everybody cares. Just tickling the gas pedal out on the highway and whoosh!, you're gone, is an attribute that will bring a grin to every driver's face, every time.

Other than the fact that this new car is very heavy, and thus less tossable than the previous car, this car is better in pretty much every way - thus continuing a long tradition of the M Group. Each M3 has been bigger, heavier and less tossable (thus less fun to drive) than the one before it, and altogether a better car.

This time, however, the more useable power band may mean the new one is just as much fun to drive as the E46 version, even though it'll be less tossable.

Making comparisons, the 335i, in my opinion, is a seriously flawed car - enough so that I skipped out and went Japanese for my four-door three months back because of the open rear (had a bad experience during the test drive) and the runflats. Sure, it'll be a top gear terror with the Vishnu (or other) mods, but coming out of turn three at NHIS, you're just going to make enough smoke to take over for the Bug Comissioner. Sure, you can throw a rear in there, and mod the supension (not to mention the brakes), but then you'll be sacrificing one of the things that BMW does better than anybody else, which is the ride/handling compromise. Oh, the 12.6 @ 109 with the Vishnu? Forget about it. Nobody's doing that without traction aids.

Comparing the new car with a Vette? Don't. Vettes are killer cars either in a straight line or on a road course, and the new M3 won't be able to match them. It'll be closer, but apparently the '08 Vette will get even more power, along with tweaked steering and a high-zoot (for $4K) interior. The single downer they have from a performance point of view is that they're slugs in top gear.

What BMW does best is back-road banditry. They're better than nearly anything else on bumpy back roads, and you'll screw that up by modding a 335i.

I think the new car will be worth the money.

Bruce

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by revah2

First off I'd like to say that I acknowledge the fact that a pleasurable driving experience isn't all about how fast the car goes in a straight line. Of course, there is more to a car. However, when price is put into the equation, getting a 335i and slapping a couple of mods on there seems like the better choice when put against the new M3. Car and Driver reported a quarter mile of 12.9 at 111mph. 335is with AA Xede and Exhaust are hitting 12.6@ 109 in the quarter mile with 3-5k worth of mods... not to mention your still spending about 15k less than you would be if you bought the E92 M3. The only thing that puzzles me is the M3s trap speed of 111 mph. With a trap speed like that, shouldn't the 1/4 mile time be mid to low 12s. Either that or there is a loss of traction, and the only way to get a better time would be to slap some new tires on there. I guess the 335i gave everyone very, very high expectations for the new M3, and that is exactly where BMW faulted. So, is the 6mph faster trap speed and about a half-a-second faster quarter mile time plus some extra styling and better handling (scored something like .05 higher on the skidpad than the 335i) worth the extra 20-25k for the new M3? Oh, you get the ///M badge.

If you look at the 12.x runs from the Procede 335i's, the majority of them have sub 2 second 0-60 times. I believe that even one of the videos, the car was using drag tires. So there are some instances where the 335i gets great traction and that gets multiplied down the track.

In looking at the trapspeeds, the new M3 is going to walk the 335i on a roll.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

I was actually pleased by that Car & Driver report. One of the things that bothers me about the E46 M3 is the fact that you need to go for the right-hand side of the tach in order to go quickly. There's no such thing as lazy speed in that car. (As an aside, this would bother me less if the exhaust note was any good. Decades of sonorous snarl from BMW sixes replaced by that tinny rasp.)

In any event, the engine boys at the M Group apparently decided to forego maximum torque in favor of broadening the entire curve - and apparently it's paid off this time. 111 mph in the quarter mile is very impressive for a car that tips the scales at 3649 pounds (as BMW told the Edmunds people), and 12.9 seconds is about right for that mph on street sneakers. Furthermore, Autoweek reported a 50 - 75 mph time of 4.9 seconds in top gear, which is stupid fast (that's a technical term, son). You won't find another street car that can do this.

I know, I know. In concept, nobody cares about top gear performance, but I'll tell you what: Out on the road, everybody cares. Just tickling the gas pedal out on the highway and whoosh!, you're gone, is an attribute that will bring a grin to every driver's face, every time.

Other than the fact that this new car is very heavy, and thus less tossable than the previous car, this car is better in pretty much every way - thus continuing a long tradition of the M Group. Each M3 has been bigger, heavier and less tossable (thus less fun to drive) than the one before it, and altogether a better car.

This time, however, the more useable power band may mean the new one is just as much fun to drive as the E46 version, even though it'll be less tossable.

Making comparisons, the 335i, in my opinion, is a seriously flawed car - enough so that I skipped out and went Japanese for my four-door three months back because of the open rear (had a bad experience during the test drive) and the runflats. Sure, it'll be a top gear terror with the Vishnu (or other) mods, but coming out of turn three at NHIS, you're just going to make enough smoke to take over for the Bug Comissioner. Sure, you can throw a rear in there, and mod the supension (not to mention the brakes), but then you'll be sacrificing one of the things that BMW does better than anybody else, which is the ride/handling compromise. Oh, the 12.6 @ 109 with the Vishnu? Forget about it. Nobody's doing that without traction aids.

Comparing the new car with a Vette? Don't. Vettes are killer cars either in a straight line or on a road course, and the new M3 won't be able to match them. It'll be closer, but apparently the '08 Vette will get even more power, along with tweaked steering and a high-zoot (for $4K) interior. The single downer they have from a performance point of view is that they're slugs in top gear.

What BMW does best is back-road banditry. They're better than nearly anything else on bumpy back roads, and you'll screw that up by modding a 335i.

I think the new car will be worth the money.

Bruce

Talk about an informative post. Thanks Bruce.

[JEllis]

Bruce,

I liked your post very much!

Jason

[revah2]

Originally Posted by lucid

Will this ever end? This topic has been discussed hundreds of times in the past month here--almost always started by a 335 owner. Will we see another thread for every possible acceleration distance: 0-30; 0-60; 0-100; 1/4 mile; 1/2 mile; full mile???

What is your problem? You made a decision, bought a car, so enjoy it! If you are not happy with your car, sell it, and buy something you'd enjoy more. Why try to prove something to yourself on a public forum? This is not a therapy medium so that you can work out your problems with your car.

And, yeah, one can always mod the M3, and then what is your modded 335 going to do? Or one can always go buy a Corvette for even less than a 335, and blow most cars away. Why don't you do just that--sell your 335 and buy a Corvette?

I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone, i wanted your collective opinions. Your the only one provoking here. Re-read my post again, it might be above your head.

[revah2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

I was actually pleased by that Car & Driver report. One of the things that bothers me about the E46 M3 is the fact that you need to go for the right-hand side of the tach in order to go quickly. There's no such thing as lazy speed in that car. (As an aside, this would bother me less if the exhaust note was any good. Decades of sonorous snarl from BMW sixes replaced by that tinny rasp.)

In any event, the engine boys at the M Group apparently decided to forego maximum torque in favor of broadening the entire curve - and apparently it's paid off this time. 111 mph in the quarter mile is very impressive for a car that tips the scales at 3649 pounds (as BMW told the Edmunds people), and 12.9 seconds is about right for that mph on street sneakers. Furthermore, Autoweek reported a 50 - 75 mph time of 4.9 seconds in top gear, which is stupid fast (that's a technical term, son). You won't find another street car that can do this.

I know, I know. In concept, nobody cares about top gear performance, but I'll tell you what: Out on the road, everybody cares. Just tickling the gas pedal out on the highway and whoosh!, you're gone, is an attribute that will bring a grin to every driver's face, every time.

Other than the fact that this new car is very heavy, and thus less tossable than the previous car, this car is better in pretty much every way - thus continuing a long tradition of the M Group. Each M3 has been bigger, heavier and less tossable (thus less fun to drive) than the one before it, and altogether a better car.

This time, however, the more useable power band may mean the new one is just as much fun to drive as the E46 version, even though it'll be less tossable.

Making comparisons, the 335i, in my opinion, is a seriously flawed car - enough so that I skipped out and went Japanese for my four-door three months back because of the open rear (had a bad experience during the test drive) and the runflats. Sure, it'll be a top gear terror with the Vishnu (or other) mods, but coming out of turn three at NHIS, you're just going to make enough smoke to take over for the Bug Comissioner. Sure, you can throw a rear in there, and mod the supension (not to mention the brakes), but then you'll be sacrificing one of the things that BMW does better than anybody else, which is the ride/handling compromise. Oh, the 12.6 @ 109 with the Vishnu? Forget about it. Nobody's doing that without traction aids.

Comparing the new car with a Vette? Don't. Vettes are killer cars either in a straight line or on a road course, and the new M3 won't be able to match them. It'll be closer, but apparently the '08 Vette will get even more power, along with tweaked steering and a high-zoot (for $4K) interior. The single downer they have from a performance point of view is that they're slugs in top gear.

What BMW does best is back-road banditry. They're better than nearly anything else on bumpy back roads, and you'll screw that up by modding a 335i.

I think the new car will be worth the money.

Bruce

Thanks Bruce, thats exactly what I meant.

[sdiver68]

Originally Posted by revah2

You raise a good point, sadly enough. But if your one who enjoys a comfy interior, corvettes come stock with shit hole interior, no, really. And you only get 2 seats!

The 2 seats doesn't change, but for MY 08 there is a $3-5K high dollar leather interior option that is said to be from the same people who do many of the factory exotics.

oops, someone already posted that...oh well, here it is in short form.

[Car Enthusiast]

Nice points Bruce. I get a little frustrated seeing all the M-loving worshippers on this Board get offended by any question as to the supremacy of their M's, but in truth revah has posted a valid point. I don't know why people get so defensive about comparisons between the 335 and M3. It's obvious that with a chip and exhaust the 335 will be very similar in terms of straightline performance with the upcoming M, and the 335 has already proven itself to be a fairly respectable track handler (though it will obviously be a bit slower than the new M3).

The comparison is between a 2 different versions of BMW 3 series so I see no reason to toss it out. This is nothing like an M3 vs. Civic w/turbo, supercharger, etc. argument. Revah has specifically noted his respect for the M (as do I) and is just wondering about people's opinions on the justification for the price difference. I agree that if the car comes at a base price of over $60K there is reason to question whether the add'l price is worth it. Obviously, if you are loaded and money does not matter, than be happy with the M3. I personally wouldn't mind spending 4-5k on a 335 to add a chip, exhaust, and coilovers to have very decent performance just shy of an M3's.

Also, to say that the M3 hasn't been fairly evaluated yet is absurd. Sure, all the exact performance figures are not out yet, but go look at any major car magazine website and see what's at the top. I highly doubt the car will get a "significantly" better 1/4 or 0-60 time than what C&D posted. They implied that marginally better times should be possible w/better track conditions. All in all, a 12.9 sec. 1/4 is pretty impressive to me, but do I really want to shell out $65K+ for this (if it comes out at that price)? No thanks.

[Garissimo]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

[...]

That's a great summary. I'm curious which Japanese 4 door you chose in favor of the 335i, though. I can't see anything outside of a Mitsu EVO that delivers the goods as well as the BMW when pushed hard.

[phrozen06]

Originally Posted by M3onTwomps

No, not disappointed. C&D stated that they could've done better with more time and on a better racing surface and better tires.

Either way, if I wanted a dragster, I wouldn't be looking at the M3.

But, thanks for trying, and likely succeeding at starting another flame war.

well put. Get a Z06 if you're worried about 1/4 mile times.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by revah2

I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone, i wanted your collective opinions. Your the only one provoking here. Re-read my post again, it might be above your head.

Do a simple search on the topic, browse through the last 100 threads, and as others have also indicated, you'll see that what you've posted has been commented and debated on this forum in hundreds of posts. So stop bringing this topic up unless there is something new to say. You add no new insights to any of this. And reread your own initial post--especially the last sentence--and get over your denial: you are trying to prove something.

[M3onTwomps]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

I was actually pleased by that Car & Driver report. One of the things that bothers me about the E46 M3 is the fact that you need to go for the right-hand side of the tach in order to go quickly. There's no such thing as lazy speed in that car. (As an aside, this would bother me less if the exhaust note was any good. Decades of sonorous snarl from BMW sixes replaced by that tinny rasp.)

In any event, the engine boys at the M Group apparently decided to forego maximum torque in favor of broadening the entire curve - and apparently it's paid off this time. 111 mph in the quarter mile is very impressive for a car that tips the scales at 3649 pounds (as BMW told the Edmunds people), and 12.9 seconds is about right for that mph on street sneakers. Furthermore, Autoweek reported a 50 - 75 mph time of 4.9 seconds in top gear, which is stupid fast (that's a technical term, son). You won't find another street car that can do this.

I know, I know. In concept, nobody cares about top gear performance, but I'll tell you what: Out on the road, everybody cares. Just tickling the gas pedal out on the highway and whoosh!, you're gone, is an attribute that will bring a grin to every driver's face, every time.

Other than the fact that this new car is very heavy, and thus less tossable than the previous car, this car is better in pretty much every way - thus continuing a long tradition of the M Group. Each M3 has been bigger, heavier and less tossable (thus less fun to drive) than the one before it, and altogether a better car.

This time, however, the more useable power band may mean the new one is just as much fun to drive as the E46 version, even though it'll be less tossable.

Making comparisons, the 335i, in my opinion, is a seriously flawed car - enough so that I skipped out and went Japanese for my four-door three months back because of the open rear (had a bad experience during the test drive) and the runflats. Sure, it'll be a top gear terror with the Vishnu (or other) mods, but coming out of turn three at NHIS, you're just going to make enough smoke to take over for the Bug Comissioner. Sure, you can throw a rear in there, and mod the supension (not to mention the brakes), but then you'll be sacrificing one of the things that BMW does better than anybody else, which is the ride/handling compromise. Oh, the 12.6 @ 109 with the Vishnu? Forget about it. Nobody's doing that without traction aids.

Comparing the new car with a Vette? Don't. Vettes are killer cars either in a straight line or on a road course, and the new M3 won't be able to match them. It'll be closer, but apparently the '08 Vette will get even more power, along with tweaked steering and a high-zoot (for $4K) interior. The single downer they have from a performance point of view is that they're slugs in top gear.

What BMW does best is back-road banditry. They're better than nearly anything else on bumpy back roads, and you'll screw that up by modding a 335i.

I think the new car will be worth the money.

Bruce

Excellent first post.

[M3onTwomps]

Originally Posted by Car Enthusiast

Nice points Bruce. I get a little frustrated seeing all the M-loving worshippers on this Board get offended by any question as to the supremacy of their M's, but in truth revah has posted a valid point. I don't know why people get so defensive about comparisons between the 335 and M3. It's obvious that with a chip and exhaust the 335 will be very similar in terms of straightline performance with the upcoming M, and the 335 has already proven itself to be a fairly respectable track handler (though it will obviously be a bit slower than the new M3).

The comparison is between a 2 different versions of BMW 3 series so I see no reason to toss it out. This is nothing like an M3 vs. Civic w/turbo, supercharger, etc. argument. Revah has specifically noted his respect for the M (as do I) and is just wondering about people's opinions on the justification for the price difference. I agree that if the car comes at a base price of over $60K there is reason to question whether the add'l price is worth it. Obviously, if you are loaded and money does not matter, than be happy with the M3. I personally wouldn't mind spending 4-5k on a 335 to add a chip, exhaust, and coilovers to have very decent performance just shy of an M3's.

Also, to say that the M3 hasn't been fairly evaluated yet is absurd. Sure, all the exact performance figures are not out yet, but go look at any major car magazine website and see what's at the top. I highly doubt the car will get a "significantly" better 1/4 or 0-60 time than what C&D posted. They implied that marginally better times should be possible w/better track conditions. All in all, a 12.9 sec. 1/4 is pretty impressive to me, but do I really want to shell out $65K+ for this (if it comes out at that price)? No thanks.

So, you know the E92 M3's performance numbers? Please post them here.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by M3onTwomps

Excellent first post.

Truly excellent first post Bruce. Looking forward to hearing more insightful things from you. Welcome!

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by Garissimo

That's a great summary. I'm curious which Japanese 4 door you chose in favor of the 335i, though. I can't see anything outside of a Mitsu EVO that delivers the goods as well as the BMW when pushed hard.

This is our go-on-trips sedan. We do track time in an SRT4 and M3.

It's an Acura TL Type S six-speed. Comfy. Power ash trays (meaning it comes with a lot of stuff). Roomy back seat for grandkids. Absolute killer stereo. Best GPS available.

Nice chassis for 7/10ths street work. Terrific engine (eager like a 328 only quicker).

Posi. No runflats. A spare tire and dipstick.

After making a right onto a 50 mph road from a stop sign and having the electronic nannies yank the throttle back because of the right rear going up in smoke (at way less than full throttle), the 335i wasn't even in the hunt.

Bruce

PS - I may track this car once or twice. The handling is very honest, and I have several thousand track miles in fwd cars, so am comfy with some of the differing things you need to do to go fast, powered by the "wrong" wheels.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

This is our go-on-trips sedan. We do track time in an SRT4 and M3.

It's an Acura TL Type S six-speed. Comfy. Power ash trays (meaning it comes with a lot of stuff). Roomy back seat for grandkids. Absolute killer stereo. Best GPS available.

Nice chassis for 7/10ths street work. Terrific engine (eager like a 328 only quicker).

Posi. No runflats. A spare tire and dipstick.

After making a right onto a 50 mph road from a stop sign and having the electronic nannies yank the throttle back because of the right rear going up in smoke (at way less than full throttle), the 335i wasn't even in the hunt.

Bruce

PS - I may track this car once or twice. The handling is very honest, and I have several thousand track miles in fwd cars, so am comfy with some of the differing things you need to do to go fast, powered by the "wrong" wheels.

I drove a TL a few years ago, and when I got on the throttle, I really had to fight the wheel. How does the type S feel in that regard?

[M3onTwomps]

Originally Posted by mintenasi

You know you can "fix" that "problem" easily with a few grands, then add a chip and you are ready to fight the M3. Not the old one, that's easily out of the question.

Unless of course you S/C the E46 M3.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by lucid

I drove a TL a few years ago, and when I got on the throttle, I really had to fight the wheel. How does the type S feel in that regard?

From what I've read, this is somewhat of a variable on TLs. On our car, first gear gets tamed by the traction control, or if disabled, it breaks the tires loose as it clears around 4000 rpm, so torque steer is tamed. I notice it somewhat (not a bunch) in second gear - but find it entertaining.

Bruce